<p>Controlled Source Tensor Magnetotelluric (CSTMT) ground measurements were executed on the Hallandsåsen horst where a major tunnel is under construction. The instrument system EnviroMT are used for this purpose. The major research aspect of this thesis has been to form an opinion of the effectiveness of the method by comparing the results from the CSTMT survey with a prior investigation performed with the DC resistivity method. Another important part of this thesis has been to compile the basic and fundamental CSTMT and RMT theory, in a way that people outside the EM community easily can be introduced to the subject.</p><p>When comparing the different inversion models from the CSTMT and DC resistivity surveys one can see differences in the depth at which the conductors are resolved. In the CSTMT inversion models (TE+TM) there are two conductors that possibly can reach the depth of the tunnel in construction. These conductors are not resolved at the deeper structures in the DC resistivity models. Whether the conductors in the CSTMT inversions (TE+TM) truly extend to the depth at which they are modeled, or if they in deeper parts are artificial effects of regularisation in the inversion cannot be said for sure. Accounting for the low frequencies utilised in the TE mode, one has very strong arguments that the deep conductors seen in the CSTMT model are true.</p><p>The TE-mode models have shown to be much less affected by the complex problems of near field effects in comparison with the TM-mode models. The evidence of the near field effects is very prominent in the TM-mode phase, but in the phase of the TE-mode one can not see any such tendencies. However, one can see a discontinuity in the same part of three profile lines which shows that the data is disturbed but not nearly as much as in the TM-mode. The apparent resistivity seems to be over all less affected by the near field effects. In the apparent resistivity of the TE-mode, one can not discern any near field effects at all.</p><p>In the TM-mode, the apparent resistivity shows higher apparent resistivity than the real apparent resistivity in the near field. To receive more information about the deeper structures, lower controlled source frequencies were allowed in the TE-mode than in the TM-mode inversion models. The RMS in the TE-mode inversions has not been deteriorated, which is an another indication that the TE mode is not very disturbed by the near field effects.</p><p>The RMT inversion models are shown to be heavily biased in the deeper parts to which the RMT data are insensitive and regularization determining the outcome of the inversion. One can also see that regularisation is influencing the whole inversion model. In the shallow subsurface the inversion models should be same for CSTMT and RMT, but one can see differences in resistivity between the models.</p><p>The real induction arrows show features that are not as clearly displayed in either the phase or apparent resistivity. It seems that the real induction arrows are better at detecting lateral differences in conductivity in a more resistive media, than the phase and apparent resistivity.</p>

Controlled Source Tensor Magnetotelluric (CSTMT) ground measurements were executed on the Hallandsåsen horst where a major tunnel is under construction. The instrument system EnviroMT are used for this purpose. The major research aspect of this thesis has been to form an opinion of the effectiveness of the method by comparing the results from the CSTMT survey with a prior investigation performed with the DC resistivity method. Another important part of this thesis has been to compile the basic and fundamental CSTMT and RMT theory, in a way that people outside the EM community easily can be introduced to the subject. When comparing the different inversion models from the CSTMT and DC resistivity surveys one can see differences in the depth at which the conductors are resolved. In the CSTMT inversion models (TE+TM) there are two conductors that possibly can reach the depth of the tunnel in construction. These conductors are not resolved at the deeper structures in the DC resistivity models. Whether the conductors in the CSTMT inversions (TE+TM) truly extend to the depth at which they are modeled, or if they in deeper parts are artificial effects of regularisation in the inversion cannot be said for sure. Accounting for the low frequencies utilised in the TE mode, one has very strong arguments that the deep conductors seen in the CSTMT model are true. The TE-mode models have shown to be much less affected by the complex problems of near field effects in comparison with the TM-mode models. The evidence of the near field effects is very prominent in the TM-mode phase, but in the phase of the TE-mode one can not see any such tendencies. However, one can see a discontinuity in the same part of three profile lines which shows that the data is disturbed but not nearly as much as in the TM-mode. The apparent resistivity seems to be over all less affected by the near field effects. In the apparent resistivity of the TE-mode, one can not discern any near field effects at all. In the TM-mode, the apparent resistivity shows higher apparent resistivity than the real apparent resistivity in the near field. To receive more information about the deeper structures, lower controlled source frequencies were allowed in the TE-mode than in the TM-mode inversion models. The RMS in the TE-mode inversions has not been deteriorated, which is an another indication that the TE mode is not very disturbed by the near field effects. The RMT inversion models are shown to be heavily biased in the deeper parts to which the RMT data are insensitive and regularization determining the outcome of the inversion. One can also see that regularisation is influencing the whole inversion model. In the shallow subsurface the inversion models should be same for CSTMT and RMT, but one can see differences in resistivity between the models. The real induction arrows show features that are not as clearly displayed in either the phase or apparent resistivity. It seems that the real induction arrows are better at detecting lateral differences in conductivity in a more resistive media, than the phase and apparent resistivity.