Kaijun Wu, Elodie Jacquemin, Loïc Ory, T. Parizel, S. Lambot
{"title":"低频无人机探地雷达在土壤电导率测绘中的应用分析","authors":"Kaijun Wu, Elodie Jacquemin, Loïc Ory, T. Parizel, S. Lambot","doi":"10.1109/iwagpr50767.2021.9843145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this study, we analysed the low-frequency drone-borne ground-penetrating radar (GPR) and full-wave inversion method for soil electrical conductivity characterization. The sensitivity of parameters (the relative dielectric permittivity εr and electrical conductivity σ) is investigated based on the full-wave inversion method. For the full-wave inversion analysis, numerical experiments were conducted within the frequency range of 15–45 MHz. The results show that the soil surface reflexion is more sensitive to the soil electrical conductivity than the soil permittivity to be retrieved using full-wave inversion within this frequency range, with a sensitivity depth of around 0.5 m. Yet, the permittivity also affects the results. For the field experiment, a 5-meter long dipole was mounted on a drone to provide the low frequency range of 15–45 MHz. The measurements were conducted during two different days. The conductivity maps obtained by the drone-borne GPR and by electromagnetic induction (EMI) are presented for comparison. The agreement between the two drone-GPR experiments demonstrated the feasibility of soil conductivity mapping using drone-borne GPR and full-wave inversion. Nevertheless, the conductivity maps were opposite in terms of spatial distributions compared to EMI. This was attributed to the different depth sensitivities of the two methods in relation to the local soil pedology.","PeriodicalId":170169,"journal":{"name":"2021 11th International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR)","volume":"453 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of Low-frequency Drone-Borne GPR for Soil Electrical Conductivity Mapping\",\"authors\":\"Kaijun Wu, Elodie Jacquemin, Loïc Ory, T. Parizel, S. Lambot\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/iwagpr50767.2021.9843145\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this study, we analysed the low-frequency drone-borne ground-penetrating radar (GPR) and full-wave inversion method for soil electrical conductivity characterization. The sensitivity of parameters (the relative dielectric permittivity εr and electrical conductivity σ) is investigated based on the full-wave inversion method. For the full-wave inversion analysis, numerical experiments were conducted within the frequency range of 15–45 MHz. The results show that the soil surface reflexion is more sensitive to the soil electrical conductivity than the soil permittivity to be retrieved using full-wave inversion within this frequency range, with a sensitivity depth of around 0.5 m. Yet, the permittivity also affects the results. For the field experiment, a 5-meter long dipole was mounted on a drone to provide the low frequency range of 15–45 MHz. The measurements were conducted during two different days. The conductivity maps obtained by the drone-borne GPR and by electromagnetic induction (EMI) are presented for comparison. The agreement between the two drone-GPR experiments demonstrated the feasibility of soil conductivity mapping using drone-borne GPR and full-wave inversion. Nevertheless, the conductivity maps were opposite in terms of spatial distributions compared to EMI. This was attributed to the different depth sensitivities of the two methods in relation to the local soil pedology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":170169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2021 11th International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR)\",\"volume\":\"453 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2021 11th International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/iwagpr50767.2021.9843145\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2021 11th International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/iwagpr50767.2021.9843145","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Analysis of Low-frequency Drone-Borne GPR for Soil Electrical Conductivity Mapping
In this study, we analysed the low-frequency drone-borne ground-penetrating radar (GPR) and full-wave inversion method for soil electrical conductivity characterization. The sensitivity of parameters (the relative dielectric permittivity εr and electrical conductivity σ) is investigated based on the full-wave inversion method. For the full-wave inversion analysis, numerical experiments were conducted within the frequency range of 15–45 MHz. The results show that the soil surface reflexion is more sensitive to the soil electrical conductivity than the soil permittivity to be retrieved using full-wave inversion within this frequency range, with a sensitivity depth of around 0.5 m. Yet, the permittivity also affects the results. For the field experiment, a 5-meter long dipole was mounted on a drone to provide the low frequency range of 15–45 MHz. The measurements were conducted during two different days. The conductivity maps obtained by the drone-borne GPR and by electromagnetic induction (EMI) are presented for comparison. The agreement between the two drone-GPR experiments demonstrated the feasibility of soil conductivity mapping using drone-borne GPR and full-wave inversion. Nevertheless, the conductivity maps were opposite in terms of spatial distributions compared to EMI. This was attributed to the different depth sensitivities of the two methods in relation to the local soil pedology.