ONTARIO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geophysical Data Set 1074
Ontario Airborne Geophysical Surveys Magnetic and Gamma-Ray Spectrometric Data Renfrew Area
by
Ontario Geological Survey
2014
Ontario Geological Survey Ministry of Northern Development and Mines Willet Green Miller Centre, 933 Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, Ontario P3E 6B5 Canada
© Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2014
Contents
CREDITS ...... iii DISCLAIMER ...... iii CITATION ...... iii NOTE ...... iii 1. Introduction ...... 1 2. Survey Location and Specifications ...... 1 2.1. Survey Location ...... 1 2.2. Survey Specifications ...... 1 3. Aircraft, Equipment and Personnel ...... 3 4. Data Acquisition ...... 4 4.1. Acquistion Summary ...... 4 4.2. Pre-survey Tests and Calibrations ...... 5 5. Data Compilation and Processing ...... 5 5.1. Personnel ...... 5 5.2. Base Maps ...... 6 5.3. Processing of the Magnetic Data ...... 6 5.4. Processing of Radiometric Data ...... 12 5.5. Processing of the Positioning and Altitude Data ...... 19 6. Final Products ...... 19 7. Quality Assurance and Quality Control ...... 23 7.1. Survey Contractor ...... 23 7.2. QA/QC Geophysicist ...... 26 7.3. Ministry of Northern Development and Mines ...... 27 8. References ...... 27 Appendix A. Test and Calibration Results ...... 29 Appendix B. Archive Definitions ...... 58 Appendix C. Operational Reports ...... 65
FIGURES
1. Geology of the Renfrew survey area; survey boundaries shown in black ...... 2 2. Ontario master aeromagnetic grid. The outline for the sample data set to be levelled, using the Vickers survey area as the example, is shown ...... 8 3. Difference grid (difference between survey grid and master grid), using the Vickers survey as the example ...... 9 4. Difference grid after application of non-linear filtering and rotation, using the Vickers survey as the example ...... 10 5. Level correction grid, using the Vickers survey as the example ...... 10
ii
CREDITS
List of accountabilities and responsibilities. • Jack Parker, Senior Manager, Earth Resources and Geoscience Mapping Section, Ontario Geological Survey (OGS), Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) – accountable for the geophysical survey projects, including contract management • Edna Mueller-Markham, Senior Consulting Geophysicist, Paterson, Grant & Watson Limited (PGW), Toronto, Ontario, Geophysicist under contract to MNDM – responsible for the airborne geophysical survey project management, quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) • Tom Watkins, Manager, Publication Services Unit, GeoServices Section, Ontario Geological Survey, MNDM – managed the project-related hard-copy products • Desmond Rainsford, Geophysicist, Earth Resources and Geoscience Mapping Section, Ontario Geological Survey – responsible for initial quality assurance (QA), quality control (QC) and project-related digital products • Goldak Airborne Surveys, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan – data acquisition and data compilation
DISCLAIMER
To enable the rapid dissemination of information, this digital data has not received a technical edit. However, every possible effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information presented in this report and the accompanying data; however, the Ontario Ministry of Northern Development and Mines does not assume liability for errors that may occur. Users should verify critical information.
CITATION
Parts of this publication may be quoted if credit is given. It is recommended that reference to this publication be made in the following form:
Ontario Geological Survey 2014. Survey report on Renfrew area, 70p. [PDF document]; in Ontario airborne geophysical surveys, magnetic and gamma-ray spectrometric data, grid and profile data (ASCII and Geosoft® formats) and vector data, Renfrew area, Ontario Geological Survey, Geophysical Data Set 1074.
NOTE
Users of OGS products are encouraged to contact those Aboriginal communities whose traditional territories may be located in the mineral exploration area to discuss their project.
iii
iv Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
1. Introduction The airborne survey contract was awarded through a Request for Proposal and Contractor Selection process. The system and contractor selected for the survey area were judged on many criteria, including the following: • applicability of the proposed system to the local geology and potential deposit types • aircraft capabilities and safety plan • experience with similar surveys • QA/QC plan • capacity to acquire the data and prepare final products in the allotted time • price-performance
2. Survey Location and Specifications
2.1. SURVEY LOCATION The Renfrew survey area is located within the Central Metasedimentary Belt of the Grenville Province. The simplified geology is shown in Figure 1. The north and eastern parts of the area are underlain primarily by metamorphosed carbonate rocks comprising mainly marbles, calc-silicate gneiss with minor mafic and felsic gneiss. Large (up to 15 km) plutonic bodies, with granitic, dioritic and tonalitic compositions, are intruded into these rocks. The northwest corner of the survey area is occupied by granitic gneisses belonging to the Central Gneiss Belt. Sinistral strike-slip deformation has been noted in the area; a later ductile deformational event has also been identified along with a subsequent dextral thrusting event. Each of these deformational episodes appears to have been associated with syenitic to granitic magmatism. Strongly potassic alteration, with concentrations of up to 11.5% K2O, has also been noted in the area.
2.2. SURVEY SPECIFICATIONS The Renfrew area survey specifications and tolerances are as follows: a) Traverse-line spacing and direction • flight-line spacing is 200 m • the survey area was flown with lines oriented at 150°/330° (relative to UTM grid). The distance between adjacent flight lines will not exceed 1.25 times the line spacing for a distance of more than 1 km along any flight line. b) Control-line spacing and direction • at regular 2000 m intervals, perpendicular to the flight-line direction • tie lines were flown along the 10 survey boundary vectors that were not perpendicular to the traverse lines c) Terrain clearance of the magnetometers • nominal terrain clearance is 125 m and will be consistent with safety of aircraft and crew • altitude tolerance limited to ±15 m, except in areas of severe topography • altitude tolerance limited to ±10 m at flight-line–control-line intersections except in areas of severe topography
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.1 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
d) Aircraft speed • nominal aircraft speed is 55 to 75 m/s e) Magnetic diurnal variation • could not exceed a maximum deviation of 3.0 nT peak-to-peak over a long chord equivalent to 1 minute f) Magnetometer noise envelope • in-flight noise envelope could not exceed 0.1 nT, for straight and level flight • base station noise envelope could not exceed 0.1 nT g) Re-flights and turns • all re-flights of flight-line segments intersected at least 2 control lines • all turns at the end of flight lines or control lines took place beyond the survey or block boundaries
Figure 1. Geology of the Renfrew survey area (from Ontario Geological Survey 2011); survey boundaries shown in black.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.2 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
3. Aircraft, Equipment and Personnel Aircraft: C-GJBB, C-GJBG Piper® Navajo® PA-31 4 m composite tail stinger Demonstrated Figure of Merit 0.9 nT Sensor Separation Lateral: 584″ 14.783 m Longitudinal: 384″ 9.754 m Aircraft Magnetometers: Manufacturer: Geometrics Type and Model Number: Cesium G-822A Range: 20 000 to 90 000 nT Sensitivity: 0.005 nT Sampling Rate: 10 Hz Base Station Magnetometers: Manufacturer: GEM Systems, Inc. Type and Model Number: Overhauser GSM-19W Range: 20 000 to 120 000 nT Sensitivity: 0.01 nT Sampling Rate: 1 Hz Real-time Magnetic Compensator: Manufacturer: RMS Instruments Limited Type and Model Number: AADCII Range: 20 000 to 100 000 nT Resolution: 0.001 nT Sampling Rate: 10 Hz Digital Acquisition System: Manufacturer: Goldak Exploration Technology Type and Model Number: GEDAS Sampling Rate: 10 Hz Data Format: GEDAS binary Radiometric System: Manufacturer: Radiation Solutions Inc. Type and Model Number: RS-500 Digital Gamma Array Spectrometer Detector Volume: 33.6 L downward, 8.4 L upward Channels: 1024 Sample rate: 1 Hz Positioning Cameras: Manufacturer: Panasonic Model: GPKR402 HRSV Lens: WV-LR4R5 4.5 mm FOV at 1000 feet; AGL is 1040 by 1300 feet Barometric Altimeter: Manufacturer: Setra Systems, Inc. Type and Model Number: 270 Range: –1000 to 10 000 feet Resolution: 1 m Sampling Rate: 10 Hz
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.3 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Radar Altimeter 1: Manufacturer: Thompson Type and Model Number: CFS 530A Range: 0 to 8000 feet Resolution: 1 m Accuracy: 2% Sampling Rate: 10 Hz Radar Altimeter 2: Manufacturer: Terra Type and Model Number: TRA3000 – TRI40 Range: 40 to 2500 feet Resolution: 3 m Accuracy: 5 to 7% Sampling Rate: 10 Hz Positioning System: Manufacturer: Goldak Exploration Technology Ltd. Type and Model Number: GEDAS Displays: 10″ colour LCD graphical display Graphic LCD pilot indicator GPS Subsystem: Manufacturer: NovAtel Inc. Type and Model Number: OEM4 dual-frequency ProPak™ (×3) System Resolution: 1 m Overall accuracy: 3 m in real-time; <1 m post-corrected Goldak Personnel: Captain: Jay Mathieson Timothy Foyle Co-pilot/Equipment Operator: Lawrence Ando Darryl Sandhana Field Processing: Drew Rotheram Abbas Shaik Project Management: Ben Goldak Data Processing: Glen Carson
4. Data Acquisition 4.1. ACQUISTION SUMMARY Goldak Airborne Surveys was selected by the MNDM to perform the Renfrew area horizontal magnetic gradient and gamma-ray survey over an area of approximately 6000 km2 centred about 45 km south of Ottawa, Ontario. The principal geophysical sensors were 3 high-sensitivity caesium vapour magnetometers and gamma-ray spectrometer linked to 42 L (33.6 L downward-looking and 8.4 L upward-looking) of sodium iodide detectors. Ancillary equipment included a GPS navigation system with GPS base station, a colour video tracking camera, temperature and pressure sensors, radar and barometric altimeters and 2 base station magnetometers.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.4 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Goldak Airborne Surveys utilized 2 of its aircraft—registrations C-GJBB and C-GJBG—for this survey and based its operations out of Arnprior, Ontario.
The survey area was flown with traverse lines oriented N30°W and perpendicular control lines. The traverse-line spacing was 200 m, whereas the control-line spacing was 2000 m. An additional 10 tie lines were flown along the off-angle survey borders. Total survey coverage was 33 975 line-kilometres (30 586 km traverse lines plus 3389 km tie lines).
Aircraft C-GJBG arrived in Arnprior on September 30, 2013, and performed its first production flight on October 5. Aircraft C-GJBB arrived in Arnprior on October 10, 2013, and performed its first production flight on October 14. Fifty-five flights were required to complete the project. To complete the project, 55 flights were required: 36 production flights and 19 calibration flights. On October 4, 13, 18, 22 and 24, 2013, when weather conditions prevented radiometric surveying, the aircraft were dispatched to fly the eastern Ontario survey that Goldak was also performing for MNDM at the same time. The survey of the Renfrew area was completed on November 6, 2013, after which time survey operations continued exclusively on the eastern Ontario survey until final demobilization on December 8.
Field logs detailing production, status and weather conditions were kept and forwarded to the MNDM quality assurance authority on a weekly basis and are included as Appendix C.
4.2. PRE-SURVEY TESTS AND CALIBRATIONS The following tests and calibrations were performed prior to data acquisition: • System lag verification (“lag test”) • Magnetometer heading check • Magnetometer figure of merit (“FOM”) check • Altimeter calibration (“radar stack”) • Stripping ratio calibration (“pad test”) • Cosmic calibration • Altitude attenuation and sensitivity calibration
The pad tests took place in Goldak’s Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, hangar using their set of calibrated test pads. The altitude attenuation and sensitivity calibration was flown over the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC)–approved Danielson calibration range, approximately 100 km south of Saskatoon. Radar stack and lag tests for C-GJBG were flown in Arnprior, whereas these tests for C-GJBB were flown in Saskatoon. The heading tests were flown over the Bourget magnetic observatory site near Ottawa before commencement of data collection. Several figure of merit flights were undertaken over an area of relatively low magnetic gradient centred directly over Arnprior, approximately 55 km northwest of Ottawa.
Further details of these tests are described in 7.1.1 and their results are provided in Appendix A.
5. Data Compilation and Processing 5.1. PERSONNEL The following personnel were involved in the compilation of data and creation of the final products: Final Processing: Glen Carson Field Processing: Drew Rotheram, Abbas Shaikh
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.5 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
5.2. BASE MAPS Base maps of the survey area were supplied by the Ontario Ministry of Northern Development and Mines.
5.2.1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Datum: North American Datum 1983 (NAD83) Local Datum: (4 m) Canada Ellipsoid: Geodetic Reference System 1980 (GRS 80) Projection: UTM (Zone 18N) Central Meridian: 75° W False Northing: 0 m False Easting: 500 000 m Scale Factor: 0.9996
5.3. PROCESSING OF THE MAGNETIC DATA
5.3.1. INITIAL FIELD PROCESSING Processing of the magnetic data begins in the field where the raw magnetic, positioning and altitude data from the aircraft acquisition systems is first imported into a Geosoft® Oasis montaj™ database on a line basis. The magnetic base station data, logged during the corresponding flight time, were then merged with the flight data for display and quality control checks.
A system latency correction, determined from the pre-survey lag test of 0.4 seconds for the tail magnetometer data and 0.3 seconds for the wing-tip magnetometer data, is then applied.
The raw, measured magnetic gradients are normalized using the known aircraft sensor separations and aircraft direction to give consistently signed gradient values in units of nT/m. A correction matrix, derived from the attitude data, is then applied scaling them to provide true longitudinal and transverse gradient values parallel to and perpendicular to the ideal line direction.
Quality-control procedures described in section 7.1.2 are also performed at this time.
5.3.2. CONTROL-LINE LEVELLING The intention of control-line levelling is to apply a smoothly-varying function to the measured data, which results in nearly identical values at the intersections of traverse and control lines. The most significant component of the correction is to accommodate the diurnal variation of the magnetic field. Other sources of error are altitude errors, GPS positioning errors and system drift.
Levelling of the total field data consists of the following steps: 1. Calculation of the positions of the survey-line–control-line intersection points and the extraction of mismatch values of the magnetic data between the line and control lines at these points.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.6 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
2. An iterative application of corrections, based of best-fit, first-order linear trends of mismatch values (with outliers removed), on the traverse and control lines until the resulting corrections approach zero. 3. An iterative application of long-wavelength corrections on traverse and control lines determined by applying median and low-pass filters to the remaining intersection mismatches (with outliers removed) and then using Akima spline interpolation between the now-filtered intersection mismatch values. This enhances and isolates correction “features” that span several intersections. The lengths of the filters are based on the traverse-line–control-line intersection separations. In this case, the initial filter lengths spanned 10 control-line intersections on survey lines and 50 survey-line intersections on control lines. The number of intersections spanned is reduced in increments to an appropriate minimum until the correction approaches zero. 4. Calculation of the first vertical derivative from the gridded data of the intermediate levelled total field using a 2-D fast Fourier transform (FFT) operator. 5. An altitude correction derived by multiplying the calculated vertical gradient by the aircraft’s deviation from the planned surface height is then applied to the original unlevelled magnetic data. 6. Steps 1 to 3 are then repeated using the altitude-corrected magnetic data. 7. Manual inspection of the remaining intersection mismatches and reducing it to zero (where appropriate) by applying the necessary corrections to either the survey or tie lines. Special attention is paid to ensuring that the overall correction profiles are as smooth as possible and that there is no line-to-line correlation in the correction profiles, which implies a misapplied correction. 8. The second vertical derivative of the total field grid is analyzed to ensure that the corrections are sufficient and appropriate. Features that appear along the survey lines in the second vertical derivative may be the result of over-correction or under-correction. In either case, the solution is to revise the correction profile at those intersections.
