Appendix H Marine Magnetic Survey

Document MARINE MAGNETOMETRY SURVEY FOR FERROUS OBJECTS
Description MANDORAH, NORTHERN TERRITORY
Document
SH20221103_November_2022_CMG_Mandorah_Marine_Magnetics_Report
Name
Document Justin Anning

Author Principal Geophysicist, Surrich Hydrographics
Mandorah New Marine Facilities to Service Mandorah and Cox Peninsula

Project Name
Communities
Client Project
Number
Client CMG
REVISION HISTORY
REV DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION BY APPROVED
Rev0 28/11/2022 Fist issue of report JMA AR
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Surrich operates under the QAS international ISO 9001:2015 quality

management system.
SH20221103_November_2022_CMG_Mandorah_Marine_Magnetics_Report_rev0 1
CONTENTS
1. ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 4
2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 5
3. SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................... 6
4. LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................................................ 7
4.1. MARINE MAGNETICS (MM) LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................... 7
4.2. SIDE SCAN SONAR (SSS) LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................... 7
5. FIELD LOGISTICS ................................................................................................................................................. 8
5.1. PROJECT TIMELINE.............................................................................................................................................. 8
5.2. PROJECT PERSONNEL .......................................................................................................................................... 8
6. COORDINATE SYSTEM ....................................................................................................................................... 9
6.1. HORIZONTAL DATUM.......................................................................................................................................... 9
6.2. VERTICAL DATUM .............................................................................................................................................. 9
7. POSITIONING SYSTEM CHECKS ...................................................................................................................... 9
8. ACQUISITION ...................................................................................................................................................... 10
8.1. SURVEY VESSEL USED DURING SSS/MM ACQUISITION .................................................................................... 10
8.2. SURVEY VESSEL USED DURING SURFACE TO MM ACQUISITION ........................................................................ 10
8.3. POSITIONING AND NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT .................................................................................................... 11
8.4. SIDE SCAN SONAR ............................................................................................................................................ 11
8.5. MARINE MAGNETOMETER (MM) ...................................................................................................................... 12
9. PROCESSING ........................................................................................................................................................ 13
9.1. SIDE SCAN SONAR (SSS) .................................................................................................................................. 13
9.2. MARINE MAGNETICS ........................................................................................................................................ 13
10. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ................................................................................................................................ 14
11. FOLLOW UP TARGET INVESTIGATIONS .................................................................................................... 15
12. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................................... 15
13. REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................... 15
14. DIGITAL PRODUCTS.......................................................................................................................................... 16
FIGURES
Site Overview. ............................................................................................................................................... 5
MM sensor line coverage. .............................................................................................................................. 6
Survey Vessel “Category 5” ........................................................................................................................ 10
Survey Vessel “Bluey” ................................................................................................................................ 10
TABLES
Table 1. Project Timeline ................................................................................................................................................. 8
Table 2. Project Personnel ................................................................................................................................................ 8
Table 3. Catategory-5 survey vessel specification ......................................................................................................... 10
Table 4. Bluey survey vessel specification ..................................................................................................................... 10
Table 5. Navigation Equipment...................................................................................................................................... 11
Table 6. Side Scan Sonar Specifications ........................................................................................................................ 11
Table 7. Marine Magnetometer Specifications............................................................................................................... 12
APPENDICIES
Appendix A.1 Magnetic Survey Lines Over Bathymetry
Appendix A.2 Magnetic Survey Lines Over Site Layout
Appendix A.3 Magnetic Sensor Altitude
Appendix A.4 Magnetic First Vertical Derivative with Targets
Appendix A.5 Magnetic Analytic Signal with Targets
Appendix A.6 Targets Over Bathymetry
Appendix B.1 SSS Mosaic with Targets

