GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS

211

Espoo

15.11.2012 68/2014

Geological 3D modeling (processes) at GTK

Eevaliisa Laine

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK

15.11.2012

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF FINLAND DOCUMENTATION PAGE

Date / Rec. no.

Authors

Eevaliisa Laine

Type of report

Commissioned by

Title of report

Geological 3D modeling (processes) at GTK

Abstract

3D modeling at GTK is presented by examples, tools and workflows and 3D modeling processes are discussed. In some ap-

plications there are already well established practices such as in ore modeling. The ongoing 3D modeling work is described

and recommendations for future use of 3D software packages are given.

Keywords

geological 3D modeling, GTK, Finland

Geographical area

Finland

Map sheet

Other information

Part 1/3 of the 3 reports concerning 3D modelling at GTK from the year 2012

Report serial

Archive code

Total pages

Language

english

Price

Confidentiality

Unit and section

ESY, 211

Project code

7780021

Signature/name

Signature/name

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK

15.11.2012

Contents

Documentation page

1 INTRODUCTION 1

2 GEOLOGICAL 3D MODELS 1

3 EXAMPLES 2 3.1 Example 1: Ore exploration and evaluation 2 3.2 Example 2: 3D model of Quaternary deposits used in ground water modeling 3 3.3 Example 3: Suurpelto 5

3.4 Example 4: Geological mapping the southern Finland 6 3.5 Example 5 Dimension stones and fracturing 7 3.6 Example 6: Stone aggregate quarries 8

3.7 Example 7. Geometrical 3D model of Pyhäsalmi –Kettuperä area 9 3.8 Example 9. Geometrical 3D model of Vuonos 10

3.9 Example 10. Ni-content of the Outokumpu assemblage surrounding the Vuonos ore 10

4 WORKFLOWS FOR GEOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS 11

5 3D MODELLING WORKFLOWS 13 5.1 Data import 13 5.2 3D bedrock models 15 5.3 Quaternary deposits 17

5.4 Geological models combining Quaternary and bedrock models 18

6 DESCRIPTION OF 3D MODELING PROCESS AND ASSOCIATED

UNCERTAINTY 19

7 3D MODELING SOFTWARE 19

8 REFERENCES 21

LITERATURE

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 1

15.11.2012

1 INTRODUCTION

Geological 3D modelling has traditionally been related mainly with ore modeling and evaluation. The 3D

modeling is also nowadays done in connection with ore exploration. In addition to ore modeling, the well

documented bedrock models have been recently built for environmental and engineering geological stud-

ies. GTK is also participating to the 3D modeling at Olkiluoto nuclear waste site in (e.g. Aaltonen et al.

2010).

Regional 3D bedrock models are being built of from different parts of Finland. In addition, the 3D mod-

eling processes for Quaternary depostits are under discussion. In future, it will be important to combine

3D models of the Precambrian crystalline rock and the Quaternary deposits in many engineering and en-

vironmental geological investigations.

In this report, 3D modeling at GTK is presented by examples, tools and workflows. 3D modeling proc-

esses are discussed. There are already well established practices, for example, in ore modeling (Koistinen

2011 a-c). Recommendations for future use of 3D software packages are given.

2 GEOLOGICAL 3D MODELS

3D geological models are either geometrical, property or combined models. Geometrical 3D models show

bedrock interfaces, faults and shear zones as surfaces. Voxel models are derived from geometrical models

and used for property distributions. Combined models showing bedrock and surficial deposits together

will be important in many engineering geological applications. In groundwater and ore deposit modeling

it is important to be able to combine geological formations and properties in the same model.

The 4th

dimension is added to show geological processes such as deformation of geometrical forms, ther-

mal and geochemical processes. However, it might be difficult or even impossible to present everything

in the same model. Sometimes even 1-dimensional study of the processes in depth can give satisfactory

result (e.g.,Kukkonen and Lauri 2009). Perhaps most important in 3D modeling is that it helps us to de-

scribe our views of subsurface geology to our fellow researchers

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 2

15.11.2012

3 EXAMPLES

The 3D modeling results are used in several applications related to ore exploration, environmental inves-

tigations and urban geology. In the following are given examples of the 3D geological modeling work at

GTK:

3.1 Example 1: Ore exploration and evaluation

Computerized 3D ore modeling has been done since 1980 at GTK for example by Jyrki Parkkinen and

Esko Koistinen. One of the recent 3D models of Koistinen is presented in the Figure 1. – a solid model of

Syväjärvi lithium deposit. The used software was GEMS.

