GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 72, NO. 5 共SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2007兲; P. B133–B140, 11 FIGS.
10.1190/1.2759921
Case History
Modeling and inversion of magnetic and VLF-EM data with an application
to basement fractures: A case study from Raigarh, India
V. Ramesh Babu1, Subhash Ram1, and N. Sundararajan2
ABSTRACT
We present modeling of magnetic and very low frequency
electromagnetic 共VLF-EM兲 data to map the spatial distribu-
tion of basement fractures where uranium is reported in Sam-
balpur granitoids in the Raigarh district, Chhattisgarh, India.
Radioactivity in the basement fractures is attributed to bran-
nerite, U-Ti-Fe complex, and uranium adsorbed on ferrugi-
nous matter. The amplitude of the 3D analytical signal of the
observed magnetic data indicates the trend of fracture zones.
Further, the application of Euler 3D deconvolution to mag-
netic data provides the spatial locations and depth of the
source. Fraser-filtered VLF-EM data and current density
pseudosections indicate the presence of shallow and deep
conductive zones along the fractures. Modeling of VLF-EM
data yields the subsurface resistivity distribution of the order
of less than 100 ohm-m of the fractures. The interpreted re-
sults of both magnetic and VLF-EM data agree well with the
geologic section obtained from drilling.
INTRODUCTION
Of all the geophysical methods, magnetic mapping is the oldest,
simplest, most reliable, and most widely used technique for locating
both hidden ores and structures associated with mineral deposits.
For the magnetic method, the important petrophysical parameters
are the magnetic susceptibility and remanent magnetization, which
can exist only at temperatures cooler than the Curie point. Magnetic
susceptibility of rocks is primarily dependent on the presence of fer-
romagnetic minerals, of which magnetite and members of the titano-
magnetite series are most common in the earth’s crust 共Grant, 1985;
Clark, 1997兲. Parallel advances have been made in digital compila-
Manuscript received by the Editor June 17, 2006; revised manuscript received May 17, 2007; published online August 14, 2007.
1
Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration and Research, Department of Atomic Energy, Hyderabad, Nagpur, India. E-mail: ram-sand@yahoo.com.
2
Osmania University, Centre for Exploration Geophysics, Hyderabad, India. E-mail: raajanns@hotmail.com.
© 2007 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. All rights reserved.
B133
tion and processing of data in optimized forms for subsequent inter-
pretation. Quantitative interpretation has advanced, particularly
with the development of computerized multiparameter inversion
methods. Methods such as Euler deconvolution 共Reid et al., 1990;
FitzGerald et al., 2004兲 are mainly based on ideas that are reasonably
well established. However, these techniques are now being imple-
mented on much faster computing platforms with more useful
graphic output. The amplitude of the analytical signal approach
共Nabighian, 1972; Sundararajan, 1983; Hsu et al., 1996; Srinivas,
2001兲 is an important method to delineate boundaries of different
geologic structures. The theories of magnetic method and interpreta-
tion are readily available in the literature 共e.g., Paterson and Reeves,
1985; Sharma, 1987兲.
Conversely, the very low frequency electromagnetic 共VLF-EM兲
prospecting method is suitable for studying structural details and
shallow subsurface conductors 共Fisher et al., 1983兲 because it is not
only rapid but also cost effective. VLF-EM is a passive method that
uses radiation from military navigation radio transmitters; according
to ABEM, there are approximately 42 global ground military com-
munication transmitters operating in the VLF band 共15–30 kHz兲 as
the primary EM field. These stations located around the world gener-
ate signals used for a variety of applications, including groundwater
detection and contamination evaluation, soil engineering, archaeol-
ogy, and mineral exploration for mapping narrow mineralized fault
zones 共Philips and Richards, 1975; Wright, 1988兲. The VLF-EM
method also has been used in mapping weathered layers in granitic
terrain 共Poddar and Rathor, 1983兲 and in the detection of weak con-
ductors probably caused by water-filled fractures or shallow faults in
nuclear waste management programs 共Hayles and Sinha, 1986兲. For
groundwater exploration, the VLF-EM method has proved to be
quite effective in comparison with vertical electrical sounding in
hard rock terrains 共Sundararajan et al., 2007兲. Hence, the VLF-EM
method is a popular EM tool for quick mapping of near-surface geo-
B134 Sundararajan et al.