Appendix B.2 SSS Targets Report
Appendix C.1 MM Target Table with Calculated Properties
1. Abbreviations
The following abbreviations may be used in this document
1VD First Vertical Derivative
AGC Automatic Gain Control
GDA94 Geocentric Datum of Australia 1994
GNSS Global Navigation Survey System
kn Knots
LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide
MGA Map Grid Australia
m Metres
ms Milliseconds
m/s Metres per second
MBES Multi-Beam Echo Sounder
MM Marine Magnetics
QA Quality Assured
QC Quality Control
SSM Standard Survey Mark
2. Introduction
During June 2022, Surrich Hydrographics was contracted to perform a marine magnetic survey for the purpose of
identifying ferrous objects on and beneath the seabed at the proposed project site for the “Mandorah New Marine
Facilities to Service Mandorah and Cox Peninsula Communities”.
In the deeper waters, the methodology consisted of towing a Side Scan Sonar (SSS) which in turn towed a neutrally
buoyant magnetometer. This approach allowed the magnetometer to be towed at a nominal altitude of 2m above the seabed.
The altitude of the magnetometer is derived from analysis of the SSS bottom track, and the side scan imagery is
navigationally fine-tuned to provide superior positioning for the magnetometer..
In the shallower waters, larger vessel access was restricted a small 4m polly craft was utilized to surface tow the
magnetometer. The altitude above the seabed was calculated using tides and supplied bathymetry.
Figure 1 shows the survey area and planned works supplied by the client. The existing jetty is visible to the south, and the
planned construction works consists of breakwaters, dredging, piling and a floating pontoon.
Site Overview.
3. Scope and Methodology
The scope was for a magnetometer survey at Mandorah to target ferrous objects for follow-up investigation by divers
experienced in the search, identification, and recovery of objects on and beneath the seabed.
The scope included the requirement to identify hazards that may affect dredging and construction activities including the
potential for UXO objects. Surrich is not a registered UXO contractor, however we believe this survey provides an
excellent first investigation in the process of UXO risk management.
The survey areas were described as extending from North of Mandorah jetty to a distance of 50m beyond the new
breakwater locations. The grey lines in Figure 2 demonstrates the magnetometer sensor coverage achieved.
MM sensor line coverage.
When operating in shallow coastal locations for ferrous object detection, we typically utilize a methodology where we
consider it is more important to travel slowly and get the magnetic sensor as close to the seabed, and thus as close to the
ferrous targets, as possible. We achieve this by towing a weighted SSS on a winch which is used to control altitude, then
the neutrally buoyant magnetic sensor is towed a fixed distance behind the SSS towfish. Operating the magnetometer in
in close proximity to a vessel, results in the magnetic field of the vessel being detected by the sensor. By operating in
smooth waters and conducting ‘graceful’ turns, the longer wavelength interference, or heading errors, including other
unwanted magnetic components including diurnal magnetic variations, may be filtered out during processing, leaving the
small wavelength anomalies from shallow sources including the ferrous objects being targeted. This methodology also
allows us to utilize the SSS imagery to refine the navigation of the magnetometer. Our methodology is contrary to some
scopes which require the magnetometer to be towed far enough behind the vessel to reduce the interference. We maintain
our methodology results in technically superior results for detection of small ferrous on this project.
4. Limitations
4.1. Marine Magnetics (MM) Limitations
The marine magnetic method responds to man-made ferrous objects above and below the seabed, as well as magnetic
minerals in the geology.
The use of the term “ferrous” indicates a material ‘containing iron’ which typically exhibits a measurable magnetic field
in the presence of the Earth’s magnetic field. Some varieties of stainless steel are ‘austenitic’ meaning they are non-
magnetic and will therefore not be detectable by a magnetometer survey.
The magnetic method does not have the ability to locate all magnetically ferrous objects in a survey area. The response
from smaller objects may not be distinguishable from the background. The probability of detection decreases as iron
content becomes less and distance from the sensor increases.
Operating in high magnetic gradient areas, for example, around wharves and vessels, further reduces the ability of the
technique to detect target objects on the seabed. In the immediate vicinity of wharves and steel pilings effectiveness of the
method degrades to the level where the method becomes ineffective, and the ground should be inspected using diver search
methods.
Operating in close proximity to magnetic geological sources, for example in high susceptibility magnetic gravels, or very
shallow magnetic bedrock further reduces the ability of the technique to detect target objects on the seabed.
Quantitative interpretation relies on an accurately sampled field, however in practice, the inability to perfectly sample the
magnetic field vectors, as well as non-ideal, complex magnetic sources, strongly reduce the reliability of the calculated
target properties.
4.2. Side Scan Sonar (SSS) Limitations
Operating SSS for object detection is a trade-off between range, resolution, and required accuracy. 100% imaging of the
seafloor at consistent accuracy is impossible. The position of the sensor and sonar beams are typically estimated using a
layback calculation and object detection and positioning in turns may be unreliable.
Supplied SSS mosaics should not be relied upon for detailed object detection. Target interpretation is performed in an
interactive software environment which allows analysis of all available information at the maximum resolution.
5. Field Logistics
Work was conducted out of the Cullen Bay Marina. Acquisition was planned to take advantage of high tides.
5.1. Project Timeline
Activity Dates
Fly Perth to Darwin 8/11/2022
Mobilizing vessel (some delay waiting for freight to arrive) 9/11/2022 – 11/11/2022
Acquisition aboard Category 5 using the SSS/MM deployment method. 12/11/2022 – 13/11/2022
Mobilizing polycraft Bluey for surface tow. 14/11/2022
Acquisition using Bluey using the surface tow method. 15/11/2022
Demobilize vessels and ship equipment. 16/11/2022
Fly Perth to Darwin. 17/11/2022