5.3.3. CALCULATION AND REMOVAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL GEOMAGNETIC REFERENCE FIELD The International Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) was calculated using the 2005 model year with a constant date of October 20, 2013 (roughly the mid-point of the survey) as the reference date. A constant altitude of 355 m, the mean altitude over the course of the survey, was specified as the elevation. This value was subtracted from the tie-line levelled data to obtain the residual magnetic field data.
5.3.4. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA DATA LEVELLING In 1989, as part of the requirements for the contract with the Ontario Geological Survey (OGS) to compile and level all existing Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) aeromagnetic data (flown prior to 1989) in Ontario, Paterson, Grant & Watson Limited developed a robust method to level the magnetic data of various base levels to a common datum provided by the GSC as 812.8 m grids. The essential theoretical aspects of the levelling methodology were fully discussed in Gupta et al. (1989) and Reford et al. (1990). The method was later applied to the remainder of the GSC data across Canada and the high-resolution airborne magnetic and electromagnetic surveys flown by the OGS (Ontario Geological Survey 1996). It has since been applied to all newly acquired OGS aeromagnetic surveys.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.7 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey a) Terminology Master grid: refers to the 200 m Ontario magnetic grid compiled and levelled to the 812.8 m magnetic datum from the Geological Survey of Canada GSC levelling: the process of levelling profile data to a master grid, first applied to GSC data Intra-survey levelling or microlevelling: refers to the removal of residual line noise described earlier in this chapter; the wavelengths of the noise removed are usually shorter than tie-line spacing Inter-survey levelling or GSC levelling: refers to the level adjustments applied to a block of data; the adjustments are the long wavelength (in the order of tens of kilometres) differences with respect to a common datum, in this case, the 200 m Ontario master grid, which was derived from all pre-1989 GSC magnetic data and adjusted, in turn, by the 812.8 m GSC Canada-wide grid b) The GSC Levelling Methodology The GSC levelling methodology is described below, using, as an example, the Vickers survey flown for OGS. Several data processing procedures are assumed to be applied to the survey data prior to levelling, such as microlevelling, IGRF calculation and removal. The final levelled data are gridded at 1/5 of the line spacing. If a survey was flown as several distinct blocks with different flight directions, then each block is treated as an independent survey.
Figure 2. Ontario master aeromagnetic grid (Ontario Geological Survey 1999). The outline for the sample data set to be levelled, using the Vickers survey area as the example, is shown.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.8 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
The steps in the GSC levelling process are as follows: 1. Create an upward continuation of the survey grid to 305 m. Almost all recent surveys (1990 and later) to be compiled were flown at a nominal terrain clearance of 100 m or less. The first step in the levelling method is to upward continue the survey grid to 305 m, the nominal terrain clearance of the Ontario master grid (Figure 2). The grid cell size for the survey grids is set at 100 m. Since the wavelengths of level corrections will be greater than 10 to 15 km, working with 100 m or even 200 m grids at this stage will not affect the integrity of the levelling method. Only at the very end, when the level corrections are imported into the databases, will the level correction grids be re-gridded to 1/5 of line spacing. The un-levelled 100 m grid is extended by at least 2 grid cells beyond the actual survey boundary, so that, in the subsequent processing, all data points are covered.
2. Create a difference grid between the survey grid and the Ontario master grid. The difference between the upward-continued survey grid and the Ontario master grid, re- gridded at 100 m, is computed (Figure 3). The short wavelengths represent the higher resolution of the survey grid. The long wavelengths represent the level difference between the 2 grids.
Figure 3. Difference grid (difference between survey grid and master grid), using the Vickers survey as the example.
3. Rotate difference grid so that flight-line direction is parallel with grid column or row, if necessary. 4. Apply the first pass of a non-linear filter (Naudy and Dreyer 1968) of wavelength on the order of 15 to 20 km along the flight-line direction. Reapply the same non-linear filter across the flight-line direction. 5. Apply the second pass of a non-linear filter of wavelength on the order of 2000 to 5000 m along the flight-line direction. Reapply the same non-linear filter across the flight-line direction.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.9 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
6. Rotate the filtered grid back to its original (true) orientation (Figure 4).
Figure 4. Difference grid after application of non-linear filtering and rotation, using the Vickers survey as the example.
7. Apply a low-pass filter to the non-linear filtered grid. Streaks may remain in the non-linear filtered grid, mostly caused by edge effects. They must be removed by a frequency-domain, low-pass filter with the wavelengths in the order of 12 km (Figure 5).
Figure 5. Level correction grid, using the Vickers survey as the example.
8. Re-grid to 1/5 line spacing and import level corrections into database. 9. Subtract the level correction channel from the un-levelled channel to obtain the level corrected channel. 10. Make final grid using the gridding algorithm of choice with grid cell size at 1/5 of line spacing.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.10 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey c) Survey Specific Parameters
The following GSC levelling parameters were used in the Renfrew survey: • Upward continuation distance: 205 m • First pass non-linear filter length: 40 000 m • Second pass non-linear filter length: 20 000 m • Low-pass filter cut-off wavelength: 15 000 m
5.3.5. PROCESSING OF MEASURED MAGNETIC GRADIENTS Processing of the magnetic gradient data consists of the following steps: 1. Attitude correction, as described in section 5.3.1, is performed before levelling the gradient information. The effect of attitude on a particular measurement is dependent on the magnitude of the local gradient and the degree of deviation from straight and level flight. This compound effect cannot be accounted for by tie-line levelling of the data, as it is both non-systematic and at a much shorter wavelength than the tie-line separation. Correcting the data for attitude before levelling insures that levelling corrections are kept to a minimum. 2. Horizontal gradients are calculated from the gridded total field data, sampled into the database and subtracted from the measured, rotated gradients. 3. A 31 second median filter followed by a 31 second low-pass filter is applied to the difference and then added back to the measured gradient. This ensures that the lower wavelengths accurately represent the regional field, which is otherwise difficult to achieve.
5.3.6. GRADIENT-ENHANCED GRIDDING Gradient enhancement of the total magnetic field grid was achieved using Goldak’s Gradient Variable Trend (GVT) gridding algorithm, which utilizes the horizontal gradients to guide the between-line interpolation of the data to generate a more realistic image free of artifacts and irregularities present grids generated from minimum curvature algorithms.
5.3.7. CALCULATION OF VERTICAL DERIVATIVES OF THE RESIDUAL MAGNETIC FIELD The final grid of the residual magnetic field values is then used as input to create the first vertical derivative, for both the tail sensor and gradient-enhanced magnetic grids. The latter grid is presented on the second vertical derivative maps because of its superior rendition of the magnetic anomalies. The calculation is done in the frequency domain by combining the transfer function of the second vertical derivative and a small low-pass filter (200 m, Order 5 low-pass Butterworth filter) aimed at attenuating the high frequency signal enhanced by the second derivative operator, without aliasing the geological signal.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.11 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
5.3.8. CALCULATION OF THE KEATING COEFFICIENTS The magnetic signatures of kimberlite pipes are approximately circular anomalies. Through pattern recognition analysis of a moving window, first-order regression between the analytic signal of the residual magnetic field grid and the theoretical signature of a magnetic vertical cylinder, correlation coefficients are derived (Keating 1995). Where the correlation meets some threshold, the location, magnitude and sign of the correlation, expressed as a percentage are retained and can be plotted on a magnetic map. Increasing values in magnitude of the coefficient signify a goodness of fit with a cylindrical model, whereas sign signifies the direction of magnetization as some kimberlite pipes acquired magnetization during a time of geomagnetic field reversal.
The Keating coefficients were calculated using the GSC Kim_TMI utility with the following parameters: • Window Size: 1000 m • Minimum Correlation: 0.75 • Cylinder Radius: 100 m • Distance to Sensor: 100 m • Susceptibility: 0.005 • Field Inclination: 70.9° • Field Declination: –12.8° • Field Intensity: 54 640 nT
5.4. PROCESSING OF RADIOMETRIC DATA All radiometric raw channels were background corrected from overwater background line segments, flown pre- and post-flight, in the field for quality control.
The processing methodology was as described in the IAEA Airborne Gamma Ray Spectrometer Surveying Report (IAEA 1991). In this case, no energy calibration or dead-time correction was done as the dead time is typically much less than 0.1% with the Radiation Solutions Inc. system.
5.4.1. FILTERING OF THE COSMIC AND UPWARD URANIUM CHANNELS Variations in the cosmic channel are of long wavelength and usually attributed to changes in altitude or atmospheric conditions. A 200 point low-pass filter is applied on a flight-by-flight basis to the cosmic channel to allow for a smooth correction, free of statistical noise in the process described in section 5.4.2. Similarly, the upward uranium channel, used in the correction of atmospheric radon, is highly susceptible to statistical noise due to generally low count rates. A 60 point low-pass filter, again on a flight-by-flight basis, is applied to the upward-looking uranium channel.
5.4.2. COSMIC BACKGROUND CORRECTIONS Radiation in the 3 to 6 MeV range, the cosmic channel, is attributed to non-Earth sources and can be considered as pure noise, in that it has no relationship with the desired geological signal. As such, it can be measured independently and used to remove the cosmic component in lower energy windows.
Theory suggests that the cosmic measurement should increase linearly as altitude increases, provided there is no contamination from radon. Methodology for the removal of the cosmic background involves a
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.12 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
cosmic calibration flight where measurements are taken at a variety of heights from 3500 to 12 000 feet altitude. Linear regressions are derived for each of the regions of interest relative to the cosmic channel. The slope yields the “cosmic stripping ratio” and the y intercept is, in theory, the aircraft background.
The correction applied is then expressed as = ( ) + where, Ni = cosmic correction푁푖 in 푎the푖 ∗ i’th퐶 channel푏푖 ; ai = cosmic stripping ratio in the i’th channel; C = counts in cosmic window (3 to 6 MeV); bi = aircraft background in the i’th channel. In practice, the aircraft background derived in this fashion can be unreliable, however.
The cosmic stripping ratios for each aircraft determined from the respective cosmic calibration flights are listed below. A complete summary of the tests are listed in Appendix A.
C-GJBG C-GJBB
aTC 1.1768 1.1652
aK 0.0678 0.0667
aTh 0.0541 0.0544
au 0.0714 0.0669
aupu 0.0137 0.0150
5.4.3. AIRCRAFT BACKGROUND CORRECTIONS The aircraft background, derived from the cosmic calibration test described in section 5.4.2., is not reliable, likely because of the small number of data points in each flight and some non-linearity in the relationship between counts in the cosmic and ROI region of interest windows at lower altitudes. It is also difficult to obtain a data set that is untainted by radon contamination. As an alternative, an iterative process was used to determine the final aircraft backgrounds. Initially, a background value of zero is assumed for each channel and cosmic and radon corrections are applied. Then, the overwater repeat lines are averaged for each aircraft and added to the background. The process is repeated until the overwater values average zero.
The values below are the final backgrounds applied as determined from the above method and are not those from the cosmic calibration flight.
C-GJBG C-GJBB
bTC 63.2 44.67
bK 18.73 12.51
bU 0.5 0.38
bTh -2.7 -1.81
bupu 0.26 0.04
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.13 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
5.4.4. RADON BACKGROUND CORRECTIONS Radon concentrations vary from flight to flight and are affected by weather and topography. A variety of methods can be used to model and remove this signal. The upward detector, which is mostly shielded from geologic signal by being centred above 4 downward detectors, is used to estimate the contribution of atmospheric radon into the downward uranium channel, Ur, and overwater tests are used to determine the ratio between radon in the uranium window and radon contributions to the other windows.
After cosmic and background corrections have been applied, the signal detected over water is solely due to atmospheric radon. Overwater “backgrounds” are flown at the beginning and end of every flight to collect data with a variety of ambient radon concentrations.
These data are averaged and analyzed to solve the following equations by linear regressions: = + = + 푢푟 푎푈 ∗ 푈푟 푏푈 = + 퐾푟 푎퐾 ∗ 푈푟 푏퐾 = + 푟 푇ℎ 푟 푇ℎ where, 푇ℎ 푎 ∗ 푈 푏 푟 푇퐶 푟 푇퐶 ur = the radon푇퐶 component푎 ∗ in푈 the upward푏 U window; Kr , Ur , Thr , TCr = the radon components in the various windows of the downward detectors (where K = potassium; U = uranium; Th = thorium; TC = total count); ai = coefficients are the calibration constants determined by linear regression; bi = coefficients are now near-zero after removal of aircraft and cosmic backgrounds.
The ai coefficients, determined by linear regression of count rates in the i’th window to downward uranium count rates of the overwater test data for each aircraft, are as follows:
C-GJBG C-GJBB
aTC 15.760 16.204
aK 0.836 0.879
aTh 0.108 0.073
au 0.305 0.301
The radon contribution to the downward uranium window, Ur, can be determined from
(u – a1 * U – a2 * Th + a2 * bTh – bU ) U r = (aU – a1 – a2 * aTh ) where, u = count rate in the upward uranium window; U , Th = count rates in the uranium and thorium windows; aU = ratio of upward uranium counts to downward uranium counts in the overwater data; aTh = ratio of thorium counts to downward uranium counts in the overwater data; bU , bTh = the small non-zero background in the uranium and thorium channels after removal of cosmic and aircraft backgrounds; a1 , a2 = coefficients that relate counts in the downward uranium and thorium channels to counts in the upward uranium channels. These are determined in the following process.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.14 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
The signal measured in the upward uranium window is made up of a contribution from atmospheric radon and a geologic component due to radioactive sources in the ground. This component (ug) has a linear relationship with the downward uranium (Ug) and thorium (Thg) given by
ug = a1 * U g + a2 * Thg
Values of ug, Ug and Thg are found by analyzing the differences in count rates in each window for adjacent sections of survey lines. Differences between count rates are found at some interval, m, in the upward and downward uranium and thorium channels. Where the overall radioactivity was decreasing, as evidenced by the difference in the total count window, the sign of the differences was reversed.
