1887
Volume 13 Number 3
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604
PDF

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The need for quantitative imaging of the near subsurface leads to the development of inversion algorithms to infer ground properties from recorded data. The aim of this study is to validate an inversion method recently developed for the simultaneous imaging of dielectric permittivity and electrical conductivity from 2D ground‐penetrating radar measurements. The validation is performed using electromagnetic data collected in a well‐controlled laboratory environment. In this experiment, the knowledge of the targets enables a quality control of the inversion results. In addition, the free space environment and the measurement of the incident field simplify the choice of a starting model for the inversion, as well as the calibration of the data with respect to the source signature and to the geometrical spread. To perform accurate and efficient forward simulations, we use a frequency‐domain finite‐difference scheme whose stencil coefficients can be optimized for each simulated frequency. As the objects of interest are locally concentrated at the centre of the acquisition array, it is possible to restrict the computation domain to a small region enclosing the targets using an integral representation of the analytical incident field coming from the sources and of the scattered field that we analytically propagate towards the receivers. An analysis of the numerical errors done on synthetic data shows that this strategy provides an error level that is low enough not to perturb the inversion, while dramatically decreasing the computational cost compared to a full‐domain simulation. The monoparameter reconstruction of a purely dielectric target recovers permittivity values in very good agreement with the expected ones, as well as a very satisfying data fit. We also validate our strategy for multiparameter inversion on targets involving both a purely dielectric cylinder and a purely metallic copper tube, although the optimization cannot recover the exact conductivity of copper.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015004
2014-10-01
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/nsg/13/3/nsg2015004.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015004&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. AbubakarA., van den BergP.M. and HabashyT.M.2005. Application of the multiplicative regularized contrast source inversion method on TM‐ and TE‐polarized experimental Fresnel data. Inverse Problems21, S5–S13.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BelkebirK. and SaillardM.2001. Special section: Testing inversion algorithms against experimental data. Inverse Problems17, 1565–1571.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BelkebirK. and SaillardM.2005. Guest Editors’ introduction: Testing inversion algorithms against experimental data: inhomogeneous targets. Inverse Problems21, 1–3.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BérengerJ.‐P.1994. A perfectly matched layer for absorption of electromagnetic waves. Journal of Computational Physics114, 185–200.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BuschS., van der KrukJ., BikowskiJ. and VereeckenH.2012. Quantitative conductivity and permittivity estimation using full‐wave‐form inversion of on‐ground GPR data. Geophysics77(6), H79–H91.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ByrdR.H., LuP. and NocedalJ.1995. A limited memory algorithm for bound constrained optimization. SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing16, 1190–1208.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Day‐LewisF.D., SinghaK. and BinleyA.M.2005. Applying petrophysical models to radar travel time and electrical resistivity tomograms: Resolution‐dependent limitations. Journal of Geophysical Research110(B8).
    [Google Scholar]
  8. DeedsJ. and BradfordJ.2002. Characterization of an aquitard and direct detection of LNAPL at Hill Air Force base using GPR AVO and migration velocity analyses. In: 9th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR 2002), Santa Barbara, California (USA), vol. 4758 of SPIE proceedings series, pp. 323–329.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. EllefsenK.J., MazzellaA.T., HortonR.J. and McKennaJ.R.2011. Phase and amplitude inversion of crosswell radar data. Geophysics76(3), J1–J12.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. ErnstJ.R., GreenA.G., MaurerH. and HolligerK.2007. Application of a new 2D time‐domain full‐waveform inversion scheme to crosshole radar data. Geophysics72(5), J53–J64.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. GaramboisS., SénéchalP. and PerroudH.2002. On the use of combined geophysical methods to assess water content and water conductivity of near‐surface formations. Journal of Hydrology259, 32–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. GeffrinJ.‐M., SabourouxP. and EyraudC.2005. Free space experimental scattering database continuation: experimental set‐up and measurement precision. Inverse Problems21, S117–S130.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. HakB. and MulderW.A.2010. Migration for velocity and attenuation perturbations, Geophysical Prospecting58, 939–951.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. HicksG.J.2002. Arbitrary source and receiver positioning in finite‐difference schemes using Kaiser windowed sinc functions. Geophysics67, 156–166.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. HuismanJ.A., HubbardS.S., RedmanJ.D. and AnnanA.P.2003. Measuring soil water content with ground penetrating radar: A review. Vadose Zone Journal2, 476–491.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. HustedtB., OpertoS. and VirieuxJ.2004. Mixed‐grid and staggered‐grid finite difference methods for frequency domain acoustic wave modelling. Geophysical Journal International157, 1269–1296.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. IhamoutenA., VillainG. and DérobertX.2012. Complex permittivity frequency variations from multioffset GPR data: Hydraulic concrete characterization. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing61(6), 1636–1648.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. JoC.H., ShinC. and SuhJ.H.1996. An optimal 9‐point, finite‐difference, frequency‐space 2D scalar extrapolator. Geophysics61, 529–537.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Jol HarryM.2009. Ground Penetrating Radar: Theory and Applications. Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. KalogeropoulosA., van der KrukJ., HugenschmidtJ., BuschS. and MerzK.2011. Chlorides and moisture assessment in concrete by GPR full waveform inversion. Near Surface Geophysics9(3), 277–285.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. KlotzscheA., van der KrukJ., LindeN., DoetschJ. and VereeckenH.2013. 3‐D characterization of high‐permeability zones in a gravel aquifer using 2‐D crosshole GPR full‐waveform inversion and waveguide detection. Geophysical Journal International195(2), 932–944.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. LambotS., WeihermüllerL., HuismanJ.A., VereeckenH., VancloosterM. and SlobE.C.2006. Analysis of air‐launched ground‐penetrating radar techniques to measure the soil surface water content. Water Resources Research42, W11403.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. LavouéF., BrossierR., MétivierL., GaramboisS. and VirieuxJ.2013. 2D full waveform inversion of GPR surface data: permittivity and conductivity imaging. In: 7th International Workshop on Advanced Ground‐Penetrating Radar (IWAGPR 2013), Nantes (France).
