Improved hydrogeophysical parameter estimation from empirical mode decomposition processed ground penetrating radar data

Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 171-178

  Addison, Adrian D ^a   Battista, Bradley M ^a   Knapp, Camelia C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA YIELDS; DIELECTRIC CONSTANTS; DIRECT MEASUREMENT; EMD METHOD; EMPIRICAL MODE DECOMPOSITION; GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT; GEOLOGIC MATERIALS; GROUND PENETRATING RADAR; GROUND PENETRATING RADARS; HYDROGEOPHYSICAL; MARINE CORPS AIR STATIONS; PARAMETER ESTIMATE; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SOUTH CAROLINA; VERTICAL RADAR PROFILES; VOLUMETRIC WATER CONTENT;

DIELECTRIC MATERIALS; GEOLOGICAL SURVEYS; HYDRAULICS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; PERMITTIVITY; RADAR; SIGNAL PROCESSING; WATER CONTENT;

RADAR MEASUREMENT;

DIELECTRIC PROPERTY; EXPLORATION; GROUND PENETRATING RADAR; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; POROSITY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SIGNAL PROCESSING; WATER CONTENT;

BEAUFORT; NORTH CAROLINA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 74549136777     PISSN: 10831363     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2113/JEEG14.4.171     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Annan, A. P., 2005, Hydrogeophysics, chapter 7: in GPR methods for hydrogeological studies: Springer, 523 pp.
2. Bear, J., 1972. Dynamics of fluids in porous media: American Elsevier, New York, 784 pp.
3. Davis, J., and Annan, A. P., 1989, Ground-penetrating radar for high resolution mapping of soil and rock stratigraphy: Geophysical Prospecting, 37, 531-551.
4. Freeze, R., and Cherry, J., 1979. Groundwater: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 604 pp.
5. Gerlitz, K., Knoll, M. D., Cross, G. M., Luzitano, G. M., and Knight, R., 1993, Processing ground penetrating radar data to improve resolution of near-surface targets: in Proceedings of the Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems, 564-565.
6. Gloaguen, E., Chouteau, M., Marcotte, D., and Chapuis, R., 2001, Estimation of hydraulic conductivity of an unconfined aquifer using cokriging of gpr and hydrostratigraphic data: Applied Geophysics, 47, 135-152.
7. Hubbard, S., Rubin, Y., and Majer, E., 1997, Groundpenetrating-radar- assisted saturation and permeability estimation in bimodal systems: Water Resources Research, 33, 971-990.
8. Kutrubes, D. L., Zhang, J., and Mackie, R. L., 1994, Determination of gpr processing capabilities using Promax: in Expanded Abstracts: Proceeding of the IEEE Dual-Use Technologies and Applications Conference, 439-446.
9. Oldenborger, G. A., Knoll, M. D, and Barrash, W., 2004, Effects of signal processing and antenna frequency on the geostatistical structure of ground-penetrating radar data: Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 9, 201-212.
10. Rhine, J., and Shafer, J., 2000, Groundwater characterization report: three dimensional groundwater flow and flow path analysis: Technical report, Earth Sciences and Resources 14 Institute, University of South Carolina. Aquifer vulnerability and contamination potential assessment at U. S. Marine Corps Air Station, Beaufort, South Carolina.
11. Siple, G., 1960. Geology and ground water conditions in Beaufort area, South Carolina, U. S. Geological Survey, Columbia, South Carolina.
12. Spigner, B., and Ransom, C. III, 1979, Report on groundwater conditions in the low county area, South Carolina: Technical Report 132, South Carolina Water Resources Commission, Columbia, South Carolina.
13. Topp, G., Davis, J., and Annan, A. P., 1980, Electromagnetic determination of soil water content: measurements in coaxial transmission lines: Water Resources Research, 16, 574-582.
14. Young, C, 2002, Estimating hydrogeologic parameters from radar data http://www.geo.mtu.edu/profile/CTYOUNG.htm.