IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Comparing Redundant and Sky-model-
Identification of Geothermal System Structure based Interferometric Calibration: A First
Look with Phase II of the MWA
Based on Derivative Analysis and 3D Model of W. Li, J. C. Pober, B. J. Hazelton et al.

- FAST HOLOGRAPHIC
Gravity Satellite Data of Mount Rajabasa Area, DECONVOLUTION: A NEW TECHNIQUE
FOR PRECISION RADIO
South Lampung INTERFEROMETRY
I. S. Sullivan, M. F. Morales, B. J. Hazelton
et al.
To cite this article: Andini Restiana et al 2023 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1288 012014 - Hydrodynamic fluctuations in quasi-two
dimensional diffusion
Raúl P Peláez, Florencio Balboa
Usabiaga, Sergio Panzuela et al.

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 94.46.36.240 on 23/12/2023 at 12:43

International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

Identification of Geothermal System Structure Based on

Derivative Analysis and 3D Model of Gravity Satellite Data of
Mount Rajabasa Area, South Lampung

Andini Restiana, Fardhan Rafshan Zani, Nabila Firya Wardhianty

Department of Physics, Faculty of Science and Technology, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic
University Jakarta, Indonesia

andinirestiana15@gmail.com

Abstract. Indonesia has the second largest geothermal potential with 40% (24 GigaWatt) or
331 points of geothermal reserve locations, this is because Indonesia is traversed by the ring of
fire so there are many volcanoes in Indonesia. One of the areas is the Rajabasa Mountain,
located in the south of Lampung Regency, with the manifestation of thermal springs and
fumaroles. This study aims to provide information related to the existence of geothermal
potential using the gravity method, find out the subsurface structure using the First Horizontal
Derivative (FHD), Second Vertical Derivative (SVD) methods and conduct 3D modelling.
Based on the FHD and SVD analysis, four faults controlling the geothermal system were
obtained, distributed in the Northwest – Southeast direction in the form of shear faults, and
North-South in the form of normal faults with high anomaly values on residual maps of
suspected lava rock intrusions. The 3D modelling results obtained indicate the presence of clay
rock which is assumed to be caprock with a density of 2.5 – 2.58 gr/cc at a depth of up to ±
1500 m, and andesite rock which is suspected to be a reservoir with a density of 2.64 – 2.7
gr/cc at a depth of 750 – 2000 m.

1. Introduction
Indonesia has the second-largest geothermal potential after the United States, with 40% (24 Giga
Watts), or 331 heat reserve location points on earth. Because Indonesia is surrounded by a ring of fire,
there are numerous volcanoes. The existence of volcanoes is the main source of geothermal energy
because geothermal energy sources are closely related to the tectonic activities of the earth. Therefore,
an ideal location to harness geothermal energy is near the location of the volcano.
One of its areas is on Mount Rajabasa, a stratovolcano type located in South Lampung Regency,
Lampung Province. The volcano is in a quaternary volcanic area with volcanic breccia rocks and tuff
sandstone as its rock constituents. It supports the emergence of geothermal manifestations in the form
of hot springs on Mount Rajabasa, so it is suspected that this region has a geothermal system.
Geophysical approaches can be used to identify geothermal systems in a given location. In this study,
the gravitational geophysical method was used to provide information related to the existence of
geothermal potential, find out the structure of the subsurface using the First Horizontal Derivative
(FHD) and Second Vertical Derivative (SVD) methods, and conduct 3D modelling.

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

2. Regional Geology
The area of this study is located in Rajabasa volcano, which belongs to the Stratovolcano type, located
in South Lampung Regency, Lampung Province, at the southern tip of Sumatra Island. Based on
regional geological maps[1], the Rajabasa volcano is located in a young volcanic rock formation
composed of andesite-basalt lava, breccia, and tuff. The Lampung tuff and tertiary andesite formations
are in the volcanic southeast of Rajabasa volcano (Figure 1). The andesite unit consists of andesite
lava, a Tertiary volcanic activity that extends from the west to the southeast of Rajabasa Volcano.
Based on the characteristics of lava flows occurring in the currently active volcano, this andesite unit
is predicted to develop not far from the source of the eruption[2]. There is no recorded history of
eruptions at Rajabasa volcano, but Van Padang[3] said there was an increase in volcanic activity in
1863 and 1892 but no eruptions.

