1887
Volume 18 Number 2
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Obtaining high‐quality ground penetrating radar (GPR) images in karst is difficult because materials resulting from the weathering of carbonate rocks might be electrically conductive. As a consequence, penetration depth and signal resolution might be greatly reduced due to attenuation. In addition, fractures and faults might cause a significant amount of electromagnetic wave scattering. We present a 2D data processing flow which allows improving the quality of GPR images in carbonate karst. The processing flow is composed of the following steps: obtaining a zero‐offset section by removing the direct wave, low‐frequency noise removal, geometrical spreading and exponential gain compensation, spectral balancing, Kirchhoff migration, bandpass filtering, amplitude‐volume enhancement, and topographic correction. For a 200‐MHz dataset, we present in detail each step of the processing flow, exemplifying how to parameterize every step. Spectral balancing is of key importance because it can approximately replenish the high‐frequency content lost due to propagation effects. In this step, we recommend to shift the centroid frequency as much as possible to high‐frequency values, even exceeding the nominal value of the antenna center frequency, but still looking for a band‐limited spectrum as the goal. Despite the difficulty of migrating GPR data, we show that migration (even assuming a constant velocity) might enhance the lateral continuity of the reflection events and allows identification of discontinuities such as faults and fractures. If imaged in a better way, these structures can have special importance as they are often the boundaries of dissolution features. Obtaining images based on amplitude‐volume enhancement techniques allows to better visualize karst voids and deep‐rooted discontinuities because these features are often associated with low‐amplitude zones, which are highlighted in such images. Due to this processing flow, stratigraphic, structural and dissolution features can be enhanced, allowing the interpreter to establish spatial and genetic associations among these elements to obtain a better understanding of the karst formation process.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12074
2019-11-14
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Al‐faresW., BakalowiczM., GuérinR. and DukhanM.2002. Analysis of the karst aquifer structure of the Lamalou area (Hérault, France) with ground penetrating radar. Journal of Applied Geophysics51, 97–106.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AnnanA.P.2009. Electromagnetic principles of ground penetrating radar. In: Ground Penetrating Radar Theory and Applications (ed H.M.Jol), pp. 4–38. Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BanoM.1996a. Constant dielectric losses of ground penetrating radar waves. Geophysical Journal International124, 279–288.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BanoM.1996b. Modeling and inverse Q imaging of ground penetrating radar waves in 1 and 2D. Geophysical Research Letters23, 3123–3126.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BarnettA.J., WrightV.P., ChandraV.S. and JainV.2015. Distinguishing between eogenetic, unconformity‐related and mesogenetic dissolution: a case study from the Panna and Mukta fields, offshore Mumbai, India. In: Reservoir Quality of Clastic and Carbonate Rocks: Analysis, Modelling and Prediction, Vol. 435 (eds P.J.Armitage, A.R.Butcher, J.M.Churchill, A.E.Csoma, C.Hollis, R.H.Lander, et al.), pp. 67–84. Geological Society, Geological Society, London.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. BauerM. and TóthT.M.2017. Characterization and DFN modelling of the fracture network in a Mesozoic karst reservoir: Gomba oilfield, Paleogene basin, Central Hungary. Journal of Petroleum Geology40, 319–334.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. BezerraF.H.R. and Vita‐FinziC.2000. How active is a passive margin? Palaeoseismicity in northeastern Brazil. Geology28, 591–594.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. BulhõesE.M.1999, Técnica “Volume de Amplitudes” para mapeamento de feições estruturais: 6th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society, SBGf, no. 296, Expanded Abstract, 1–4. [In Portuguese]