Table 1. Project Timeline
5.2. Project Personnel
Name Role Qualifications
J Anning Crew Chief, Geophysicist BSc Geophysics, Coxswain
Various CMG Appropriate commercial qualifications

Vessel master and onsite support
personnel to master the vessels.
Table 2. Project Personnel
6. Coordinate System
6.1. Horizontal Datum
GDA94 MGA Zone 52
6.2. Vertical Datum
The vertical datum is not a major consideration with respect to the results. For planning and presentation purposes a
topographic/bathymetric dataset was utilized from previous geotechnical seismic works conducted by Surrich
Hydrographics at the site. The supplied bathymetric file name was:
• “20170919 - Hydrographic_Drone Survey_ Geosciences Australia Combined 1m LAT-MGA94”
This dataset proved adequate for planning purposes however we note it is not complete and we noted shoals (IE shallow
rocks) in the hydrographic section of the dataset which were not adequately mapped providing a potential navigation
hazard if planning under vessel clearances based on the data and tide values.
The most relevant vertical datum for a magnetometry survey is simply the seabed itself and the height of the magnetic
sensor above the seabed.
7. Positioning System Checks

This survey was performed concurrently with a separate contract performing hydrographic survey by Surrich
Hydrographics for the Port of Darwin. We utilized the same RTK base station established on Stokes Hill Wharf
coordinated using the AUSPOS service, and verified against SSMs on land. The RTK rover utilized when performing
the RTK checks for the Port of Darwin survey was also used to position the tow point for the magnetic survey work on
this project.
As an additional check we verify the position system simply by establishing the SSS imagery is coordinated with the
supplied bathymetric surface.
8. Acquisition
8.1. Survey Vessel used during SSS/MM acquisition
Name Category-5
Description 12m Aluminium catamaran. Twin 350hp outboard engines.
Survey Certificate 2C
Table 3. Catategory-5 survey vessel specification
Survey Vessel “Category 5”
8.2. Survey Vessel used during surface to MM acquisition
Name Bluey
Description 4.1m Polycraft Challenger. 30hp outboard engine.
Survey Certificate 2D
Table 4. Bluey survey vessel specification
Survey Vessel “Bluey”
8.3. Positioning and Navigation Equipment
Survey positioning system Septentrio Altus NR2
GNSS correction source Trimble base station at Stokes Hill Wharf
Offsets and configuration Antenna mounted directly above and line with the tow point.
On-line navigation software Sonarwiz.

Table 5. Navigation Equipment
8.4. Side Scan Sonar
Side Scan Sonar Edgetech 4125 600/1600 kHz
Acquisition System Edgetech Discover.
Frequency 1600kHz
Range 20m
Altitude ~2m was the target altitude above the seabed (for magnetic purposes).
Actual altitude may vary according to risk.
Nominal vessel speed ~3kn
Line spacing 4m
Offsets Tow point is directly beneath the primary positioning antenna.
Notes The SSS was deployed via a cable counter on the survey vessel temporary
A frame. A proportional winch system was used for depth control.
Table 6. Side Scan Sonar Specifications
8.5. Marine Magnetometer (MM)
Magnetometer Marine Magnetics Explorer
Acquisition System Data logged to Edgetech JSF file stream, in addition to the manufacturers BOB
acquisition software.
Sample interval 4Hz
Nominal vessel speed ~3kn
Line spacing 4m
Base station mag None utilized.
Offsets 7.5m aft of tow point on SSS fish

13.5m behind the primary antenna when performing the surface tow from the
polycraft.
Acquisition Notes This sensor is neutrally buoyant and is assumed to tow directly behind the path of
the SSS.
When performing the surface tow, floatation was attached
Table 7. Marine Magnetometer Specifications
9. Processing
9.1. Side Scan Sonar (SSS)
o Import SSS data from the Edgetech .jsf file into Sonarwiz processing software.
o Bottom track the SSS files and apply Empirical Gain Normalization to balance the intensities.
o Apply layback calculations:
o Smooth the logged ‘cable out’ distance.
o Fine-tune the layback calculation to improve the positional match between the SSS and the MBES.
o Work through each SSS waterfall image, identifying man-made debris type contacts only.
o Filter duplicate results down to a single target.
o Place observations in the “Description” field.
o Because there were few targets it was not necessary to apply classifications. (IE sort the targets into
different types).
9.2. Marine Magnetics
1. Locating MM data towed behind the SSS.