logic structures 共Philips and Richards, 1975; Parker, 1980; Saydam,
1981兲.
The theory of VLF-EM technique is well described in the litera-
ture 共Paterson and Ronka, 1971; Philips and Richards, 1975; Wright,
1988; McNeill and Labson, 1991; Hutchinson and Barta, 2002兲. In
the far-field above a uniform earth, the ground wave of the vertically
polarized radio wave has three field components: a radial horizontal
electric field, a vertical electric field, and a tangential magnetic field.
When these three fields encounter electrically conducting ore bodies
in the subsurface, eddy currents are induced, causing the secondary
fields to radiate outward from these conductors. Although this range
is very low for radio transmission, it is higher than that used in stan-
dard low-frequency 共1–3 kHz兲 electromagnetic geophysical meth-
ods. Paal 共1965兲 observed that radio waves at VLF frequencies could
be used to prospect for conductive mineral deposits. Since then, VLF
transmitters situated around the world are being used widely as elec-
tromagnetic sources for near-surface geologic mapping as an induc-
tive survey technique.
The VLF-EM method has been widely used over the last three
decades to map shallow subsurface structural features of varying
interests. However, the interpretation of observed VLF-EM anoma-
lies is mainly carried out using anomaly curves and nomograms
N30 600
共Kaikkonen, 1979; Saydam, 1981兲. Filtering using the approaches of
Fraser 共1969兲 and Karous and Hjelt 共1983兲 and subsequent contour-
ing of the observed responses are the most common practice to de-
rive qualitative information about the subsurface. Multidimensional
numerical modeling and inversion are needed to quantitatively de-
termine geometrical and physical subsurface parameters from VLF-
EM anomalies. Kaikkonen and Sharma 共1998兲 carried out an exten-
sive study of the interpretation of VLF-EM data and suggested the
forward modeling using finite-element methods. Kaikkonen and
Sharma 共2001兲, made a comparative study of linear and global non-
linear inversion and observed that there is a possibility that linear-
ized inversion can yield more accurate and reliable results than glo-
bal nonlinear inversion. However, these techniques require consid-
erable computing time and do not ensure uniqueness. Although
Sundararajan et al. 共2006兲 developed a simple, user-friendly Matlab
code for processing and interpreting VLF-EM data, a comprehen-
sive quantitative method free from ambiguity has yet to be devel-
oped. In this paper, the measured total magnetic field and the ob-
served in-phase and out-of-phase components of the VLF-EM meth-
od were employed in modeling and inversion to decipher the base-
ment fractures associated with uranium mineralization in the
Raigarh district, Chhattisgarh, India. The results obtained from both
magnetic and, particularly, VLF-EM data define spa-
tial locations and depths of fractures that agree well
with drilling data and are presented here as a case
history.

N28 560
GEOLOGY OF THE AREA
N26 520
The area of investigation falls in the southeastern
N24 480 part of the Chhattisgarh basin, Raigarh district,
Chhattisgarh, India, in an area where the Sambalpur
N22 440 granitoids are exposed 共Das et al., 1992兲. Basement
Nagpur
fractures occur mainly along the southeastern pe-
N20 400 riphery of the Chhattisgarh basin and appear to be ge-
netically related to its evolution 共Chakraborti, 1997兲.
N18 360
Uranium mineralization mainly occurs in the base-
Study area
N16 320
ment fractures along N50E–S50W and N25E–S25W
共Benerjee, 2005兲. The fracture zones are occupied by
N14 280 breccia, cataclasite, or mylonite of acidic and basic
Distance (m)

20 0 20 40 m N compositions representing granite and basic rock

N12 240 parentage, respectively 共Figure 1兲. The mineralized
breccia/cataclasite is highly altered and generally as-
N10 200
sociated with ubiquitous silicification. Petrographic
Index
N8 160
studies on the altered breccia/cataclasite have identi-
fied them variously as altered basalt, quartzofelds-
Silicified zone
N6 120 pathic cataclasite, protocataclasite, and ferruginous
Pink granite breccia 共Kamalesh and Mukundan, 1998; Shobita,
N4 80 Radioactive 1998; Rameshbabu et al., 2004兲.
altered breccia
N2 Gray granite
40 (sambalpur granitoids)
Trench GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATIONS
0 0
N2 Geophysical traverses
S1 –20 In general, the magnetic method is rapid and reli-
DPL/2 Borehole able for structural delineation; however, the VLF-
40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 EM method is ideal for locating shallow subsurface
Distance (m) conductors. Hence, the magnetic and VLF-EM
methods were employed simultaneously for uranium
Figure 1. Location of the study area showing the traverses of the magnetic and VLF- exploration in our study to delineate the basement
EM surveys along with the geology, Raigarh district, Chhattisgarh, India. fractures associated with conductive mineralization.
 Modeling of magnetic and VLF-EM data B135

