Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Dielectric Constant Determination Using Ground-Penetrating Radar Reflection Coefficients
Dielectric Constant Determination Using Ground-Penetrating Radar Reflection Coefficients
189–197
www.elsevier.nlrlocaterjappgeo
Abstract
A method to determine ground-penetrating radar ŽGPR. velocities, which utilize Brewster angles, is presented. The
method determines the relative dielectric constant ratio at interface boundaries where the radar wave is traveling from a
low-velocity to a high-velocity medium. Using Brewster angle analysis is currently the only means to determine the velocity
of the medium below the deepest detectable reflector. Data are presented for water-saturated clean sand with a known
velocity of 0.52 mrns, which overlays a sandy silt with a known velocity of 0.13 mrns. Brewster angle analysis of a
common midpoint ŽCMP. survey gives a relative dielectric constant ratio of 33r4.77. The Brewster angle relative dielectric
constant ratio is in good agreement with the relative dielectric constant ratio calculated from the known velocities. q 2000
Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
0926-9851r00r$ - see front matter q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 6 - 9 8 5 1 Ž 9 9 . 0 0 0 5 8 - 0
190 P.M. Reppert et al.r Journal of Applied Geophysics 43 (2000) 189–197
the velocity of the high-velocity layer and intent of this paper to provide an in-depth math-
demonstrate its effectiveness with an example. ematical derivation of the EM wave equation
from Maxwell’s equations. For more detailed
information on the derivation, Keller and Zh-
2. Background danov Ž 1994. and Wait Ž 1982. contain thorough
discussions of the subject. The success of GPR
GPR is most frequently used to perform re- is based on EM waves operating in the
flection profiles, which are commonly referred frequency range where displacement currents
to as zero offset profiles. Such profiles are dominate and losses associated with conduction
acquired by keeping the two GPR antennas an currents are minimal Ž Annan, 1996. . For the
equal distance apart while taking measurements purposes of this paper, the assumption is made
at equal spacing along a traverse ŽDavis and that we are dealing only with displacement cur-
Annan, 1989. . When viewing a zero offset pro- rents and that the medium is lossless. The justi-
file, one is often looking at the topography of a fication for this assumption will be discussed
layer or for anomalies in the reflection signal, later.
such as hyperbolas associated with small buried The wave equation, in the propagation regime
objects. Due to the interpretation non-unique- for electric displacement currents, is given in
ness of radar images, errors may occur in inter- Eq. Ž1.:
preting the source of the buried layer or anomaly. E2 E
Is the hyperbola caused by a buried barrel or by = 2 E s m´ , Ž1.
a boulder? If one is looking at a horizontal Et 2
reflector, how does one determine whether the where E is the electric field, m is the magnetic
anomaly is a water-table boundary or clay-layer permeability and ´ is the permittivity. The per-
boundary? The difficulty in interpreting GPR mittivity can be defined as ´ s ´o ´ r , where ´o
data is due to many factors such as attenuation, is the permittivity of free space and ´ r is the
dispersion, scattering and radiation patterns relative dielectric constant. Using phasor nota-
ŽAnnan, 1996.. Using travel time analysis in tion, Eq. Ž 1. can be represented as shown in Eq.
conjunction with a zero offset profile can reduce Ž2. , where v is the angular frequency:
some of the problems associated with these = 2 E s yv 2m´ E. Ž2.
factors.
Velocity travel-time analysis used in conjunc- The velocity for an EM wave in a dielectric is
tion with the CMP data acquisition method is given by:
the traditional technique for determining the 1
composition of a reflector Ž Annan and Cosway, ys 1 , Ž3.
2
1992.. However, there are limitations associated
with this method. To use this technique, one
must look at radar wave velocities using travel
( ž(
m´
2
s
1q 2 2 q1
v´
2
/
times for the reflected waves. Consequently, the where s represents conductivity. At high fre-
velocity of the medium below the lowest reflec- quencies andror very low conductivity, Eq. Ž3.
tor cannot be determined. reduces to:
1
ys
3. Theory
(m´ . Ž4.
Table 1
List of relative magnetic permeabilities of various minerals
Žadapted from Telford et al., 1990.
Mineral Permeability
Magnetite 5
Pyrrhotite 2.55
Hematite 1.05
Rutile 1.0000035
Calcite 0.999987
Fig. 1. Velocity of an EM wave plotted as a function of the Quartz 0.999985
soil resistivity with a relative dielectric constant of 4.