U g = (U n −U n+m ) Thg = (Thn −Thn+m )
ug = (un −un+m )
The differences then are accumulated over the entire survey to determine the calibration factors for upward uranium to downward uranium and thorium for sources in the ground by solving the simultaneous linear equations: 2 a1 * ∑(U g ) + a2 * ∑(U g * Thg ) = ∑(ug * U g ) and 2 a1 * ∑(U g * Thg ) + a2 * ∑(Thg ) = ∑(ug * Thg ) where the summation is carried out over all (n) points in the database. The following coefficients were determined for each aircraft:
C-GJBG C-GJBB
a1 0.0211 0.0169
a2 0.0265 0.0319
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.15 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
5.4.5. SPECTRAL STRIPPING CORRECTIONS The spectra of the potassium, uranium and thorium series overlap. Because of this, each spectral window contains counts due to each of the other windows. This can be corrected by “stripping” the data using coefficients derived by obtaining measurements over concrete pads with known radioelement concentrations. Each crystal pack was tested prior to the survey with Goldak’s calibrated test pads. The first 3 coefficients vary with height above ground; the attenuation values used are standard values from the IAEA reports.
C-GJBG Average DPU 5552 DPU 5553 Δ / m α 0.291872 0.291375 0.292368 0.000490 β 0.430373 0.428316 0.432429 0.000647 ϒ 0.793658 0.785739 0.801577 0.000687 a 0.051585 0.051575 0.051595 b -0.001337 -0.001639 -0.001035 g -0.000082 -0.001681 0.001517
C-GJBB Average DPU 5407 DPU 5621 Δ / m α 0.295932 0.294872 0.296992 0.000490 β 0.437914 0.441432 0.434395 0.000647 ϒ 0.804676 0.799087 0.810264 0.000687 a 0.049574 0.047499 0.051649 b -0.002546 -0.003672 -0.001420 g -0.000350 -0.001050 0.000351 These coefficients are then applied to the data as follows to determine stripped count rates:
n (αγ − β ) + n (Aβ − γ ) + n (1− Aα) k = th u k Strip 1− Gγ − A(γ − Gβ ) − B(β −αγ ) n (Gβ − γ ) + n (1− Bβ ) + n (Bα − G) u = th u k Strip 1− Gγ − A(γ − Gβ ) − B(β −αγ ) n (1− Gγ ) + n (Bγ − A) + n (AG − B) th = th u k Strip 1− Gγ − A(γ − Gβ ) − B(β −αγ ) where, nth , nk , nu = radon corrected count rates.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.16 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
5.4.6. CALCULATION OF EFFECTIVE HEIGHT The height of the detectors must be corrected to standard temperature and pressure (STP) height to account for the attenuating properties of changes in air density on count rates. This effective height, he, is calculated from the formula below: 273.15 = + 273.15 1013.25 where, 푃 ℎ ℎ ∗ � � ∗ � � h = the observed height푒 above푇 ground level (AGL) in metres; T = temperature in degrees Celsius; P = barometric pressure in millibars.
5.4.7. HEIGHT ATTENUATION CORRECTION AND CONVERSION TO RADIOELEMENT CONCENTRATIONS The aircraft was flown over the Geological Survey of Canada–approved Danielson test range, located approximately 100 km south of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, to determine the system sensitivities and height attenuation coefficients. These parameters are installation specific and relate to the detector crystal packs used, the aircraft and the location of the equipment within the aircraft. A calibrated meter was used to traverse the test range while the aircraft was flying over at several altitudes. The data are background corrected by immediately flying over nearby water at the same height. They are then stripped and reduced to survey height. The system sensitivities are the ratios of counts to the measured concentrations. The attenuation coefficient is then derived from the exponential relationship between the stripped counts at the various heights.
C-GJBG Alititude Attenuation Coefficients Sensitivities Total Counts (c/s/m) -0.007049 Total Counts (c/s/nGy/h) 20.093783 Potassium (c/s/m) -0.008695 Potassium (c/s/%) 51.106967 Uranium (c/s/m) -0.007278 Uranium (c/s/ppm) 6.480846 Thorium (c/s/m) -0.007390 Thorium (c/s/ppm) 3.361369
C-GJBB Alititude Attenuation Coefficients Sensitivities Total Counts (c/s/m) -0.007174 Total Counts (c/s/nGy/h) 20.211889 Potassium (c/s/m) -0.009096 Potassium (c/s/%) 49.910518 Uranium (c/s/m) -0.008410 Uranium (c/s/ppm) 6.906245 Thorium (c/s/m) -0.006813 Thorium (c/s/ppm) 3.411754
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.17 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
The survey data in each window are first reduced to the observed count rate at standard temperature and pressure (STP) height and then scaled by the sensitivity to determine the final ground concentration, C, using the following equation − −h) n0e C = μ(HS where, n0 = stripped count rate; e = Euler’s constant µ = window attenuation coefficient; H = nominal survey terrain clearance; h = standard temperature and pressure (STP) height above ground of observation; S = sensitivity.
5.4.8. MICROLEVELLING OF THE RADIOELEMENT CONCENTRATION DATA As a final step, any residual flight line noise or “corrugation” in the radioelement data was further reduced using Paterson, Grant & Watson’s microlevelling technique. This technique first involves the generation of line-to-line noise profiles by applying frequency domain sixth-order, high-pass Butterworth filter and a directional cosine filter perpendicular to the flight-line direction to the gridded data. This “decorrugation” grid is then sampled back into the database. The initial noise profile data is then limited to a user-defined maximum amplitude and then filtered using a Naudy–Dreyer non-linear filter to obtain the microlevelling correction. Finally, the correction and gridded microlevelled data are inspected to ensure no geological signal was removed and an overall improvement in the gridded data was achieved.
The following parameters in Paterson, Grant & Watson’s “Miclev” routine were used: • Decorrugation wavelength cutoff: 800 m • Decorrugation grid cell size: 40 m • Naudy filter length: 400 m • Naudy filter tolerance: 0.0001 • Dose rate amplitude limit: 1.75 nGy per hour • Potassium amplitude limit: 0.1% • Uranium amplitude limit: 0.29 ppm • Thorium amplitude limit: 0.52 ppm
5.4.9. CALCULATION OF THE ELEMENTAL RATIOS Because corrected count rates frequently go to zero or even negative values over water, a simple mathematical ratio is not meaningful and is not useful in the calculation of elemental ratios. The standard procedure is to sum neighbouring points until some threshold, equivalent to 100 counts, is met in both the numerator and denominator and then calculate the ratio. If the threshold isn’t reached within 50 samples, then the point is ignored. This minimizes the statistical error in the data and cleans up the “blow-ups” that would occur when the denominator went to zero. Additionally, no ratio is calculated at locations where the potassium concentration is less than 0.25%.
The ratio grid was derived in a similar fashion from the grids of elemental concentrations. In this case, the values are summed at an increasing radius from the centre point until the threshold is met or a maximum radius of 1000 m is reached. At each step, 4 more points were added to the sum, to account for the circular symmetry. No ratio was calculated where the potassium counts were less than 100.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.18 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
5.4.10. GENERATION OF THE TERNARY RADIOELEMENT IMAGE The ternary map is produced by scaling the distribution of uranium, potassium and thorium against cyan, magenta and yellow, respectively. In this case, the data were processed using the GSC’s S-Tergen utility, which normalizes the data and applies an optimum colour distribution. The algorithm used is as described in Broome et al. (1987).
5.5. PROCESSING OF THE POSITIONING AND ALTITUDE DATA Processing of the positioning data takes place in the field and is performed on a post-flight basis. The following procedures are included in positioning and altitude data processing: 1. The raw airborne GPS data are corrected using the corresponding GPS base station data and NovAtel® Inc.’s Waypoint® GrafNav® GNSS Post-Processing software suite. 2. The corrected GPS World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) longitude, latitude and altitude are merged into a Geosoft® database with aircraft flight data and re-projected to the local UTM datum (NAD83). Velocity is then calculated from the corrected positions. Corrected UTM co- ordinates are trimmed to online. 3. The primary radar altimeter data is lagged by 0.9 seconds and the secondary radar altimeter data is lagged by 3.0 seconds. 4. The digital elevation model is calculated by subtracting the radar altimeter data from the GPS altitude data. 5. Attitude information is derived from 3 GPS receivers mounted on the tail, cabin and right wingtip. Moving baseline software by Waypoint® is used to compute the relative positions of the antennas. By determining the relative apparent positions of the front–right and front–tail antenna pairs and comparing to the known reference geometry of the aircraft, the pitch, roll, azimuth and yaw of the aircraft are calculated to better than 0.5° precision. In addition, all quality-control checks, described in 7.1.2, are performed at this time.
6. Final Products The following products were delivered to MNDM: a) Profile Databases Databases, in both Geosoft® GDB and ASCII format, of the following, were provided: • Magnetic line data archive • Radiometric line data archive • Keating coefficient archive b) Gridded Data Grids, in both Geosoft® GRD and GXF formats, gridded from co-ordinates in UTM Zone 18N, NAD83, of the following data: • digital elevation model • residual magnetic field from the tail sensor • first vertical derivative of the residual magnetic field from the tail sensor • GSC-levelled, gradient-enhanced residual magnetic field • calculated first vertical derivative of the GSC-levelled gradient-enhanced residual magnetic field
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.19 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
• measured lateral horizontal gradient • measured longitudinal horizontal gradient • dose rate • percent potassium • equivalent ppm uranium • equivalent ppm thorium • ratio of potassium to thorium c) Project Report Provided in both Microsoft® Word DOC and Adobe® Acrobat® PDF formats d) Flight Videos The digitally recorded video from each survey flight are provided in a compressed binary format on separate DVD-ROMs e) Maps Digital 1:50 000 scale maps (NAD83 UTM Zone 18N) in Geosoft® MAP format, with a topographic layer, of the following: • colour-filled contours of gradient-enhanced residual magnetic field and flight lines (with the following tile names and layout, where “m82xxx” indicates OGS Map 82 xxx):
m82596
m82597 m82598
m82599 m82600 m82601
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.20 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
• shaded colour of the second vertical derivative of the gradient-enhanced total magnetic intensity with Keating coefficients (with the following tile names and layout, where “m826xx” indicates OGS Map 82 6xx):
m82602
m82603 m82604
m82605 m82606 m82607
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.21 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
• histogram-equalized ternary cyan-magenta-yellow radioelement image with inset images of percent potassium, equivalent uranium, equivalent thorium and dose rate (with the following tile names and layout, where “m826xx” indicates OGS Map 82 6xx):
m82608
m82609 m82610
m82611 m82612 m82613
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.22 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
7. Quality Assurance and Quality Control Quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) were undertaken by the survey contractor Goldak Airborne Surveys, by Paterson, Grant & Watson Limited (QA/QC Geophysicist), and by MNDM. Stringent QA/QC is emphasized throughout the project so that the optimal geological signal is measured, archived and presented.
7.1. SURVEY CONTRACTOR Important checks are required during the data acquisition stage to ensure that the data quality is kept within the survey specifications. The following lists, in detail, the standard data quality checks that were performed by Goldak Airborne Surveys during the course of the survey.
7.1.1. TEST AND CALIBRATIONS The full results of the tests and calibrations described below can be found in Appendix A.
a) Compensation Figure of Merit Aircraft movements induce spurious magnetic fields, which are removed from the magnetic data by the compensator. The efficiency of this removal can be evaluated by conducting a test called a Figure of Merit (FOM). The aircraft flies a series of 3 manoeuvres of ±10° rolls, ±5° pitches and ±5° yaws in each of the traverse- and control-line directions in a magnetically quiet zone (low magnetic gradient). The peak-to-peak amplitudes of the responses obtained on the magnetometer compensated channel are determined for each of the 3 manoeuvre types and for each of the 4 directions. The 12 values are then summed giving the Figure of Merit. Compensation figure of merit tests were performed by both aircraft after their initial arrival on site and before survey operations commenced. In addition, the calibration and tests were repeated after any significant change to the aircraft or its systems which may have altered its magnetic properties. In all calibration and subsequent tests performed by the aircraft, the resultant figures of merit for the tail and wing-tip sensors were below the specified threshold of 1.5 nT. b) Heading Test To verify system accuracy and acceptable heading error, heading tests were performed over the GSC magnetic observatory at Bourget, Ontario, both prior to commencement and after completion of the survey. The aircraft performed 3 passes in each cardinal direction directly over the observatory and the aircraft measured total field was compared against the observatory data. For all tests performed the calculated heading errors were minimal and the absolute accuracies were within the contract threshold of 10 nT. c) Lag Tests To verify the magnetic system latency, the survey aircraft conducted lag tests. These tests involve flying multiple passes in each of the 4 cardinal headings over a known magnetic feature and comparing the position of the observed magnetic peaks with the known position of the target. Prior to survey commencement, C-GJBG flew this test over a communication tower 6 km east of the Arnprior Airport. C-GJBB flew this test over a similar tower located 22 km southwest of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. After survey completion, both aircraft repeated the test at the Saskatoon tower.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.23 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
The calculated system latencies from these tests were determined to be consistent between the pre- and post-survey values and were consistent with previous tests performed by these aircraft. d) Radar Altimeter Calibration The radar altimeter calibration and verification were performed by acquiring altitude data from several passes of increasing altitude over the runways at the Saskatoon and Arnprior airports. The radar altimeters of both aircraft were confirmed to have a linear relationship with and within acceptable range of the GPS height. e) Cosmic Calibration High-altitude cosmic calibration flights were performed by both aircraft prior to the survey. In this test, the aircraft climbed from 1500 m to 3600 m in increments of 300 m and accumulated approximately 10 minutes of data at each altitude. The resultant data determined the linear relationship between counts in the cosmic window and each region of interest window. f) Radiometric Test Range Each aircraft performed a calibration flight over Goldak’s radiometric test range at Danielson, Saskatchewan, to determine the radiometric system sensitivities and altitude attenuation factors. The aircraft repeated a 10 km test line and an adjacent over-water line (for background corrections) at altitudes of 60 to 270 m in 30 m increments.
Simultaneously, actual ground concentrations were measured by a ground crew equipped with a calibrated hand-held Exploranium™ GR-320 spectrometer. At 8 pre-determined stations along the survey test line, four 120-second sample accumulations were acquired, each approximately 20 m apart. The processed measurements are then averaged giving the ground concentrations in each window for the test line. g) Radiometric Pad Test To determine the stripping ratios of each detector, calibrations were done at Goldak’s hangar using pads calibrated by Bob Grasty (Grasty and Hovgaard 1996). Four concrete pads, 3 embedded with the ROI radioelements and one “bare” pad for background corrections, were placed beneath detector packs installed in the aircraft. Data were then accumulated for approximately 20 minutes. The averaged count rates can then be used to compute the 6 stripping ratios for each spectrometer.