Total magnetic field measurements were recorded using a proton
precession magnetometer along 17 traverses 共S1 to N30兲 40 m apart
with a station interval of 10 m 共Figure 1兲. In addition to the magnetic
measurements, the in-phase, out-of-phase, resistivity, and phase an-
gle of the VLF-EM method were acquired along 11 traverses 共N2 to
N22, Figure 1兲. The VLF transmitter 共JJI Japan兲 operating at a fre-
quency of 22.2 kHz was used as the source for the entire VLF survey
because it lies along the direction of the geologic strike. Measure-
ments were made both in magnetic and electric field mode. The mag-
netic and VLF-EM data acquired were processed with the help of
available techniques, as discussed in the following sections.
PROCESSING AND INTERPRETATION
After correcting for diurnal variations, the magnetic data were
gridded using the bicubic spline method with a cell size of 10 m 共be-
cause the data were acquired on a regular grid of 10⫻ 40 m兲, then
the image map was prepared 共Figure 2兲. Two linear anomalies 共M1
and M2兲 of varying amplitude and wavelength are observed in Fig-
ure 2. Anomaly M1 trends NE–SW, and M2 trends NNE–SSW. Be-
tween traverses S1 and N8, the anomalies are of long wavelength
with varying amplitudes, implying an en-echelon-type of fracture
system, which is well known in basement rocks. The fracture system
is vertical to subvertical between traverses S1 and N8 and dips
southeast between traverses N8 and N30.
Further, the amplitude of the analytical signal of the total magnet-
ic field yields a maximum over magnetic contacts, regardless of the
direction of magnetization 共Figure 3兲. Although the amplitude of the
analytic signal is dependent on the magnetization and the direction
of geologic strike with respect to the magnetization vector, this de-
pendency is easier to address in the interpretation of amplitude of an-
alytic signal than the original field data 共MacLeod et al., 1993兲. The
amplitude and wavelength of the analytical signal 共Figure 3兲 in-
crease from traverse N30 to S1. The fracture system southwest of
N14 appears to be relatively wide at a greater depth. Conversely,
northeast of N14, the fracture system probably narrows at a shallow-
er depth, as is evident from the width of the anomaly 共Figure 3兲. The
isolated linear closures of the magnetic anomalies M1 and M2 sug-
gest that the fractures are en echelon. Application of Euler’s decon-
volution 共Thompson, 1982兲 indicates geologically plausible spatial
locations of fractures at depths varying from 15 to 40 m 共Figure 4兲.
Modeling and inversion of magnetic anomaly AB 共Figure 2兲 was
carried out using a Matlab-based graphical user interface 共GUI兲 code
共GRAVMAG-GUI兲 developed by the authors based on the algo-
rithms of Won and Bevis 共1987兲 and Rao et al. 共1995兲. The magnetic
profile observed at an interval of 10 m was modeled with a measured
susceptibility contrast of 2200⫻ 10−6 CGS units and borehole data
600
560
520

480
600
60.2
40.1 440
560 23.0
12.8
6.3 400
520 2.9
–0.6
480 –4.2
–7.7 360
–9.9
–11.5
440 –13.3 320
–14.9
–16.9
400 –18.0
–19.6 280
Distance (m)

–20.3
360 –21.0
–21.8 240
–22.5
320 M2 –23.1
–24.6 200
–26.7
280 –29.0
–32.2
Distance (m)

–37.4 160
240 –41.0
–44.0
–47.0 120
200 –49.7
–53.2
–57.9
160 –63.7 80
–69.9
–76.0
120 –86.2
B 40
–107.0
–142.0
80
H (nT) 0
40 A
–40
0
40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360
–40 Distance (m)
40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360
Distance (m)

Figure 2. Shaded relief image of the total magnetic field anomaly Figure 3. Amplitude of the analytical signal map with a variable con-
along with the interpreted linear trends M1 and M2. tour interval.
B136 Sundararajan et al.

to constrain the inversion. An rms error of less than 2.55% has been
achieved with as many as 20 iterations. The magnetic model 共Figure
5兲 generated was helpful in planning the spatial locations of other
boreholes and their directions in the area.
The VLF-EM in-phase and out-of-phase components are present-
ed in the form of stacked profiles in Figure 6, and the recorded resis-
tivity 共␳a兲 is shown in the form of a contour map in Figure 7. The
crossovers of in-phase and out-of-phase components are inferred to
be the conductor axes 共C1 and C2兲 共Wright, 1988兲, which are caused
by pyrite and chalcopyrite associated with the fractures 共Figure 8兲.
larger anomaly peak identifies the down-dip side 共Coney, 1977;
Baker and Myers, 1979兲. The profiles 共Figure 6兲 indicate that the
conductor C1 is dipping southeastward and that C2 is dipping almost
due east, which is comparable with the dips obtained from the mag-
netic method 共Figure 2兲. Resistivities of the order of 100 ohm-m or
less observed on the resistivity contour map 共Figure 7兲 correspond to
the conductors C1 and C2. Further, the resistivity contour map indi-
cates the trend of fractures within the basement granitoids, which are
100