Figure 1. Location of the Rajabasa geothermal field[1]

3. Research Method
3.1 Field Observation
The location of this research is in the area of Mount Rajabasa and its surroundings with geographical
coordinates between longitude 105°34'46.26"E to 105°43'22.55"E and latitude 5°42'21.96"S to
5°50'18.04"S. This research was conducted in September 2022. The data used is gravity anomaly data
obtained from the Bureau Gravimetrique International website with GGMPlus and ertm 2160 data and
the amount of data we get is around 4686 data (dg, geoid, dem). Furthermore, the data is carried out by
Bouguer correction, free air correction, and terrain correction to obtain complete Bouguer anomaly
data.

2
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

Figure 2. Research Area

The complete Bouguer anomaly data is gridding which will then be subjected to spectrum analysis to
determine the estimated depth of the study area. After analysing the spectrum, regional and residual
anomalies will be separated using Bandpass filters. Furthermore, inverse modelling is carried out to
obtain a subsurface structure model. In the modelling process, model parameters are sought that have a
suitable response, also close to the truth based on observational data. In this research, inverse
modelling is carried out to obtain a 3D model of the subsurface structure of the study area. (87)

3.2 Principle of Gravity Method

The gravity method is one of the methods used in the early stages of geophysical studies and is based
on differences in variations in the subsurface gravity field. Geophysical processing data using a
gravity method below the earth's surface can see variations in the mass density of a rock using
Newton's law of gravity, which explains that there are two particles of mass and attractive force, which
are directly proportional to the product of mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance
between the centers of mass. which is shown in the equation: (87)

Where F is the attractive force between two objects M and m, is a gravitational constant which has a
value of 6.67×10-11Nm2/Kg, Mm is the mass of the earth and the mass of the object, and r is the
distance between the two particles.

3.3 Gravity Method Correction

The data used in the gravity method still needs to be corrected before the resulting Bouguer anomaly
value is complete. Gravity corrections that must be carried out include:

3.3.1 Free Air Correction

Newton's law states that the value of the gravitational force is inversely proportional to the
square of the distance between two objects. Therefore, the greater the distance from the
earth's surface, the smaller the acceleration due to gravity because of the farther distance
from the center of the earth to the measurement point. In normal gravity correction, the
object is assumed to be at the reference point. In practice, however, gravimetric
measurements are usually carried out in areas above mean sea level. Due to the height
difference, the gravimeter reading must be corrected. The average change in gravity with
altitude is 0.3086 mGal/m[4]. Free air correction is formulated by the equation:

3
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

Where FAC is the free air correction (mGal), and is the height of the very point above
sea level (m).

3.3.2 Bouguer Correction

The free-air gravity anomaly that is reduced by the bouguer correction is a simple bouguer
anomaly. So the simple Bouguer anomaly formula is found in the following equation[5]:

Where the Bouguer mass density, is the height of the measurement point from the
spheroidal plane.

3.3.3 Terrain Correction

Terrain correction is performed when the surface of the gravity measurement area is
uneven, such as a valley that will reduce the value of the gravitational acceleration at the
very point. The presence of hills will cause the point's gravitational acceleration value to be
greatly reduced. The mound mass produces an upward force component that opposes
gravity. Thus, the presence of hills and valleys shrinks the size of the true gravitational
field to a point. Therefore, the calculated field correction is always positive. This correction
can be obtained by acquiring field data, which is then processed using the Hammer chart
method[6]. Meanwhile, for gravity studies using satellite imagery, the Global Mapper and
Oasis Montaj software were used to obtain field corrections without the data being directly
transmitted to the field. Field correction can be written as the equation:
√ √
Where is the field correction (mGal), is the universal gravitational constant, Δ�
difference in elevation of the compartment (m), and is the radius of the outer and inner
circle (m), and is the angle formed by the compartment (°)[7].

3.4 Derivative Analysis

Derivative analysis is used to determine the limits of a fault structure that lies under the surface. The
First Horizontal Derivative (FHD) and Second Vertical Derivative (SVD) techniques can be used to do
this analysis[8].

3.4.1 First Horizontal Derivative

First Horizontal Derivative (FHD) is the first horizontal derivative with another name,
Horizontal Gradient. Horizontal Gradient gravity anomaly is caused by the tendency of the
body to show the edges of the body. Therefore, the FHD method can be used to determine
the location of the horizontal density contrast contact boundary from gravity data[9].
The following equation is used to get the FHD value[10]:

√( ) ( ) (5)
Where and is the first derivative of gravitational anomalies in the x and y
directions.