7.1.2. DAILY FIELD QUALITY CONTROL a) Positioning Data In a Geosoft® Oasis montaj™ database, the corrected GPS data are inspected for gaps and positioning error as indicated by anomalous velocity changes or vertical offsets. The real-time positions are compared to the post-corrected positions for integrity check. Flight path is examined to detect horizontal deviations that exceed tolerances. Computed velocity is inspected and confirmed to be within tolerances. The radar altimeter and barometric altimeter data are inspected for anomalous conditions. The computed digital elevation model is compared against known topographical data. Vertical navigation is checked for deviations from the pre-determined flight surface that exceed tolerances.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.24 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
b) Magnetic Data Goldak Airborne Surveys’ data acquisition system is designed to allow the second pilot to monitor data quality at all times. Both pilots have been trained to operate the equipment and recognize data problems. Automated systems are also in place to draw their attention to anomalous conditions. In addition, the field processor is continually monitoring the magnetic base station via radio link to be on the alert for poor diurnal conditions. The field processor maintains scheduled communication with the aircraft for flight-following purposes and to update the flight crew on weather and diurnal conditions. After a survey flight, the magnetic and measured gradient data are inspected on a line-by-line basis for gaps, spikes and other anomalous conditions. Magnetic noise levels are monitored using the fourth digital difference and visually. The magnetic base station data are examined for deviations that exceed the contract stated peak-to-peak magnitude and chord lengths. Reflights are assigned where necessary. A frequency domain plot of the uncompensated and compensated magnetic data is generated through fast Fourier transform on a line-by-line basis and inspected. Through this, the general ongoing performance of the magnetic compensation can be evaluated and any aircraft system-induced magnetic noise can be easily discerned. Grids of the total field and horizontal gradient data, along with flight path plots, are examined daily to visually compare the correlation of data between lines and across flights. c) Radiometric Data On-site, weather conditions were continuously monitored to ensure that no radiometric survey took place within 4 hours after measurable precipitation or 12 hours after heavy precipitation. Prior to each survey flight, the field crew performed 2 system verification tests. The results of these system verification tests are plotted in Appendix A. 1. Source Tests: While the aircraft sat stationary, a 232Th source was placed in a cradle and attached to the aircraft beneath the spectrometer detector pack and data were collected for 2 minutes. The sample was then removed and data were again collected for 2 minutes for background determination. The results analyzed and plotted to ensure consistent sensitivities throughout the survey. 2. System Resolution Test: A 232Th source was used determine the full width–half amplitude (FWHM) of the 2615 keV photopeak, expressed as a percentage, as a measure of system performance. In all tests performed, FWHM of the photopeak remained well below the contract specified threshold of 12%. Before and after each radiometric survey flight, a repeat line was flown as an additional measure of system consistency throughout the survey as well as consistency between aircraft. During a survey flight, the flight crew is presented with a diagnostic display of the of the radiometric acquisition system showing a combined spectra and status of each detector crystal. In the event of anomalous system state or error, a visual alert is displayed. Post flight, the radiometric data are imported into a Geosoft® Oasis Montaj™ database and viewed in profile format. The data are checked for any gaps, erroneous detector crystal states or stabilization errors. Any records that show an error in detector state are removed and scheduled for reflight if needed. Rough background correction estimates are removed from the ROI channels and the data are displayed in grid format to check for coherence. A complete archive of the spectra is maintained from the spectrometer console data. An RSI software package can be used with these archives to correct any stabilization problems that may be subsequently found.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.25 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
7.1.3. NEAR-FINAL FIELD PRODUCTS Near-final products of the profile and gridded magnetic and radiometric data were made available to the QA/QC Geophysicist during visits to the survey site, for review and approval, prior to demobilization.
7.1.4. QUALITY CONTROL IN THE OFFICE a) Review of field processed data At the home office, the results of the field processing are reviewed at regular intervals throughout the survey and following completion. b) Review of the final processed data The results of the levelling of the magnetic data are reviewed on a line-by-line basis through inspection of the total correction profile and intersection mismatch values. Final grid products are visually and statistically inspected for overall quality and validity. The final radiometric processing is reviewed on a line-by-line basis through inspection of the numerous correction profiles and final processed channels. Statistical plots of the overwater test line and repeat line data are generated to ensure proper background correction coefficients. Final grids are again inspected for quality and validity.
7.1.5. INTERIM PRODUCTS Archive files containing the raw and interim processed profile data and the gridded data were provided to the QA/QC Geophysicist for review and approval.
7.2. QA/QC GEOPHYSICIST The QA/QC Geophysicist received data directly from field operations during data acquisition, focussing initially on the data acquisition procedures, base station monitoring and instrument calibration. As data were collected, they were reviewed for adherence to the survey specifications and completeness. Any problems encountered during data acquisition were discussed and resolved. The QA/QC checks included the following: a) Navigation Data • appropriate location of the GPS base station • flight-line and control-line separations are maintained, and deviations along lines are minimized • verify synchronicity of GPS navigation and flight video • all boundary control lines are properly located • terrain clearance specifications are maintained • aircraft speed remained within the satisfactory range • area flown covers the entire specified survey area • real-time corrected GPS data do not suffer from satellite-induced shifts or dropouts • GPS height and radar/laser altimeter data are able to produce an image-quality digital elevation model • GPS and geophysical data acquisition systems are properly synchronized • GPS data are adequately sampled
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.26 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
b) Magnetic Data • appropriate location of the magnetic base station, and adequate sampling of the diurnal variations • heading error and lag tests are satisfactory • magnetometer noise levels are within specifications • magnetic diurnal variations remain within specifications • magnetometer drift is minimal once diurnal and IGRF corrections are applied • spikes and/or drop-outs are minimal to non-existent in the raw data • filtering of the profile data is minimal to non-existent • in-field levelling produces image-quality grids of total magnetic field and higher order products (e.g., second vertical derivative)
c) Radiometric data • consistency between daily test lines • consistency between daily fixed source and static background measurements • shifts in radioelement concentrations between flights • precipitation limitations are observed • The energy resolution is confirmed daily with 232Th and, using the 2615 keV photopeak of 232Th, a total system resolution better than 12% is maintained
The QA/QC Geophysicist reviewed interim and final digital and map products throughout the data compilation phase, to ensure that noise was minimized and that the products adhered to the QA/QC specifications. This typically resulted in several iterations before all digital products were considered satisfactory. Considerable effort was devoted to specifying the data formats and verifying that the data adhered to these formats.
7.3. MINISTRY OF NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT AND MINES MNDM worked with the QA/QC Geophysicist to ensure that the digital files adhered to the specified ASCII and binary file formats, that the file names and channel names were consistent, and that all required data were delivered on schedule.
In addition, the MNDM worked with the contractor and the QA/QC Geophysicist to ensure that map products were complete, contained the appropriate legend information and complied with the cartographic specifications.
8. References
Broome, J., Carson, J.M., Grant, J.A. and Ford, K. 1987. A modified ternary radioelement mapping technique and its application to the south coast of Newfoundland; Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 87-14, scale 1:500 000.
Grasty, R.L. and Hovgaard, J. 1996. The calibration of upward looking detectors in gamma ray surveys; abstract in Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 66th Annual Meeting, San Francisco, California, SEG Technical Program, Expanded Abstracts 1996, v.15, p.1422-1425, DOI:10.1190/1.1826379.
Gupta, V., Paterson, N., Reford, S., Kwan, K., Hatch, D. and Macleod, I. 1989. Single master aeromagnetic grid and magnetic colour maps for the province of Ontario; in Summary of Field Work and Other Activities 1989, Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Paper 146, p.244-250.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.27 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
International Atomic Energy Agency 1991. Airborne gamma ray spectrometer surveying; International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria, Technical Reports Series 323, 97p.
Keating, P.B. 1995. A simple technique to identify magnetic anomalies due to kimberlite pipes; Exploration and Mining Geology, v.4, no.2, p.121-125.
Naudy, H. and Dreyer, H. 1968. Essai de filtrage nonlinéaire appliqué aux profiles aeromagnétiques; Geophysical Prospecting, v.16, p.171-178.
Ontario Geological Survey 1996. Ontario airborne magnetic and electromagnetic surveys, processed data and derived products: Archean and Proterozoic “greenstone” belts – Matachewan area; Ontario Geological Survey, Geophysical Data Set 1014.
——— 1999. Single master gravity and aeromagnetic data for Ontario; Ontario Geological Survey, Geophysical Data Set 1036.
——— 2011. 1:250 000-scale bedrock geology of Ontario; Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Release— Data 126 – Revision 1.
Reford, S.W., Gupta, V.K., Paterson, N.R., Kwan, K.C.H. and Macleod, I.N. 1990. Ontario master aeromagnetic grid: A blueprint for detailed compilation of magnetic data on a regional scale; abstract in Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 60th Annual Meeting, San Francisco, California, SEG Technical Program, Expanded Abstracts 1990, p.617-619, DOI:10.1190/1.1890282.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.28 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Appendix A. Test and Calibration Results
1. RADAR ALTIMETER CALIBRATIONS
Radar Altimeter Calibration Analysis
Project OMNDM Refrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 2 Copilot Foyle Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Rotheram Date 2013-10-09
Test Summary
Runway Height 109 Test Location Arnprior CNP3 Tail Height 3.5 Radar 1 Type Thompson-CFS ERT160 Radar 2 Type Terra TRA-30 Radar 1 Scale Factor 0.995 Radar 2 Scale Factor 0.999
Test Data
PASS (ft) GPSAlt RAlt 1 RAlt 2 Hgt AGL RAlt 1 Scale RAlt 2 Scale 200 164.5 50.1 51 52 1.038 1.020 300 201.5 91.8 90 89 0.969 0.989 400 231.1 119.6 118.7 118.6 0.992 0.999 500 261.1 148.3 147.7 148.6 1.002 1.006 600 289.2 179.2 177.7 176.7 0.986 0.994 700 325.4 216 215 212.9 0.986 0.990 800 355.6 245.3 243.6 243.1 0.991 0.998
Radar Scale Factors by Linear Regression 300 y = 0.9831x + 1.1967 R² = 0.9996 250 y = 0.9911x + 0.9327 R² = 0.9998 200
150
100 Radar 1
Radar 2
GPS Height GPS Height Above Runway 50 Linear (Radar 1)
Linear (Radar 2)
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Radar Height
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.29 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Radar Altimeter Calibration Analysis
Project OMNDM Refrew / E Ont Pilot Lebrun Flight 15 Copilot Aircraft C-GJBB Proce ssor Ca rson Date 2013-10-09
Test Summary
Runway Height 501.7 Test Location Saskatoon YXE Tail Height 3.5 Radar 1 Type Thompson-CFS ERT160 Radar 2 Type Terra TRA-30 Radar 1 Scale Factor 0.990 Radar 2 Scale Factor 1.018
Test Data
PASS (ft) GPSAlt RAlt 1 RAlt 2 Hgt AGL RAlt 1 Scale RAlt 2 Scale 200 567.5 62.9 61 62.3 0.990 1.021 300 599.5 96.3 92.7 94.3 0.979 1.017 400 630.5 126.3 123.3 125.3 0.992 1.016 500 664.1 160.2 156.3 158.9 0.992 1.017 600 692.3 189 183.8 187.1 0.990 1.018 700 724.6 221.2 215.7 219.4 0.992 1.017 800 747.4 244.2 238.1 242.2 0.992 1.017
Radar Scale Factors by Linear Regression 300 y = 0.9945x - 0.6477 R² = 1 250 y = 1.0166x + 0.1237 R² = 1 200
150
100 Radar 1
Radar 2
GPS Height GPS Height Above Runway 50 Linear (Radar 1)
Linear (Radar 2)
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Radar Height
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.30 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
2. LAG TESTS
Lag Test Analysis
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 4 Copilot Foyle Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Rotheram Date 2013-10-01