a. Export improved SSS navigation files from Soanrwiz (including the SSS fish altitude) and merge the
improved positions with time-stamped magnetic data.
b. Layback the MM sensor data by 7.5m which is the distance from the SSS transducer to the MM
sensor.
2. Locating MM data surface towed behind the polycraft.
a. Layback the MM sensor data by 13.5m which is the distance from the RTK GPS antenna to the MM
sensor.
3. Processing in Oasis Montaj software using the Marine_UXO extension.
4. Apply altitude correction using the “upward/downward continuation” method to adjust anomalies to a uniform
2m altitude.
5. Trim start and end of lines as required by nulling the Easting channel only. This methodology maintains the
entire acquired magnetic profile in a file. The advantage of this methodology is it minimizes end of line effects
when filters are applied to the magnetic channel.
6. Estimate the background using appropriate filtering routine, ensuring the background estimation does not affect
target anomalies.
a. Calculate the residual by subtracting the estimated background. We refer to the resultant dataset as the
“Magnetic Anomaly”. This process effectively removes diurnal variations and heading errors for the
purpose of this survey.
b. Subsequent analysis of the Magnetic Anomaly grid derived from the “total field with background
removed” showed this methodology did not create an artifact free image due to the effect of the wharf,
therefore, we resorted to the following alternate method of shallow anomaly enhancement and display:
7. The final and preferred method of background removal and shallow target enhancement was calculating the
first vertical derivative (1VD) on the profile data. This calculates the rate of change in the vertical direction,
enhancing near surface anomalies from ferrous targets (and shallow geologies) while supressing longer
wavelength anomalies from the wharf, diurnal effects and heading effects.
8. Pick targets by working work through each acquired profile, analysing the raw magnetic profiles, in addition to
the 1VD and Analytic Signal, picking anomalies that may be due to shallow ferrous objects.
9. Calculate depth and weight of the targets using Euler Deconvolution:
a. Create appropriate windows around the anomalies to use in property calculations
b. Method described by (Pennella, 1982) and (Pawlowski et al,1995)
c. Structural index of 2.7 was used for all targets.
10.Discussion of Results
The processed results are presented in the following appendices:
• Appendix A.1 Magnetic Survey Lines Over Bathymetry
• Appendix A.2 Magnetic Survey Lines Over Site Layout
• Appendix A.3 Magnetic Sensor Altitude
• Appendix A.4 Magnetic First Vertical Derivative with Targets
• Appendix A.5 Magnetic Analytic Signal with Targets
• Appendix A.6 Targets Over Bathymetry
• Appendix B.1 SSS Mosaic with Targets
• Appendix B.2 SSS Targets Report
• Appendix C.1 MM Target Table with Calculated Properties
The data presented in the appendices are discussed herein:
• Appendix A.1 Magnetic Survey Lines Over Bathymetry
• Appendix A.2 Magnetic Survey Lines Over Site Layout
• Appendix A.3 Magnetic Sensor Altitude
These charts demonstrate good line coverage was achieved north of the existing jetty out to a distance of 50m beyond the
north and east from the planned rockwalls. Some additional data was recorded further north as it is advantageous to have
a good run in towards the navigation run lines to ensure the vessel has stabilized on the line. Additionally, it is useful to
map an increased area to get a better overview of the background when a relatively small survey site is being investigated.
With the available tides we were able to survey to approximately the 4m LAT contour utilizing the combination of a larger
vessel where we towed the sensors just above the seabed and smaller polycraft where we performed a surface tow of the
magnetic sensor over the shallows.
We were able to safely survey to approximately 10m out from the wharf in the wind and tide conditions, however
performing a magnetic survey immediately adjacent to a wharf becomes problematic due to the strong magnetic field of
the wharf itself. We recommend a manual search of the seabed where there is no data between the wharf and the supplied
data herein.
The magnetic target altitude of 2m was set by Surrich Hydrographics – no specification for this work was actually provided
by the client. It is our experience that this is a reasonable altitude to achieve good detection of smaller ferrous objects
down to roughly 10kg, however it is impossible to accurately specify detectable target size and detection limits because
some objects exhibit remnant magnetization, which can strongly enhance detectability (I.E. they behave more like a
magnet).
We also recommended a line spacing of 5m, however we performed the work along a 4m spaced line plan to account for
deviations in the vessel tracking.
The sensor altitude was typically 2m or lower in the deeper waters (eastern half of the area), where the magnetometer was
deployed from the larger vessel with the assistance of the SSS to accurately track altitude above the seabed. On the western
half of the site we switched to a surface tow and the altitude was dictated by the height of the tide over the seabed. Within
the scoped survey area, the altitude was mostly very close to the specified 2m survey altitude although increased to 3m in
places (1m above the target altitude) during the surface tow.
• Appendix A.4 Magnetic First Vertical Derivative With Targets
• Appendix A.5 Magnetic Analytic Signal With Targets
These charts show the magnetic field in two different formats. Someone experienced in magnetometry will appreciate the
“First Vertical Derivative” as an effective product to enhance the near surface targets and supress deeper and longer
wavelength targets.
The “Analytic Signal” chart is a product designed to simplify the results and enhance those shallow anomalies with high
gradients. It is also utilized in the calculation of the magnetic properties.
During processing we also produced a product consisting of the “total field magnetics with background removed” however
while this was utilized in processing, the “first vertical derivative” proved to be a superior image for presentation.
Target picking was performed using all available data including the gridded results in addition to the profile results. Small
targets may have been picked from the profile data which do not have a noticeable anomaly in the gridded images. The
fact these targets are small make them no less significant than larger targets.
As target sampling and follow up has not been performed at this project site, it is difficult to ascertain how many of the
targets may be due to shallow geological sources.
• Appendix A.6 Targets over bathymetry
This charts the identified magnetic and Side Scan Sonar targets over the supplied bathymetry. We understand the vertical
datum of the bathymetry is LAT although we have not independently verified the accuracy ourselves. We also consider it
to be incomplete and have observed it does not accurately map some of the shallowest rocks in the area.
This chart is useful for follow-up planning purposes and demonstrates that some of the areas may be examined on foot
during a suitable low tide.
• Appendix B.1 SSS Mosaic with targets
• Appendix B.2 SSS Targets Report
Appendix B1 shows the SSS mosaic and the SSS imagery extents acquired. For object detection the supplied mosaiced
image is typically not suitable for detailed analysis. Each acquired line of data is examined in detail using specialist
software and the target report contains the best imagery of any SSS targets/contacts detected.
• Appendix C1 Magnetic Targets Table
This table contains the calculated properties of the magnetic targets. These are indicative only and should only be used as
a very rough guide. The “mag depth” is below the seabed. The weights and depths may easily be twice or half of the
indicated values (or more!), and the numbers are incapable of separating out ferrous objects from geological sources.
11.Follow up target investigations

