1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 11, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 11 Number 2
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Several factors affect antenna‐soil coupling in a Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) survey, like surface roughness, lithology, lateral heterogeneities, vegetation, antenna height from the surface and water content. Among them, lithology and water content have a direct effect on the bulk electromagnetic properties of the material under investigation. It has been recently pointed out that the wavelet of the early‐time portion of a radar signal is correlated to the shallow subsurface dielectric properties of a material. This result indicates that some information on such properties can be directly extracted from the analysis of GPR early‐time traces.

In the present paper, we use the early‐time GPR signal, in terms of average envelope amplitude computed on the first half‐cycle, to map the near‐surface (few centimetres) lateral distribution of dielectric parameters, induced by changing the shallow water content on a concrete slab. This controlled experiment was specifically designed to study the effect of water content variations on antenna‐material coupling, minimizing the influence of both surface roughness and heterogeneity. The quantitative control of the water in the shallow portion of the slab is performed by using a portable unilateral Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) sensor, which is able to determine the water content in the material on the basis of the measured proton density. The results show a matching pattern of the physical parameters measured with the two different techniques and a very high degree of linear correlation ( = 0.97) between the radar early‐time signal average amplitude and the intensity of the NMR signal, which is proportional to the proton density, i.e., to the water content.

This experiment suggests that the early‐time approach could be used as a fast and high‐ spatial resolution tool for qualitatively mapping water content lateral variations in a porous material at shallow depth, using a ground‐coupled single‐offset antenna configuration and that a quantitative evaluation of the moisture content would require a calibration procedure.

© European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers © 2013 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2012051
2012-10-01
2024-04-25

