Spelling suggestions: "subject:"geophysics -- arizona."" "subject:"geophysics -- orizona.""
11 |
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS NEAR AJO, ARIZONABarber, Lorraine, Crum, Greg, George, David, Ikeda, Carrie, Irvine, Graham, LaBrecque, Doug, LeGrand, Jonathon, Lim, Andrew, Loomis, John, McGill, Robert, Muloshi, Nicholas, Nghiem, Nghi, Sevier, Philip, Sternberg, Ben, Sullivan, Emily, Toxey, Jeff, Triana, Ana, Whitley, Bonnie, York, Catherine 01 June 1997 (has links)
No description available.
|
12 |
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS NEAR PATAGONIA, ARIZONABetts, Nathan K., Chongo, Poto, Dieter, Nina K., Elliott, Blake J., Geeslin, Gretchen R., Henley, Maren B., Marcus, Matthew W., Marquez, Matthew H., Ntambakwa, Eric M., Peterson, James A., Post, Randall M., Sheaffer, Aaron M., Simukonde, Nellow, Sternberg, Ben K., Uchrin, Michael J., White, Chase A., Wilson, Charles K., Zhang, Lin 01 May 1998 (has links)
No description available.
|
13 |
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS NEAR PATAGONIA, ARIZONACisneros, Gabriel, Dearman, Marnee M., Dodds, Brian E., Edwards, Nils K., El-Kaliouby, Hesham, Gajda, Charles E., Henley, Michael L., Killian, James R., Kyselka, Rebecca C., Moore, Jeffrey R., Mwape, Finnegan, Philbin, James J., Phiri, Aimee C., Reed, Bryan W., Sorgenfrei, Michael M., Sternberg, Ben K., Weston, Eric A. 01 June 1999 (has links)
A geophysical study of the Patagonia-Sonoita Nature Conservancy property was
carried out to determine the depth to bedrock and the geometry of the underlying basin in
the area. The survey was part of the ongoing U.S. Geological Survey studies of the
region. CSAMT, TEM, DC Resistivity, Seismic, Gravity, and Magnetic surveys were
performed. Many of the surveys were not able to map depth to bedrock because the
depth of penetration of these surveys was less than the large depth to bedrock, which we
encountered in this area. The best estimate of depth to bedrock in the center of the valley
is of the order of one kilometer, as identified by the CSAMT surveys. The CSAMT
survey found a significant low-resistivity anomaly in the vicinity of the Nature
Conservancy Visitor Center. This low-resistivity anomaly could be due to clay-rich
rocks or possibly mineralized rocks. Magnetic and TEM anomalies also occurred in the
same area as the CSAMT low-resistivity anomaly. Seismic surveys showed a loosely
consolidated surface layer above more consolidated alluvium. The model from the ·
Gravity survey shows an extensive alluvial basin overlying rhyolite with high and low-angle
faults.
|
14 |
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS AT THE UNITED MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, SUPER-FUND SITE, NOGALES, ARIZONABishop, Bradley P., Casto, Daniel W., Chama, Mukonde, Heinecke, Justin M., Henley, Michael L., Malsom, Andrew A., Mason, Mark S., Miller, Alisa C., Mwewa, David C., Potts, K. Greg, Rice, Andrew W., Standridge, Larry R., Sternberg, Ben K., Ward, William J., Westervelt, Jason V. 07 May 2000 (has links)
During the Spring semester, 2000, the University of Arizona Geophysics Field
Camp (GEN/GEOS 416/516 class) conducted geophysical surveys in the vicinity of the
United Musical Instruments facility near Nogales, Arizona. This site is a super-fund site,
due to the presence of contaminants, including TCE, in the ground water. The
contaminants are presumed to have come from cleaning and electroplating solutions,
which had been dumped into a small pond on the UMI property. The U.S. Geological
Survey provided the funding for our study. The objective was to determine subsurface
structural information that would help interpret possible future movement of the
contaminant plume.
Transient electromagnetic (TEM) data were most useful for interpreting the
subsurface geohydrology. Water table was found at a depth of approximately 30 meters,
north of the UMI building. A particularly interesting feature in the TEM data was a high-resistivity
anomaly and an associated low-resistivity anomaly 10 to 1 00 meters northeast
of the UMI building. We interpret the high-resistivity anomaly as possibly being due to
an impermeable levee that was associated with a buried stream channel and the low-resisitivity
anomaly as possibly being due to the pooling of conductive contaminated
fluids against the impermeable levee.