  9. BulhõesE.M. and AmorimW.N.2005. Princípio da sismocamada elementar e sua aplicação à técnica de volume de amplitudes (TecVA): 9th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society & EXPOGEF, SBGf, pp. 1382–1387. [In Portuguese]
  10. CarrièreS.D., ChalikakisK., SénéchalG., DanquignyC. and EmblanchC.2013. Combining electrical resistivity tomography and Ground Penetrating Radar to study geological structuring of karst unsaturated zone. Journal of Applied Geophysics94, 31–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. CassidyN.J.2009. Ground penetrating radar data processing, modelling and analysis. In: Ground Penetrating Radar Theory and Applications (ed H.M.Jol), pp. 141–172. Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. ChalikakisK., PlagnesV., GuerinR., ValoisR. and BoschF.P.2011. Contribution of geophysical methods to karst‐system exploration: an overview. Hydrogeology Journal19, 1169–1180.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. CheungB‐Y. and LaiW‐L. W.2019. Field validation of water‐pipe leakage detection through spatial and time‐lapse analysis of GPR wave velocity. Near Surface Geophysics17, 231–246.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. ChipS., PengP., HeubeckC., SullivanC. and Dong LinJ.2000. Liuhua 11‐1 Field, South China Sea: a shallow carbonate reservoir developed using ultrahigh‐resolution 3‐D seismic, inversion, and attribute‐based reservoir modeling. The Leading Edge19, 834–844.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. ContiI.M.M., De CastroD.L., BezerraF.H.R. and CazarinC.L.2019. Porosity estimation and geometric characterization of fractured and karstified carbonate rocks using GPR data in the Salitre Formation, Brazil. Pure and Applied Geophysics176, 1673–1689.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. CórdobaV.C.2001. The evolution of the Jandaíra carbonate platform during the Neocretaceous in the Potiguar Basin: paleoenvironmental, diagenetic, and stratigraphic analyses. PhD thesis, University of the State of São Paulo Júlio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP), Rio Claro, 239 pp. [In Portuguese]
  17. CostaJ.C., MedeirosW.E., SchimmelM., SantanaF.L. and SchleicherJ.2018. Reverse time migration using phase cross‐correlation. Geophysics83, S345–S354.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. CuetoM., OlonaJ., Fernandez‐ViejoG., PandoL. and Lopez‐FernandezC.2018. Karst‐induced sinkhole detection using an integrated geophysical survey: a case study along the Riyadh Metro Line 3 (Saudi Arabia). Near Surface Geophysics16, 270–281.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. de CastroD.L., BezerraF.H.R., SousaM.O.L. and FuckR.A.2012. Influence of Neoproterozoic tectonic fabric on the origin of the Potiguar Basin, northeastern Brazil and its links with West Africa based on gravity and magnetic data. Journal of Geodynamics54, 29–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. de GraafS., ReijmerJ.J.G., BertottiG.V., BezerraF.H.R., CazarinC.L., BisdomK.et al. 2017. Fracturing and calcite cementation controlling fluid flow in the shallow‐water carbonates of the Jandaíra Formation, Brazil. Marine and Petroleum Geology80, 382–393.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. dos ReisJr., A.R., de CastroD.L., Silva de JesusT.E. and Lima FilhoF.P.2014. Characterization of collapsed paleocave systems using GPR attributes. Journal of Applied Geophysics103, 43–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. DoughertyM.E., MichealsP., PeltonJ.R. and LibertyL.M.1994. Enhancement of ground penetrating radar data through signal processing. Proceedings of the Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems (SAGEEP ‘94), Boston, USA, pp. 1021–1028.
  23. DujardinJ.‐R. and BanoM.2013. Topographic migration of GPR data: examples from Chad and Mongolia. Comptes Rendus Geoscience345, 73–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. EconomouN., VafidisA., BenedettoF. and AlaniA.M.2015. GPR data processing techniques. In: Civil Engineering Applications of Ground Penetrating Radar (eds A.Benedetto and L.Pajewski), pp. 281–297. Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. EhrenbergS.N., WalderhaugO. and BjørlykkeK.2012. Carbonate porosity creation by mesogenetic dissolution: reality or illusion? AAPG Bulletin 96, 217–233.