Magnetic anomaly (nT)

50
Further, the asymmetry in the in-phase and out-of-phase compo- 0
nents is caused by the dipping nature of conductors, wherein the –50
–100
Observed
–150
Computed
600 –200
Error
–250
–300
0 80 100 150 200 250 300
560 Distance (m)
0
520 –50

Depth (m)
–100
480
–150

440 –200
0 80 100 150 200 250 300
Distance (m)

400
Figure 5. Interpreted 2D model 共with susceptibility 2200
⫻ 10−6 CGS units兲 of magnetic profile AB 共Figure 2兲 with observed
360 and computed magnetic anomaly and misfit.

480
320
440 N22

280
400 N20
Distance (m)

240 360 N18

320 N16
200 c1
Depth (m) 280 N14
c2
40
160
240 N12
Distance (m)

35
120 200 N10
30
160 N8
25
80

20 120 N6

40 15 80 N4

40 N2
0 ip & op
+ 10%
0
- 10%
0
–40 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360
In-phase component
Out-of-phase component
40 80 120 160 200 240 280
Distance (m) conductor axes VLF station direction, 22.2 kHz

Figure 4. Depths to basement fractures from Euler deconvolution of Figure 6. Stacked profiles of in-phase and out-of-phase components
the magnetic data. of the VLF-EM.
 Modeling of magnetic and VLF-EM data B137

similar to the fracture system inferred already from the magnetic
data. Based on these results, two boreholes 共namely DPL/2 and
DPL/10兲 were drilled as shown in Figure 1. The boreholes not only
confirmed the fracture system but also substantiated the geophysical
interpretation.
FILTERING PROCEDURE
The VLF-EM in-phase component often results in complex pat-
terns and hence requires filtering before interpretation. Simple filter-
ing techniques such as those that we employed transform crossovers
into peaks, remove regional gradients, and amplify anomalies from
the near surface. Further, application of Fraser 共1981兲 filtering of the
in-phase component transforms the noncontourable in-phase com-
ponent into contourable form, which enables better delineation of
the conductors. In-phase contoured data generally peak almost di-
rectly over a conductor, as is evident from Figure 8, and are thus an
effective complement to the amplitude of the analytical signal of
magnetic map 共Figure 3兲. The conductors C1 and C2 demarcated in
Figure 8 are similar to the magnetic trends M1 and M2 共Figure 2兲.
In the absence of numerical modeling, the Fraser and Karous–
Hjelt linear filtering techniques have been proved to be effective be-
cause they provide a simple scheme for semiquantitative interpreta-
tion 共Ogilvy and Lee, 1991; Sundararajan et al., 2006兲. Based on the
Matlab GUI software 共Sundararajan et al., 2006 available at http://
www.iamg.org/CGEditor/index.htm兲, the in-phase components of
traverses N6 and N12 were Fraser filtered for various lengths of the
filter and are shown in Figures 9c and 10c. The longer the length of
the filter is, the better the response of the deeper sources will be.
According to Ogilvy and Lee 共1991兲, the current density pseu-
dosection provides good visualization of targets such as mineralized
pseudosections of the in-phase component of traverses N6 and N12
are given in Figures 9d and 10d, respectively. Small as well as local-
ized conductors are well resolved in the pseudosection 共Figure 9d兲
obtained from Karous-Hjelt filtering relative to the ones obtained
from Fraser 共Figure 9c兲 filtering. The current density pseudosections
were obtained using a Karous-Hjelt filter 共Karous and Hjelt, 1983兲
that is given by following the equation:
⌬Z/2␲Ia共0兲 = − 0.102H−3 + 0.059H−2 − 0.561H−1
+ 0.561H1 − 0.059H2 + 0.102H3
where Ia共0兲 = 0.5关I共⌬X/2兲 + I共− ⌬X/2兲兴 and H−3, H−2, and so forth,
are the measured data at consecutive stations, ⌬X is the measure-
ment interval, Ia is the apparent current density, ⌬Z is the assumed
thickness of the conductor, and I is the induced current density.
INVERSION OF VLF-EM DATA
The quantitative interpretation of single-frequency VLF-EM data
was examined by Beamish 共1994兲, Chouteau et al. 共1996兲,
Kaikkonen and Sharma 共1998兲, Beamish 共2000兲, and Monteiro et al.
共2006兲. They provided detailed information about how the subsur-
face resistivity distribution can be obtained from a regularized inver-
sion of the data. Generally, interpretation of VLF-EM data is not as
simple as other geophysical methods because the relatively high
transmitter frequency gives rise to secondary fields from many geo-
logic features that are electrically conductive 共Philips and Richards,
1975兲. Further, the three dimensionality of geologic structures com-
plicates the 2D inversion of VLF data. Numerical modeling 共Coney,
440

veins, fractures, and vertical stratigraphy that produce vertical to

subvertical conductors. In this study, the computed current density 400
C1
440 N
360

