Absolute calibration of EMI measurements and application to soil magnetic susceptibility inference

Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 222-235

  Zhang, Beijia ^a   O'Neill, Kevin ^b,c   Kong, Jin Au ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b Engineering Research and Development Center   (United States)

^c DARTMOUTH COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA HANDLING; ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTION; FINITE DIFFERENCE METHOD; FREQUENCY DOMAIN ANALYSIS; MAGNETIC FIELDS; MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; ORDNANCE; SOILS; TIME DOMAIN ANALYSIS;

ABSOLUTE CALIBRATION; CONVERSION FACTOR; ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTIONS (EMI); FREQUENCY DOMAINS; INSTANTANEOUS RESPONSE; SCALING METHODOLOGY; SOIL MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; SURVEY MEASUREMENT;

SOIL SURVEYS;

CALIBRATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DATA PROCESSING; ELECTROMAGNETIC METHOD; ELECTROMAGNETIC SURVEY; MAGNETIC FIELD; MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; SENSOR; SOIL PROPERTY; TRANSFER FUNCTION;

EID: 55349091386     PISSN: 10831363     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2113/jeeg13.3.223     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Ao, C.O., 2001, Electromagnetic wave scattering by discrete random media with remote sensing application: Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
2. Barrowes, B.E., 2004, Electromagnetic scattering and induction models for spheroidal geometries: Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
3. Beard, L.P., and Nyquist, J.E., 1998, Simultaneous inversion of airborne electromagnetic data for resistivity and magnetic permeability: Geophysics, 63(5) 1556-1564.
4. Bell, T.H., Barrow, B.J., and Miller, J.T., 2001, Subsurface discrimination using electromagnetic induction sensors: IEEE Trans. on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 39, 1286-1293.
5. Billings, S.D., Pasion, L.R., Oldenburg, D.W., and Foley, J., 2003, The influence of magnetic viscosity on electromagnetic sensors: International Conference on Requirements and Technologies for the Detection, Removal and Neutralization of Landmines and UXO, Brussels, September 15-18, 2003.
6. Braunisch, H., 2001, Methods in wave propagation and scattering: Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
7. Chen, X., 2005, Inverse problems in electromagnetics: Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
8. Das, Y., 2007, Effects of magnetic soil on metal detectors-preliminary experimental results: Proceedings of the SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering, 6553.
9. Ferguson, D.E., 1960, Fibonaccian searching: Communications of the ACM, 3(12) 648.
10. Fernández, J.P., Barrowes, B., O'Neill, K., Shamatava, I., Shubitidze, F., and Sun, K., 2008, A data-derived time-domain SEA for UXO identification using the MPV sensor: Proceedings of the SPIE, 6953, 69531H-12.
11. Fraser, D.C., 1981, Magnetite mapping with a multicoil airborne electromagnetic system: Geophysics, 46(11) 1579-1593.
12. Gao, P., Collins, L., Garber, P.M., Geng, N., and Carin, L., 2000, Classification of landmine-like metal targets using wideband electromagnetic induction: IEEE Trans. on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 38(3) 1352-1361.
13. Geng, N., Baum, K.E., and Carin, L., 1999, On the low frequency natural responses of conducting and permeable targets: IEEE Trans. on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 37, 347-359.
14. Huang, H., and Fraser, D.C., 2000, Airborne resistivity and susceptibility mapping in magnetically polarized areas: Geophysics, 65(2)502-511.
15. Huang, H., and Won, I.J., 2003, Characterization of UXO-like targets using broadband electromagnetic induction sensors: Geoscience and Remote Sensing, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 41(3) 652-663.
16. Keiswetter, D., Won, I.J., Barrow, B., and Bell, T., 1999, Object identification using multi-frequency EMI data: in Proceedings UXO Forum.
17. Norton, S.J., and Won, I.J., 2001, Identification of buried unexploded ordnance from broadband electromagnetic induction data: IEEE Transaction on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 39(10) 2253-2261.
18. O'Neill, K., Shubitidze, F., Sun, K., Shamatava, I., and Paulsen, K.D., 2005, EMI obscuration of buried UXO by geophysical magnetic permeability, anthropogenic clutter, and by magnitude disparities: Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering, 5811, 87-99.
19. Schill Jr., R.A., 2003, General relation for the vector magnetic field of a circular current loop: A closer look: IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, 39, 961-967.
20. Simms, J.E., Van Dam, R.L., and Hendrickx, J.M.H., 2005, Classification of magnetic susceptibility anomalies and their relevance to UXO detection: FastTIMES, 10(2) 48-51.
21. Shubitidze, F., O'Neill, K., Shamatava, I., Sun, K., and Paulsen, K.D., 2004, Analyzing the effects of conductive and permeable soil on the EMI response for UXO discrimination: Mathematical Methods in Electromagnetic Theory, MMET, Conference Proceedings, 455-457.
22. Shubitidze, F., O'Neill, K., Shamatava, I., Sun, K., and Paulsen, K., 2005, Analysis of geological soil effects on EMI responses relevant to UXO discrimination: Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering, 5794(PART I) 296-307.
23. Smythe, W.R., 1968. Static and dynamic electricity: McGrawHill, 3rd ed, New York.
24. Sun, K., O'Neill, K., Shubitidze, F., Haider, S.A., and Paulsen, K.D., 2002, Simulation of electromagnetic induction scattering from targets with negligible to moderate penetration by primary fields: IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sensing, 40, 910-927.
25. Sun, K., O'Neill, K., Shubitidze, F., Shamatava, I., and Paulsen, K.D., 2005, Discrimination of UXO buried under magnetic soil: Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering, 5794 (PART I) 308-319.
26. van Bladel, J., 1985. Electromagnetic fields: Hemisphere Pub. Corp.
27. van Dam, R.L., Hendrickx, J.M.H., and Harrison, B.E.A., 2004, Spatial variability of magnetic soil properties: SPIE: Detection and Remediation Technologies for Mines and Minelike Targets IX, 5415.
28. Wait, J., and Spies, K.P., 1969, Quasi-static transient response of a conducting permeable sphere: Geophysics, 34(5) 789-792.
29. Wait, J., 1985, Electromagnetic wave theory: Harper and Row, New York.
30. Won, I.J., Keiswetter, D.A., and Hansen, D.R., 1997, GEM-3: A monostatic broadband electromagnetic induction sensor: Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 2(1) 53-64.
31. Zhang, B., O'Neill, K., Grzegorczyk, T.M., and Kong, J.A., 2006, Use of EMI response coefficients from spheroidal excitation and scattering modes to classify objects via SVM: SPIE: Detection and Remediation Technologies for Mines and Minelike Targets XI, 6217.
32. Zhang, Z., and Oldenburg, D.W., 1997, Recovering magnetic susceptibility from electromagnetic data over a 1-D earth: Geophys. J. Internat., 130, 422-434.
33. Zhang, Z., and Oldenburg, D.W., 1999, Simultaneous reconstruction of 1-D susceptibility and conductivity from electromagnetic data: Geophysics, 64(1) 33-47.