Ground-penetrating radar and its use in sedimentology: principles, problems and progress
Introduction
For humans, the shallow subsurface is perhaps the most important geological layer in the earth. This layer contains many of the earth's natural resources (e.g. building aggregates/stone, placer deposits, drinking water aquifers, soils) and also acts as a sink for human waste (e.g. landfill sites). In addition, through the study of rocks and unconsolidated sediment accumulations at or near the surface we have discovered much about earth history and behaviour of its dynamic landforms. These insights have aided environmental management, such as prediction of natural disasters, helped exploration for more remote natural resources such as oil and gas, and increased understanding of the geological development of other planets in our solar system. Given the large rise in human population predicted for the 21st century, a more detailed understanding of the shallow subsurface will be required if humans are to sustainably manage many of the earth's finite resources.
As Grasmück and Green (1996) note, given the importance of the earth's upper layers to human development, it is surprising that during much of the 20th century techniques for exploring them did not change significantly. Analysis of field exposures linked via data from limited numbers of widely spaced boreholes, shallow excavations and geophysical surveys is still typical. Drilling and trial pits are time-consuming and expensive, often yielding only limited additional information that is difficult to correlate between distant sampling points. In some instances such invasive techniques cannot be implemented due to environmental or conservation considerations.
The most common geophysical techniques employed in shallow subsurface investigations are seismic reflection and seismic refraction, although these have a vertical resolution that does not normally meet the submetre resolution required in many practical situations. Consequently, during the 1970s attention increasingly turned to using other, higher resolution, geophysical techniques. One technique that has proved extremely useful is ground-penetrating radar (GPR or ground-probing radar, surface-penetrating radar, subsurface radar, georadar or impulse radar). GPR detects electrical discontinuities in the shallow subsurface (typically <50 m) by generation, transmission, propagation, reflection and reception of discrete pulses of high-frequency electromagnetic energy in the megahertz (MHz=106 Hz, 1 Hz=1 cycle/s) frequency range. GPR's origins lie in research carried out during the early 20th century by German scientists trying to patent techniques to investigate the nature of various buried features Daniels, 1996, Reynolds, 1997. Pulsed electromagnetic waves were first used in the mid-1920s. Following these initial developments, much early work using radar was in glaciology (Plewes and Hubbard, 2001), with civil engineering, archaeological and geological applications becoming more frequent from the 1970s onwards Daniels, 1996, Conyers and Goodman, 1997, Reynolds, 1997. However, it was not until the 1980s that GPR systems became commercially available and digital data acquisition was feasible (Annan and Davis, 1992). Since the mid-1990s there has been an explosion of interest in GPR, with an ever-increasing number of research articles published on the technique each year (Fig. 1). Many publications relate to geological applications of GPR, a significant subset of which have a strong sedimentological component (Fig. 1). GPR has been used by sedimentologists to reconstruct past depositional environments and the nature of sedimentary processes in a variety of environmental settings, aid hydrogeological investigations (including groundwater reservoir characterisation), and assist hydrocarbon reservoir analogue studies (Table 1). It is these applications in sedimentology that form the basis of this review paper, although much of the GPR research performed is of direct or indirect relevance.
Although the rise in use of GPR in sedimentological studies can be attributed to its wider availability since the 1980s, its use by the research community is also related to the ease and rapidity of data collection, the ability to collect subsurface information away from outcrops or boreholes, and the apparent familiarity of the images, due to GPR's analogy with the established seismic reflection technique. The power of seismic reflection data was demonstrated to geologists when new interpretation techniques associated with seismic stratigraphy (Mitchum et al., 1977) revolutionised regional sedimentological studies in the late 1970s/early 1980s, and subsequently led directly to the concepts associated with the new geological science of sequence stratigraphy (for a review of the history and controversies surrounding seismic and sequence stratigraphy consult Miall and Miall, 2001).
Seismic reflection and GPR data are often analogous in terms of wave propagation kinematics Ursin, 1983, Carcione and Cavallini, 1995 and reflection and refraction responses to subsurface discontinuities McCann et al., 1988, Fisher et al., 1992a. Consequently, the broad assumptions that underpin processing and interpretation of seismic reflection data Sangree and Widmier, 1979, Yilmaz, 1987, Yilmaz, 2001 should also apply to GPR. With respect to interpretation, the basic assumption in both techniques is that, at the resolution of the survey and after appropriate data processing, reflection profiles will contain accurate information regarding the nature of a sediment body's primary depositional structure. In other words, the form and orientation of bedding and sedimentary structures in the plane of the survey will be adequately represented by recorded reflections, and any nongeological reflections can be readily identified and removed by data processing, or by simply discounting them from the interpretation. Although this assumption is a seemingly simple basis for the interpretation of radar reflection profiles, the degree to which it can be assumed to be true is dependent upon a wide range of factors. These include the nature of the sediment body under investigation, the groundwater regime, the type of terrain immediately adjacent to the survey line, the nature and appropriateness of any data processing undertaken, the interpretation techniques employed, and the overall understanding and experience of the researcher(s) with respect to GPR, and hence their appreciation of the other factors.