If requested, we can assist with setting up a laptop showing imagery and targets on a moving map type display to assist
with navigation and target follow up.
12.Conclusions
• We believe the survey was performed to a high standard and our methodology was well suited to meet the survey
objectives.
• We believe that many of the targets represent ferrous objects however we expect that there may also be geological
sources.
• Magnetic detection immediately adjacent to the wharf becomes problematic due to the strong magnetic field of
the wharf and risk involved in operating too closely to the wharf in wind and current. Therefor there is a section
of missing magnetic data adjacent, and on the north side of the wharf, where no magnetic data exists.
13.References
Pennella J. (1982) Magnetometer Techniques in the Detection of Projectiles. NAVEODTECHCEN Technical Report TR-
239, Navel Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology Center, Indian Head Maryland.
Pawlowski J., Lewis R., Dobush T., Valleau N. (1995) An Integrated Approach for Measuring and Processing Geophysical
Data for the Detection of Unexploded Ordnance, Proceedings of SAGEEP 1995, Orlando Florida.
14.Digital Products
The digital data has been supplied in the following directory tree:
+---0. Report
| SH20221103_November_2022_CMG_Mandorah_Marine_Magnetics_Report_rev0.pdf
|
+---1. MM_geotiff
| Appendix_A4_first_vertical_derivative_magnetic_imagery_and_targets.tif
| Appendix_A5_analytic_signal_magnetic_imagery_and_targets.tif
|
+---2. MM_ascii_targets
| Appendix_C1_Magnetic_Targets_Table_rev0.xlsx
|
+---3. SSS_geotiff
| Mandorah_MM_2022_10cm.tif
| Mandorah_MM_2022_5cm.tif
|
+---4. SSS_ascii_targets
| SSS_Contacts_ASCII_Table_rev0.csv
|
\---5. Bathymetry_3rd_Party_Supplied
20170919 - Hydrographic_Drone Survey_ Geosciences Australia Combined 1m LAT-MGA94.xyz
Appendix B.2 – SSS Report Mandorah2022
Generated on 28/11/2022 07:33:45
Contact Position Summary, GDA94 Datum.
Contact1 12/11/2022 21:23:05 12° 26.56540' S 130° 46.04336' E
Contact2 13/11/2022 01:18:43 12° 26.51639' S 130° 46.06402' E
Contact3 13/11/2022 01:28:07 12° 26.52404' S 130° 46.07527' E
Contact4 12/11/2022 02:02:06 12° 26.47670' S 130° 46.08983' E
Contact5 12/11/2022 02:44:42 12° 26.56935' S 130° 46.09338' E
Contact6 12/11/2022 02:02:19 12° 26.48759' S 130° 46.09462' E

