3D geological volume modeling (raster 3D): is it really possible ?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

3D geological volume modeling (raster 3D): is it really possible ?

gene
Hello

Since I do not have Gocad (or others 3D geological modeling softwares), I try to do 3D modeling in geology with GRASS GIS. It works very well for surfaces

  • :faults surfaces from contours ( from boreholes and coal mining data):
Images intégrées 11
  • Thrust faults from boreholes data and traces of the faults on geological map:
Images intégrées 2Images intégrées 6

Images intégrées 3
  • interpolation of planar geological layers (v.surf.rst) from boreholes data 
Images intégrées 4
  • and cross sections from the model with nviz "cutting planes"
Images intégrées 5
But my problem is to build volumes (raster 3D) from these surfaces.  I read everything that was available on the series of r3.x modules and VTK with Paraview and the work of Sören Gebbert but I do not get any results really satisfactory.

For example:
from Images intégrées 9to Images intégrées 10


Is this really possible ?  (it needs lots and lots of memory)

Many thanks


_______________________________________________
grass-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 3D geological volume modeling (raster 3D): is it really possible ?

Michael Barton
It is indeed possible. The 2 important issues are the way you construct the voxels and the way you visualize them.

If you want to have solid layers with sharp upper and lower boundaries (e.g., geologic strata), use r.to.rast3 or r.to.rast3elev. If you want to represent a property that varies continuously vertically (e.g., soil OM or groundwater), you need to create 3D points and do a 3D interpolation. 

Once you have a volume, it just looks like a block unless you specify colors and visualize it in NVIZ with isosurfaces and/or slices. However, even if it "looks" like a block, you can still query it as a 3D volume to extract a geologic layer, for example based on its z coordinate or voxel value.

Michael



On Jun 9, 2012, at 6:04 AM, <[hidden email]>
 wrote:

For example:
from <plangeol.jpg>to <volumo.jpg>


Is this really possible ?  (it needs lots and lots of memory)

Many thanks 



_____________________
C. Michael Barton
Visiting Scientist, Integrated Science Program
National Center for Atmospheric Research &
University Consortium for Atmospheric Research
303-497-2889 (voice)

Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity 
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Arizona State University






_______________________________________________
grass-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 3D geological volume modeling (raster 3D): is it really possible ?

gene
I think that the problem is my understanding of  r.to.rast3elev

The problem


I define the 3D resolution (the lower limit of the formation is 540m and the upper 1330m)
   g.region res=200 res3=200  t=1400  b=500 tbres=20
(2d/3d resolution of 200m, top at 1400m, bottom at 500m and a top-bottom-resolution of 20m.

I create two support maps
   r.mapcalc 'one= 1'
   r.mapcalc 'two= 2'

and

r.to.rast3elev --o -l input=one,two elevation=bxltop,bxlbase output=bxl
If I export to vtk the result (with the boreholes) is (with the threshold filter = 1)


The upper surface is correct, the lower not


and and I do not understand why
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: 3D geological volume modeling (raster 3D): is it really possible ?

gene
Ok, it works now

with the two surfaces


the volume between the surfaces:


with the base surface:

and the top surface:


But I can not visualize it in nviz:
- I tried with isosurfaces attributes 1 and 2 or 2 only, like the threshold values in Paraview (from  r.mapcalc 'one= 1' and r.mapcalc 'two= 2' )
GRASS 6.4.2 (geol):~ > r3.univar volume20
 100%
total null and non-null cells: 2410200
total null cells: 1703698
Of the non-null cells:
----------------------
n: 706502
minimum: 2
maximum: 2
range: 0
mean: 2
mean of absolute values: 2
standard deviation: 0
variance: 0
variation coefficient: 0 %
sum: 1413004

- I tried with different values ​​associated with surfaces :

GRASS 6.4.2 (geol):~ > r.univar bxlbase
 100%
total null and non-null cells: 48204
total null cells: 8133
Of the non-null cells:
----------------------
n: 40071
minimum: 463.652
maximum: 749.639
range: 285.987
mean: 577.433
mean of absolute values: 577.433
standard deviation: 87.919
variance: 7729.75
variation coefficient: 15.2258 %
sum: 23138333.880065918
GRASS 6.4.2 (geol):~ > r.univar bxlbase
 100%
total null and non-null cells: 48204
total null cells: 8133
Of the non-null cells:
----------------------
n: 40071
minimum: 544.634
maximum: 1081.48
range: 536.846
mean: 842.635
mean of absolute values: 842.635
standard deviation: 126.068
variance: 15893.2
variation coefficient: 14.9612 %
sum: 33765222.471862793

But my nviz remains hopelessly empty.... (only the box outline)

Loading...