Figure 1 A solid model of the Syväjärvi lithium deposit seen downwards to north. Length of the deposit is 500 m.

(Koistinen et al. 2010).

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 3

15.11.2012

3.2 Example 2: 3D model of Quaternary deposits used in ground water modeling

Figure 2 presents the Patamäki 3D model and Figure 3 the derived hydraulic conductivity in the Patamäki

area (Okkonen and Pasanen 2011). The geological 3D model is built by GSi3D2011.

Figure 1 The Patamäki 3D geological model of Patamäki groundwater area (Okkonen and Pasanen, 2011) (red =

bedrock, light brown = moraine, dark green = gravel, lila = silt, light green = sand, darker light green = fine

sand).

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 4

15.11.2012

Figure 1 Hydraulic conductivity in the Patamäki area (Okkonen and Pasanen, 2011)

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 5

15.11.2012

3.3 Example 3: Suurpelto

GTK made geological investigations in the Suurpelto area where they are now building blocks of flats.

The geological cross sections are based on drilling and geophysical investigations.

Figure 3. The thickness of fine sediments in the Suurpelto area and geological cross sections along the marked

lines (Ojala et al. 2007).

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 6

15.11.2012

3.4 Example 4: Geological mapping the southern Finland

The studies of Pajunen et a. (2008) show the importance of the geological inference in predicting large

scale structures and associated fracturing. Figure 4 illustrates the classical way to visualize the third

dimension by a hand-drawn block model.

Figure 4. Migmatitic felsic gneiss with a deformed SC+D dome-and-basin interference structure on the horizontal

surface (Pajunen 2008) (a.); scale bar is 10 cm in length. Vertical surface is shown in (b.); width of the area of the

figure is c.2 m. Indistinct relations between the gneiss and tonalitic rock are due to strong granitic melting and in-

truded dykes. (c.) Interpretation of structure: The SB foliation plane in felsic gneiss is folded to form DC+D dome-

and-basin structures. The DC+D dome-and-basin interference structure is cut by FG/(H)-folded DE pegmatitic

granite. Photos by M. Pajunen..

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 7

15.11.2012

3.5 Example 5 Dimension stones and fracturing

Figure 5 presents a 3D discontinuity model based on GPR survey and scanline measurements in the

Onkimaa dimension stone quarry (Markovaara-Koivisto et al. 2010). The model is made with GocadTM

by Paradigm. Fault surfaces have been connected using tectonic observations from the quarry walls.

Figure 5. A 3D discontinuity model based on GPR survey and scanline measurements (Markovaara-Koivisto et al.

2010). The 3D model is made by Paradigm GocadTM

.

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 8

15.11.2012

3.6 Example 6: Stone aggregate quarries

Figure 6 shows the 3D Sirovision models made from Ristee aggregate pit. Stereophotos were taken by

Matti Talikka and 3D visualizations were done by Mira Markovaara-Koivisto (unpublished material re-

lated to 3D modeling by Mira Markovaara-Koivisto, Marit Wennerstrom and Eevaliisa Laine).

A

B

Figure 6 Stone aggregate pit at Ristee: 3D stereophotos from A) Southeast and B) Northeast by Siro3DTM

CSIRO

software.

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 9

15.11.2012

3.7 Example 7. Geometrical 3D model of Pyhäsalmi –Kettuperä area

In the Figure 7 shows the geometrical 3D model of Pyhäsalmi mine by Jouni Luukas in Puustjärvi (ed.)

1999.

Figure 7 A 3D model of the Pyhasalmi-Kettuperä area by Jouni Luukas in Puustjärvi (1999)..

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 10

15.11.2012

3.8 Example 9. Geometrical 3D model of Vuonos

This is an example of 3D model done using surfaces. Green surfaces represent the boundary of the ser-

pentinite or Outokumpu assemplage rocks. White surface marks the main shear zone cutting the Outo-

kumpu assemblage and red surface marks the thin Vuonos ore. The height of the geological section

(Koistinen 1981) is about 300 m.

Figure 8. Outokumpu formation (bounded by green surfaces) and Vuonos ore (red). (Laine et al. 2012).

