1887
Volume 22, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

Borehole ground‐penetrating radar (BGPR) measurements allow for the detection of objects and structures in the subsurface and are often applied to the detection of unexploded ordnance (UXO). If omnidirectional borehole antennas in reflection mode are used for the measurement, the localization of UXO is only possible if the data from a multitude of boreholes are analysed. Data analysis is usually still done by manual picking of reflections. We propose novel approaches to process and visualize data from BGPR measurements in a more advanced and appealing manner. Therein, the reflected energy recorded in the radargrams is projected back to all potential reflection points in the three‐dimensional space around the boreholes. If the projection direction is considered, we obtain a vectorized energy projection image. Superposition of projected energy yields an easy‐to‐grasp indicator of possible locations of UXO and of regions of interest that ought to be investigated in more detail. These approaches have been applied to synthetic data and to data measured on a test site with buried UXO. The results show that energy projection is a useful tool for BGPR data visualization, although the result is dependent on data pre‐processing. The proposed methods provide novel representations of BGPR data based on an objective algorithm which will at least complement the conventional methods.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12303
2024-07-21
2026-02-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/nsg/22/4/nsg12303.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12303&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bredeck, A. (2023) Entwicklung von Methoden zur Kampfmittelortung mit ungerichtetem Bohrlochgeoradar. Master thesis, Germany: University of Münster.
  2. DPRA . (2001) UXO incident report. DPRA Incorporated.
  3. Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining . (2022) Explosive ordnance guide for Ukraine. Geneva: Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Gundelach, V. (2018) GPR measurements for spatial investigations at the Asse salt structure. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 23(4), 397–405. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2113/JEEG23.4.397
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Hampe, E. (1963) Der Zivile Luftschutz im Zweiten Weltkrieg. Königsberg: Bernard & Graefe.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Johnson, C. (2004) Top scientific visualization research problems. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 24(4), 13–17. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2004.20
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Jol, H.M. (2009) GPR—Theory and applications. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978‐0‐444‐53348‐7.X0001‐4
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Kötter, M., Schmoldt, J.‐P. & Preetz, H. (2016) Detektionsverfahren in der Kampfmittelräumung. Berlin: Ingenieurtechnischer Verband Altlastenmanagement und Flächenrecycling e.V.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Kranz, L. (2020) Vergleich der Tiefenreichweiten elektromagnetischer Messgeräte in Abhängigkeit von der Objektgrösse und Ermittlung des Einflusses von Textur und Wassergehalt des Bodens auf das Auffinden von oberflächennahen Störkörpern. Master thesis, Germany: University of Osnabrück.
  10. Laake, A. (2015) Structural interpretation in color — a new RGB processing application for seismic data. Interpretation, 3(1), SC1–SC8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/INT‐2014‐0041.1
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Leucci, G. (2008) Ground penetrating radar: the electromagnetic signal attenuation and maximum penetration depth. Scholarly Research Exchange, 2008, 926091. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3814/2008/926091
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Loewer, M., Igel, J. & Wagner, N. (2016) Spectral decomposition of soil electrical and dielectric losses and prediction of in situ GPR performance. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 9(1), 212–220. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2015.2424152
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Martin, M.F., Dolven, B., Feickert, A. & Lum, T. (2019) War legacy issues in Southeast Asia: unexploded ordnance (UXO). Washington D.C: Congressional Research Service.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Miller, J.S. (2014) Dynamic UXO classification sensors: advanced digital geophysical mapping for munitions response sites. FastTIMES, 19(3), 43–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Organization for Security and Co‐operation in Europe . (2021) The impact of mines, unexploded ordnance and other explosive objects on civilians in the conflict‐affected regions of Eastern Ukraine. Vienna: Organization for Security and Co‐operation in Europe. Available from: http://www.osce.org/ukraine‐smm
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Sheffield, T.M., Meyer, D., Lees, J., Kahle, G., Payne, B. & Zeitlin, M.J. (1999) Geovolume visualization interpretation; color in 3‐D volumes. The Leading Edge, 18(6), 668–674. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1438352
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Siebauer, C., Terres, M. & Garbe, H. (2019) Identification of metallic object in soil in order to detect UXOs. In: 2019 International symposium on electromagnetic compatibility—EMC EUROPE. Barcelona, Spain: IEEE, pp. 518–523. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1109/EMCEurope.2019.8871972
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Smith, A.R. (1978) Color gamut transform pairs. ACM Siggraph Computer Graphics, 12(3), 12–19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/965139.807361
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Stadler, S., Schennen, S. & Igel, J. (2021) Realistic 3D simulation of GPR for landmine/IED detection including full antenna models, soil dispersion and heterogeneity. In: Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems 2021, Environmental & Engineering Geophysical Society. pp. 243. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.33‐135
  20. Takahashi, K., Preetz, H. & Igel, J. (2011) Soil properties and performance of landmine detection by metal detector and ground‐penetrating radar—soil characterisation and its verification by a field test. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 73(4), 368–377. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.02.008
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Wapcaplet . (2005) HSV color space visualization; HSV as a conical object. GIMP. Used under Creative Commons Attribution‐ShareAlike 3.0 Unported. Available from: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HSV_cone.jpg.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Warren, C., Giannopoulos, A. & Giannakis, I. (2016) gprMax: open source software to simulate electromagnetic wave propagation for Ground Penetrating Radar. Computer Physics Communications, 209, 163–170. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2016.08.020
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Wissenschaftlicher Dienst . (2022) Kampfmittelaltlasten in Deutschland—Ein Überblick. Deutscher Bundestag—Wissenschaftlicher Dienst. Report WD 2 ‐ 3000 ‐ 032/22. Available from: https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/909216/a5448dd84ac14a5b36fb93f400a4dff1/WD‐2‐032‐22‐pdf‐data.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12303
Loading
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12303
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): data processing; GPR; ground‐penetrating radar; 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