Test Summary
MB Average Lag 0.35 Test Location Arnprior, ON MR Average Lag Feature Easting 398307 ML Average Lag Feature Northing 5031121 MT Average Lag Air Time 1.1 Test Time 0.5 Ferry Time 0.6
Test Data
Bottom Tail Magnetometer (MB) Pa ss Direction Peak X Peak Y Velocity From Tower Lag 1 N 398309 5031145 83.66 24.53 0.29 2 S 398312 5031089 78.01 32.41 0.42 3 N 398299 5031146 72.21 26.28 0.36 4 S 398307 5031095 77.95 25.23 0.32 5 E 398334 5031119 83.91 26.95 0.32 6 W 398283 5031126 62.6 23.95 0.38 7 E 398330 5031120 81.55 22.98 0.28 8 W 398279 5031126 65 27.91 0.43
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.31 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Lag Test Analysis
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 14 Copilot Foyle Aircraft C-GJBB Proce ssor Rotheram Date 2013-10-09
Test Summary
MB Average Lag 0.38 Test Location Near Saskatoon MR Average Lag Feature Easting 370602 ML Average Lag Feature Northing 5767236 MT Average Lag Air Time 1 Test Time 0.4 Ferry Time 0.6
Test Data
Bottom Tail Magnetometer (MB) Pa ss Direction Peak X Peak Y Velocity From Tower Lag 1 N 370606 5767264 82.57 28.37 0.34 2 S 370595 5767209 75.6 27.41 0.36 3 N 370606 5767264 81.06 28.38 0.35 4 S 370600 5767207 76.24 28.33 0.37 5 N 370605 5767263 79.26 27.25 0.34 6 S 370594 5767204 74.04 32.66 0.44 7 W 370574 5767242 71.86 28.76 0.40 8 E 370632 5767231 83.88 30.71 0.37 9 W 370570 5767242 67.53 32.17 0.48 10 E 370633 5767231 84.59 31.26 0.37 11 W 370574 5767240 69.59 28.05 0.40 12 E 370630 5767231 83.48 29.04 0.35
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.32 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
3. HEADING TESTS
Heading Test Analysis
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 3 Copilot Foyle Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Rotheram Date 2013-10-01
Test Summary
MB Mean Offset 8.44 Test Location Bourget, ON MB Mean N/S Error 0.12 Station Offset 550.00 MB Mean E/W Error 0.33 MB Mean Error 0.22 Air Time 1.1 MR Mean Offset 7.10 Test Time 0.6 MR Mean N/S Error 0.26 Ferry Time 0.5 MR Mean E/W Error 0.29 MR Mean Error 0.28 ML Mean Offset 8.82 ML Mean N/S Error 0.15 ML Mean E/W Error 0.29 ML Mean Error 0.22
Test Data
Bottom Tail Magnetometer (MB) Heading Pa ss Direction Time Meas TF Base TF Offset (nT) Heading Error (nT) 1 E 19:40:54 54098.18 54639.76 8.42 0.26 E-W 2 W 19:43:29 54100.27 54641.59 8.68 3 E 19:45:55 54101.08 54642.75 8.33 0.61 E-W 4 W 19:48:19 54101.73 54642.79 8.94 5 E 19:50:20 54102.33 54643.86 8.47 0.11 E-W 6 w 19:52:57 54103.25 54644.89 8.36 7 N 19:25:34 54095.53 54637.07 8.46 0.06 N-S 8 S 19:27:34 54096.73 54638.21 8.52 9 N 19:31:38 54099.01 54640.31 8.71 0.21 N-S 10 S 19:34:08 54097.76 54639.26 8.50 11 N 19:36:18 54096.28 54638.28 8.00 0.10 N-S 12 S 19:38:17 54097.14 54639.24 7.90
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.33 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Right Wing Magnetometer (MR) Heading Pa ss Direction Time Meas TF Base TF Offset (nT) Heading Error (nT) 1 E 19:40:54 54096.87 54639.76 7.11 0.05 E-W 2 W 19:43:29 54098.75 54641.59 7.16 3 E 19:45:55 54099.89 54642.75 7.14 0.34 E-W 4 W 19:48:19 54100.27 54642.79 7.48 5 E 19:50:20 54101.22 54643.86 7.36 0.47 E-W 6 w 19:52:57 54101.78 54644.89 6.89 7 N 19:25:34 54094.28 54637.07 7.21 0.10 N-S 8 S 19:27:34 54095.32 54638.21 7.11 9 N 19:31:38 54097.75 54640.31 7.44 0.38 N-S 10 S 19:34:08 54096.33 54639.26 7.07 11 N 19:36:18 54095.07 54638.28 6.79 0.32 N-S 12 S 19:38:17 54095.71 54639.24 6.47
Left Wing Magnetometer (ML) Heading Pa ss Direction Time Meas TF Base TF Offset (nT) Heading Error (nT) 1 E 19:40:54 54098.73 54639.76 8.97 0.15 E-W 2 W 19:43:29 54100.71 54641.59 9.12 3 E 19:45:55 54101.65 54642.75 8.90 0.42 E-W 4 W 19:48:19 54102.11 54642.79 9.32 5 E 19:50:20 54102.92 54643.86 9.06 0.31 E-W 6 w 19:52:57 54103.64 54644.89 8.75 7 N 19:25:34 54095.82 54637.07 8.75 0.04 N-S 8 S 19:27:34 54097.00 54638.21 8.79 9 N 19:31:38 54099.31 54640.31 9.00 0.22 N-S 10 S 19:34:08 54098.04 54639.26 8.78 11 N 19:36:18 54096.58 54638.28 8.30 0.19 N-S 12 S 19:38:17 54097.35 54639.24 8.11
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.34 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Heading Test Analysis
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 23 Copilot Sadawha Aircraft C-GJBB Proce ssor Rotheram Date 2013-10-13
Test Summary
MB Mean Offset 7.91 Test Location Bourget, ON MB Mean N/S Error 0.14 Station Offset 550.00 MB Mean E/W Error 0.23 MB Mean Error 0.18 Air Time 1.2 MR Mean Offset 2.90 Test Time 0.4 MR Mean N/S Error 0.58 Ferry Time 0.8 MR Mean E/W Error 0.08 MR Mean Error 0.33 ML Mean Offset 8.85 ML Mean N/S Error 0.41 ML Mean E/W Error 0.11 ML Mean Error 0.26
Test Data
Bottom Tail Magnetometer (MB) Heading Pa ss Direction Time Meas TF Base TF Offset (nT) Heading Error (nT) 1 N 14:18:44.9 54092.26 54634.35 7.91 0.02 N-S 2 S 14:21:33.1 54092.50 54634.61 7.89 3 N 14:23:38.0 54092.68 54634.44 8.24 0.36 N-S 4 S 14:25:50.6 54091.80 54633.93 7.88 5 N 14:27:54.2 54091.83 54633.79 8.04 0.04 N-S 6 S 14:29:52.8 54092.09 54634.01 8.08 7 E 14:31:51.2 54091.42 54633.54 7.88 0.21 E-W 8 W 14:33:42.9 54091.06 54632.98 8.08 9 E 14:35:47.2 54090.71 54633.06 7.65 0.13 E-W 10 W 14:37:39.7 54090.64 54632.87 7.77 11 E 14:39:37.7 54090.13 54632.55 7.58 0.34 E-W 12 W 14:41:30.5 54090.19 54632.27 7.92
Right Wing Magnetometer (MR) Heading Pa ss Direction Time Meas TF Base TF Offset (nT) Heading Error (nT) 1 N 14:18:44.9 54087.39 54634.35 3.04 0.58 N-S 2 S 14:21:33.1 54087.07 54634.61 2.46 3 N 14:23:38.0 54087.83 54634.44 3.39 0.79 N-S 4 S 14:25:50.6 54086.52 54633.93 2.59 5 N 14:27:54.2 54086.99 54633.79 3.20 0.39 N-S 6 S 14:29:52.8 54086.82 54634.01 2.81 7 E 14:31:51.2 54086.52 54633.54 2.98 0.05 E-W 8 W 14:33:42.9 54086.00 54632.98 3.02 9 E 14:35:47.2 54085.90 54633.06 2.84 0.06 E-W 10 W 14:37:39.7 54085.64 54632.87 2.77 11 E 14:39:37.7 54085.31 54632.55 2.76 0.13 E-W 12 W 14:41:30.5 54085.16 54632.27 2.89
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.35 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Left Wing Magnetometer (ML) Heading Pa ss Direction Time Meas TF Base TF Offset (nT) Heading Error (nT) 1 N 14:18:44.9 54093.18 54634.35 8.83 0.34 N-S 2 S 14:21:33.1 54093.10 54634.61 8.49 3 N 14:23:38.0 54093.66 54634.44 9.22 0.62 N-S 4 S 14:25:50.6 54092.52 54633.93 8.59 5 N 14:27:54.2 54092.81 54633.79 9.02 0.27 N-S 6 S 14:29:52.8 54092.76 54634.01 8.75 7 E 14:31:51.2 54092.63 54633.54 9.09 0.08 E-W 8 W 14:33:42.9 54091.98 54632.98 9.00 9 E 14:35:47.2 54091.94 54633.06 8.88 0.11 E-W 10 W 14:37:39.7 54091.63 54632.87 8.76 11 E 14:39:37.7 54091.40 54632.55 8.85 0.13 E-W 12 W 14:41:30.5 54090.99 54632.27 8.72
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.36 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
4. MAGNETOMETER FIGURE OF MERIT TESTS
Compensation / Figure of Merit Test Analysis
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 7 Copilot Foyle Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Rotheram Date 2013-10-03
Test Summary
MB FOM 0.75 Test Location Arnprior, ON MR FOM 1.46 Reason for Comp / FOM Initial calibration ML FOM 1.23 MT FOM GX FOM Air Time 1.5 GY FOM Test Time 1.3 GZ FOM Ferry Time 0.2
RMS AADCII Compensator Statistics
Uncomp Std Comp Std Solution IR Dev Dev Norm Left Wing M1 1.45E+00 3.45E-02 41.9 45.6 Right Wing M2 7.56E-01 3.05E-02 24.8 31.3 Tail Lower M4 1.89E-01 3.28E-02 7.3 15.3 Lateral Grad G1 7.50E+00 1.06E-01 70.5 49.7 Long Grad G2 5.95E+00 1.03E-01 58 42.9 Memory Slot 11
FOM Analysis
Bottom Tail Magnetometer (MBc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.06 0.31 Roll 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.15 Yaw 0.09 0.08 0.05 0.07 0.29 Sum 0.24 0.23 0.12 0.16 0.75
Right Wing Magnetometer (MRc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.15 0.24 0.1 0.1 0.59 Roll 0.09 0.12 0.08 0.11 0.40 Yaw 0.11 0.16 0.07 0.13 0.47 Sum 0.35 0.52 0.25 0.34 1.46
Left Wing Magnetometer (MLc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.16 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.46 Roll 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.33 Yaw 0.14 0.1 0.08 0.12 0.44 Sum 0.38 0.31 0.25 0.29 1.23
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.37 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Compensation / Figure of Merit Test Analysis
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 19 Copilot Lebrun Aircraft C-GJBB Proce ssor Rotheram Date 2013-10-12
Test Summary
MB FOM 1.1 Test Location Arnprior, ON MR FOM 1.48 Reason for Comp / FOM Initial calibration ML FOM 1.49 MT FOM GX FOM Air Time 1.2 GY FOM Test Time 1 GZ FOM Ferry Time 0.2
RMS AADCII Compensator Statistics
Uncomp Std Comp Std Solution IR Dev Dev Norm Left Wing M1 1.05E+00 3.89E-02 26.9 39.8 Right Wing M2 1.02E+00 3.97E-02 25.6 33.8 Tail Lower M4 1.67E-01 3.07E-02 5.4 15.7 Lateral Grad G1 9.98E-01 8.78E-02 11.4 42.3 Long Grad G2 5.36E+00 1.01E-02 53.2 39.2 Memory Slot 5
FOM Analysis
Bottom Tail Magnetometer (MBc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.13 0.14 0.09 0.14 0.50 Roll 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.21 Yaw 0.09 0.1 0.06 0.14 0.39 Sum 0.28 0.29 0.20 0.33 1.10
Right Wing Magnetometer (MRc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.14 0.17 0.09 0.16 0.56 Roll 0.1 0.09 0.06 0.08 0.33 Yaw 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.19 0.59 Sum 0.39 0.39 0.27 0.43 1.48
Left Wing Magnetometer (MLc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.15 0.15 0.08 0.15 0.53 Roll 0.16 0.14 0.1 0.1 0.50 Yaw 0.09 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.46 Sum 0.40 0.42 0.30 0.37 1.49
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.38 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Compensation / Figure of Merit Test Analysis
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 47 Copilot Saldhana Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Rotheram Date 2013-10-24
Test Summary
MB FOM 1.09 Test Location Arnprior, ON MR FOM 1.373 Reason for Comp / FOM Left wing mag replaced ML FOM 1.4 MT FOM GX FOM Air Time 0.8 GY FOM Test Time 0.4 GZ FOM Ferry Time 0.4
RMS AADCII Compensator Statistics
Uncomp Std Comp Std Solution IR Dev Dev Norm Left Wing M1 1.57E+00 4.54E-02 34.6 45.4 Right Wing M2 8.43E-01 3.42E-02 24.7 34.7 Tail Lower M4 2.07E+00 2.84E-02 7.3 16.8 Lateral Grad G1 8.20E+00 1.03E-01 77.7 49.5 Long Grad G2 6.11E+00 8.59E-02 71.1 40.3 Memory Slot 5
FOM Analysis
Bottom Tail Magnetometer (MBc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.17 0.09 0.12 0.07 0.45 Roll 0.01 0.05 0.13 0.04 0.23 Yaw 0.09 0.15 0.06 0.11 0.41 Sum 0.27 0.29 0.31 0.22 1.09
Right Wing Magnetometer (MRc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.19 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.51 Roll 0.06 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.28 Yaw 0.14 0.19 0.13 0.123 0.58 Sum 0.39 0.40 0.32 0.26 1.37
Left Wing Magnetometer (MLc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.19 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.55 Roll 0.1 0.07 0.12 0.08 0.37 Yaw 0.1 0.12 0.09 0.17 0.48 Sum 0.39 0.33 0.32 0.36 1.40
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.39 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Compensation / Figure of Merit Test Analysis
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 74 Copilot Saldhana Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Shaikh Date 2013-11-14
Test Summary
MB FOM 0.92 Test Location Arnprior, ON MR FOM 1.44 Reason for Comp / FOM Tail mag replaced ML FOM 1.21 MT FOM GX FOM Air Time 1 GY FOM Test Time 0.5 GZ FOM Ferry Time 0.5
RMS AADCII Compensator Statistics
Uncomp Std Comp Std Solution IR Dev Dev Norm Left Wing M1 6.40E-01 2.97E-02 21.5 37.8 Right Wing M2 1.26E+00 3.98E-02 31.7 47.5 Tail Lower M4 1.48E-01 2.32E-02 6.4 15.8 Lateral Grad G1 7.85E+00 1.32E-01 59.2 53 Long Grad G2 5.56E+00 9.41E-02 59.1 41.1 Memory Slot 13
FOM Analysis
Bottom Tail Magnetometer (MBc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.09 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.31 Roll 0.06 0.07 0.13 0.03 0.29 Yaw 0.05 0.15 0.05 0.07 0.32 Sum 0.20 0.29 0.26 0.17 0.92
Right Wing Magnetometer (MRc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.57 Roll 0.11 0.14 0.13 0.08 0.46 Yaw 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.11 0.41 Sum 0.34 0.39 0.39 0.32 1.44
Left Wing Magnetometer (MLc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.47 Roll 0.08 0.09 0.14 0.06 0.37 Yaw 0.07 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.37 Sum 0.28 0.31 0.35 0.27 1.21
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.40 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Compensation / Figure of Merit Test Analysis
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 82 Copilot Ando Aircraft C-GJBB Proce ssor Shaikh Date 2013-11-21
Test Summary
MB FOM 0.72 Test Location Arnprior, ON MR FOM 1.19 Reason for Comp / FOM Tail mag replaced ML FOM 1.38 MT FOM GX FOM Air Time 1 GY FOM Test Time 0.5 GZ FOM Ferry Time 0.5
RMS AADCII Compensator Statistics
Uncomp Std Comp Std Solution IR Dev Dev Norm Left Wing M1 1.05E+00 3.71E-02 28.3 42.7 Right Wing M2 9.42E-02 3.86E-02 24.4 36.5 Tail Lower M4 1.31E-02 2.76E-02 4.7 16.2 Lateral Grad G1 1.43E+00 7.95E-02 18 37.3 Long Grad G2 5.21E+00 1.07E-02 48.7 38.6 Memory Slot 6
FOM Analysis
Bottom Tail Magnetometer (MBc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.12 0.1 0.07 0.04 0.33 Roll 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.13 Yaw 0.09 0.1 0.04 0.03 0.26 Sum 0.25 0.24 0.15 0.08 0.72
Right Wing Magnetometer (MRc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.13 0.1 0.07 0.07 0.37 Roll 0.11 0.1 0.08 0.08 0.37 Yaw 0.14 0.13 0.06 0.12 0.45 Sum 0.38 0.33 0.21 0.27 1.19
Left Wing Magnetometer (MLc) North Ea st South W e st Sum Pitch 0.11 0.12 0.1 0.19 0.52 Roll 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.09 0.51 Yaw 0.07 0.13 0.05 0.1 0.35 Sum 0.32 0.37 0.31 0.38 1.38
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.41 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