3.9 Example 10. Ni-content of the Outokumpu assemblage surrounding the Vuonos ore

This is an example of interpolated property here Ni content into a grid conforming the geometry of the

orebody (Figure 10).

Figure 9. Vuonos ore and grided Ni content (Laine et al. 2012).

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 11

15.11.2012

4 WORKFLOWS FOR GEOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS

The main components in 3D modelling (Figure 10) are data import into an application, visualization, 3D

model building and finally saving and reporting them into database and then transferring them to different

applications. The geological models can be used in various practical applications but also in visualizing

the geological research results in 3D in scientific papers. The important role is also in the popularizing

and presentation of the recent geological research, e.g. with 3D-display applications and hardware.

Figure 10. The main components in 3D modeling.

Presently the 3D modeling is done in almost all geological fields and applications at GTK. The presented

applications were only a few examples. There are almost as many ways of building 3D models as there

are 3D modelers. The main reason for this is the differences in data and modeled 3D geometries. For ex-

ample, layered Quaternary formations and folded metamorphic Precambrian rocks need different ap-

DATA

•Maps

•Numerical data

•Literature

3D MODELING

•Geometrical

•Numerical

•Statistical

3D DATABASE

VISUALIZATION

•1D

•2D

•3D

APPLICATIONS

•Ore modeling

•General geological 3D modeling

•3D models for environmental and civil engineering

•Groundwater modeling

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 12

15.11.2012

proaches. The 3D software packages are often created for different applications. (In ideal case, we should

have had our own specific 3D tools suitable for our geology and available data in Finland. )

In Figure 11, the 3D modeling workflow is presented for Precambrian bedrock (Laine (ed.) 2012). One

important point that should be added is the characterization of the geometrical properties (i.e. topology) of

the studied 3D target. This is essential in order to make the right choice of the 3D modeling software. In

the present report, 3D modeling process will be divided into data processing, actual 3D modeling and

visualization and, finally, to the description of the modeling process and evaluation of the reliability of

the model.

Figure 11. A workflow diagram for a geological 3D modelling process (Laine (ed.) 2012).

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 13

15.11.2012

5 3D MODELLING WORKFLOWS

5.1 Data import

The data import process is perhaps the most time consuming phase in 3D modelling. This is not because it

is not well documented but because it is always difficult to combine data from different sources having

different resolutions and aims than the ongoing 3D modelling work. A good example is the simplification

of detailed drill core information for regional scale geological 3D models. Figure 12 illustrates one possi-

ble workflow for data import to 3D modelling software.

2D data (and 3D data ~ drill hole data, elevation models,…) are already available at GTK and stored di-

rectly in digital format and it is managed in different data systems from which information is mainly

shared as different digital information products. Using them usually requires GIS software or at least a

viewer intended for browsing such files. The meta-data file (the "product specification") is a key part of

information products. The file informs how the information has been created and for what and how it can

be used. At GTK researchers are searching and extracting these data using ArcMap (ESRI product) for

their target areas.

In future, GTK also needs a 3D database for storing 3D objects from geological, geophysical and geo-

chemical modelling. This data consists of points, surfaces, solids and different kinds of grids storing rock

and soil properties. It should be possible to extract geometrical objects in simple ASCII data with the

meta-data, links to reports describing the 3D modeling process and properties of the used data and appli-

cations. In the ideal case the 3D models could be visualized with the used hard data (e.g., drill hole data).

In addition, the grids should be transformable into hexaedric grids for physical modeling such as 4D

modeling in thermal and geomechanical applications. We need some example targets for building the 3D

data base. This work will be part of international co-operation but the final form of 3D data base depends

on our national needs. Within nuclear waste studies at Olkluoto there exists already 3D geological data

storage (e.g. Aaltonen et al. 2010). In general, there will be needs for interchanging 3D information be-

tween GTK and mining companies, state organizations and consulting firms. There has been already

thoughts for building geotechnical 3D database (e.g. Vähäaho, 1998). Gustavsson (2009) has made a re-

port of 3D storage at GTK and presented the international work on subject. Two important international

studies have been made on geological 3D database by Apel (2006) and Schneider & Weinrich (2006).

Some sources of good examples for the present work are the web pages of geological surveys around the

world.

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 14

15.11.2012

Figure 12. A possible workflow for data import to 3D modeling .