Contact1 Dimensions and attributes
● Sonar Time at Target: 12/11/2022 21:23:05 ● Target Width: 0.94 Meters
● Click Position ● Target Height: 0.00 Meters
12° 26.56540' S 130° 46.04336' E (WGS84) ● Target Length: 2.06 Meters
(X) 692103.58 (Y) 8623846.34 (Projected) ● Target Shadow: 0.00 Meters
● Map Projection: EPSG:28352 ● Area:
● Acoustic Source File: 20221112211949.jsf ● Description: Geometrical shape suggests man
● Ping Number: 30069 made object. Nearby magnetic anomaly however
● Range to target: 10.52 Meters does not exactly coincide.
● Fish Height: 4.03 Meters
● Heading: 84.419 Degrees
● Water Depth: 0.15 Meters
● Acoustic Source File: 20221113011604.jsf ● Description: Rope or cable. Doesn't appear to
● Ping Number: 352649 be magnetic however on surface and possibly
● Range to target: 6.59 Meters connected to a chain or similar causing the long
● Fish Height: 1.91 Meters linear magnetic feature (unless it s a geological
● Heading: 178.861 Degrees anomaly). Shoud certainly be investigated as a
● Water Depth: 1.50 Meters priority.
● Acoustic Source File: 20221113012547.jsf ● Description: Coincides with strong magnetic
● Ping Number: 372707 anomaly so may be a chain.
● Range to target: 9.74 Meters
● Acoustic Source File: 20221112015951.jsf ● Description: Frame structure. Nearby magnetic
● Ping Number: 81997 anomaly however this structure by itself cant
● Range to target: 3.70 Meters explain all the localized magnetic
● Fish Height: 1.53 Meters anomalies.Possibly sits 1m above seabed but may
● Heading: 185.112 Degrees not be deteched by MBES bathymetry surveys so
● Water Depth: 3.40 Meters possible navigational hazard.
● Acoustic Source File: 20221112024055.jsf ● Description: Numerous construction debris
● Ping Number: 153668 objects beneath base of wharf. If inspected during
● Range to target: 9.54 Meters dive operations, consider leaving in place as a fish
● Fish Height: 0.88 Meters habitat.
● Acoustic Source File: 20221112015951.jsf ● Description: Unrecognisable seabed feature
● Ping Number: 82394 coincides with magnetic anomaly.
● Range to target: 14.26 Meters
Appendix C.1 Magnetic Targets
Mag_Target_ID MGA52_N MGA52_E Analytic_Signal App_weight (kg) Mag_Depth (m) Depth_err (%)
1 692130.55 8623825.61 68.3 281.5 1.5 3.8
3 692140.48 8623836.37 24.2 50.2 0.6 3.9
4 692101.84 8623837.2 11.3 25 0.2 5.3
6 692053.71 8623841.34 4.8 108.6 2.1 2.3
7 692107.79 8623843.52 85.4 46.8 0.1 1.3
8 692127.37 8623843.76 7.6 0 -1.6 58.8
9 692057.32 8623857.82 4.5 8.4 0.6 3.5
10 692138.51 8623859.07 4.2 1 -0.6 7.4
11 692105.17 8623863.95 11.8 27 0.8 1.9
12 692108.98 8623875.34 23.6 138.5 1.9 1.5
13 692099.54 8623878.45 6.5 24.7 0.8 2.5
14 692118.59 8623880.36 213.4 228.1 0.6 1
15 692082.33 8623881.24 9.3 99.4 2.5 2.1
16 692179.54 8623883.01 8.3 72.3 2 2.7
17 692189.97 8623883.85 24.4 70.3 1.1 3.7
18 692185.17 8623885.95 34.4 207.3 1.9 1.1
19 692149.97 8623889.3 158.7 59.2 0 1
20 692094.27 8623889.52 15.3 69.2 1.6 3.6
22 692100.61 8623891.53 28.5 165.9 1.9 1.2
23 692174.66 8623898.29 15.6 141.1 2.3 4.5
24 692179.88 8623900.64 37.5 321.6 2.6 1
25 692103.74 8623901.21 19.3 152.2 2.2 1.7
26 692171.19 8623901.51 9.1 441.4 5.5 2.2
27 692191.11 8623903 13.4 213 2.9 4
28 692167.83 8623908.23 89.9 314.7 1.6 0.8
29 692080.13 8623910.25 15.4 294.3 3.6 3.2
31 692113.4 8623915.35 3.9 9.2 1.2 1.2
32 692086.47 8623915.85 14.5 82.5 2.1 1.3
34 692159.32 8623921.58 138.1 307.5 1.2 1.1