5. COSMIC CALIBRATIONS
Cosmic Calibration
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 5 Copilot Ando Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Ca rson Date 2013-10-13
Calibration Results
Cosmic Correction Ratios Slope Intercept R² TC 1.1768 87.8062 0.9952 K 0.0678 20.0099 0.9955 U 0.0541 1.8256 0.9978 Th 0.0714 -3.9383 0.9989 UpU 0.0137 0.7055 0.9933
Test Data
Line Order Cosmic TC K U Th UpU L1500 1 247.4 429.5 39 17.8 14.5 4.7 L1800 2 283.5 444.3 39.2 18.5 16.5 4.6 L2150 3 327.6 482 42.6 19.5 19.7 5.3 L2470 4 380.6 541.6 45.9 22.6 23 5.9 L2790 5 441.3 622.5 50.5 26.1 27.8 6.9 L3100 6 513.6 684.4 54.4 29.2 32.9 7.7 L3420 7 594 792.7 60.9 33.8 38.9 8.7 L3750 8 697.5 907.3 66.9 39.6 45.7 10.4 L3420 9 598.4 783.6 60.4 34.1 38.4 8.7 L3100 10 514.7 698.3 55 30.1 32.7 7.9 L2790 11 444 615.3 50.6 26.3 28.1 6.9 L2470 12 384.9 526.3 44.9 22.4 23.3 5.9 L2150 13 332.3 465.2 42.3 19.5 19.5 5.1
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.42 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Graphs - TC, K, U, Th, UpU vs Cosmic Counts
1000.0 80.0 y = 1.1768x + 87.806 70.0 y = 0.0678x + 20.01 800.0 R² = 0.9952 60.0 R² = 0.9955 600.0 50.0 40.0 400.0 30.0
Potassium 20.0 200.0
Total Counts Total 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 Cosmic Cosmic TC K
45.0 50.0 40.0 y = 0.0541x + 1.8256 y = 0.0714x - 3.9383 35.0 R² = 0.9978 40.0 R² = 0.9989 30.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 Thorium Uranium 10.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 Cosmic Cosmic U Th
12.0 y = 0.0137x + 0.7055 10.0 R² = 0.9933 8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0 Upward Uranium 0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 Cosmic UpU
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.43 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Cosmic Calibration
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Mathieson Flight 21 Copilot Salanda Aircraft C-GJBB Proce ssor Ca rson Date 2013-10-14
Calibration Results
Cosmic Correction Ratios Slope Intercept R² TC 1.1652 34.7630 0.9971 K 0.0667 11.9860 0.9923 U 0.0544 -0.6203 0.9967 Th 0.0669 -2.3064 0.9995 UpU 0.0150 -0.4752 0.9980
Test Data
Line Order Cosmic TC K U Th UpU L1530 1 246.5 338.1 29.1 13.9 14 3.2 L1820 2 278.9 364 31.2 14.5 16.3 3.8 L2140 3 321.8 413.6 34.4 17 19.2 4.3 L2450 4 373.7 475.6 37.7 19.6 22.8 5.2 L2780 5 431.7 544.5 41.5 22.8 27 6 L3100 6 504.9 633.9 46.7 27.5 31.3 7.1 L3420 7 591.3 731.2 52 31.7 37.2 8.4 L3720 8 691.4 843 58.4 37.4 44.1 10 L3420 9 594.6 722.1 51 31.3 37.5 8.4 L3100 10 507.8 616.2 44.8 26.7 31.7 6.9 L2780 11 436.1 532.5 40.1 22.7 26.5 6 L2450 12 378 463.6 36 19.6 23 5.1 L2140 13 323.8 405.4 33.4 16.6 19.1 4.4 L1820 14 279.5 350.3 29.8 14.4 16.5 3.6 L1530 15 244.2 316.4 27.7 12.5 14.4 3.3
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.44 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.45 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
6. RADIOMETRIC TEST RANGE
Radiometric Calibration Range
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Lebrun Flight 1 Copilot Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Ca rson Date 2013-08-13
Calibration Summary
Alititude Attenuation Coefficients Sensitivities Total Counts (c/s/m) -0.007049 Total Counts (c/s/nGy/h) 20.093783 Potassium (c/s/m) -0.008695 Potassium (c/s/%) 51.106967 Uranium (c/s/m) -0.007278 Uranium (c/s/ppm) 6.480846 Thorium (c/s/m) -0.007390 Thorium (c/s/ppm) 3.361369
Test Data
Background Line Data Effective Radar Alt (m) GPS Alt (m) TC (c/s) K (c/s) U (c/s) Th (c/s) Height (m) 61.2 54.0 622.3 348.7 34.5 15.8 9.3 91.3 80.1 651.5 351.2 34.3 15.6 9 121.6 106.4 683.1 353.4 35.4 15.9 9.7 152.3 132.8 713.9 358.4 35.3 16.1 9.5 181.4 157.7 742.5 359.9 34.8 16 9.8 213.9 185.3 775.5 362 35.5 15.9 10.4 243.4 210.2 805.1 368.2 35.7 16.8 10.1 274 235.9 835 362.3 35.5 15.9 10.4
Test Line Data Effective Radar Alt (m) GPS Alt (m) TC (c/s) K (c/s) U (c/s) Th (c/s) Height (m) 62 54.4 660.2 1850.5 206.7 44.2 49.8 91.6 80.1 688.3 1590.9 171.8 41 42.5 120.7 105.2 717.9 1381.9 142.2 35.7 37.9 151.5 131.6 748.2 1211.2 122.6 33.2 33 181.5 157.2 777 1073.3 107.3 30.5 29.6 212.8 183.7 808.1 962.5 92.8 28.7 25.6 243.9 209.8 838.5 868.2 83.5 27 23.3 274.5 235.5 867.9 789.6 74.5 25.5 21.3
Ground Truth Concentrations Total Counts (nGy/h) 46.293 Pota ssium (%) 1.497 Uranium (ppm) 1.463 Thorium (ppm) 7.386
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.46 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Graphs - Stripped Counts per Second vs Effective Height
1600.0 160.0
1400.0 140.0
1200.0 R² = 0.9998 120.0 R² = 0.9963 1000.0 100.0
800.0 80.0
600.0 60.0 Potassium
Total Counts Total 400.0 40.0
200.0 20.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 Effective Height Effective Height
TC Log. (TC) K Log. (K)
18.0 45.0 16.0 40.0
14.0 R² = 0.9961 35.0 R² = 0.9973 12.0 30.0 10.0 25.0 8.0 20.0 Thorium Uranium 6.0 15.0 4.0 10.0 2.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 Effective Height Effective Height
U Log. (U) Th Log. (Th)
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.47 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Radiometric Calibration Range
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot Lebrun Flight 13 Copilot Aircraft C-GJBB Proce ssor Ca rson Date 2013-10-09
Calibration Summary
Alititude Attenuation Coefficients Sensitivities Total Counts (c/s/m) -0.007174 Total Counts (c/s/nGy/h) 20.211889 Potassium (c/s/m) -0.009096 Potassium (c/s/%) 49.910518 Uranium (c/s/m) -0.008410 Uranium (c/s/ppm) 6.906245 Thorium (c/s/m) -0.006813 Thorium (c/s/ppm) 3.411754
Test Data
Background Line Data Effective Radar Alt (m) GPS Alt (m) TC (c/s) K (c/s) U (c/s) Th (c/s) Height (m) 62 56.5 621 382.4 31.6 18.8 9.6 92.5 83.8 650.1 397.2 31.7 19.7 10.5 122.8 110.8 681.1 412.4 33.5 20.3 10.2 153.8 138.3 711.8 421.5 33.8 21.3 10.1 183.7 164.6 740.5 430.9 33.7 21.8 10.5 215.4 192.5 772.4 440.2 35.2 22.7 10.9 243.9 217.4 800.5 440.7 35.2 22.1 11.2
Test Line Data Effective Radar Alt (m) GPS Alt (m) TC (c/s) K (c/s) U (c/s) Th (c/s) Height (m) 93.3 84.2 688.3 1666.4 169.3 46.8 42.3 122.8 110.2 718.3 1461.7 143.1 43.6 37 153.1 136.9 748 1280.5 117.9 40.2 32.7 183.3 163.4 777 1145.6 104.1 37.7 30 214.5 190.7 807.7 1028.4 89.4 35.4 27.2 244.6 216.7 837.2 936.2 80.4 33.4 24.1 275.3 243.2 866.5 865.3 73 31.9 23
Ground Truth Concentrations Total Counts (nGy/h) 47.769 Pota ssium (%) 1.522 Uranium (ppm) 1.721 Thorium (ppm) 7.256
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.48 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Graphs - Stripped Counts per Second vs Effective Height
1400.0 120.0
1200.0 R² = 0.9998 100.0 R² = 0.9933 1000.0 80.0 800.0 60.0 600.0
Potassium 40.0 400.0 Total Counts Total
200.0 20.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 Effective Height Effective Height
TC Log. (TC) K Log. (K)
18.0 35.0 16.0 30.0 R² = 0.9979 R² = 0.9946 14.0 25.0 12.0 10.0 20.0
8.0 15.0 Thorium Uranium 6.0 10.0 4.0 5.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 Effective Height Effective Height
U Log. (U) Th Log. (Th)
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.49 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
7. PAD CALIBRATIONS
Ground Pad Calibration
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot N/A Flight N/A Copilot N/A Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Ca rson Detectors 5552 / 5553 Date 2013-07-18
Calibration Results
DPU 5552 Stripping Ratios DPU 5553 Stripping Ratios α 0.291375 α 0.292368 β 0.428316 β 0.432429 ϒ 0.785739 ϒ 0.801577 a 0.051575 a 0.051595 b -0.001639 b -0.001035 g -0.001681 g 0.001517
Test Data
Known Pad Concentrations Window BG (Bare) K U Th K (%) 0.86 9.77 1.02 0.82 U (ppm) 0.99 0.9 53.7 2.15 Th (ppm) 2.64 2.57 3.43 121
DPU 5552 Window BG (Bare) K U Th K (c/s) 151.3 347.6 223.9 202.9 U (c/s) 23.5 23 111.2 60.1 Th (c/s) 27 26.6 32.3 146.1 TC (c/s) 1089.9 1784.3 2491.6 2706.8
DPU 5553 Window BG (Bare) K U Th K (c/s) 135.9 343.9 231.1 191.4 U (c/s) 21.6 21.7 135.5 60.9 Th (c/s) 25 24.7 31.7 151 TC (c/s) 1004.2 1767.1 2874 2744.4
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.50 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Ground Pad Calibration
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot N/A Flight N/A Copilot Aircraft C-GJBB Proce ssor Ca rson Detectors 5407 / 5621 Date 2013-10-09
Calibration Results
DPU 5407 Stripping Ratios DPU 5621 Stripping Ratios α 0.294872 α 0.296992 β 0.441432 β 0.434395 ϒ 0.799087 ϒ 0.810264 a 0.047499 a 0.051649 b -0.003672 b -0.001420 g -0.001050 g 0.000351
Test Data
Known Pad Concentrations Window BG (Bare) K U Th K (%) 0.86 9.77 1.02 0.82 U (ppm) 0.99 0.9 53.7 2.15 Th (ppm) 2.64 2.57 3.43 121
DPU 5407 Window BG (Bare) K U Th K (c/s) 156.1 352.2 240.9 210.1 U (c/s) 29.5 29.1 131 67.2 Th (c/s) 27.7 26.9 33.3 148.1 TC (c/s) 1187.8 1888.2 2834.8 2855.8
DPU 5621 Window BG (Bare) K U Th K (c/s) 136.6 300.6 206.2 181.2 U (c/s) 27.4 27.3 109.5 59.2 Th (c/s) 26.2 25.9 31.1 127.3 TC (c/s) 1096 1692.6 2424.9 2476.8
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.51 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
8. RADIOMETRIC SYSTEM RESOLUTION TESTS
Radiometric System Resolution Test
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot N/A Flight N/A Copilot N/A Aircraft C-GJBG Proce ssor Ca rson Detectors 5552 / 5553 Date 2013-10-02 to 2013-11-06
Test Data
Date DPU FW HM (%) Error (+/- %) 5552 4.3 0.60 10/02 5553 4.1 0.55 5552 4.4 0.58 10/04 5553 4.2 0.67 5552 4.3 0.64 10/05 5553 4.2 0.50 5552 4.6 0.74 10/08 5553 4.3 0.60 5552 4.4 0.66 10/09 5553 4.1 0.66 5552 4.6 0.72 10/10 5553 4.4 0.58 5552 4.4 0.59 10/11 5553 4.2 0.52 5552 4.4 0.57 10/12 5553 4.3 0.47 5552 4.4 0.63 10/13 5553 4.2 0.62 5552 4.3 0.55 10/14 5553 4.2 0.60 5552 4.6 0.64 10/15 5553 4.2 0.53 5552 4.7 0.72 10/17 5553 4.1 0.56 5552 4.4 0.65 10/19 5553 4.1 0.64 5552 4.5 0.61 10/20 5553 4.4 0.61 5552 4.7 0.68 11/03 5553 4.3 0.63 5552 4.3 0.70 11/06 5553 4.2 0.61
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.52 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Graphs C-GJBG DPU 5552 & 5553 FWHM
DPU 5552 FWHM 6
5.5
5
% 4.5
4
3.5
3 10/02 10/04 10/05 10/08 10/09 10/10 10/11 10/12 10/13 10/14 10/15 10/17 10/19 10/20 11/03 11/06 DPU1 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.6 4.7 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.3
DPU 5553 FWHM 5.5
5
4.5 % 4
3.5
3 10/02 10/04 10/05 10/08 10/09 10/10 10/11 10/12 10/13 10/14 10/15 10/17 10/19 10/20 11/03 11/06 DPU2 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.1 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.4 4.3 4.2
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.53 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Radiometric System Resolution Test
Project OMNDM Renfrew / E Ont Pilot N/A Flight N/A Copilot N/A Aircraft C-GJBB Proce ssor Ca rson Detectors 5407 / 5621 Date 2013-10-13 to 2013-11-06
Test Data
Date DPU FW HM (%) Error (+/- %) 5407 4.4 0.63 10/13 5621 4.4 0.59 5407 4.1 0.69 10/14 5621 4.4 0.64 5407 4.3 0.59 10/15 5621 4.4 0.68 5407 4.3 0.64 10/17 5621 4.4 0.70 5407 4.3 0.66 10/19 5621 4.4 0.55 5407 4.4 0.65 10/20 5621 4.5 0.71 5407 4.2 0.60 10/23 5621 4.4 0.53 5407 4.3 0.73 10/24 5621 4.2 0.54 5407 4.3 0.61 10/30 5621 4.3 0.58 5407 4.1 0.60 11/03 5621 4.4 0.58 5407 4.3 0.72 11/06 5621 4.2 0.61
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.54 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Graphs C-GJBB DPU 5407 & 5621 FWHM
DPU 5407 FWHM 5.5
5
4.5 % 4
3.5
3 10/13 10/14 10/15 10/17 10/19 10/20 10/23 10/24 10/30 11/03 11/06 DPU1 4.38 4.13 4.28 4.32 4.33 4.37 4.18 4.31 4.34 4.12 4.26
DPU 5621 FWHM 5.5
5
4.5 % 4
3.5
3 10/13 10/14 10/15 10/17 10/19 10/20 10/23 10/24 10/30 11/03 11/06 DPU2 4.42 4.36 4.37 4.39 4.41 4.46 4.39 4.22 4.33 4.36 4.23
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.55 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
9. DAILY REPEAT LINES
Graphs - Final Average Test Line Concentrations (C-GJBG in Blue, C-GJBB in Red)
Test Line Average Dose Rate vs Day on Site 56
54
52
50 nGy/h 48
46
44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 JBG 53 53 50 50 52 51 52 52 55 52 52 53 52 53 51 51 52 51 51 50 51 50 50 49 50 50 50 50 49 51 50 51 50 49 49 50 49 50 50 50 JBB 51 52 52 51 51 52 50 51 50 49 48 49 49 49 50 50 49 50 50 49 50 51 49 50 48 49 50 50 49 49 50 50
Test Line Average Pecent Potassium vs Day on Site 2.1 2.05 2 1.95 1.9
% 1.85 1.8 1.75 1.7 1.65 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 JBG 2.1 2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 2 2 2 2 2 1.9 2 1.9 2 1.9 2 2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 JBB 2 2 2 1.9 1.9 2 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.9
Test Line Average Uranium ppm vs Day on Site 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8
ppm 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 JBG 0.9 1 1 0.8 1.1 1 1.2 1 1.6 0.9 0.8 1 0.8 1.1 0.8 1 1.1 0.9 0.9 1 1 1.1 0.9 0.9 1 1 0.8 0.9 0.6 1.1 1 1.1 1 0.9 1.1 1.1 0.8 1 0.9 1.1 JBB 0.9 0.9 1 0.9 1 1 0.8 1.2 1.1 1 0.8 0.9 1 0.9 1.2 1 0.9 0.9 1.1 0.9 1 1.1 0.8 0.9 0.8 1 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.1
Test Line Average Thorium ppm vs Day on Site 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7
ppm 6.5 6 5.5 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 JBG 8.5 8.7 7.9 8.1 8 7.9 8.1 8.1 7.9 8 8.2 8.3 8.2 8.2 8 8.1 8.1 8.1 7.9 7.9 7.8 7.6 8 7.7 7.8 7.9 8.3 7.9 8 7.8 8.2 8.1 8 7.8 7.7 7.6 7.8 8 7.7 7.6 JBB 8.2 9 8.1 8 7.9 8.4 8.1 8 7.9 7.9 7.7 7.9 7.6 7.8 7.7 7.6 8 7.9 7.7 7.8 8 7.8 8 8 7.7 7.8 7.7 7.6 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.6
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.56 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
10. DAILY SOURCE TESTS
Note: On October 15, between the test performed on C-GJBG and the test performed on C-GJBB, the cradle and sample orientation were altered, resulting in a shift in accumulated counts in each window for subsequent tests.
