Problems and challenges of 3D modeling of regional geological structures in the Precambrian bedrock – a case study from the Outokumpu area, Finland.

@inproceedings{LaineGM2013,
 abstract = { 3D geological modeling usually begins with digitizing of geological features from geological and geophysical maps and cross sections. 3D models are then built using these digitized points and lines, together with drill-hole data. Digitized points and lines are connected to surfaces representing lithological contacts, faults and shear zones based on tectonic observations and taking into account the relative ages of formations. A profound understanding of the structural geology is essential because lithologies or faults may be connected in many different ways when based only on the drill-hole data. In this stage the main interpretation work is carried out. Every time a point is added outside the known objects (points, drill holes), an interpretation is made. There are several approaches to connect the lines and points into surfaces in 3D. Different approaches were applied to 3D geological modeling using data from Outokumpu mining area in Finland in order to demonstrate the important differences resulting from the application of different concepts and procedures and their effect on the whole 3D geological modeling process. Geological modeling software has been used such as Paradigm Gocad, GeoModeller (Intrepid) and mining software Surpac and Gems (Gemcom). The region is located in the North Karelia Schist Belt, which was thrust on the late Archaean gneissic–granitoid basement of the Karelian craton during the early stages of the Svecofennian Orogeny between 1.92 and 1.87 Ga.
The aim of present work was to make recommendations for the use of 3D-modeling tools and processes for 3D/4D modeling at Geological Survey of Finland (GTK). As a result, we conclude that the use of different approaches is necessary for comprehensive data capture and 3D visualization of a complex geology. It is also evident that purely technical visualization without involving geological ideas and interpretations is impossible. It is important to understand that all models contain a large degree of uncertainty, and very different models may be constructed from the same geological and geophysical data. },
 author = { Laine, Eeva-Liisa AND Saalmann, Kerstin AND Koistinen, Esko },
 booktitle = { Proc. 33rd Gocad Meeting, Nancy },
 title = { Problems and challenges of 3D modeling of regional geological structures in the Precambrian bedrock – a case study from the Outokumpu area, Finland. },
 year = { 2013 }
}