DC resistivity surveys were dominated by cultural coupling, which was pervasive
m the survey area. Magnetic readings were used to help locate potential cultural
interference. Gravity surveys indicated a low-density anomaly, which may be due to a
buried stream channel. This feature could be related to the features mapped with the
TEM surveys. The seismic survey indicated progressively more compacted and
cemented alluvium, overlying the Nogales formation. The seismic data did not provide
any direct information about the geohydrology of the area
|
15 |
Geophysical Surveys near the San Pedro River, ArizonaCallegary, James, Chamunda, Tafwachi, Dearman, Marnee, Drury, Amelia, Jannusch, Jennifer, Katako, Rollina, Mkwayaya, Mabvuto, Mohamedyahya, Elhafedh, Muzumara, Dorcas, Russell, Simon, Sternberg, Ben, Wagner, Frank, Zgambo, Simon 10 May 2001 (has links)
During the Spring semester, 2001, the University of Arizona Geophysics Field
Camp (GEN/GEOS 416/516) conducted geophysical surveys near the San Pedro River,
Arizona. This site is being investigated by the U.S. Geological Survey as part of a basinwide
study of water resources. Our geophysical investigation was designed to provide
information that will assist in this hydrogeological study. The surveys were conducted
near Boquillas Ranch (approximately 2 km south of Fairbank, AZ) and approximately 2
km north of Hereford, AZ.
Dipole-dipole and Schlumberger DC resistivity surveys were conducted at both
the Boquillas Ranch and Hereford sites. Depth to water table was approximately 10-20
meters at the Boquillas Ranch site and 0-to-1 0 meters at the Hereford site. The electrical
resistivities at depth at the Hereford site were unusually low for Arizona basin-fill
sediments (less than 10 ohm-m).
Transient electromagnetic (TEM) soundings were also recorded at both the
Boquillas Ranch and Hereford sites. Electrical resistivity models were determined that
were very similar to the DC resistivity models. In general, the TEM soundings were able
to provide similar information to the DC resistivity soundings with greater data
acquisition rates and with a smaller crew.
Electromagnetic induction (EM31 and EM34) surveys were run at the Hereford
site. Qualitatively, an electrical resistivity structure was found that was similar to the DC
resistivity survey and the TEM survey results (i.e. the resistivity decreased with
increasing depth of investigation).These data are not well suited, however, to quantitative modeling.
Seismic, magnetic, and gravity surveys were run at the Boquillas Ranch site.
These surveys provided useful background information on the geologic structure at this
site. They did not provide direct information on the hydrogeology at the site.
|
16 |
Geophysical Surveys near Fort Huachuca, ArizonaCall, Christopher J., Gleason, Arianna E., Kaunda, Rennie B., Meneill, Michael J., Mkandawire, Emmanuel, Palmer, Joe D., Portney, Barrie S., Sternberg, Ben K., Tembo, Jones, Wagner, Shanda L. 04 May 2002 (has links)
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has been studying the water
resources in the vicinity of Fort Huachuca, Arizona. As a part of this study, they
contracted an Airborne Electromagnetic (AEM) survey of the region, which was flown in
1997. During the spring semester of 2002, the University of Arizona Geophysics Field
Camp class conducted Transient Electromagnetic (TEM) surveys at five locations near
AEM flight lines in order to provide an independent test of the resistivity structure.
We used 100 X 100 m transmitting loops. A central induction loop array was
employed where the transient decay voltage after transmitter turn off was recorded in the
center of the transmitter loop. The TEM data were inverted using a smooth modeling
program from Zonge Engineering. The resulting apparent resistivity cross sections, in
general, showed a resisitivity structure that was similar to the AEM cross sections down
to the depth of the investigation of the TEM survey (approximately 200 m). The surface
layers (zero to 50 meters) showed high resistivity (30 to 300 ohm-m) and deeper layers
showed lower resistivities (10- 30 ohm meters).
We also recorded low-induction number (LIN) EM surveys over a sink hole
feature in this area. There was a pronounced conductivity high coincident with the
sinkhole. Background conductivity readings were typically 10-15 mS/m and over the
sinkhole feature the conductivity readings were typically 20-25 mS/m.
|
17 |
Geophysical Surveys near Chino Valley, ArizonaAl-senani, Haitham S., Cox, Melissa R., Duke, Vasco S., Duncan, Laurel M., El-Kaliouby, Hesham, Gandler, Greg L., Geauner, Scott A., Manuel, Justin, Powell, Kathy S., Sternberg, Ben K. 07 May 2003 (has links)
Four different geophysical methods were used near Chino Valley, Arizona in
order to map a suspected andesite intrusive, identified as plug 15, which had
originally been found using aeromagnetic data already acquired over the area.