Graphs - Daily Source Test Average Counts per Second (C-GJBG in Blue, C-GJBB in Red)
Average Total Counts per Second 2800.0
2700.0
2600.0
2500.0
2400.0
Counts per Second per Counts 2300.0
2200.0
2100.0 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 01 02 03 04 05 06 ------10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 ------2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 Date
JBG TC JBB TC
Average Potassium Counts per Second 95.0
90.0
85.0
80.0
75.0
Counts per Second per Counts 70.0
65.0
60.0 04 05 06 07 08 15 16 17 18 19 26 27 28 29 30 06 02 03 09 10 11 12 13 14 20 21 22 23 24 25 31 01 02 03 04 05 ------10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 ------2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 Date
JBG K JBB K
Average Uranium Counts per Second 78.0
76.0
74.0
72.0
70.0
68.0
66.0 Counts per Second per Counts 64.0
62.0
60.0 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 01 02 03 04 05 06 ------10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 10 ------2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 Date
JBG U JBB U
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.57 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Average Thorium Counts per Second 180.0
175.0
170.0
165.0
160.0
155.0
Counts per Second per Counts 150.0
145.0
140.0 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 01 02 03 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 04 05 06 ------10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 ------2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 Date
JBG Th JBB Th
Appendix B. Archive Definitions
Geophysical Data Set 1074 is derived from surveys using a magnetic gradiometry and gamma-ray spectrometric systems mounted on fixed-wing platforms and carried out by Goldak Airborne Surveys.
1. ARCHIVE LAYOUT The files for the Renfrew Geophysical Survey are archived on a single DVD-ROM and sold as single product, as outlined below: Type of Data Magnetic and Gamma-Ray Spectrometric Format Grid and Profile Data (DVD-R) ASCII and Geosoft® Binary Geophysical Data Set (GDS) 1074 The content of the ASCII and Geosoft® binary file types are identical. They are provided in both forms to suit the user’s available software. The survey data are divided as follows.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 (DVD) a) ASCII (GXF) grids • digital elevation model • total magnetic field • first vertical derivative of the total magnetic field • “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field • first vertical derivative of the “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field • second vertical derivative of the “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field • measured lateral (across line) horizontal magnetic gradient • measured longitudinal (along line) horizontal magnetic gradient • natural air absorbed dose rate (nGy per hour) • potassium (%) • equivalent thorium (ppm) • equivalent uranium (ppm) • potassium/equivalent thorium ratio (%/ppm)
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.58 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey b) Geosoft® binary (GRD) grids • digital elevation model • total magnetic field • first vertical derivative of the total magnetic field • “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field • first vertical derivative of the “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field • second vertical derivative of the “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field • measured lateral (across line) horizontal magnetic gradient • measured longitudinal (along line) horizontal magnetic gradient • natural air absorbed dose rate (nGy per hour) • potassium (%) • equivalent thorium (ppm) • equivalent uranium (ppm) • potassium/equivalent thorium ratio (%/ppm) c) Vector (DXF) files • flight path • total field magnetic contours • Keating coefficients d) GeoTIFF seamless map images • “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field with planimetric base • shaded second vertical derivative of the “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field with planimetric base • total count grid with planimetric base • potassium grid with planimetric base • equivalent uranium grid with planimetric base • equivalent thorium grid with planimetric base • potassium, uranium, thorium ternary image with planimetric base e) Geosoft® (GDB) binary data • profile database of magnetic data (10 Hz sampling) in Geosoft® GDB format • profile database of gamma-ray spectrometric data (1 Hz sampling) in Geosoft® GDB format • Keating coefficients in Geosoft® GDB format f) ASCII (XYZ) data • profile database of magnetic data (10 Hz sampling) in ASCII XYZ format • profile database of gamma-ray spectrometric data (1 Hz sampling) in ASCII XYZ format • database of Keating coefficients in ASCII CSV (comma-separated values) format
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.59 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
g) Geosoft® (MAP) map files • colour-filled contours of gradient-enhanced residual magnetic intensity with flight lines • shaded colour of the second vertical derivative of the gradient-enhanced total magnetic intensity with Keating coefficients • histogram-equalized ternary cyan-magenta-yellow radioelement image with inset images of percent potassium, equivalent uranium, equivalent thorium and dose rate and flight line h) Survey report in Adobe® Acrobat® (PDF) format
2. CO-ORDINATE SYSTEMS
The profile data are provided in 2 co-ordinate systems: • Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection, Zone 18N, NAD83, Canada local datum • latitude/longitude co-ordinates, NAD83, Canada local datum
The gridded data are provided in 1 co-ordinate system: • Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection, Zone 18N, NAD83, Canada local datum
3. LINE NUMBERING
The line numbering convention for survey data provided in GDS 1074 is as follows: • Line numbers are 2 to 4 digits with the last digit indicating part or revision number i.e., line 10 is the first line of the survey followed by line 20; should line 10 be in 2 parts, the first is 10 and the second is 11. Similarly, should line 220 have been reflown, it will be in the database as line 221. • Control Line numbers start with 80000, but are otherwise organized under the same scheme. • In the Geosoft® Oasis montaj™ binary database, survey lines are designated with a leading character “L” and control lines are designated with a leading character “T”.
4. DATA FILES
The survey data files are provided as follows: • REMAG.GDB Geosoft® Oasis montaj™ uncompressed binary database file of the magnetic data, sampled at 10 Hz • REMAG.XYZ ASCII file of the magnetic data, sampled at 10 Hz • RESPEC1024.GDB Geosoft® Oasis Montaj™ uncompressed binary database file of the gamma-ray spectrometric data, sampled at 1 Hz • RESPEC1024.XYZ ASCII file of the gamma-ray spectrometric data, sampled at 1 Hz • RESPEC1024ARRAY(1-8).XYZ ASCII file of the 1024 channel gamma-ray spectra, sampled at 1 Hz • REKC.GDB Geosoft® Oasis montaj™ uncompressed binary database file of the Keating coefficients • REKC.CSV ASCII file of the Keating coefficients
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.60 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
The contents of REMAG.XYZ/REMAG.GDB (both file types contain the same set of data channels) are summarized as follows:
Channel Description Units aircraft aircraft registration gps_x_raw raw GPS X metres gps_y_raw raw GPS Y metres gps_z_raw raw GPS Z metres gps_base_x GPS base station X DD.MM.DSS gps_base_y GPS base station Y DD.MM.DSS gps_base_z GPS base station Z metres gps_x_final differentially corrected GPS X (NAD83 datum) decimal-degrees gps_y_final differentially corrected GPS Y (NAD83 datum) decimal-degrees gps_z_final differentially corrected GPS Z (NAD83 datum) metres above sea level x_nad83 easting in UTM co-ordinates using NAD83 datum metres y_nad83 northing in UTM co-ordinates using NAD83 datum metres lon_nad83 longitude using NAD83 datum decimal-degrees lat_nad83 latitude using NAD83 datum decimal-degrees radar1_raw raw radar altimeter 1 metres above terrain radar2_raw raw radar altimeter 2 metres above terrain radar_final corrected radar altimeter metres above terrain dem digital elevation model metres above sea level fiducial fiducial flight flight number line_number full flightline number (flightline and part numbers) line flightline number time_utc UTC time seconds time_local local time seconds after midnight time_unix unix time (seconds after Jan 1, 1970) seconds date local date YYYY/MM/DD height_mag magnetometer height metres above terrain mag_base1_raw raw magnetic base station 1 data nanoteslas mag_base1_final corrected magnetic base station 1 data nanoteslas mag_base2_raw raw magnetic base station 2 data nanoteslas mag_base2_final corrected magnetic base station 2 data nanoteslas fluxgate_x X-component field from the compensation fluxgate magnetometer nanoteslas fluxgate_y Y-component field from the compensation fluxgate magnetometer nanoteslas fluxgate_z Z-component field from the compensation fluxgate magnetometer nanoteslas mag_raw_left raw magnetic field from left wingtip sensor nanoteslas mag_comp_left compensated magnetic field from left wingtip sensor nanoteslas mag_lag_left comp’d, edited and lag corrected magnetic field from left wing sensor nanoteslas mag_raw_right raw magnetic field from right wingtip sensor nanoteslas mag_comp_right compensated magnetic field from right wingtip sensor nanoteslas mag_lag_right comp’d, edited and lag corrected mag. field from rt. wingtip sensor nanoteslas mag_raw_tail raw magnetic field from tail sensor nanoteslas mag_comp_tail compensated magnetic field from tail sensor nanoteslas mag_lag_tail compensated, edited and lag corrected mag. field from tail sensor nanoteslas mag_diurn_tail diurnally-corrected magnetic field from tail sensor nanoteslas igrf local IGRF field nanoteslas mag_igrf_tail IGRF-corrected magnetic field from tail sensor nanoteslas mag_lev_tail levelled magnetic field from tail sensor nanoteslas mag_gsclevel_tail GSC levelled magnetic field from tail sensor nanoteslas mag_grad_lat_raw raw lateral horizontal mag. gradient (from wingtip sensors) nanoteslas/metre mag_grad_lat_cor attitude corrected lateral horizontal mag gradient nanoteslas/metre mag_grad_lat_final levelled /filtered lateral horiz. mag. gradient (from wingtip sensors) nanoteslas/metre mag_grad_long_raw raw longitudinal horizontal magnetic gradient nanoteslas/metre mag_grad_long_cor attitude corrected longitudinal horizontal mag gradient nanoteslas/metre mag_grad_long_final levelled /filtered longitudinal horizontal magnetic gradient nanoteslas/metre pitch aircraft pitch degrees roll aircraft roll degrees yaw aircraft yaw degrees azimuth aircraft azimuth degrees
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.61 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
The contents of RESPEC1024.XYZ/ RESPEC1024.GDB (both file types contain the same set of data channels) are summarized as follows:
Channel Description Units aircraft aircraft registration gps_x_final differentially corrected GPS X (NAD83 datum) decimal-degrees gps_y_final differentially corrected GPS Y (NAD83 datum) decimal-degrees gps_z_final differentially corrected GPS Z (NAD83 datum) metres above sea level x_nad83 GPS X in UTM co-ordinates using NAD83 datum metres y_nad83 GPS Y in UTM co-ordinates using NAD83 datum metres lon_nad83 differentially corrected GPS X (longitude - NAD83 datum) decimal-degrees lat_nad83 differentially corrected GPS Y (latitude - NAD83 datum) decimal-degrees radar_raw raw radar altimeter metres above terrain radar_final corrected radar altimeter metres above terrain dem digital elevation model metres above sea level fiducial fiducial flight flight number line_number full flight line number (flight line and part numbers) line flight line number time_utc UTC time seconds time_local local time seconds after midnight time_unix unix time (seconds after Jan 1, 1970) seconds date local date YYYY/MM/DD height_rad gamma-ray spectrometer height at STP metres above terrain live_time_down downward gamma-ray spectrometer live time milliseconds live_time_up upward gamma-ray spectrometer live time milliseconds cosmic_raw raw cosmic counts counts per second radon_raw raw upward-looking uranium counts counts per second radon_final calculated radon counts counts per second total_count_win corrected total counts counts per second potassium_win corrected potassium counts counts per second uranium_win corrected uranium counts counts per second thorium_win corrected thorium counts counts per second dose rate natural air-absorbed dose rate nanograys per hour total_count_corr corrected total air-absorbed dose rate nanograys per hour potassium_corr corrected percent potassium percent euranium_corr corrected equivalent uranium parts per million ethorium_corr corrected equivalent thorium parts per million total_count_final micro-levelled total air-absorbed dose rate nanograys per hour potassium_final micro-levelled potassium percent euranium_final micro-levelled equivalent uranium parts per million ethorium_final micro-levelled equivalent thorium parts per million k_over_th ratio of potassium over equivalent thorium percent per parts per million air_temp outside air temperature degrees Celsius air_temp_f low-pass filtered outside air temperature degrees Celsius baro_press barometric pressure kiloPascals spectrum_down raw downward 1024-channel gamma-ray spectrum counts per second spectrum_up raw upward 1024-channel gamma-ray spectrum counts per second
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.62 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
The contents of REKC.CSV/REKC.GDB (both file types contain the same set of data channels) are summarized as follows:
Channel Description Units x_nad83 easting in UTM co-ordinates using NAD83 datum metres y_nad83 northing in UTM co-ordinates using NAD83 datum metres lon_nad83 longitude using NAD83 datum decimal-degrees lat_nad83 latitude using NAD83 datum decimal-degrees corr_coeff correlation coefficient percent x 10 pos_coeff positive correlation coefficient percent neg_coeff negative correlation coefficient percent norm_error standard error normalized to amplitude percent amplitude peak-to-peak anomaly amplitude within window nanoteslas
5. GRID FILES The gridded data are provided in 2 formats: • *.gxf Geosoft® uncompressed ASCII grid exchange format (revision 3.0) • *.grd Geosoft® Oasis montaj™ uncompressed binary grid file
All grids are NAD83 UTM Zone 18N co-ordinates with a grid cell size of 40 m × 40 m and are summarized as follows: • REDEM83.gxf/.grd digital elevation model • REMAG83.gxf/.grd total magnetic field • RE1VD83.gxf/.grd first vertical derivative of the total magnetic field • REGMAGGSC83.gxf/.grd “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field • REG1VDMAGGSC83.gxf/.grd first vertical derivative of the “GSC levelled” gradient- enhanced total magnetic field • REG2VDMAGGSC83.gxf/.grd second vertical derivative of the “GSC levelled” gradient- enhanced total magnetic field • RELAG.gxf/.grd measured lateral (across line) horizontal magnetic gradient • RELOG.gxf/.grd measured longitudinal (along line) horizontal magnetic gradient • RETC83.gxf/.grd natural air absorbed dose rate (nGy per hour) • REK83.gxf/.grd percent potassium (%) • RETH83.gxf/.grd equivalent thorium (ppm) • REU83.gxf/.grd equivalent uranium (ppm) • REKTHRATIO83.gxf/.grd percent potassium/equivalent thorium ratio (% / ppm)
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.63 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
6. GEOREFERENCED IMAGE FILES Geographically referenced colour images, incorporating a base map, are provided in GeoTIFF format for use in GIS applications: • REGMAGGSC83.TI “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field grid + planimetric base • REG2VDMAGGSC83.TIF shaded second vertical derivative of the “GSC levelled” gradient-enhanced total magnetic field grid + planimetric base • RETC83.TIF total count grid + planimetric base • REK83.TIF potassium grid + planimetric base • REU83.TIF equivalent uranium grid + planimetric base • RETH83.TIF equivalent thorium grid + planimetric base • RETERN83.TIF potassium, uranium, thorium ternary image + planimetric base
7. VECTOR FILES Vector line work from the maps is provided in DXF (v.12) ASCII format using the following naming convention: • REPATH83.DXF flight path • REKC83.DXF Keating coefficients • REMAG83.DXF magnetic contours The layers within the DXF files correspond to the various object types found therein and have intuitive names.
