Hole‐to‐surface resistivity measurements

Geophysics ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey J. Daniels

Hole‐to‐surface resistivity measurements over a layered volcanic tuff sequence illustrate procedures for gathering, reducing, and interpreting hole‐to‐surface resistivity data. The magnitude and direction of the total surface electric field resulting from a buried current source is calculated from orthogonal potential difference measurements for a grid of closely spaced stations. A contour map of these data provides a detailed map of the distribution of the electric field away from the drill hole. Resistivity anomalies can be enhanced by calculating the difference between apparent resistivities calculated from the total surface electric field and apparent resistivities for a layered earth model. Lateral discontinutities in the geoelectric section are verified by repeating the surface field measurments for current sources in several drill holes. A qualitative interpretation of the anomalous bodies within a layered earth can be made by using a three‐dimensional (3-D) resistivity model in a homogeneous half‐space. The general nature of resistive and conductive bodies causing anomalies away from the source drill holes is determined with the aid of data from several source holes, layered models, and 3-D models.


Geophysics ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 988-1001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey J. Daniels

The layered earth model is a fundamental interpretation aid for direct current resistivity data. This paper presents a solution for the layered earth problem for a buried current source and a buried receiver. The model is developed for source and receiver electrodes buried anywhere within a horizontally stratified layered earth containing an arbitrary number of resistivity layers. Model results for the normal well‐logging array indicate that large departures between true and apparent resistivity can be caused by thin beds or highly resistant layers. A true resistivity distribution from well logs can be established by modeling when the effects from borehole rugosity and fluid resistivity are negligible. The equations derived for resistivity well logs can be used to interpret hole‐to‐hole, hole‐to‐surface, and conventional surface array data. A field example demonstrates that deviations between hole‐to‐hole field data and model results, based on well logs in the receiver hole, can be accounted for by combining the resistivity logging models in the receiver holes with information from geologic logs. Differences between the field data and the layered‐model results are attributed to lateral changes between or near the source and receiver holes.



1997 ◽  
Vol 473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heng-Chih Lin ◽  
Edwin C. Kan ◽  
Toshiaki Yamanaka ◽  
Simon J. Fang ◽  
Kwame N. Eason ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTFor future CMOS GSI technology, Si/SiO2 interface micro-roughness becomes a non-negligible problem. Interface roughness causes fluctuations of the surface normal electric field, which, in turn, change the gate oxide Fowler-Nordheim tunneling behavior. In this research, we used a simple two-spheres model and a three-dimensional Laplace solver to simulate the electric field and the tunneling current in the oxide region. Our results show that both quantities are strong functions of roughness spatial wavelength, associated amplitude, and oxide thickness. We found that RMS roughness itself cannot fully characterize surface roughness and that roughness has a larger effect for thicker oxide in terms of surface electric field and tunneling behavior.



1956 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 553-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. M. Papadopoulos

ABSTRACTThe scattering of the dominant transverse electric mode in an infinite perfectly conducting rectangular wave-guide by a semi-infinite resistive strip, centrally placed and parallel to the electric field, is calculated by the use of Laplace transforms. Formulae are derived for the amplitude of the scattered waves, and the numerical results, obtained using a digital computer, are given for various values of the surface resistivity of the strip.







1984 ◽  
Vol 53 (5) ◽  
pp. 493-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. D. Wieck ◽  
E. Batke ◽  
D. Heitmann ◽  
J. P. Kotthaus ◽  
E. Bangert


2000 ◽  
Vol 73 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 230-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Ichimura ◽  
M Hirano ◽  
A Tada ◽  
E Arai ◽  
H Takamatsu ◽  
...  


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haizhou Ren ◽  
Pengtao Wang ◽  
Haibin Huo ◽  
Mengyan Shen ◽  
Marina Ruths ◽  
...  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document