35 692145.33 8623923.33 149.3 85.2 0.2 0.7
37 692156.99 8623926.94 11.6 674.4 6.6 2.5
38 692105.35 8623927.46 6.9 121 3.2 1
39 692172.11 8623927.89 8.5 455.7 5 2.3
40 692144.99 8623930.07 20.2 148.3 2.3 5.5
41 692010.59 8623932.58 30.2 13.4 -0.1 1.8
42 692186.77 8623935.78 15 55.6 1.4 2.6
43 692078.45 8623936.99 28.9 168.5 2.1 0.8
44 692135.25 8623937.84 39.2 259.5 2.3 1
46 692132.07 8623940.67 36.7 288.7 2.3 1.2
47 692087.19 8623942.57 16.8 108.7 2 3
48 692128.82 8623943.76 24.2 303.3 2.9 1.2
49 691995.08 8623943.76 2.2 4.7 0.7 1.6
50 692055.86 8623944.41 13.9 14.5 -0.2 3
51 692126.44 8623944.8 21.5 403.1 3.5 1
52 692103.63 8623945.3 16.1 110.8 2.2 2.3
53 692121.41 8623949.34 27 641.3 4.1 1.6
54 692097.57 8623950.27 13.3 151.7 2.2 2.8
55 692048.55 8623953.96 36.3 261.3 2.2 1.1
56 692054.79 8623954.06 9.2 27.7 1.1 5.9
57 692117.23 8623954.28 43.3 358.8 2.9 0.7
58 692114.81 8623955.2 74.3 667.4 2.9 0.7
59 692126.45 8623957.76 7.2 62.5 2.3 6.2
60 692110.84 8623957.91 61.9 538.7 2.8 1.1
61 692130.92 8623959.73 9.3 41.6 1.4 3.6
62 692105.38 8623962.58 76.4 674.4 3.3 0.9
63 692102.64 8623965.17 76.6 556.5 2.4 1.2
64 692041.33 8623967.06 22.7 92 1.5 1.6
65 692036.72 8623967.25 10.1 123.4 2.8 2.8
66 692098.13 8623969.74 83 327 2 1.2
67 692180.96 8623970.46 21.3 23.8 0.4 2
68 692022.91 8623970.72 13.7 77.3 2 1.7
69 692094.46 8623971.79 65.3 360.6 2.2 1.1
70 691992.99 8623971.86 2.4 10.8 1.3 1.8
71 692017.99 8623972.69 20 86.7 1.6 1.8
72 692032.44 8623972.74 18.4 117.6 1.9 1.8
73 692027.91 8623974.48 15.8 143.6 2.3 2.2
74 692018.48 8623976.74 17.4 9.8 0 6.9
75 692194.97 8623977.21 18.8 49.1 1.3 1.8
76 692086.45 8623977.35 76.4 667.4 2.9 1.3
78 692161.31 8623978.53 8.3 210.8 3.9 1.4
79 691970.62 8623979.01 4.5 5.4 0.4 2.6
80 692102.02 8623980.14 21.2 39.5 0.8 4.6
81 692003.66 8623981.11 6 8.6 0.5 4.6
82 692080.5 8623982.2 46.8 26.7 -0.4 4.6
83 692017.87 8623984.97 6.2 30.9 1.4 4.6
84 692009.81 8623985.08 7.4 258.4 4.5 1.6
85 692013.15 8623985.27 8.7 169.8 3.4 4.7
86 692079.87 8623987.18 22.3 225.9 2.8 4.5
87 692005.51 8623987.29 28.4 23.5 0.1 2.1
88 691996.51 8623987.48 9.6 6.1 0 1.9
89 692074.73 8623988.06 27 517.8 4.6 2.5
91 691985.33 8623993.67 2.8 10.2 1.1 1.6
92 691992.23 8623994.61 2.4 5.9 0.5 1.6
93 692171.78 8623996.13 7.5 292 4.9 1.2
94 692063.44 8623996.27 637.4 674.4 2 0.5
95 692039.1 8623997.21 25 21.2 0.3 2.2
96 692191.84 8624004.06 107.5 225.2 1.1 1.1
97 692184.34 8624004.46 51.4 517.3 2.5 1.7
99 692037.68 8624005.67 14.3 29.4 1 1.3
100 692046.46 8624010.96 30.2 72.8 1.1 1
101 692001.8 8624011.78 2 9 1.1 2.1
102 692196.63 8624014.97 83.8 123 0.7 1.3
103 691964.6 8624021.87 2.8 2.1 -0.1 1.7
104 692017.65 8624023.33 2.2 4.9 0.7 1.7
106 692179.06 8624026.23 7.2 12.1 0.5 1.8
107 692189.57 8624033.27 7 78.9 2.1 2.1
109 692115 8624051.73 14.9 75.1 1.8 1
110 692036.61 8624071.6 11.7 26.6 0.8 0.9
111 692110.79 8624074.46 10.5 52.5 1.4 0.7
112 691967.11 8624099.25 15.9 4.5 -0.3 1.6
113 692075.31 8624103.98 79 80.1 0.4 0.5
114 691986.55 8624105.89 3.1 6.3 0.5 2.2
115 692112.61 8624107.07 31.2 79.5 1.1 2
117 691957.5 8624115.4 10.2 5.8 -0.2 1.9
118 691987.45 8624130.93 3.5 3 0 3.2
120 691975.24 8624150.92 2.2 6.8 1 1.3
121 692008.53 8624155.04 10.8 15.7 0.4 1.4
122 692192.78 8624157.43 20 674.4 4.7 1.2
124 692042.75 8624166.03 3.1 3.8 0.2 2.1
126 692155.48 8624179.73 14.7 489.5 4.9 0.8
128 692137.49 8624188.18 57.4 515 2.7 0.7