192 P.M. Reppert et al.r Journal of Applied Geophysics 43 (2000) 189–197
to the traverse, the polarization detected by the For details on the derivation of these equa-
radar will change. Polarization type will affect tions, please refer to any textbook on EM theory
Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of perpendicular and parallel polarized EM waves. Ža. shows a perpendicular polarized EM wave
where the E field points out of the page perpendicular to the plane of incidence and the H field is parallel to the plane of
incidence. Žb. shows a parallel polarized EM wave with the E field parallel to the plane of incidence and the H field
perpendicular to the plane of incidence.
P.M. Reppert et al.r Journal of Applied Geophysics 43 (2000) 189–197 193
Fig. 4. Magnitude and phase portion of reflection coefficients for two different velocity contrasts. Parallel and perpendicular
polarizations are shown when the EM wave goes from low velocity to high velocity and from high velocity to low velocity.
such as Electromagnetic Waves and Radiating flected energy goes to zero. When viewing Fig.
Systems ŽJordan and Balmain, 1968. . Plots of 4c and d, other phase changes are evident and
the reflection coefficients vs. angle of incidence these occur after all energies have been re-
for both the parallel and perpendicular polarized flected. It should be noted that these phase
waves are shown in Fig. 4. This figure shows changes are not step changes in phase.
the magnitude and phase portion of the reflec-
tion coefficients.
For parallel polarized waves, there exists an 4. Application of theory
angle where no reflected wave exists. This an-
gle is referred to as the Brewster angle and If the Brewster angle or phase changes can
given by Eq. Ž7.. The Brewster angle occurs be detected in radar data, it should be possible
when the numerator in Eq. Ž6. goes to zero: to determine the relative dielectric constant of
´2 the materials on either side of the boundary.
tan u 1 s ( ´1
. Ž7. This is accomplished by utilizing the reflection
coefficient properties of the boundary. The
The Brewster angle is more easily understood Brewster angle can be determined from the
when one looks at the magnitude and phase radar data by determining the event of interest
portions of Fig. 4. The Brewster angle occurs in and looking for a 908 phase change occurring in
Fig. 4b and d when a step change of 908 in the CMP data of that event. Depending on the
phase occurs prior to reaching the critical angle Brewster angle, a null in the amplitude may be
where all energies are reflected from the inter- detectable at the same location. The data are
face. When a step change of 908 in phase occurs easiest to read if color contour plots are used as
prior to all energies being reflected, the re- opposed to using radar wiggle plots. Once the
194 P.M. Reppert et al.r Journal of Applied Geophysics 43 (2000) 189–197
5. Data collection
Fig. 6. Reflection profile over the test site with a velocity profile shown alongside the CMP.
P.M. Reppert et al.r Journal of Applied Geophysics 43 (2000) 189–197 195
Fig. 9. Color plot of the data shown in Fig. 7. The Brewster angle location is highlighted by the circled area.
reflection coefficient, calculated from Eq. Ž6., and the other at 23.758. An incident angle of
was converted to amplitudes by multiplying the 23.758 on event Žd. gives a surface distance of
theoretical reflection coefficients by a constant. approximately 7.25 m. When the event is exam-
The same equation was used to generate the ined, another phase change is apparent at 7.25
model for Fig. 4 where a parallel polarized m. On first examination, it seems unusual that a
wave goes from high permittivity to low permit- small change in angle of the incident ray, 38,
tivity. A simple exponential attenuation was
then applied to the theoretical amplitudes. As
can be seen in Fig. 10, there is good similarity
between the data amplitudes from event Žd. and
the theoretical amplitudes. It can also be seen in
Fig. 10 that two changes in phase occur for this
relative dielectric constant ratio, one at 20.778
Table 3
Comparison of velocities determined using X 2 – T 2 analy-
sis and Brewster angle analysis
Layer Material Brewster angle X 2 – T 2
velocity Žmrns. velocity
Žmrns.
1 air 0.3 Fig. 10. Real portion of theoretical amplitudes for a rela-
2 clean sand 0.114 tive dielectric constant ratio of 33r4.8. The Brewster angle
3 water-saturated sand 0.052 occurs at 20.778. The amplitudes were obtained by multi-
4 sandy silt 0.137 0.13 plying the reflection coefficients by a constant and then
5 hardpan 0.153–0.17 multiplying by a simple exponential attenuation. The the-
ory is compared to data obtained from event Žd..
P.M. Reppert et al.r Journal of Applied Geophysics 43 (2000) 189–197 197