1887
Volume 4 Number 4
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

We obtain the transverse electric (TE) and transverse magnetic (TM) Fresnel reflection coefficients for different interfaces in the subsoil: air/fresh‐water, air/seawater, fresh‐water/seawater, air/NAPL (non‐aqueous phase liquid), NAPL/water and water/NAPL. We consider a range of NAPL saturations, where the complementary fluid is water with 0.65 ppt (parts per thousand) of NaCl. The common feature is that the TM mode (parallel polarization) has a negative anomaly and the TE mode (perpendicular polarization) has a positive anomaly. For the cases studied in this work, pseudo‐Brewster angles appear beyond 40° for the air/NAPL and NAPL/water interfaces and at near offsets (below 40°) for the water/NAPL interface. Pseudo‐critical angles are present for the water/NAPL interface. Besides the reflection strength, the phase angle can be used to discriminate between low‐ and high‐conductivity NAPL, when the properties of the upper medium are known. A wavenumber–frequency domain method is used to compute the reflection coefficient and phase angle from synthetic radargrams. This method and the curves can be used to interpret the amplitude variations with angle (AVA) of reflection events in radargrams obtained with ground‐penetrating radar (GPR).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2005049
2005-11-01
2020-04-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BakerG.S.1998. Applying AVO analysis to GPR data. Geophysical Research Letters25, 397–400.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BensonA.K.1995. Applications of ground penetrating radar in assessing some geological hazards: examples of groundwater contamination, faults, cavities. Journal of Applied Geophysics33, 177–193.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BornM. and WolfE.1964. Principles of Optics. Pergamon Press, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BotelhoM.A.B., MachadoS.L., DouradoT.C. and AmparoN.S.2003. Experimentos laboratoriais com GPR (1 GHz) em corpos arenosos para analisar a influência da água e de hidrocarbonetos na sua veloci‐dade de propagação. 8th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Expanded Abstracts,
    [Google Scholar]
  5. CarcioneJ.M.1991. Domain decomposition for wave propagation problems. Journal of Scientific Computing6(4), 453–472.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. CarcioneJ.M.1994. The wave equation in generalized coordinates. Geophysics59, 1911–1919.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. CarcioneJ.M.1996a. Ground penetrating radar: wave theory and numerical simulation in conducting anisotropic media. Geophysics61, 1664–1677.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. CarcioneJ.M.1996b. Ground radar simulation for archaeological applications. Geophysical Prospecting44, 871–888.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. CarcioneJ.M.2001. Wave Fields in Real Media. Theory and Numerical Simulation of Wave Propagation in Anisotropic, Anelastic and Porous Media. Pergamon Press, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. CarcioneJ.M. and CavalliniF.1995. On the acoustic‐electromagnetic analogy. Wave Motion21, 149–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. CarcioneJ.M. and HelleH.B.2004. On the physics and simulation of wave propagation at the ocean bottom. Geophysics69, 825–839.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. CarcioneJ.M., HelleH. and ZhaoT.1998. The effects of attenuation and anisotropy on reflection amplitude versus offset. Geophysics63,1652–1658.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. CarcioneJ.M., MarcakH., SerianiG. and PadoanG.2000. GPR modeling study of a contaminated area of Krzywa airbase (Poland). Geophysics65, 521–525.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. CarcioneJ.M. and SerianiG.2000. An electromagnetic modelling tool for the detection of hydrocarbons in the subsoil. Geophysical Prospecting48, 231–256.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. CarcioneJ.M., SerianiG. and GeiD.2003. Acoustic and electromagnetic properties of soils saturated with salt water and NAPL. Journal of Applied Geophysics52, 177–191.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. ColeK.S. and ColeR.H.1941. Dispersion and absorption in dielectrics. Journal of Chemical Physics9, 341–351.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. DanielsJ.J., RobertsR. and VendlM.1995. Ground penetrating radar for the detection of liquid contaminants. Journal of Applied Geophysics33, 195–207.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. DavisJ.L. and AnnanA.P.1989. Ground‐penetrating radar for high‐resolution mapping of soil and rock stratigraphy. Geophysical Prospecting37, 531–551.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. DebyeP.1929. Polar Molecules. Dover, New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. GreenhouseJ., BrewsterM., SchneiderG., RedmanD., AnnanP., OlhoeftG., LuciusJ., SanderK. and MazzellaA.1993. Geophysics and solvents: The Borden experiment. The Leading Edge12(4), 261–267.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. KindelanM., SerianiG. and SguazzeroP.1989. Elastic modelling and its application to amplitude versus angle interpretation. Geophysical Prospecting37, 3–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. KnightR. and EndresA.1990. A new concept in modeling the dielectric response of sandstones: Defining a wetted rock and bulk water system. Geophysics55, 586–594.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. LehmannF.1996. Fresnel equations for reflection and transmission at boundaries between two conductive media, with applications to georadar problems. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar, Sendai (Japan), pp. 555–560.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. LutzP., GaramboisS. and PerroudH.2003. Influence of antenna configurations for GPR survey: information from polarization and amplitude versus offset measurements. In: Ground Penetrating Radar in Sediments (eds C.Bristow and H.M.Jol ), pp. 299–313. Geological Society, London.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. OsellaA., de la VegaM. and LascanoE.2002. Characterization of a contaminant plume due to a hydrocarbon spill using geoelectrical methods. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics7, 78–87.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. PereiraA.J., GambôaL.A.P., da SilvaM.A.M., da CostaA. and RodriguesA.R.2003. Uso do GPR na identificação da interface água doce/água salgada em cordões arenosos da praia de Itaipuaçú ‐ Municipio de Maricá (RJ). 8th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Expanded Abstracts,
    [Google Scholar]
  27. ReppertP.M., MorganD.F. and ToksözN.M.2000. Dielectric constant determination using ground‐penetrating radar reflection coefficients. Journal of Applied Geophysics43, 189–197.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. RobertsR.L. and DanielsJ.J.1996. Analysis of GPR polarization phenomena. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics1,139–157.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. SauckW.A.2000. A model for the resistivity structure of LNAPL plumes and their environs in sandy sediments. Journal of Applied Geophysics44, 151–165.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. SchönJ.H.1996. Physical Properties of Rocks, Handbook of Geophysical Exploration. Pergamon Press, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. TaherianM.R., KenyonW.E. and SafinyaK.A.1990. Measurement of dielectric response of water‐saturated rocks. Geophysics55, 1530–1541.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. de la VegaM., OsellaA. and LascanoE.2003. Joint inversion of Wenner and dipole‐dipole data to study a gasoline‐contaminated soil. Journal of Applied Geophysics54, 97–109.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. ZengX., McMechanG.A. and XuT.2000. Synthesis of amplitude‐versus‐offset variations in ground‐penetrating radar data. Geophysics65,113–125.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2005049
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2005049
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
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