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2012051
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AnnanA.P.1973. GPR Methods for hydrogeological studies. In: Hydrogeophysics (eds Y.Rubin and S.S.Hubbard ), 2005, Springer, New York.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. AnnanA.P.1996. Transmission Dispersion and GPR.Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics1, January, 125–136.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BalibanuF., HailuK., EymaelR., DemcoD.E. and BlümichB.2000. NMR in inhomogeneous magnetic fields.Journal of Magnetic Resonance145, 246–258.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BarnesA.E.2007. A tutorial on complex seismic trace analysis.Geophysics72, W33–W43.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. BaroneP.M., Di MatteoA., GrazianoF., MatteiE. and PettinelliE.2010. GPR application to historical buildings structural control.Near Surface Geophysics8(5), 407–413. doi: 10.3997/1873‐0604.2010017
     [Google Scholar]
  6. BevingtonP.R.1969. Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences.McGraw‐Hill Book Co.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. BlümichB., AnferovaS., KremerK., SharmaS., HermannV. and SegreA.L.2003. Unilateral nuclear magnetic resonance for quality control: The NMR‐MOUSE.Spectroscopy18, 18–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. BlümichB., BlümlerP., EidmannG., GuthausenA., HakenR., SchmitzU. et al. 1998. The NMR MOUSE: Construction, excitation, and applications.Magnetic Resonance Imaging16, 479–484.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. BlümichB., CasanovaF., DabrowskiM, DanieliE., EvertzL., HaberA. et al. 2011. Small‐scale instrumentation for nuclear magnetic resonance of porous media.New Journal of Physics13, 015003.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. CapitaniD., ProiettiN., GobbinoM., SoroldoniL., CasellatoU., ValentiniM. and RosinaE.2009. An integrated study for mapping the moisture distribution in an ancient damaged wall painting.Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry395, 2245–2253.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. ClennellB., BorysenkoA., BurgarI., SedevR. and RalstonJ.2007. Dielectric and combined NMR/capillary pressure methods for monitoring liquid/air and liquid/liquid interface evolution: Application to rock and mineral wettability studies.International Symposium of the Society of Core Analysts (SCA2007–39), Calgary, Canada.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. DaneJ.H. and ToppG.C.2002. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part4 – Physical Methods.SSSA BOOK SERIES NO. 5, Wisconsin, USA.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Di MatteoA., PettinelliE. and SlobE.2012. Early‐Time GPR Signal Attributes to Estimate Soil Dielectric Permittivity: A Theoretical Study.IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing99, 1–12. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2012.2206817
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Di TullioV., ProiettiN., GobbinoM., CapitaniD., OlmiR., PrioriS. et al. 2010. Non‐ destructive mapping of dampness and salts in degraded wall paintings in hypogeous building: The case of St. Clement at mass fresco in St. Clement Basilica, Rome.Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry396, 1885–1896.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. DuS.1996. Determination of water content in the subsurface with the ground wave of ground penetrating radar.PhD thesis, Fakultät für Geowissenschaften der Ludwig‐Maximilians‐Universität München.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. EidmannG., SavelsbergR., BlümlerP. and BlümichB.1996. The NMR mouse, a mobile universal surface explorer.Journal of Magnetic Resonance A122, 104–109.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. FarrarT.C. and BeckerE.D.1971. Pulse and Fourier Transform NMR.Academic Press, London.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. GalagedaraL.W., ParkinG.W. and J.D.RedmanJ.D.2003. An analysis of the ground penetrating radar direct ground wave method for soil water content measurement.Hydrological Processes17, 3615–3628.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. HuismanJ.A., HubbardS.S., RedmanJ.D. and AnnanA.P.2003. Measuring soil water content with ground penetrating radar: A review.Vadose Zone Journal2.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. JolH.M.2009. Ground Penetrating Radar.Theory and Applications, Elsevier Science.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. LampeB. and HolligerK.2003. Effects of fractal fluctuations in topographic relief, permittivity and conductivity on ground‐penetrating radar antenna radiation.Geophysics68, 1934–1944.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. LaurensS., BalayssacJ.P., RhaziJ., KlyszG. and ArliguieG.2005. Nondestructive evaluation of concrete moisture by GPR: Experimental study and direct modelling.Materials and Structures38, 827–832.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. LegchenkoA. and VallaP.2002. A review of the basic principles for proton magnetic resonance sounding measurements.Journal of Applied Geophysics50, 3–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Müller‐PetkeM., DlugoschR. and YaramanciU.2011. Evalauation of surface nuclear magnetic resonance‐estimated subsurface water content.New Journal of Physics13, 095002.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. NagaharaH., IchinoT. and YoshikawaK.2004. Direction detector on an excitable field: Field computation with coincidence detection.Physical Review70(3), 1–5. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.70.036221
     [Google Scholar]
  26. PettinelliE., Di MatteoA., PaolucciF., BellaF., VannaroniG., CeretiA. et al. 2004. Early‐Time GPR signal Analysis: Implications for Water Content Measurement.Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar, 21–24 June, Delft, The Netherlands.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. PettinelliE., VannaroniG., Di PasquoB., MatteiE., Di MatteoA., De SantisA. and AnnanA.P.2007. Correlation between near‐surface electromagnetic soil parameters and early‐time GPR signals: An experimental study.Geophysics72(2), A22–A28.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. ProiettiN., CapitaniD., CozzolinoS., RossiE. and SegreA.L.2007. Unilateral NMR study of a XVI century wall painted.Journal of Magnetic Resonance186(2), 311–318.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. ProiettiN., CapitaniD., CozzolinoS., ValentiniM., PedemonteE., PrinciE. et al. 2006. In Situ and Frontal Polymerization for the Consolidation of Porous Stones: A Unilateral NMR and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study.Journal of Physical Chemistry B110, 23719–23728.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. RabinerL.R. and GoldB.1975. Theory and Application of Digital Signal Processing.Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. ReynoldsJ.M.1997. An Introduction to Applied and Environmental Geophysics, John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Chichester.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. RubinY. and HubbardS.S.2005. Hydrogeophysics.Springer, New York.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. SbartaiZ.M., LaurensS., RhaziJ., BalayssacJ.P. and ArliguieG.2007. Using radar direct wave for concrete condition assessment: Correlation with electrical resistivity.Journal of Applied Geophysics62, 361–374.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. SharmaS., CasanovaF., WacheW., SegreA.L. and BlümichB.2003. Analysis of historical porous building materials by NMR MOUSE.Magnetic Resonance Imaging21, 249.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. SperlC.1999. Determination of spatial and temporal variations of the soil water content in an agro‐ecosystem with ground penetrating radar (in German). PhD dissertation, Technische Universitat München, Munich, Germany.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. TanerM.T., KoehlerF. and SheriffR.E.1979. Complex seismic trace analysis.Geophysics44, 1041–1063.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. TaylorJ.R.1997. An Introduction to Error Analysis.The Study of Uncertainties in Physical Measurements.Second Edition, University Science Book.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. ToppG.C., DavisJ.L. and AnnanA.P.1980. Electromagnetic determination of soil water content: Measurements in coaxial transmission lines.Water Resource Research16, 574–582.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. TurnerG.1993. The influence of subsurface properties on ground penetrating radar pulses.PhD dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Van OvermeerenR., SariowanS. and GehrelsJ.1997. Ground penetrating radar for determining volumetric soil water content; results of comparative measurements at two test sites.Journal of Hydrology197, 316–338.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. VV.AA.1997. Fluid properties (Section 6). In: CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (ed. D. R.Lide ), pp. 6–13. CRC Press, New York.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. WalshD.O., GrunewaldE., TurnerP. and FridI.2010. Javelin: A slim‐hole and microhole NMR logging tool.Fast Times15, 3, 67–72.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. WatsonA.T. and ChangC.T.P.1997. Characterizing Porous Media with NMR Methods.Progress in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy31, 343–386.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. WatanabeK. and WakeT.2009. Measurement of unfrozen water content and relative permittivity of frozen unsaturated soil using NMR and TDR.Cold Regions Science and Technology59, 34–41.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. WhartonR.P., HazenG.A., RauR.N. and BestD.L.1980. Electromagnetic propagation logging: Advances in technique and interpretation. The Society of Petroleum Engineers, 55th Annual Fall Meeting, Dallas, Texas, SPE 9267.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. YaramanciU.2004. New technologies in groundwater exploration – Surface Nuclear Magnetic Resonance.Geologica Acta2, 109–120.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. YaramanciU., LangeG. and HertrichM.2002. Aquifer characterisation using Surface NMR jointly with other geophysical techniques at the Nauen/Berlin test site.Journal of Applied Geophysics50, 47– 65.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. YilmazO.2001. Seismic data analysis.Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tusla, OK.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. YoshikawaK. and OverduinP.P.2005. Comparing unfrozen water content measurements of frozen soil using recently developed commercial sensors.Cold Regions Science and Technology42, 250‐256.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. ZhangT., LigneulP., NicotB., PairoysF. and AkbarM.2010. Dielectric Response of Carbonate Core‐Plugs‐Influence of Heterogeneous Rock Properties on Permittivity.SPE/DGS Saudi Arabia Section Technical Symposium and Exhibition, Al‐Khobar, Saudi Arabia. doi:10.2118/136941‐MS
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2012051
Loading
Comparison of GPR and unilateral NMR for water content measurements in a laboratory scale experiment
Near Surface Geophysics 11, 143 (2013); https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2012051
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2012051
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2012051
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

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