3.4.2 Second Vertical Derivative

Second Vertical Derivative (SVD) was carried out to highlight the shallow effects of
regional influences, as well as determine the boundaries of existing structures within the
study area. The derivative of this filter is used to get a good view of the fault or fault
structure so that the filter can overcome residual anomalies that cannot be separated by
regional residual separation methods[5]. The SVD equation is obtained through horizontal
decreasing by using the Laplace equation for gravitational anomalies[11]:
( ) (6)

4
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

When the change in the gravitational field in the horizontal x and vertical z directions is
considered, the second derivative in the y direction has a constant value.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1 Complete Bouguer Anomaly (CBA)
In the results of GGMPlus data processing, a CBA map was obtained with a range of values ranging
from 33.2 - 83.4 mGal. When viewed in Figure 2 there is a low anomaly distribution with anomalous
values ranging from 33.2 - 56.2 mGal marked in blue which is spread in the central to the southern
part of the research area, it is suspected that this low anomaly is associated with tuff rocks containing
rhyolite and dacite which dominate around Mount Rajabasa. High anomalies with anomalous values
ranging from 77.6 - 83.4 mGal are marked with red to pink colors scattered in the northeast and
northwest of the study area, presumably this high anomaly is associated with lava rocks with andesite
composition.

Figure 3. CBA Map of Mount Rajabasa

4.2 Regional and Residual Anomaly

The regional and residual maps are obtained from the separation results using the bandpass filter
method, by taking the boundaries of the regional and residual areas on the radially average spectrum
curve. Based on the results obtained from the separation, it can be seen in Figure 3 that the regional
anomaly distribution obtained ranges from 34.6 - 83.9 mGal and the residual anomaly has a range
ranging from (-4.0) - 3.4 mGal.

5
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

Figure 4. Regional Map of Mount Rajabasa

The regional map obtained has a smoother pattern than the CBA map. This is because the distribution
of regional anomaly patterns consists of deep enough rocks so that the distribution of regional
anomalies is homogeneous. The low anomaly on the regional map has a range between 34.6 - 55.9
mGal which is spread in the central part of the research area, it is suspected that this low anomaly is
associated with rocks with tuff rocks containing rhyolite and dacite which dominate around Mount
Rajabasa. While the high anomaly has a range of 77.6 - 83.9 mGal spread in the northeast and
northwest of the study area, it is suspected that this high anomaly is associated with andesite-
composed lava rocks.

Figure 5. Residual Map of Mount Rajabasa

The residual map obtained has a varied pattern, this is because the distribution of anomalies on the
residual map is closer to the surface, so the distribution of residual anomalies is heterogeneous. Low
anomalies on the residual map have a range between (-4.0) - (-0.8) mGal which is spread in the
southeast, south, west, and northeast of the research area, it is suspected that this low anomaly is
associated with tuff rocks containing rhyolite and dacite. While high anomalies have a range of 0.8 -
3.4 mGal scattered in the north, south, southeast, and central parts of the study area, it is suspected that
this high anomaly is associated with lava rocks composed of andesite breccia and basalt. The residual

6
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

anomaly map is then cropped to match the location of its interest for further overlay and 3D modeling
(Figure. 4) (Figure. 5).

Figure 6. Overlay Residual Anomaly Map and Google Earth

4.3 Derivative Analysis

Derivative analysis was carried out using First Horizontal Derivative (FHD) and Second Vertical
Derivative (SVD) filters to determine the location and type of faults that control the geothermal
system in the Rajabasa Mountain area which is marked by the maximum FHD value and SVD value of
0 which is suspected of a fault.

(a) (b)

Figure 7. (a) First Horizontal Derivative (FHD) Map, (b) Second Vertical Derivative (SVD) Map

The FHD map (a) shows the distribution of anomalies ranging from 0.000301 - 0.031929 mGal. The
existence of a fault in FHD is characterised by a high anomaly (0.009115 - 0.031929 mGal), while the
SVD map (b) shows anomaly distribution ranging from (-0.000102) - (0.000098) mGal. The presence
of faults in the SVD is characterised by low anomalies ((-0.000102) - (-0.000015) mGal). Based on the
geological structure of the Rajabasa Mountain area, there is a Lampung fault, namely a horizontal fault
(shear) that controls geothermal heat in the north which is northwest - southeast and a local fault
which is a normal fault with a northeast - southwest direction that controls geothermal heat in the
southern part of the study area marked with black lines on the FHD and SVD maps.