    [Google Scholar]
  24. LavouéF., BrossierR., MétivierL., GaramboisS. and VirieuxJ.2014. Two‐dimensional permittivity and conductivity imaging by full waveform inversion of multioffset GPR data: a frequency‐domain quasi‐Newton approach. Geophysical Journal International197(1), 248–268.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. LitmanA. and CroccoL.2009. Testing inversion algorithms against experimental data: 3D targets. Inverse Problems25(2).
    [Google Scholar]
  26. MelesG.A., van der KrukJ., GreenhalghS.A., ErnstJ.R., MaurerH. and GreenA.G.2010. A new vector waveform inversion algorithm for simultaneous updating of conductivity and permittivity parameters from combination crosshole/borehole‐to‐surface GPR data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing48, 3391–3407.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. MétivierL., BrossierR., VirieuxJ. and OpertoS.2013. Full Waveform Inversion and the truncated Newton method. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing35(2), B401–B437.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. MétivierL., BretaudeauF., BrossierR., OpertoS. and VirieuxJ.2014. Full waveform inversion and the truncated Newton method: quantitative imaging of complex subsurface structures. Geophysical Prospecting, in press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. MinetJ., LambotS., SlobE.C. and VancloosterM.2010. Soil surface water content estimation by full‐waveform GPR signal inversion in the presence of thin layers. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing48(3), 1138–1150.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. MUMPS‐team
    MUMPS‐team . 2011. MUMPS ‐ MUltifrontal Massively Parallel Solver users’ guide ‐ version 4.10.0 (May 10, 2011), ENSEEIHT‐ENS Lyon, http://mumps.enseeiht.fr or http://graal.ens‐lyon.fr/MUMPS, Accessed 15 January 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. OpertoS., BrossierR., GholamiY., MétivierL., PrieuxV., RibodettiA. and VirieuxJ.2013. A guided tour of multiparameter full waveform inversion for multicomponent data: from theory to practice. The Leading Edge, Special section Full Waveform Inversion (September), 1040–1054.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. PatriarcaC., LambotS., MahmoudzadehM.R., MinetJ. and SlobE.2011. Reconstruction of sub‐wavelength fractures and physical properties of masonry media using full‐waveform inversion of proximal penetrating radar. Journal of Applied Geophysics74, 26–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. PlessixR.E.2006. A review of the adjoint‐state method for computing the gradient of a functional with geophysical applications. Geophysical Journal International167(2), 495–503.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. PrattR.G.1999. Seismic waveform inversion in the frequency domain, part I: theory and verification in a physic scale model. Geophysics64, 888–901.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. PrattR.G. and WorthingtonM.H.1990. Inverse theory applied to multisource cross‐hole tomography. Part I: acoustic wave‐equation method. Geophysical Prospecting38, 287–310.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. PrattR.G., ShinC. and HicksG.J.1998. Gauss‐Newton and full Newton methods in frequency‐space seismic waveform inversion. Geophysical Journal International133, 341–362.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. RibodettiA., OpertoS., VirieuxJ., LambaréG., ValéroH.‐P. and GibertD.2000. Asymptotic viscoacoustic diffraction tomography of ultrasonic laboratory data: a tool for rock properties analysis. Geophysical Journal International140, 324–340.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. SirgueL. and PrattR.G.2004. Efficient waveform inversion and imaging: a strategy for selecting temporal frequencies. Geophysics69(1), 231–248.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. TafloveA. and HagnessS.C.2005. Computational Electrodynamics: The Finite‐Difference Time‐Domain Method. Artech House, 3rd edn.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. TikhonovA. and ArseninV.1977. Solution of Il‐posed Problems. Winston, Washington, DC.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. VelichkoA. and WilcoxP.D.2010. A generalized approach for efficient finite element modeling of elastodynamic scattering in two and three dimensions. Journal of Acoustical Society of America128(3), 1004–1014.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. WeihermüllerL., HuismanJ.A., LambotS., HerbstM. and VereeckenH.2007. Mapping the spatial variation of soil water content at the field scale with different ground penetrating radar techniques. Journal of Hydrology340, 205–216.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. WilcoxP.D. and VelichkoA.2010. Efficient frequency‐domain finite element modeling of two‐dimensional elastodynamic scattering. Journal of Acoustical Society of America127(1), 155–165.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. ZhaoY., XieX., WuJ., ChenJ. and GeS.2013. Maxwell curl equation datuming for GPR based on the Kirchhoff integral solution and application in a tunnel grouting test. Near Surface Geophysics11, 211–219.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. ZhuC., ByrdR.H. and NocedalJ.1997. Algorithm 778: L‐BFGS‐B, FORTRAN routines for large scale bound constrained optimization. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software23(4), 550–560.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015004
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2015004
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