400 C2 26
24
320
22
360 20
18
280 16
320 (ohm-m) 14
1000 C1
12
10
280 920 240 8
840 6
Distance (m)

Distance (m)

760 C2 4
240 2
680 200 0
600 –2
200 520 –4
160 –6
440
–8
160 360 –10
280 (ip %)
200 120
120
160
120
80
80 80
40
40 0 40
50 100 150 200 250 300 80 120 160 200 240 280 320
Distance (m) Distance (m) N

Figure 7. Resistivity contour map derived from the VLF-EM data Figure 8. Fraser-filtered in-phase contour map of the VLF-EM data
with contour intervals of 20 and 40 ohm-m. C1 and C2 indicate the with contour interval of 2%. C1 and C2 indicate the conductors dis-
conductors discussed in the text. cussed in the text.
B138 Sundararajan et al.

1977兲 is a useful way to interpret VLF-EM data, wherein a realistic EM data and computed values derived by inversion for traverses N6
model of the earth must incorporate different conductivities of regu- and N12 are shown in Figure 9a and b and Figure 10a and b, respec-
lar or irregular geometry. Because the vertical component of the tively.An rms error of less than 1% is achieved between the observed
magnetic field decreases at sites far from conductors, it is possible, at and computed response in both the cases based on as many as 30 iter-
least theoretically, to use the tipper to characterize the subsurface re- ations. In these models 共Figures 9b and 10b兲, resistivities of less than
sistivity distribution. The tipper is a complex quantity originated by 100 ohm-m extend to a depth of 80 m in a host rock with resistivity
the time lag between horizontal and vertical components of the mag- of 800 ohm-m. The resistivity distributions in the models agree well
netic fields resulting from the electromagnetic induction phenome- with those obtained from the Fraser and Karous–Hjelt filtered data
na. The tipper does not exist over a homogeneous earth 共or over a 共Figure 9c and d and Figure 10c and d兲, which in turn agree well with
layered earth兲. Over a 2D earth, the tipper varies along the measuring the borehole section 共Figure 11兲.
profile showing the strongest variations in the vicinity of resistivity
contrasts. In the case of the VLF-EM method, the in-phase and out--
of-phase components of the tipper are usually expressed as percent- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
ages. Sasaki 共1989, 2001兲 developed a 2D regularized inversion
code for EM data; subsequently, Monteiro et al. 共2006兲 modified the Qualitative and quantitative interpretation of magnetic data,
code to suit VLF-EM data and discussed its effectiveness. We have namely the amplitude of analytical signal and the Euler depth, are
used the modified code of Monteiro et al. 共2006兲 in our inversion. equally useful in deciphering the spatial locations of the fractures in
The observed in-phase and out-of-phase components of the VLF-
a) 70
Observed in phase
100 Observed out of phase
a)

In-phase & out-of-phase components (%)

60 Computed in phase
Computed out of phase
In-phase & out-of-phase components (%)

80 Observed in phase Fraser filtered in phase

Observed out of phase 50
Computed in phase
Computed out of phase 40
60 Fraser filtered in phase
30
40
20
20
10
0 0
40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320
-10
–20
-20 rms error: 0.5209
–40 rms error: 0.6351 Distance (m) No. of iterations: 30
No. of iterations: 30 -30
Distance (m)
–60 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320
80 120 160 200 240 280 320 b) 0
b) 0
–20
–20
Depth (m)

–40
Depth (m)

–40
–60
–60
–80
–80
–100
–100
Resistivity 600 500 400 300 200 100 0
800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 (ohm-m)
Resistivity
(ohm-m) 80 120 160 200 240 280
120 160 200 240 280 c) 0
0 –10
Depth (m)

c)
Depth (m)

–20
–20 –30
–40
–40 –50
40 20 0 –20 –40
120 160 200 240 280
110 90 70 50 30 10 –10 –30 80 120 160 200 240 280
d) 0
Depth (m)

d) 120 160 200 240 280

0
Depth (m)

–20
–10
–20 –40
–30
–40 In-phase 100 150 200 250 300
90 70 50 30 10 –10 –30 Filtered component 50 40
In-phase filtered component 30 20 10 0 –10 –20 –30 –40
(arbitrary units)
(arbitrary units)

