1887

Abstract

Summary

Ground penetrating radar (GPR) and seismic surface wave methods (SWMs) are widely used in near-surface surveys. For the most frequently used common offset GPR reflection data, a key requirement for proper imaging of subsurface reflectors is an accurate velocity model, especially when dipping layers are present in the subsurface. For the inversion of surface wave data in a layered system, the model parameterization is critical if a priori information is not available. Here, we presented a possible way for mutually constrained inversion of the common offset GPR reflection traveltime and surface wave dispersion data. We used the depth of interfaces to link the model parameters of GPR and the surface wave method based on structural similarity. The parameterization problem of the surface wave data inversion is mitigated by using interface constraints from GPR profile, we then inverted the layered model parameters including thickness and velocities of EM wave and shear wave simultaneously by using the alternate coupling strategy. Test on a synthetic example showed that the estimation of depth and EM velocity in GPR result is significantly improved, while, the simultaneous use of both datasets could provide a reliable parametrization for the surface wave inversion.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201902568
2019-09-08
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. J. H.Bradford
    , “Applying reflection tomography in the postmigration domain to multifold ground-penetrating radar data,” Geophysics, vol. 71, pp. K1–K8, January 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. E.Forte, M.Dossi, M.Pipan, and R. R.Colucci
    , “Velocity analysis from common offset GPR data inversion: theory and application to synthetic and real data,” Geophysical Journal International, vol. 197, pp. 1471–1483, June 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. U.Spagnolini and V.Rampa
    , “Multitarget detection/tracking for monostatic ground penetrating radar: application to pavement profiling,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 37, pp. 383–394, January 1999.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Z.Huang and J.Zhang
    , “Determination of Parameters of Subsurface Layers Using GPR Spectral Inversion Method,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 52, pp. 7527–7533, December 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. J.Cai and G. A.McMechan
    , “2-D ray-based tomography for velocity, layer shape, and attenuation from GPR data,” Geophysics, vol. 64, pp. 1579–1593, September 1999.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. S.Hanafy and S. A.AI Hagrey
    , “Ground-penetrating radar tomography for soil-moisture heterogeneity,” Geophysics, vol. 71, pp. K9–K18, January 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. J. H.Bradford
    , “Applying reflection tomography in the postmigration domain to multifold ground-penetrating radar data,” Geophysics, vol. 71, pp. K1–K8, January 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. A.Becht, E.Appel and P.Dietrich
    , “Analysis of multi-offset GPR data: a case study in a coarse-grained gravel aquifer,” Near Surface Geophysics, vol. 4, pp. 227–240, August 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. M.Pipan, L.Baradello, E.Forte, A.Prizzon and I.Finetti
    , “2-D and 3-D processing and interpretation of multi-fold ground penetrating radar data: a case history from an archaeological site,” Journal of Applied geophysics, vol. 41, pp. 271–292, March 1999.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. S.Foti, C.Comina D.Boiero and L.V.Socco
    , “Non-uniqueness in surface-wave inversion and consequences on seismic site response analyses,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 29, pp. 982–993, June, 2009.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. L. V.Socco, S.Foti and D.Boiero
    , “Surface-wave analysis for building near-surface velocity models—Established approaches and new perspectives,” Geophysics, vol. 75, pp. 75A83–75A102, September 2010.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. L. V.Socco, D.Boiero, S.Foti and R.Wisén
    , “Laterally constrained inversion of ground roll from seismic reflection records,” Geophysics, vol. 74, pp. G35–G45, Novermber 2009.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. A.Ismail and N.Anderson
    , “Near-surface characterization of a geotechnical site in north-east Missouri using shear-wave velocity measurements,” Near Surface Geophysics, vol. 5, pp. 331–336, October 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. T.Bodin, M.Sambridge, H.Tkalčič, P.Arroucau, K.Gallagher and N.Rawlinson
    , “Transdimensional inversion of receiver functions and surface wave dispersion,” Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, vol. 117, February 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. L. V.Socco, D.Boiero, C.Comina, S.Foti and R.Wisén
    , “ Seismic characterization of an Alpine site,” Near Surface Geophysics, vol. 6, pp. 255–267, June 2008.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. C.Piatti, L. V.Socco, D.Boiero and S.Foti
    , “Constrained 1D joint inversion of seismic surface waves and P-refraction traveltimes,” Geophysical Prospecting, vol. 61, pp. 77–93, June 2013.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. P.Anbazhagan, S.Lijun, I.Buddhima I and R.Cholachat
    , “Model track studies on fouled ballast using ground penetrating radar and multichannel analysis of surface wave,” Journal of Applied Geophysics, vol. 74, pp. 175–184, August 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. G.Cassiani, J.Boaga, L.Busato
    , , “Combined Geophysical Surveys for the Characterization of a Reconstructed River Embankment,” Engineering Geology, vol. 211, pp. 74–84, June 2016.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. E.Auken, L.Pellerin and K. I.Serensen
    , “Mutually constrained inversion (MCI) of electrical and electromagnetic data,” SEG Int’l Exposition and Annual Meeting, pp.1455–1458, January 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Y. H. R.Tsai, L. T.Cheng, S.Osher and H. K.Zhao
    , “Fast sweeping algorithms for a class of Hamilton--Jacobi equations.” SIAM journal on numerical analysis, vol. 41, pp. 673–694, July 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. J. A.Hole and B. C.Zelt
    , “3-D finite-difference reflection traveltimes,” Geophysical Journal International, vol. 121, pp. 427–434, May 1995.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. J. W.Huang and G.Bellefleur
    , “Joint transmission and reflection traveltime tomography using the fast sweeping method and the adjoint-state technique,” Geophysical Journal International, vol. 188, pp. 570–582, February 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. W. T.Thomson
    , “Transmission of elastic waves through a stratified solid medium,” Journal of applied Physics, vol. 21, pp. 89–93, 1950.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. N. A.Haskell
    , “The dispersion of surface waves on multilayered media,” Bulletin of the seismological Society of America, vol. 43, pp. 17–34, January 1953.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. S. E.Dosso, J.Dettmer, G.Steininger and C. W.Holland
    , “Efficient trans-dimensional Bayesian inversion for geoacoustic profile estimation,” Inverse Problems, vol. 30, pp. 114018, October 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. W.Hu, A.Abubakar and T. M.Habashy
    , “Joint electromagnetic and seismic inversion using structural constraints,” Geophysics, vol. 74, pp. R99–R109, November 2009.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. E.Auken and A. V.Christiansen
    , “Layered and laterally constrained 2D inversion of resistivity data,” Geophysics, vol. 69, pp. 752–761, May 2004.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. R.Wisén and A. V.Christiansen
    , “Laterally and mutually constrained inversion of surface wave seismic data and resistivity data,” Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, vol. 10, pp. 251–262, September 2005.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. C.Warren, A.Giannopoulos, I.Giannakis
    , “gprMax: Open source software to simulate electromagnetic wave propagation for Ground Penetrating Radar,” Computer Physics Communications, vol. 209, pp. 163–170, December 2016.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. A. R.Levander
    , “Fourth-order finite-difference P-SV seismograms,” Geophysics, vol. 53, pp. 1425–1436, November 1988.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201902568
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201902568
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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