Advertisement

Finite difference time domain method forward simulation of complex geoelectricity ground penetrating radar model

  • Dai Qian-wei Email author
  • Feng De-shan 
  • He Ji-shan 
Article

Abstract

The ground penetrating radar (GPR) forward simulation all aims at the singular and regular models, such as sandwich model, round cavity, square cavity, and so on, which are comparably simple. But as to the forward of curl interface underground or “v” figure complex model, it is difficult to realize. So it is important to forward the complex geoelectricity model. This paper takes two Maxwell’s vorticity equations as departure point, makes use of the principles of Yee’s space grid model theory and the basic principle finite difference time domain method, and deduces a GPR forward system of equation of two dimensional spaces. The Mur super absorbed boundary condition is adopted to solve the super strong reflection on the interceptive boundary when there is the forward simulation. And a self-made program is used to process forward simulation to two typical geoelectricity model.

Key words

ground penetrating radar finite difference time domain method forward simulation ideal frequency dispersion relationship 

CLC number

P319.1+

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Lambot S, Slob E C, Van B, et al. Modeling of ground-penetrating radar for accurate characterization of subsurface electric properties [J]. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2004, 42(11): 2555–2568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Guangyou F. FDTD and optimization approach to time-domain inversing problem for underground multiple objects [J]. Microwave and Optical Technology Letters, 2001, 31(5): 384–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Meincke P. Linear GPR inversion for lossy soil and a planar air-soil interface[J]. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2001, 39(12): 2713–2721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Kowalsky M B, Dietrich P, Teutsch G, et al. Forward modeling of ground-penetrating radar data using digitized outcrop images and multiple scenarios of water saturation[J]. Water Resources Research, 2001, 37(6): 1615–1625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Eisen O, Wilhelms F, Nixdorf U, et al. Revealing the nature of radar reflections in ice: DEP-based FDTD forward modeling[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2003, 30(5): 1218–1224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Hubbard S, Grote K. Mapping the volumetric soil water content of a California vineyard using high-frequency GPR ground wave data[J]. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 2002, 21(6): 556–559.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Cull J, Massie D, Roberts J. Complex impedance mapping using GPR survey methods[A]. International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium[C]. Toulouse: IEEE, 2003. 2909–2911.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Hasegawa Y, Yokoe K, Kawai Y, et al. GPR-based adaptive sensing GPR manipulation according to terrain configurations [A]. International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems [C]. Sendai: IEEE, 2004. 3021–3026.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Bergmann T, Robertsson J O A, Holliger K. Numerical properties of staggered finite-difference solutions of Maxwell’s equations for ground-penetrating radar modeling[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 1996, 23(1): 45–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Carcione J M. Radiation patterns for 2-D GPR forward modeling[J]. Geophysics, 1998, 63(2): 424–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Bernardi P, Cavagnaro M, Atanasio P, et al.. FDTD, multiple-region/FDTD, ray-tracing/FDTD: A comparison on their applicability for human exposure evaluation [J]. International Journal of Numerical Modelling, 2002, 15(5–6): 579–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Rejiba F, Camerlynck C, Mechler P. FDTD-SUPMLADE simulation for ground-penetrating radar modeling [J]. Radio Science, 2003, 38(1): 511–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Yarovoy A G, Vazouras C N, Fikioris J G, et al. Numerical simulations of the scattered field near a statistically rough air-ground interface [J]. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 2004, 52(3): 780–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Mei K K, Fang J. Superabsorption—a method to improve absorbing boundary conditions [J]. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 1992, 40(9): 1001–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Cui T J, Chew W C, Aydiner A A, et al. Fast-for-ward solvers for the low-frequency detection of buried dielectric objects[J]. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2003, 41(9): 2026–2036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Joaquim F G. A novel 3-D subsurface radar imaging technique[J]. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2002, 40(2): 443–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Central South University 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Info-physics and Geomatics EngineeringCentral South UniversityChangshaChina

Personalised recommendations