Figure 9. VLF-EM response along traverse N6. 共a兲 Observed and Figure 10. VLF-EM response along traverse N12. 共a兲 Observed and
computed in-phase and out-of- phase components with Fraser-fil- computed in-phase and out-of-phase components with Fraser-fil-
tered in-phase component, 共b兲 2D resistivity model obtained from tered in-phase component, 共b兲 2D resistivity model obtained from
the inversion of the VLF-EM data, 共c兲 Karous–Hjelt current density the inversion of the VLF-EM data, 共c兲 Karous–Hjelt current density
section, and 共d兲 Fraser-filtered current density pseudosection. section and 共d兲 Fraser-filtered current density pseudosection.
 Modeling of magnetic and VLF-EM data B139

300 Magnetic 50 these positive peaks gives the spatial locations of

Resistivity the conductor axis. The Fraser-filtered response
200
In-phase
40 obtained as suggested by Wright 共1988兲 gives the
Out of phase
dip attitude of the conductors. The computed cur-
rent density pseudosections of the traverses N6
30
共Figure 9c and d兲 and N12 共Figure 10c and d兲 us-
Magnetic (nT) and resistivity (ohm-m)

In-phase and out-of-phase (%)

100 ing Fraser and Karous–Hjelt filters help in under-
20 standing the nature of conductors. The low-resis-
0 tivity distributions observed in the models for
traverses N6 and N12 are caused by fracturing in
10
the granite. Further, this suggests that the inter-
preted conductors 共namely C1 and C2兲 dip to-
–100
0 ward southeast in low-resistivity zones.

–200
–10 CONCLUSIONS
VLF-EM surveys are relatively simple and
–20
economical to carry out along with magnetic sur-
Distance (m) DPL/2 DPL/10 veys to provide a better understanding of shallow
–300
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 vertical to subvertical subsurface conductors.
Reference level 0 Transformation of noisy, noncontourable, in-
280 0 DPL/2 DPL/10 S40 E
(R.L.) N40 W phase data into relatively noise-free, contourable
(R. L 262.37 m) (R. L 261.95 m)
data by the Fraser filter greatly helped in deci-
250 phering the conductors. Both magnetic and VLF-
EM surveys are able to identify the spatial loca-
tion and depth extent of fractures hosting uranium
Depth (m)

