Geographic Information Systems have strongly impacted on Earth Sciences, in particular on 2D and 3D imaging of geological objects. In today’s world, the extremely rapid evolution of the digital technology is a permanent stimulus to improve our geological representations continuously running after more and more sophisticated programs. However, this escalation trend implies three risks: - The management of the geological objects may become a complex toy, property of a few initiated usually out of the real geological problems; - The toy may become a slot machine that repays with a few smart products long-lived and high operating costs; - The quality and the self-consistency of the geological database may become a second-order article with respect to the quality of the geological-object imaging. No doubt that Earth Sciences are entering a post-paper map era; no doubt, however, that the Earth-Science world community will obtain very different results whether geologists will choose widely-accessible data-processing systems or not, and whether they will be able not only to collect high-quality analytical data but also to assure the self-consistency of the entire data set by dividing the whole information into homogeneous categories organized in logic hierarchic trees. We present an example of digital geological cartography based in which inhomogeneous geological/geophysical objects (including surface and subsurface geological/structural maps, reflection seismic lines, borehole wire logs and stratigraphic analyses, stratigraphic sections etc.) have been organized in a homogeneous and self-consistent geological/geophysical data bank. The software we used is a widespread commercial program running on PC. Great effort has been devoted to the formalization of the initial geological/geophysical information into logic categories organized into homogeneous groups occupying equivalent positions in the hierarchic tree. For example, in the digital Structural Model of Italy the Alps occupy an intermediate position between more comprehensive categories (Europe-verging Mountain Chain, which derives from the Europe-verging Orogenic System together with the European Foreland) and more specific categories that following the hierarchic tree range from groups of nappes (e.g. Austroalpine System of the Central and Eastern Alps) to single nappes (e.g. Margna Nappe) the composition of which, finally, is described in the last level of the tree. A complete description of first-order geological objects such as the Europe-verging Orogenic System occupies up to nine hierarchic levels. The advantages of a hierarchic organization of the geological/geophysical data set are quite obvious. A hierarchic organization obliges geologists to analyze in details every object for defining its information content, obliges to compare the object with the other objects present in the data bank and finally obliges to store every object in well defined categories occupying precise positions in the hierarchic tree. In the same time the described organization allows different displays of the same area showing a more or less detailed geology depending on the hierarchic level chosen in the query. A hierarchic organization, finally, allows by simple queries the optional display of objects present in the data bank that are logically linked to a certain hierarchic level of the general legend (e.g. wells or seismic profiles that have explored a certain geological unit). Our presentation will illustrate several examples referred to different areas of the Italia Peninsula and surrounding offshore areas.
Geological maps of the future. The example of the Structural Model of Italy
SCANDONE, PAOLO;PATACCA, ETTA
2004-01-01
Abstract
Geographic Information Systems have strongly impacted on Earth Sciences, in particular on 2D and 3D imaging of geological objects. In today’s world, the extremely rapid evolution of the digital technology is a permanent stimulus to improve our geological representations continuously running after more and more sophisticated programs. However, this escalation trend implies three risks: - The management of the geological objects may become a complex toy, property of a few initiated usually out of the real geological problems; - The toy may become a slot machine that repays with a few smart products long-lived and high operating costs; - The quality and the self-consistency of the geological database may become a second-order article with respect to the quality of the geological-object imaging. No doubt that Earth Sciences are entering a post-paper map era; no doubt, however, that the Earth-Science world community will obtain very different results whether geologists will choose widely-accessible data-processing systems or not, and whether they will be able not only to collect high-quality analytical data but also to assure the self-consistency of the entire data set by dividing the whole information into homogeneous categories organized in logic hierarchic trees. We present an example of digital geological cartography based in which inhomogeneous geological/geophysical objects (including surface and subsurface geological/structural maps, reflection seismic lines, borehole wire logs and stratigraphic analyses, stratigraphic sections etc.) have been organized in a homogeneous and self-consistent geological/geophysical data bank. The software we used is a widespread commercial program running on PC. Great effort has been devoted to the formalization of the initial geological/geophysical information into logic categories organized into homogeneous groups occupying equivalent positions in the hierarchic tree. For example, in the digital Structural Model of Italy the Alps occupy an intermediate position between more comprehensive categories (Europe-verging Mountain Chain, which derives from the Europe-verging Orogenic System together with the European Foreland) and more specific categories that following the hierarchic tree range from groups of nappes (e.g. Austroalpine System of the Central and Eastern Alps) to single nappes (e.g. Margna Nappe) the composition of which, finally, is described in the last level of the tree. A complete description of first-order geological objects such as the Europe-verging Orogenic System occupies up to nine hierarchic levels. The advantages of a hierarchic organization of the geological/geophysical data set are quite obvious. A hierarchic organization obliges geologists to analyze in details every object for defining its information content, obliges to compare the object with the other objects present in the data bank and finally obliges to store every object in well defined categories occupying precise positions in the hierarchic tree. In the same time the described organization allows different displays of the same area showing a more or less detailed geology depending on the hierarchic level chosen in the query. A hierarchic organization, finally, allows by simple queries the optional display of objects present in the data bank that are logically linked to a certain hierarchic level of the general legend (e.g. wells or seismic profiles that have explored a certain geological unit). Our presentation will illustrate several examples referred to different areas of the Italia Peninsula and surrounding offshore areas.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