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.64 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Appendix C. Operational Reports
Goldak Airborne Surveys WEEK BEGINNING September 29, 2013 Aircraft: C-GJBG C-GJBB WEEKLY OPERATIONS REPORT Pilot: Mathieson Co Pilot: Foyle MNDM Eastern Ontario & Renfrew Base: Knights Inn, Arnprior Data Processor: Rotheram Phone: 613 623 4271 Project total 68285 Project #: 2013-03
Flight Times Kilometers Unservicability Date Flt AircraftFerry Te st Prod Total Flown Accept Remain A/C Eqt Diur Wx Comments Sun 68285 Sep 29 68285 DOY :272 68285 68285 Mon 68285 JBG Arrives on site Sep 30 68285 DOY :273 68285 68285 Tues 1 GJBG 0.5 0.5 1 68285 Innitial Comp Flight Oct 01 2/3 GJBG 0.7 0.9 1.6 68285 Bourget Heading Test/Radar Stack DOY :274 68285 68285 Wed 4 GJBG 0.8 3 3.8 68285 Lag Test/Cosmic Oct 02 6 GJBG 0.2 1 1.2 68285 Recompensation DOY :275 68285 68285 Thurs 7 GJBG 0.3 1 1.3 68285 Compensation Flight Oct 03 68285 DOY :276 68285 68285 Fri 8 GJBG 0.2 1.9 2.1 268 268 68017 20 Flight aborted due to limited vis Oct 04 9 GJBG 0.6 5.2 5.8 1033 1033 66984 Both flights in E.Ont block DOY :277 66984 66984 Sat 10 GJBG 0.6 5.4 6 889 889 66095 Renfrew Block Oct 05 66095 DOY :278 66095 66095 TOTAL FOR WEEK 3.9 6.4 12.5 22.8 2190 2190
CARRIED OVER 0 0 0 0 0 0 68285 TOTAL FOR JOB 3.9 6.4 12.5 22.8 2190 2190 66095
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.65 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Goldak Airborne Surveys WEEK BEGINNING October 6, 2013 Aircraft: C-GJBG C-GJBB WEEKLY OPERATIONS REPORT Pilot: Mathieson/Foyle Co Pilot: Ando/Saudawha MNDM Eastern Ontario & Renfrew Base: Knights Inn, Arnprior Data Processor: Rotheram Phone: 613 623 4271 Project total 68285 Project #: 2013-03
Flight Times Kilometers Unservicability Date Flt AircraftFerry Te st Prod Total Flown Accept Remain A/C Eqt Diur Wx Comments Sun 66095 100 Low Ceilings/Vis Oct 06 66095 DOY :279 66095 66095 Mon 66095 100 Low Ceilings/Vis Oct 07 66095 DOY :280 66095 66095 Tues 11 GJBG 0.6 5.4 6 1070 989 65106 Renfrew Block Oct 08 65106 DOY :281 65106 65106 Wed 12 GJBG 0.6 5.3 5.9 1085 926 64180 Renfrew Block Oct 09 64180 DOY :282 64180 64180 Thurs 16 GJBG 0.6 5.3 5.9 1115 1115 63065 Renfrew Block Oct 10 63065 DOY :283 63065 63065 Fri 17 GJBG 0.7 5.4 6.1 1144 1144 61921 Renfrew Block Oct 11 61921 DOY :284 61921 61921 Sat 18 GJBG 0.3 1 1.3 61921 Comp/FOM Oct 12 19 GJBB 0.3 1 1.3 61921 Comp/FOM DOY :285 20 GJBG 0.7 4.3 5.1 871 871 61050 Renfrew Block 21 GJBB 3.4 0.1 3.5 61050 Cosmic Test Flight
TOTAL FOR WEEK 3.8 5.4 25.8 35.1 5285 5045 CARRIED OVER 3.9 6.4 12.5 22.8 2190 2190 66095 TOTAL FOR JOB 7.7 11.8 38.3 57.9 7475 7235 61050
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.66 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Goldak Airborne Surveys WEEK BEGINNING October 13, 2013 Aircraft: C-GJBG C-GJBB WEEKLY OPERATIONS REPORT Pilot: Mathieson/Foyle Co Pilot: Ando/Saldanha MNDM Eastern Ontario & Renfrew Base: Knights Inn, Arnprior Data Processor: Rotheram Phone: 613 623 4271 Project total 68285 Project #: 2013-03
Flight Times Kilometers Unservicability Date Flt AircraftFerry Te st Prod Total Flown Accept Remain A/C Eqt Diur Wx Comments Sun 22 GJBG 0.7 3.1 3.8 580 533 60517 Renfrew Block Oct 13 23 GJBB 0.8 0.4 1.2 60517 Bourget Heading Test DOY :286 24 GJBB 0.6 3.9 4.5 509 509 60008 Renfrew Block 25 GJBG 0.3 1.7 2 301 301 59707 E.Ont Block 26 GJBB 228 228 59780 E.Ont Block - Time accounted for in F24 Mon 27 GJBG 0.9 5.2 6.1 1061 1061 58719 Renfrew Block Oct 14 28 GJBB 0.7 4.7 5.4 992 992 57727 Renfrew Block DOY :287 57727 57727 Tues 29 GJBG 0.7 5.4 6.1 1078 1078 56649 Renfrew Block Oct 15 30 GJBB 0.7 4.8 5.5 754 754 55895 Renfrew Block DOY :288 32 GJBB 56 56 55839 East Ontario Block 55839 Wed 33 GJBB 0.3 0.3 0.6 0 55839 100 conditions too turbulent Oct 16 55839 DOY :289 55839 55839 Thurs 34 GJBB 0.8 4.8 5.6 1078 1049 54790 Renfrew Oct 17 35 GJBG 1.2 4.8 6 1063 961 53829 Renfrew DOY :290 53829 53829 Fri 36 GJBB 1.1 4.5 5.6 887 843 52986 40 East Ontario Oct 18 37 GJBG 0.6 2.1 2.7 372 283 52703 70 East Ontario DOY :291 52703 Flights shortened due to turbulence 52703 Sat 38 GJBB 1.2 3.3 4.5 616 616 52087 Renfrew Oct 19 39 GJBG 0.8 5.2 6 1093 1093 50994 Renfrew DOY :292 50994 50994 TOTAL FOR WEEK 11.4 0.4 53.8 65.6 10668 10357 CARRIED OVER 7.7 11.8 38.3 57.9 7475 7235 61050 TOTAL FOR JOB 19.1 12.2 92.1 123.5 18143 17592 50693
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.67 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Goldak Airborne Surveys WEEK BEGINNING October 20, 2013 Aircraft: C-GJBG C-GJBB WEEKLY OPERATIONS REPORT Pilot: Mathieson/Foyle Co Pilot: Ando/Saldanha MNDM Eastern Ontario & Renfrew Base: Knights Inn, Arnprior Data Processor: Rotheram Phone: 613 623 4271 Project total 68285 Project #: 2013-03
Flight Times Kilometers Unservicability Date Flt AircraftFerry Te st Prod Total Flown Accept Remain A/C Eqt Diur Wx Comments Sun 40 GJBB 0.7 4.9 5.8 1166 1166 49527 Renfrew Oct 20 41 GJBG 0.6 5.2 5.8 1060 1040 48487 Renfrew DOY :293 48487 48487 Mon GJBB 0.3 0.3 0 0 48487 100 Oct 21 48487 DOY :294 48487 48487 Tues 42 GJBB 0.3 1.3 1.6 222 146 48341 95 East Ontario Oct 22 43 GJBG 0.4 0.2 0.6 35 26 48315 95 East Ontario DOY :295 48315 Both flights terminated due to severe 48315 Turbulence Wed 44 GJBB 0.8 4.9 5.7 1153 1153 47162 Renfrew Oct 23 45 GJBG 0.8 4.6 5.4 1023 559 46603 ~40 Renfrew (Mag sensor failure, spec data OK DOY :296 46603 46603 Thurs 46 GJBB 0.5 1.6 2.1 391 391 46212 60 Renfrew Oct 24 47 GJBG 0.4 0.4 0.8 46212 Comp following wing mag change DOY :297 48 GJBB 0.7 2.7 3.4 636 636 45576 East Ontario 49 GJBG 0.2 4.1 4.3 864 864 44712 East Ontario Fri 50 GJBB 1 5 6 1199 1199 43513 Renfrew Oct 25 51 GJBG 0.9 4.9 5.8 1109 1101 42412 Renfrew DOY :298 42412 42412 Sat 42412 100 Oct 26 42412 DOY :299 42412 42412
TOTAL FOR WEEK 7.6 0.4 39.4 47.6 8858 8281
CARRIED OVER 19.1 12.2 92.1 123.5 18143 17592 50693 TOTAL FOR JOB 26.7 12.6 131.5 171.1 27001 25873 42412
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.68 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Goldak Airborne Surveys WEEK BEGINNING October 27, 2013 Aircraft: C-GJBG C-GJBB WEEKLY OPERATIONS REPORT Pilot: Mathieson/Foyle Co Pilot: Ando/Saldanha MNDM Eastern Ontario & Renfrew Base: Knights Inn, Arnprior Data Processor:Rotheram/Shaikh Phone: 613 623 4271 Project total 68285 Project #: 2013-03
Flight Times Kilometers Unservicability Date Flt AircraftFerry Te st Prod Total Flown Accept Remain A/C Eqt Diur Wx Comments Sun 52 GJBB 1 5.2 6.2 1252 1252 41160 Renfrew Oct 27 53 GJBG 0.8 4.7 5.5 1081 1081 40079 Renfrew DOY :300 40079 40079 Mon 40079 100 Low ceilings/low level turbulence Oct 28 40079 DOY :301 40079 40079 Tues 54 GJBB 0.9 4.8 5.7 1114 1114 38965 Renfrew Oct 29 55 GJBG 0.9 4.8 5.7 1030 978 37987 Renfrew DOY :302 37987 37987 Wed 56 GJBB 0.7 5.2 5.9 1132 1132 36855 Renfrew Oct 30 57 GJBG 0.8 4.7 5.5 1010 1010 35845 Renfrew DOY :303 35845 35845 Thurs 35845 100 Rain, Low visibility Oct 31 35845 DOY :304 35845 35845 Fri 35845 100 Rain, Turbulance/gusting Nov 01 35845 DOY :305 35845 35845 Sat 35845 100 Rain, Low visibilty Nov 02 35845 DOY :306 35845 35845
TOTAL FOR WEEK 5.1 0 29.4 34.5 6619 6567
CARRIED OVER 26.7 12.6 131.5 171.1 27001 25873 42412 TOTAL FOR JOB 31.8 12.6 160.9 205.6 33620 32440 35845
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.69 Report on the Renfrew Area Airborne Geophysical Survey
Goldak Airborne Surveys WEEK BEGINNING November 3, 2013 Aircraft: C-GJBG C-GJBB WEEKLY OPERATIONS REPORT Pilot: Mathieson/Foyle Co Pilot: Ando/Saldanha MNDM Eastern Ontario & Renfrew Base: Knights Inn, Arnprior Data Processor: Shaikh Phone: 613 623 4271 Project total 68285 Project #: 2013-03
Flight Times Kilometers Unservicability Date Flt AircraftFerry Te st Prod Total Flown Accept Remain A/C Eqt Diur Wx Comments Sun 35845 Nov 03 58 GJBB 1.1 4.5 5.6 1094 1094 34751 Renfrew DOY :307 59 GJBG 0.9 4.7 5.6 1004 1004 33747 Renfrew 33747 Mon 60 GJBB 0.8 5.3 6.1 1174 1174 32573 Renfrew Nov 04 61 GJBG 0.6 1.4 2 322 322 32251 70 Renfrew - Flt. Terminated due to aircraft vib DOY :308 32251 32251 Tues 62 GJBB 5.8 5.1 0.7 1021 1021 31230 Renfrew Nov 05 63 GJBG 5.6 4.6 1 927 927 30303 Renfrew DOY :309 30303 30303 Wed 64 GJBB 0.8 5.2 6 1103 1103 29200 Renfrew and East Ontario block Nov 06 65 GJBG 1.4 4.4 5.8 752 752 28448 Renfrew and East Ontario block DOY :310 28448 Renfew Survey completed 28448 Thurs 66 GJBB 0.2 6 6.2 1349 1349 27099 East Ontario Nov 07 67 GJBG 0.5 5.3 5.8 1228 1228 25871 East Ontario DOY :311 25871 25871 Fri 68 GJBB 0.2 6.1 6.3 1400 1400 24471 East Ontario Nov 08 69 GJBG 0.5 5.7 6.2 1360 1360 23111 East Ontario DOY :312 23111 23111 Sat GJBB 23111 100 Low Cloud/Freezing rain/Low visibilty Nov 09 GJBG 23111 100 Low Cloud/Freezing rain/Low visibilty DOY :313 23111 23111 TOTAL FOR WEEK 18.4 0 58.3 57.3 12734 12734
CARRIED OVER 31.8 12.6 160.9 205.6 33620 32440 35845 TOTAL FOR JOB 50.2 12.6 219.2 262.9 46354 45174 23111
Geophysical Data Set 1074 p.70