  26. FernandesJr., A.L., MedeirosW.E., BezerraF.H.R., OliveiraJr.J.G. and CazarinC.L.2015. GPR investigation of karst guided by comparison with outcrop and unmanned aerial vehicle imagery. Journal of Applied Geophysics112, 268–278.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. ForteE., PipanM., CasabiancaD., Di CuiaR. and RivaA.2012. Imaging and characterization of a carbonate hydrocarbon reservoir analogue using GPR attributes. Journal of Applied Geophysics81, 76–87.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. GerlitzK., KnollM.D., CrossG.M., LuzitanoR.D. and KnightR.1993. Processing ground penetrating radar data to improve resolution of near‐surface targets. Proceedings of the Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems (SAGEEP 93), San Diego, USA, pp. 561–575.
  29. Gómez‐OrtizD. and Martín‐CrespoT.2012. Assessing the risk of subsidence of a sinkhole collapse using ground penetrating radar and electrical resistivity tomography. Engineering Geology149–150, 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. GoodmanD., NishimuraY., HongoH. and HigashiN.2006. Correcting for topography and the tilt of ground‐penetrating radar antennae. Archaeological Prospection13, 157–161.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. GrasmueckM., QuintàM.C., PomarK. and EberliG.P.2013. Diffraction imaging of sub‐vertical fractures and karst with full‐resolution 3D ground‐penetrating radar. Geophysical Prospecting61, 907–918.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. GrimmR.E., HeggyE., CliffordS., DinwiddieC., McGinnisR. and FarrellD.2006. Absorption and scattering in ground‐penetrating radar: Analysis of the Bishop Tuff. Journal of Geophysical Research111, E06S02.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. HuberE., AndersB. and HuggenbergerP.2019. Imaging scours in straightened and braided gravel-bed rivers with ground‐penetrating radar. Near Surface Geophysics17, 263–276.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. JahnertR., de PaulaO., CollinsL., StrobachE. and PevznerR.2012. Evolution of a coquina barrier in Shark Bay, Australia by GPR imaging: architecture of a Holocene reservoir analog. Sedimentary Geology281, 59–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. JeanninM., GaramboisS., GrégoireC. and JongmansD.2006. Multiconfiguration GPR measurements for geometric fracture characterization in limestone cliffs (Alps). Geophysics71, B85–B92.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. JolH.M.1995. Ground penetrating radar antennae frequencies and transmitter powers compared for penetration depth, resolution and reflection continuity. Geophysical Prospecting43, 693–709.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. JorryS.J. and BievreG.2011. Integration of sedimentology and ground‐penetrating radar for high‐resolution imaging of a carbonate platform. Sedimentology58, 1370–1390.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. KaufmannG., RomanovD., TippeltT., VienkenT., WerbanU., DietrichP.et al. 2018. Mapping and modelling of collapse sinkholes in soluble rock: The Münsterdorf site, northern Germany. Journal of Applied Geophysics154, 64–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. KimJ.‐H., ChoS.‐J. and YiM.‐J.2007. Removal of ringing noise in GPR data by signal processing. Geosciences Journal11, 75–81.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. KitchkaA.A., VakarchukS.G., DovzhokT.E. and GavrylyukR.O.2013. Exploration opportunities of the tectonically induced Mississippian hydrothermal dolomite reservoirs in the Dnieper‐Donets Basin. Tectonics and Stratigraphy40, 27–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. KruseS., GrasmueckM., WeissM. and ViggianoD.2006. Sinkhole structure imaging in covered Karst terrain. Geophysical Research Letters33, L16405.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. LanzaroneP. and BihgmanD.2018. Processing consideration and improved interpretation for ground‐penetrating radar imaging of a relict archaelogical excavation unit. Near Surface Geophysics16, 463–475.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. LiuY., LiangX., ZhouY., LiuS., LinS. and WangN.2013. The first land full azimuth seismic for fractured‐cavernous carbonate reservoirs exploration in Tarim basin, Western China. International Petroleum Technology Conference held in Beijing, China, 26–28 March 2013.
  44. LiuY. and LiuE.2012. Introduction to this special section: carbonate research in China. The Leading Edge31, 138–138.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. LoucksR.G.1999. Paleocave carbonate reservoirs: origins, burial‐depth modifications, spatial complexity, and reservoir implications. AAPG Bulletin 83, 1795–1834.