Magnetic, transient electromagnetic, seismic, and gravity measurements were
collected between 3/1/2003-3/2/2003 and 3/22/2003-3/23/2003. The surveys were
located near the center of section 35, township 17 North, Range 2 West, just north of
Chino Valley, AZ. The magnetic and TEM surveys provided the best indication of
the location and depth of the plug. The north-south spatial extent of the plug was
estimated to be approximately 600 meters. The depth to the top of the plug was found
from the TEM survey to be approximately 300 meters at the center of the survey. The
seismic survey did not reach deep enough to find the andesite anomaly and the
gravity survey did not appear to be affected by the plug. Magnetic, TEM, and seismic
surveys were also performed at another site located approximately 1.25 km northeast
of plug 15. The seismic survey did not reach deep enough and the magnetic survey
was too short to provide a depth interpretation. The single TEM sounding measured a
very high resistivity (approximately 900 ohm-m) at this site.
|
18 |
Geophysical Surveys near Sierra Vista, ArizonaAsbury, Nicholas A., Barker, Margaret E., Blainey, Joan, Fabijanic, J. Matthew, Hazwezwe, Nchimunya M., Miller, Thomas E., Musosha, Chalwe P., O’Brien, Gillian E., Sternberg, Ben K. 07 June 2004 (has links)
Five different geophysical methods were used near Sierra Vista, Arizona in order
to determine the presence or absence of impermeable silt-clay layers in reference to a
proposed water-retention system. Geophysical investigations were conducted at
Woodcutters 3 and Basin Floor 1 (both approximately one kilometer long north-south and
east-west transects), and School Basin (10 meter by 50 meter area where only TEM data
were collected). Magnetic, VLF, seismic, EM 31 and 34, and TEM survey data were
collected on February 28th and 29th and March 20th and 21st of 2004. Magnetic and VLF
surveys conducted at the Woodcutters 3 and Basin Floor 1 sites had relatively flat profiles
that indicated only a few single-station anomalies with little difference between the two
sites. Seismic survey data produced velocities in two-layer earth models that were similar
between the two sites in the upper 5 meters, again indicating little difference between the
sites. The EM 31 and 34 surveys, with depths of investigation in the 3-6 meter range,
measured higher ground conductivity values in the upper 10 meters at the Woodcutters 3
site. This agreed with shallow borehole data from the Woodcutters 3 and Basin Floor 1
sites. The higher ground conductivity is indicative of higher water content, which may be
due to the increased percentage of clay. For the TEM surveys, conducted at all three sites
and with depths of investigations in the 0-50 meter range, it was found that a low
resistivity layer at 30-50 meter depth resides at the Basin Floor 1 site. This layer is deeper
than the available borehole data. At both sites the borehole data do not show definitive
clay layers, making it difficult to correlate the high conductivity values with clay content
percentages.
|
19 |
Geophysical Investigations near Yuma, ArizonaAl-Zaabi, Mohamed, Eastman, Julie, Huebner, Laura, Muhlenkamp, Brianna, Riley, Jeannemarie, Rohe, Chris, Smith, Gwynneth, Souza, Deborah, Sternberg, Ben, Taft, Cristin M. January 2005 (has links)
VLF (Very Low Frequency), magnetic, TEM (Transient ElectroMagnetics), and Seismic were performed in Yuma, Arizona over two weekends in February and March of 2005. The targets of interest in Yuma included the depth to the shallow bedrock, the trace of the Algodones Fault, and the distribution and thickness of clay units. The VLF and magnetic surveys both proved not to be valuable for the interpretation of groundwater or bedrock depth. The Seismic surveys found a quartz monzonite horst structure at a depth of 8 meters and 250 in length and a graben at 8 meters depth and 48 meters in length. The TEM surveys were performed along Line 2 and Line 4 for Site One, Line 1 and Line 3 for Site Two, and SG1 line and SG2 line for Site Three. The TEM survey, located near the Seismic surveys, was in agreement with the findings of these Seismic surveys. At all sites, the TEM surveys were useful for determining depth to water table. At one site, the TEM survey mapped substantial near-surface clay layers.
|
20 |
GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE UPPER SAN PEDRO RIVER BASIN, BENSON, ARIZONAAspiras, Gerald P., Crawford, Matthew T., Cylwik, Scott D., Dangi, Tarun, Dewan, Milan M., Hays, Naydene R., Miller, Thomas E., Sternberg, Ben K., Thompson, Mayo 07 May 2006 (has links)
Four geophysical surveys were conducted at the Nature Conservancy about 20 miles north of Benson, AZ, in the Upper San Pedro River Basin, in order to better understand the nature of the sub-surface features of the basin. The geophysical methods included TEM (Transient Electromagnetic), seismic, EM34 and magnetic surveys. The TEM, seismic and magnetic surveys were conducted perpendicular to the river basin while the EM34 lines followed the riverbed. The perpendicular surveys were divided into two regions, referred to as the South and North Lines. The TEM, seismic, and magnetic surveys revealed a consolidated bedrock structure at shallow depths (30-40 m) along the South Line. The feature has an east-west extension of approximately 500 meters, and is located just east of the San Pedro River. None of the perpendicular surveys were able to detect bedrock features along the North Line, implying that the depth to bedrock exceeds the maximum depth of this investigation (360 m). Both lines showed regions of high porosity, and, potentially, of saturated materials. These regions were more prevalent along the North Line, where numerous highly porous areas were detected at various depths (including one region beginning at a depth of 50 meters and extending at least to 360 m). The EM34 failed to detect any appreciable long-wavelength changes in conductivity along the riverbed, though localized point anomalies were found.
|
Page generated in 0.0356 seconds