mineralization. Initially, the magnetic method

200
Index
150
Overburden soil
Gray granite
Pink granite
Breccia zone
Uranium
100 Mineralization
D.D. 200.05 m D. D. 200.05 m
D.D. (drilled depth)
Figure 11. The VLF-EM in-phase and out-of-phase components, the resistivity, and mag-
netic anomaly along traverse N12 with section from boreholes DPL/2 and DPL/10.
the basement granitoids. Further, the 2D model of profile AB 共Figure
2兲 paved the way for planning the borehole locations and their
directions.
The modeling of VLF-EM data has provided a useful basis for the
delineation of shallow subsurface vertical to subvertical conductors
associated with basement fractures. The combined interpretation of
magnetic and VLF-EM data has clearly brought out the subsurface
fractures associated with the conducting mineralization, which in
turn led to drilling. Crossovers of the in-phase and out-of-phase
components demarcate the conductors 共Figure 6兲. Drilling data sub-
stantiated the presence of a low-resistivity zone of less than 20
ohm-m over a background of 800 ohm-m obtained from VLF-EM
data. The fractures inferred from VLF-EM 共Figure 7兲 are conductive
due to pyrite, chalcopyrite, ilmenite, and brecciated matrix in the
presence of hematite and magnetite. This combination of minerals
yields strong magnetic and VLF-EM anomalies.
The contour map of the Fraser-filtered, in-phase component ob-
tained by converting crossovers into peaks in which the line joining
helped in delineating the trend of the basement
fractures associated with ferruginous breccia fol-
lowed by the VLF-EM method, which clearly de-
marcated the fracture system associated with me-
tallic sulphides hosting uranium mineralization.
The current density pseudosections provide
first-hand information regarding the number,
size, depth, and relative disposition of the discrete
conductors. However, both Fraser and Karous–
Hjelt filters are capable of providing dip attitudes.
Two boreholes drilled based on the results inter-
cepted the basement fractures in association with
conducting mineralization. The salient features
of the combined effect of these two methods are
that the magnetic method clearly demarcated the
fractures, whereas the VLF-EM method has brought out the conduc-
tors associated with these fractures. The overall results paved the
way for drilling of many boreholes in the study area for further ex-
ploration of uranium.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We record our sincere and profound thanks to the editorial board
and reviewers P. J. Hutchinson and Kevin Mickus for their construc-
tive review and useful suggestions to improve the manuscript. G.
Randy Keller, associate editor, is thanked profusely for his time and
efforts in so keenly reviewing the manuscript and editing it in its
present form. We are highly thankful to Fernando Monteiro Santos
for providing the 2D code and guidelines for modeling the VLF-EM
data. Further, we extend our heartfelt thanks to R. M. Sinha, former
Director, and Anjan Chaki, Director, Atomic Minerals Directorate
for Exploration and Research 共AMD兲, for according permission to
publish this work. In addition, thanks are due to Shri D. B. Sen,Addi-
B140 Sundararajan et al.
tional Director, for the encouragement. Discussions with and fruitful
suggestions from A. K. Bhattacharya and D. Veerabhasker, former
Regional Directors, AMD, D. C. Fraser, Geoterrex-Dighem, Cana-
da, and R. L. Narasimha Rao, K. Kamlesh, A. R. Mukundan, and R.
Srinivas, AMD have been of immense use at various stages of the
work.
REFERENCES
ABEM, 2007, A Nitro Consultant Company, International frequency list,
ABEM printed matter no. 93062: www.abem.se/products/wadi/vlf-
freq.pdf, accessed June 18, 2007.
Baker, H. A., and J. O. Myers, 1979, VLF-EM model studies and some sim-
ple quantitative applications to field results: Geoexploration, 17, 55–63.
Beamish, D., 1994, Two-dimensional, regularized inversion of VLF data:
Journal of Applied Geophysics, 32, 357–374.
——–, 2000, Quantitative 2D VLF data interpretation: Journal of Applied
Geophysics, 45, 33–47.
Benerjee, D. C., 2005, Development in uranium resources, production, de-
mand and the environment: International Atomic Energy Agency, Techni-
cal Document 1426, 81–94.
Chakraborti, S., 1997, Elucidation of the sedimentary history of the Singhora
group of rocks, Chhattisgarh Super Group, Madhya Pradesh: Research in
Geological Survey of India, 130, Plate 6, 184–187.
Chouteau, M., P. Zhang, and D. Chapellier, 1996, Computation of apparent
resistivity profiles from VLF-EM data using linear filtering: Geophysical
Prospecting, 44, 215–232.
Clark, D. A., 1997, Magnetic petrophysics and magnetic petrology: Aids to
geological interpretation of magnetic surveys: AGSO Journal of Austra-
lian Geology & Geophysics, 17, no. 2, 83–103.
Coney, D. P., 1977, Model studies of the VLF-EM method of geophysical
prospecting: Geoexploration, 15, 19–35.
Das, D. P., V. Kundu, A. N. Das, D. R. Datta, A. Kumaran, S. Ramanamurthy,
C. Thangavelu, and V. Rajaiya, 1992, Lithostratigraphy and sedimentation
of Chhattisgarh basin: Indian Minerals, 46, no. 3&4, 271–288.
Fisher, G., B. V. Le Quang, and I. Muller, 1983, VLF ground surveys, a pow-
erful tool for the study of shallow two-dimensional structures: Geophysi-
cal Prospecting, 31, 977–991.
FitzGerald, D., A. Reid, and P. McInerney, 2004, New discrimination tech-
niques for Euler deconvolution: Computers & Geosciences, 3, 461–469.
Fraser, D. C., 1969, Contouring of VLF-EM data: Geophysics, 34, 958–967.