3D GEOLOGICAL SOFTWARE

Data import and storage within the specific 3D modeling software packages (usually more than one) used in the modeling process

IMPORT OF DATA INTO A 3D MODELING SOFTWARE

Import of typical data in compatible dataformat Coordinate and other data transformations for

incompatible data

PRELIMINARY PROCESSING OF DATA

Data evaluation and validation Simplification of the bedrock classification according

to the modeling scale

TYPICAL DATA SETS FOR 3D GEOLOGICAL MODELING

drill hole data

maps and previous 3D

models

elevation model

cross sections

geophysical data and models

geochemical data and models

outcrop data

GTK 2D and 3D DATABASE

2D data 3D data 2D and 3D models

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 15

15.11.2012

5.2 3D bedrock models

Figure 13 illustrates the 3D bedrock modeling process. The process is very different depending on the

scale and purpose of the study. In 3D regional modeling the geological ideas and theories are essential

because the data is sparse and in greater depths the only data sources are deep geophysical soundings that

may be interpreted in many different ways. In mining sites, dense drilling gives a possibility to build more

reliable models. Even then, the structures between drill holes can be drawn in many different ways ac-

cording to different geological interpretations. In many practical applications, such as in nuclear waste

site investigations, groundwater modeling or rock engineering, it is important to estimate rock fracturing

in 3D. Connected rock fractures act as water conduits and, in general, fracturing affects the rock mechani-

cal properties. Each specific geologic 3D modeling process will need its own workflow.

4D modeling in the workflow (Fig. 13) means either the restoration of geologic events, for example, in

order to understand ore forming processes or the prediction of future physical processes such as water or

fluid flow or fracturing based on the built 3D geological model.

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 16

15.11.2012

Figure 13. Work flows for 3D bedrock modeling.

DIFFERENT KIND OF

BEDROCK MODELS

Regional models

Local models

Ore models

Fracture models

ROCKS AND STRUCTURES AND THEIR RELATIVE

AGES

Main shear and fracture zones,

folds, i.e. general tectonic history of

the area, lithological contacts

Local shear and fracture zones,

folds, i.e. general tectonic history of

the area, lithological contacts

Structures related to ore, lithological

contacts

Geologically inferred relative

ages of structures, fracture patterns,

orientations, statistical analysis

of fractures

DEFINING OF GEOMETRIES

TO BE MODELED

Mainly surfaces and solids, gridding

for modeling numerical

processes s

Mainly surfaces and solids, gridding

for modeling numerical processes

Ore models as solids and

associated property model as a grid for

ore evaluation

Fractures and discontinuities represented as

discs or surfaces

3D GEOLOGICAL SOFTWARE

GeoModeller, Surpac, GOCAD and

geophysical modeling software,

ArcScene

GeoModeller, Surpac, GOCAD and

geophysical modeling software,

ArcScene

Surpac and Gems, (GOCAD),ISATIS,

Target

Surpac, GSi3D, (GOCAD), under

discussion, ArcScene

APPLICATIONS

Visualizing bedrock geology in 3 dimensions,

research, regional ore exploration, 4D

modeling

Visualizing bedrock geology in 3 dimensions, research, ore

exploration, 4D modeling

Ore evaluation

Urban geology, environmental

investigations and groundwater modeling, 4D

modeling

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 17

15.11.2012

5.3 Quaternary deposits

Figure 15 illustrates a very approximate workflow for 3D modeling of Quaternary deposits. This process

is under discussion and should be made in more detail by quaternary geologists at GTK. The main differ-

ence between soil layers and Precambrian formations is the fact that, in most cases, it is possible to define

a soil layer stratigraphy as nearly horizontal layers young upwards.

Figure 14. A very preliminary workflow for 3D modeling of Quaternary deposits.

APPLICATIONS

Visualizing geology in 3 dimensions, research, groundwater modeling, urban and environmental geology

BUILDING SURFACES AND EASTIMATING PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES IN GRIDS; CALCULATING GROUNDWATER FLOW ETC

3D GEOLOGICAL SOFTWARE

GSi3D, GeoMOdeller, GMS, Surfer, ArcGIS, (GOCAD) and geophysical modeling software

DETERMINATION OF STRATIGRAPHY

3D MODELS OF QUATERNARY DEPOSITS

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 18

15.11.2012

5.4 Geological models combining Quaternary and bedrock models

Figure 15 3D block showing geological formations together with woods lakes and houses etc. drawn by Harri Kut-

vonen.