  46. LuX., WangY., TianF., LiX., YangD., LiT.et al. 2017. New insights into the carbonate karstic fault system and reservoir formation in the southern Tahe area of the Tarin Basin. Marine and Petroleum Geology86, 587–605.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. MohamedA.M.E., El‐HussainI., DeifA., AraffaS.A.S., MansourK. and Al‐RawasG.2019. Integrated ground penetrating radar, electrical resistivity tomography and multichannel analysis of surface waves for detecting near‐surface caverns at Duqm area, Sultanate of Oman. Near Surface Geophysics17, 379–471.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Montiel‐ZafraV., Canadas‐QuesadaF.J., Vera‐CandeasP., Ruiz‐ReyesN., ReyJ. and MartinezJ.2017. A novel method to remove GPR background noise based on the similarity of non‐neighboring regions. Journal of Applied Geophysics144, 188–203.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. MukherjeeD., HeggyE. and KhanS.D.2010. Geoelectrical constraints on radar probing of shallow water‐saturated zones within karstified carbonates in semi‐arid environments. Journal of Applied Geophysics70, 181–191.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. NobesD.1999. Geophysical surveys of burial sites: a case study of Oaro urupa. Geophysics64, 357–367.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. OliveiraJr.J.G., MedeirosW.E., TabosaW.F. and VitalH.2008. From barchan to domic shape: evolution of a coastal sand dune in northeastern brazil based on GPR imaging. Brazilian Journal of Geophysics26, 5–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Pueyo‐AnchuelaÓ., Casas‐SainzA.M., SorianoM.A. and Pocoví‐JuanA.2009. Mapping subsurface karst features with GPR: results and limitations. Environmental Geology58, 391–399.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Pueyo‐AnchuelaO., Casas‐SainzA.M., SorianoM.A. and Pocoví‐JuanA.2010. A geophysical survey routine for the detection of doline areas in the surroundings of Zaragoza (NE Spain). Engineering Geology114, 382–396.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. RashedM. and HarbiH.2014. Background matrix subtraction (BMS): a novel background removal algorithm for GPR data. Journal of Applied Geophysics106, 154–163.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. RedhaouniaB., AktarakçiH., IlondoB.O., GabtniH., KhomsiS. and BédirM.2015. Hydro‐geophysical interpretation of fractured and karstified limestone reservoirs: a case study from Amdoun region (NW Tunisia) using electrical resistivity tomography, digital elevation model (DEM) and hydro‐geochemical approaches. Journal of African Earth Sciences112, 328–338.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. RodriguezV., GutierrezF., GreenA.G., CarbonelD., HorstmeyerH. and SchmelzbachC.2014. Characterizing sagging and collapse sinkholes in a mantled karst by means of ground penetrating radar (GPR). Environmental and Engineering Geoscience20, 109–132.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. SandmeierK.J.2012. REFLEXW Version 7.0, Program for the processing of seismic, acoustic or electromagnetic reflection, refraction and transmission data. Software Manual, Karlsruhre, Germany.
  58. StoltR.H.1978. Migration by Fourier transform. Geophysics63, 23–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. TurnerG. and SigginsA.F.1994. Constant Q attenuation of subsurface radar pulses. Geophysics59, 1192–1200.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. VernengoL. and TrincheroE.2015. Application of amplitude volume technique attributes, their variations, and impact. The Leading Edge34, 1246–1253.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Xavier NetoP. and MedeirosW.E.2006. A practical approach to correct attenuation effects in GPR data. Journal of Applied Geophysics59, 140–151.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. YangP., SunS.Z., LiuY., LiH., DanG. and JiaH.2012. Origin and architecture of fractured‐cavernous carbonate reservoirs and their influences on seismic amplitudes. The Leading Edge31, 140–150.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. YelfR.2004. Where is true time zero? Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar, Delft, The Netherlands, pp. 279–282.
  64. YilmazÖ.1987. Seismic Data Analysis: Processing, Inversion and Interpretation of Seismic Data, Vol. 10 (Investigations in Geophysics). Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 2027.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12074
Loading
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12074
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Data processing; Georadar; GPR; Imaging

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error