——–, 1981, A review of some useful algorithms in geophysics Canadian In-
stitute of Mining: Metallurgy and Petroleum Transactions, 74, no. 828,
76–83.
Grant, F. S., 1985, Aeromagnetics, geology and ore environments, I. Magne-
tite in igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks: An overview: Geoex-
ploration, 24, 2141–2159.
Hayles, J. G., and A. K. Sinha, 1986, A portable local loop VLF transmitter
for geological fracture mapping: Geophysical Prospecting, 34, 873–896.
Hsu, S.-K., J. C. Sibuet, and C. T. Shyu, 1996, High-resolution detection of
geological boundaries from potential-field anomalies — An enhanced an-
alytic signal technique: Geophysics, 61, 373–386.
Hutchinson, P. J., and L. S. Barta, 2002, VLF surveying to delineate long
wallmine induced fractures: The Leading Edge, 21, 491–493.
Kaikkonen, P., 1979, Numerical VLF modeling: Geophysical Prospecting,
27, 815–834.
Kaikkonen, P., and S. P. Sharma, 1998, 2D nonlinear joint inversion of VLF
and VLF-R data using simulated annealing: Journal of Applied Geophys-
ics, 39, 155–176.
——–, 2001, A comparison of performances of linearized and global nonlin-
ear 2D inversions of VLF and VLF-R electromagnetic data: Geophysics,
66, 462–475.
Kamalesh, K., and A. R. Mukundan, 1998, Proterozoic Basin Investigation
Group: unpublished report of AMD/DAE, C.R., Nagpur, India.
Karous, M., and S. E. Hjelt, 1983, Linear filtering of VLF dip-angle measure-
ments: Geophysical Prospecting, 31, 782–794.
MacLeod, I. N., K. Jones, and F. D. Ting, 1993, 3-D Analytic signal in the in-
terpretation of total magnetic field data at low magnetic latitudes: Explora-
tion Geophysics, 24, 679–688.
McNeill, J. D., and V. Labson, 1991, Geological mapping using VLF Radio
fields, in M. N. Nabighian, ed., Electromagnetic methods in applied geo-
physics — Part B, Applications: SEG, 521–640.-
Monteiro, S. F. A., A. Mateus, J. Figueiras, and M. A. Gonçalves, 2006, Map-
ping groundwater contamination around a landfill facility using the VLF-
EM method — A case study: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 60, 115–125.
Nabighian, M. N., 1972, The analytical signal of two-dimensional magnetic
bodies with polygonal cross section: Its properties and use for automated
anomaly interpretation: Geophysics, 37, 507–517.
Ogilvy, R. D., and A. C. Lee, 1991, Interpretation of VLF-EM in-phase data
using current density pseudosections: Geophysical Prospecting, 39,
567–580.
Paal, G., 1965, Ore prospecting based on VLF radio signals: Geoexploration,
3, 139–147.
Parker, M. E., 1980, VLF electromagnetic mapping for stratabound mineral-
ization near Aberfeldy: Transactions of the Institute of Mining and Metal-
lurgy, Section B, 89, B123–B133.
Paterson, N. R., and C. V. Reeves, 1985, Application of gravity and magnetic
surveys: The state-of-art in 1985: Geophysics, 50, 2558–2594.
Paterson, N. R., and V. Ronka, 1971, Five years of surveying with the very
low frequency electromagnetic method: Geoexploration, 9, 7–26.
Philips, W. J., and W. E. Richards, 1975, A study of the effectiveness of the
VLF method for the location of narrow-mineralized fault zones: Geoex-
ploration, 13, P.215–226.
Poddar, M., and B. S. Rathor, 1983, VLF survey of the weathered layer in
southern India: Geophysical Prospecting, 31, P.524–537.
Rameshbabu, V., Subashram, R. Srinivas, D. VeeraBhaskar, and A. K. Bhat-
tacharya, 2004, VLF-EM surveys for uranium exploration in Dulapali
area, Raigarh district, Madhya Pradesh, India: Journal of Geophysics, 25,
27–33.
Rao, B. N., P. Ramakrishna, and A. Markandeyulu, 1995, GMINV: A com-
puter program for gravity or magnetic data inversion: Computers & Geo-
sciences, 21, 301–319.
Reid, A. B., J. M. Allsop, H. Granser, A. J. Millett, and I. W. Somerton, 1990,
Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution:
Geophysics, 55, 80–91.
Sasaki, Y., 1989, Two-dimensional joint inversion of magnetotelluric and di-
pole-dipole resistivity data: Geophysics, 54, 254–262.
——–, 2001, Full 3-D inversion of electromagnetic data on PC: Journal of
Applied Geophysics, 46, 45–54.
Saydam, A. S., 1981, Very low frequency electromagnetic interpretation us-
ing tilt angle and ellipticity measurements: Geophysics, 46, 1594–1606.
Sharma, P. V., 1987, Magnetic methods applied to mineral exploration: Ore
Geology Reviews, 2, 323–357.
Shobita, K., 1998, Petrological report no. 97–98/9, unpublished report,
Atomic Mineral Directorate for Exploration and Research 共AMDER兲/De-
partment of Atomic Energy 共DAE兲, C. R., Nagpur, India.
Srinivas, Y., 2001, Modified Hilbert transform — A tool to the interpretation
of geophysical field anomalies: Ph.D. thesis, Osmania University.
Sundararajan, N., 1983, Interpretation techniques in geophysical exploration
using Hilbert transform: Ph.D. thesis, Osmania University.
Sundararajan, N., M. Narasimhachary, G. Nandakumar, and Y. Srinivas,
2007, VES and VLF an application to ground water exploration, Kham-
mam, India: The Leading Edge, 708–716.
Sundararajan, N., V. Rameshbabu, N. S. Prasad, and Y. Srinivas, 2006, VLF-
PROS–A MATLAB code for processing of VLF-EM data: Computers &
Geosciences, 32, 1806–1813.
Thompson, D. T., 1982, EULDPH: A new technique for making computer-
assisted depth estimates from magnetic data: Geophysics, 47, 31–37.
Won, I. J., and M. G. Bevis, 1987, Computing the gravitational and magnetic
anomalies due to a polygon: Algorithms and Fortran subroutines: Geo-
physics, 52, 232–238.
Wright, J. L., 1988, VLF Interpretation manual: Scintrex, Ltd.