In order to build 3D models for several applications we need to combine our 3D bedrock and soil models

with surficial formations. Examples of such applications are groundwater and environmental modeling.

At the moment the candidates for presenting such combined models are GSi3D and GeoVisionary (or

Fracsis or ParaViewGeo or ArcScene…). 3D software packages used at GTK are listed in Table 1 in the

end of this report.

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 19

15.11.2012

6 DESCRIPTION OF 3D MODELING PROCESS AND ASSOCIATED UNCER-

TAINTY

The description of the 3D modeling results include:

Meta data that is associated with the 3D objects that are saved in the future 3D database.

In addition, all the 3D models should be reported, and the link to the report should be included in

the meta data.

There are a few simple measures to express the uncertainty:

amount of data / studied area

data heterogeneity

data quality

For the client or the other scientists using the model it is also important to know different specialists par-

ticipating in the modeling work and their experience. The uncertainty, especially related to geological

data from Finland, has been discussed in depth by Nils Gustavsson (2010). The 3D visualization of uncer-

tainties has recently been discussed, for example,by Viard et al. (2011).

7 3D MODELING SOFTWARE

3D modeling results consist of geometrical objects:

surfaces that represent lithological contacts, faults, shear zones, veins and dykes

solids that represent geological formations such as layers or intrusions

grids with attributes e.g. geochemical compositions or petrophysical properties

Presently these are saved according to used 3D software (Table 1). They are mostly having their own data

storage formats. The future 3D database should be able to import the software specific data formats and

to export 3D models, data and visualizations in formats that imported in several different 3D software.

The table 1 presents the 3D software list with main applications.

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 20

15.11.2012

Table 1. 3D software at GTK.

SOFTWARE APPLICATION LICENSES EXAMPLES

GoCad + Mira

packages +

research

plugins

Geometric and numeric

modeling for regional

geological 3D models

10 academic +

5 Mira package, 1 UBC

Central Lapland, Outokumpu

area, Vihanti area

Surpac Geometric and numeric

ore and geological

modeling

6 Olkiluoto nuclear waste site,

in many application with

abundant drill hole data

Regional and target 3D inter-

pretations for ore modeling

and exploration purposes

(ISY)

GEMS Geometric and numeric

for ore modeling

4 Ore exploration in southern

Finland

GeoModeller Geometric and numeric

modeling for regional

and local geological

modeling

2 (+ 3 academic under discussion)

used at Espoo and Kuopio offices

Vihanti area, Suomusjärvi

GSi3D2011 Geometric 3D model-

ing of soil layers

Unlimited use at GTK. GSi3D2012

in testing, faultmodeling

Patamäki, Östersundom

GMS Geometric and numeric

(+statistical) modeling,

groundwater

used at Kokkola office

ArcScene 3D visualization 2 Regional and target 3D inter-

pretations for exploration

purposes (ISY)

Target 3D visualization used at Rovaniemi and Kuopio

offices

Testing at ISY

Geovisionary 3D modelling and

visualization

0, 2? Testing at GTK

FracSIS 3D visualization 1 ISY

ISATIS Geostatistics and 3D

visualization

1 + possible academic lisences for

a ’study group’

ParaviewGeo 3D visualization Free

Geophysical

3D software

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 21

15.11.2012

8 REFERENCES

Aaltonen, I. (ed.), Lahti, M., Engström, J., Mattila, J., Paananen, M., Paulamäki, S., Gehör, S., Kärki, A., Ahokas,

T., Torvela, T. & Front, K., 2010. Geological model of the Olkiluoto Site, Version 2.0. Posiva Oy, Working Report

2010-70, 580 p.

Marcus Apel, 2006: From 3d geomodelling systems towards 3d geoscience information systems: Data model,

query functionality and data management. Computers & Geosciences 32 (2006) 222–229.

Nils Gustavsson (toim.), 2009. 3D-tiedonhallinnan kehittäminen GTK:ssa. Arcive report. (In Finnish).

Gustavsson, N. 2010. Geologisen paikkatiedon epävarmuus.Uncertainty of geological spatial data. Geological Sur-

vey of Finland, Archive report TA/2010/7.

Koistinen, Esko 2011a. Malmiesiintymän 3D-mallinnus Gemcom GEMS-ohjelmistolla - Projektin perustaminen.