Appendix H Marine Magnetic Survey

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Appendix H Marine Magnetic Survey

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Appendix H Marine Magnetic Survey

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Document MARINE MAGNETOMETRY SURVEY FOR FERROUS OBJECTS

Description MANDORAH, NORTHERN TERRITORY

Document Justin Anning

Mandorah New Marine Facilities to Service Mandorah and Cox Peninsula

Surrich operates under the QAS international ISO 9001:2015 quality

Appendix B.1 SSS Mosaic with Targets

Appendix C.1 MM Target Table with Calculated Properties

MM sensor line coverage.

4.2. Side Scan Sonar (SSS) Limitations

5.1. Project Timeline

Fly Perth to Darwin 8/11/2022

Mobilizing polycraft Bluey for surface tow. 14/11/2022

Acquisition using Bluey using the surface tow method. 15/11/2022

Demobilize vessels and ship equipment. 16/11/2022

Fly Perth to Darwin. 17/11/2022

5.2. Project Personnel

Name Role Qualifications

J Anning Crew Chief, Geophysicist BSc Geophysics, Coxswain

Various CMG Appropriate commercial qualifications

GDA94 MGA Zone 52

6.2. Vertical Datum

7. Positioning System Checks

Description 12m Aluminium catamaran. Twin 350hp outboard engines.

Survey Vessel “Category 5”

8.2. Survey Vessel used during surface to MM acquisition

Description 4.1m Polycraft Challenger. 30hp outboard engine.

Survey Vessel “Bluey”

Survey positioning system Septentrio Altus NR2

GNSS correction source Trimble base station at Stokes Hill Wharf

On-line navigation software Sonarwiz.

8.4. Side Scan Sonar

Side Scan Sonar Edgetech 4125 600/1600 kHz

Acquisition System Edgetech Discover.

Nominal vessel speed ~3kn

Offsets Tow point is directly beneath the primary positioning antenna.

Magnetometer Marine Magnetics Explorer

Sample interval 4Hz

Nominal vessel speed ~3kn

Base station mag None utilized.

Offsets 7.5m aft of tow point on SSS fish

9.2. Marine Magnetics

1. Locating MM data towed behind the SSS.

11.Follow up target investigations

Generated on 28/11/2022 07:33:45

Contact Position Summary, GDA94 Datum.

Contact1 12/11/2022 21:23:05 12° 26.56540' S 130° 46.04336' E

Contact2 13/11/2022 01:18:43 12° 26.51639' S 130° 46.06402' E

Contact3 13/11/2022 01:28:07 12° 26.52404' S 130° 46.07527' E

Contact4 12/11/2022 02:02:06 12° 26.47670' S 130° 46.08983' E

Contact5 12/11/2022 02:44:42 12° 26.56935' S 130° 46.09338' E

Contact6 12/11/2022 02:02:19 12° 26.48759' S 130° 46.09462' E

You might also like