7
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

(a) (b)

Figure 8. Section Map (a) FHD Map, (b) SVD Map

To find out the type of fault that controls the geothermal system of Mount Rajabasa, a section of data
digitization that intersects the fault on the FHD and SVD maps is carried out so that the FHD and SVD
curves are obtained which are used in determining the type of fault. Four sections were digitised in the
north-south direction that intersect the faults around the research area (black lines) on the FHD and
SVD maps (Figure 7).

Figure 9. Line 1 Fault Analysis

In the results of line 1 fault analysis, the normalised FHD and SVD chart values show that there is 1
Strike-slip fault, 2 Normal fault, and 4 Reverse faults. F1 Strike-slip Fault with coordinates (568294.9,
9356010.21), F2 Reverse fault with coordinates (568305.1, 9357350.1), F3 normal faults with
coordinates (568312, 9358250.1), F4 Reverse fault with coordinates (568319.7, 9359270.1), F5
Normal fault with coordinates (568328, 9360350), F6 Reverse fault with coordinates (568330,
9360610), F7 Reverse fault with coordinates (568355.9, 9364009.9).

8
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

Figure 10. Line 2 Fault Analysis

In the results of line 2 fault analysis, the normalised FHD and SVD chart values show 1 Reverse fault,
2 Normal faults and 1 Strike-slip Fault. F1 Reverse fault with coordinates (571868.9, 9360629.9), F2
Normal fault with coordinates (571873.9, 9359329.9), F3 Normal fault with coordinates (571878.1,
9358229.9), F4 Strike-slip Fault with coordinates (571884.5, 9356569.9).

Figure 11. Line 3 Fault Analysis

In the results of line 3 fault analysis, the normalised FHD and SVD graph values show that there is 1
Normal fault, and 2 Normal faults. F1 normal fault with coordinates (572525.5, 9362878.9), F2
reverse fault with coordinates (572536, 9361738.9), F3 reverse fault with coordinates (572553.8,
9359799), F4 normal fault with coordinates (572562.1, 9358899).

9
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

Figure 12. Line 4 Fault Analysis

In the results of line 4 fault analysis, the normalised FHD and SVD graph values show that there are 5
Normal faults. F1 with coordinates (572888.1, 9363997.7), F2 with coordinates (572895.5,
9363537.8), F3 with coordinates (572927.2, 9361578), F4 with coordinates (572980.2, 9358298.4), F5
with coordinates (573000.3, 9357058.6).

4.4 3D Inversion Modelling

The results of 3D inversion modelling to describe the subsurface structure of the geothermal system in
the Mount Rajabasa area are correlated with the results of FHD and SVD graphic analysis in
determining the faults that control the geothermal system. In the north-south directional L1 model,
there is a complex structure under the surface of raja basa manifestations, the presence of 1 Strike-slip
fault, 4 Reserve faults, and 2 Normal faults that control the geothermal system based on the correlation
of FHD and SVD. It can be seen that there is a clay cap layer with a density of 2.5 – 2.58 gr/cc at a
depth of 0 – 1250 m which is suspected to be a caprock that serves to hold the hot fluid from escaping
to the surface. The presence of andesite rock layers with a density of 2.64 – 2.7 gr/cc at a depth of
1000 - 2000 m is suspected to be a reservoir (Figure 13).

Figure 13. Section L1 Model 3D

10
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

In the north–south directional L2 model, there is a complex structure under the surface of the Kunjir
manifestation, the presence of 1 Reserve fault, 1 Strike-slip fault and 2 Normal faults that control the
geothermal system based on the correlation of FHD and SVD. It can be seen that there is a clay cap
with a density of 2.5 – 2.58 gr/cc at a depth of 0 – 1000 m, which is suspected to be a caprock that
functions to hold hot fluid from escaping to the surface. The presence of andesite rocks with a density
of 2.64 – 2.7 gr/cc at a depth of 1000 – 2000 m is suspected to be a reservoir (Figure 14).

Figure 14. Section L2 Model 3D

In the north-south directional L3 model, there is a complex structure under the surface of the cugung
manifestation, the presence of 2 Normal faults, and 2 Reserve faults that control the geothermal
system based on the correlation of FHD and SVD. It can be seen that the clay cap layer with a density
of 2.5 – 2.58 gr/cc at a depth of 0 – 1500 m, which is suspected to be a caprock that functions to hold
the hot fluid from escaping to the surface. The presence of andesite rock layers with a density of 2.64 –
2.7 gr/cc at a depth of 1000 - 2000 m is suspected to be a reservoir (Figure 15).