86 s. Geological Survey of Finland, Archive report, 18/2011. (in Finnish)

Koistinen, Esko 2011b. Malmiesiintymän 3D-mallinnus Gemcom GEMS-ohjelmistolla - Pinnat ja solidit. 51

s. Geological Survey of Finland, Archive report, 20/2011. (in Finnish)

Koistinen, Esko 2011c. Malmiesiintymän 3D-mallinnus Gemcom GEMS-ohjelmistolla - Datan tulostaminen,

muokkaus ja analysointi. 87 s. Geological Survey of Finland, Archive report. (in Finnish)

Koistinen, Esko; Seppänen, Hannu; Ahtola, Timo; Kuusela, Janne 2010. Mineral resource assessment and 3D mod-

elling of the Syväjärvi lithium pegmatite deposit in Kaustinen, Western Finland. 20 s. + 21 liites. Geological Sur-

vey of Finland, Archive report,M19/2323/2010/45. (in Finnish)

Kukkonen, I.T. and Lauri, L.S., 2010. Modelling the thermal evolution of a collisional Precambrian orogen: High

heat production migmatitic granites of southern Finland. Precambrian Research, Volume 168, Issues 3–4, February

2009, Pages 233–246.

Kukkonen, I. T. & Lahtinen, R. (eds.) 2006. Finnish Reflection Experiment (FIRE) 2001–2005. Geological Survey

of Finland, Special Paper 43. 247 p.

Laine, E. (ed.) 2012. 3D modeling of polydeformed and metamorphosed rocks: the old Outokumpu Cu-Co-Zn mine

area as a case study. Geological Survey of Finland. Report of Investigation 195, 77 pages, 66 figures and 1 table

Luoma, Samrit; Backman, Birgitta; Valjus, Tuire; Klein, Johannes. Three-dimensional geological model and its

application for groundwater flow model and management of the Hanko Aquifer, south Finland, Department of

Geosciences and Geography. C 1 (2010): 30.

Luukkonen, K., Mäki, T., Perä, P. & Niiranen, S. 2000. Pyhäsalmen uusi kaivos. Vuoriteollisuus – Bergshanterin-

gen 58, 16–20. (in Finnish)

Markovaara-Koivisto, Mira, Laine, Eevaliisa and Wennerstrom, Marit. 2D and 3D visualization of scanline meas-

urements Department of Geosciences and Geography. C 1 (2010): 32.

GEOLOGIAN TUTKIMUSKESKUS 3D modeling processes at GTK 22

15.11.2012

Okkonen, Jarkko; Pasanen, Antti; Ikonen, Maiju 2011. Patamäen pohjavesialueen virtausmallinnus. 17 s. + 12

liites. Geologian Geological Survey of Finland, Archive report, 62/2011. (in Finnish)

Ojala, Antti E. K.; Ikävalko, Ossi; Palmu, Jukka-Pekka; Vanhala, Heikki; Valjus, Tuire; Suppala, Ilkka; Salminen,

Reijo; Lintinen, Petri; Huotari, Tarja 2007. Espoon Suurpellon alueen maaperän ominaispiirteet. 50 s. + 1

liites. Geological Survey of Finland, Archive report, P22.4/2007/39. (in Finnish)

Pajunen Matti (ed.) 2008. Tectonic evolution of the Svecofennian crust in southern Finland - a basis for character-

izing bedrock technical properties. Geological Survey of Finland, Special Paper 47, 326 p., 1 app. map.

Puustjärvi, H. (ed.) 1999. Pyhäsalmi Modelling Project. Technical Report 13.5.1997 – 12.5.1999. 251 p., 76 app.

http://arkisto.gsf.fi/m19/3321/M19_3321_99_1_10.pdf

Schneider Markus & Weinrich Brian E, 2006: An Abstract Model of Three-Dimensional Spatial Data Types.

GIS’04, November 12–13, 2004, Washington, DC, USA.

Viard, T., Caumon, G. & Lévy, B. 2011. Adjacent versus coincident representations of geospatial uncertainty:

Which promote better decisions? Computers & Geosciences 37, 511–520.

Vähäaho, Ilkka, 1998. From geotechnical maps to three-dimensional models. Tunnelling and Underground Space

Technology, Volume 13, Issue 1, January–March 1998, Pages 51–56