+1
Planned

additional points when Implicit modelling

ronald reid 8 years ago in Geology updated by Yan 8 years ago 6
I have set up a macro that imports a drillhole data update, refreshes the database and rebuilds the implicit models of our porphyries. In order to get the porphyries to build as I interpret them to be I have to add several points to drive the interpolant. To do this I create a lithology interpolant and then edit the interpolated points (adding a few positive and negative distances as in red and blue in image1),Image 438
To do this in an automated fashion I have to have the data saved to a separate file, then append them to the new interpolated distance points files, then use the attribute modelling option to model the 0 surface. It would be great if there was an option on the Build Options tab where I could select an additional points or string file that can be included into the building process, eg;

Image 439

or on the Attribute modelling tab;
Image 440
That way I can simply have a point or string file that contains the edits that simply get included into the modelling process - making building new edited shells simpler - especially when doing it using the macros.



Hi,

I think this would be a brilliant addition to the IM tools.  If possible, I would really like to see this kind of functionality added to the Lithological Modelling IM tool - skips the unnecessary process of having to rebuild in Attribute Modelling using the interpolated points from Lithological Modelling.  
+1
Under review
Yes great idea.  The concept applies to other functions as well.  For example the raw data for gridding a horizon typically comes from drill hole intersections.  But you may well have (in a different file) surface mapping or outcrop points.  
A DTM, by definition, cannot extrapolate beyond the outer points.  You may have some points, from another source, to extend the limits of the triangulation.
+1
Agree, the IM tool already does this in the Fault modelling option where you select the structural data - and then select extra control points by grabbing a fault trace digitised on the the topography for instance. It would definitely be useful to extend this option to the other methods. And yes the concept can be extended to gridding, and modelling DTMs or even solids - use the strings plus some additional points I have digitised.
+1
I really like the idea of being able add in polygons to guide the model and increase the continuity, in effect combing polygon modelling and Lithology or Grade shells.  

Ron, something that might work for you is to create your implicit model, then do some explicit wireframing in the areas that require additional interpretation/extrapolation and save these a separate wireframe. Then in your Macros you can perform a solid intersection with your explicit and implicit wireframes. Obviously there are some cons to this method as its not as dynamic as an entirely implicit model, but it is a good way of filling the gaps. 

Thanks Richard, although the method of having a separate table of edit points the same structure as the interpolated distance function that I can simply append to the distance function table then run through the attribute modelling process works quite well - it is just a whole lota extra steps that an option to add the points dynamically into the first interpolation would cut short.