Figure 15. Section L3 Model 3D

In the L4 model in the north-south direction, there is a complex structure under the surface of the
baling manifestation, namely that there are 5 Normal faults that control the geothermal system based
on the correlation of FHD and SVD. It can be seen that the clay cap layer with a density of 2.5 – 2.58
gr/cc at a depth of 0 – 1500 m, which is suspected to be a caprock that functions to hold the hot fluid
from escaping to the surface. The presence of rock layers with a density of 2.64 – 2.7 gr/cc at a depth
of 750 – 2000 m andesite is suspected to be a reservoir (Figure 16).

11
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

Figure 16. Section L4 Model 3D

5. Conclusion

On the analysis of residual anomaly, The low anomaly with density values (-4.0) - (-0.8) mGal is
thought to be associated with tuff rocks containing rhyolite and dacite, while The high anomaly with
density values of 0.8 - 3.4 mGal is thought to be associated with lava composed andesite, breccia, and
basalt. The results of the FHD and SVD map analysis, There are 9 Normal faults, 8 Reserve faults, and
2 Stike-slip faults that control the geothermal system, which shows that the raja basa mountain area
has very complex faults is a northwest-southeast directional fault in the form of the Lampung shear
fault, and the Simpur normal fault, a local fault that is northeast-southwest in the direction of normal
faults, and faults that are North-South directions are reserve faults. On the results of 3D inversion
modelling, there is a layer of clay rock with an average density value of 2.5 - 2.58 gr/cc marked in red
which is suspected to be a caprock at a depth of up to ± 1500 m, and a layer of andesite rock with an
average density value of 2.64 - 2.7 gr/cc marked in blue which is suspected to be a reservoir at a depth
of 750 - 2000 m.

References

[1] Mangga, S. A., Amirudin, T., Suwarti, S., Gafoer, Geological Maps sheet Tanjungkarang,
Sumatra. Bandung, 1993.

[2] Bronto, S., Asmoro, P., Hartono, G., “Evolution of Rajabasa Volcano in Kalianda Area and Its
Vicinity, South Lampung Regency,” Indones. J. Geol., vol. 7, no. No.1, pp. 11–25, 2012.

[3] Budiardjo, B., Masdjuk dan Leonardus, “Detailed Geological report Rajabasa Mountain area,
Lampung,” 1995. [Online]. Available: Pertamina Geothermal Division, Indonesia (not
published).

[4] Sleep, N.H. & Fujita, Principles of Geophysics. USA, 1997.

[5] Reynold J M, An Introduction To Applied And Environmental Geophysics. England, 2006.

[6] A. R. Isroi, “Ekesplorasi Energi Geothermal dengan Menggunakan Metode Gravity Sebagai
Tahap Awal di Daerah Prospek Geothermal Gunung Kelud,” Skripsi Institut Teknologi
Bandung.

[7] R. Lewerissa, “Overview of Geothermal Potential in Momiwaren, South Manokwari Regency

using Earth Gravity Field Analysis,” 2020.

12
International Conference on Geoscience and Earth Resources Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1288 (2023) 012014 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1288/1/012014

[8] R. B. Sihombing, H. M. Sarkowi, “Pemodelan Dan Analisa Struktur Bawah Permukaan Daerah
Prospek Panasbumi Kepahiang Berdasarkan Metode Gayaberat,” J. Geofis. Eksplor., vol. 4,
2018.

[9] Zaenudin, A., Sarkowi, M., “Pemodelan Sintetik Gradien Gayaberat Untuk Identifikasi Sesar,”
Jur. Tek. Geofis. Fak. Tek. UNILA, 2013.

[10] R. J. Blakely, Potential Theory in Gravity and Magnetic. 1996.

[11] I. G. B. Darmawan, Zaenudin A., O. Dewanto, “Pemodelan Rasio Gradien Densitas Struktur
Bawah Permukaan Berdasarkan Trend Surface Analysis Data Gayaberat,” vol. 1, pp. 367–372,
2018.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Nanda Ridki Permana for the discussion on developing the article and
all those who have aided this research, especially the Integrated Laboratory Center of UIN Syarif
Hidayatullah Jakarta, which has offered good collaboration.

13