Geophysicists and sedimentologists want to extract accurate and meaningful sedimentological information from GPR profiles, but so do geomorphologists, soil scientists, hydrogeologists, archaeologists, environmental scientists and others with an interest in the structure of the shallow subsurface. Due to GPR's relatively recent development and acceptance, and the wide range of potential uses, experience of GPR end-users is wide and their subject backgrounds diverse. This point was emphasised at ‘GPR in Sediments’ (Geological Society, London, 20–21 August 2001) the first international conference on the applications of GPR in sedimentological studies (Bristow and Jol, 2003). From the papers presented and comments made by delegates in open discussion sessions, it was clear that appreciation of the GPR technique was highly variable across the user, and potential-user, base. On the basis of this observation and a comprehensive review of the literature, it is clear that overall understanding of the value and limitations of GPR is not as high as that generally displayed by the seismic reflection community for their analogous technique, where robust data collection, processing and interpretation methods have been developed, particularly since the 1970s.
It is not the purpose of this paper to review the use of GPR in sedimentology in terms of the actual sedimentological information extracted and the conclusions drawn. At this stage in the development of the use of GPR in sedimentological studies, this seems premature. Instead, it will attempt to consider in detail the basis for the use of GPR in sedimentology, the problems and pitfalls of data collection and processing, and the development of techniques for the interpretation of radar reflection profiles that maximise the sedimentological information obtained and prevent or minimise incorrect interpretations. Such an approach appears timely; an increasing number of sedimentological studies are attempting to utilise GPR (Fig. 1, Table 1), and yet the basis for the processing and interpretation of their data is often unclear and many misinterpretations or overinterpretations are evident.
Given the background outlined above, the aims of this paper are as follows:
- (1)
to introduce those theoretical aspects that are fundamental to understanding the GPR technique and its use in sedimentology, in a manner that is suitable for the wide user-base;
- (2)
to outline the fundamental limitations of the GPR technique, in particular by examining how unprocessed or poorly processed radar reflection profiles can often seriously misrepresent the nature of the subsurface sedimentary structure, and by considering the causes and nature of nongeological reflection events that further complicate subsequent data processing and sedimentological interpretation;
- (3)
to examine the ways in which appropriate data processing can enhance the interpretability of radar data, by producing reflection profiles that more accurately depict the subsurface sedimentary structure;
- (4)
to critically evaluate the assumptions that underlie interpretation of GPR data for sedimentological research purposes;
- (5)
to show how systematic interpretation of appropriately processed GPR profiles, through the application of a strictly defined radar stratigraphy approach, can maximise the sedimentological information extracted and minimise interpretation pitfalls.
To earth scientists familiar with the seismic reflection technique, the need for an understanding of the basic principles underlying data acquisition, processing techniques that convert data into the most meaningful representation of the subsurface possible, and robust interpretation techniques that maximise geological information return, might seem obvious. However, it is clear that, as yet, the GPR community engaged in sedimentological research does not fully share this common vision. This can only inhibit future research and wider appreciation of the technique within the earth-science community. This paper is, therefore, offered as a contribution to the on-going debate regarding the future direction of GPR research in sedimentology.
Section snippets
Data collection
Geophysical reflection data are of four main types: common offset, common mid (or depth) point, common source and common receiver (Fig. 2). Common-offset surveys (Fig. 2a) are most frequently used in GPR studies, with commercial radar systems consisting of either a single transmitting and receiving antenna, or two, separate, transmitting and receiving antennae. In the latter systems, a fixed spacing is employed between the antennae, typically with both orientated in the same direction (i.e.
Theoretical background and causes of subsurface GPR reflections
The material properties that control the behaviour of electromagnetic energy in a medium are dielectric permittivity (ε), electrical conductivity (σ) and magnetic permeability (μ). When an alternating electric field is applied to a material, those electric charges that are bound, and, therefore, unable to move freely, still respond to the applied field by undergoing a small amount of displacement. When the resulting internal electric field balances the external electric field, the charges stop
Time-zero drift
This occurs when the first break in a common-offset radar reflection profile (the airwave) changes position from trace to trace during data collection. It causes misalignment not only of the air and ground waves, but also the primary and secondary reflections beneath. Drift commonly occurs when console electronics are markedly colder or warmer than ambient air temperature, such as when a GPR system is operated outdoors having just been removed from storage (Sensors and Software, 1999a). This
Data processing
The basic aim of processing GPR data, just as in processing reflection seismic or many other types of geophysical data, is to try and overcome the inherent limitations of the basic survey data, such that you obtain more realistic subsurface information. This then allows more confident interpretation in terms of geological or sedimentological meaning. Clearly some limitations cannot be overcome once data has been collected, as they are dependent upon site characteristics and/or the data
Radar reflection profile interpretation
Soon after the realisation that GPR could provide useful data for stratigraphic and sedimentological studies, various authors suggested that the principles of seismic stratigraphy could be applied to the interpretation of radar reflection profiles Baker, 1991, Beres and Haeni, 1991, Jol and Smith, 1991. Jol and Smith (1991) first used the term ‘radar stratigraphy’ for this new interpretation technique, although Gawthorpe et al. (1993) were the first to fully define the concept and its
Conclusions
GPR has found a wide range of applications in the field of sedimentology over the last two decades. This is because in correctly processed profiles and at the resolution of the survey, primary reflections generally parallel primary depositional structure. Using GPR wisely, it is possible to image the two and three-dimensional structure of a range of sedimentary structures in unconsolidated sediments and sedimentary rocks, including sets of laminae, beds, bedsets, bounding surfaces and
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by NERC Geophysical Equipment Pool Loans 555, 556, 638 and 639, the Environment Agency, the Isle of Man's Centre for Manx Studies, the Isle of Man Government and the University of Wolverhampton. Robert Arklay, Roger Dackombe, Martin Fenn, Gemma Fenn, Melanie Neal, Nigel Pontee, Clive Roberts, Magic Shirt and Jane Washington-Evans provided field assistance. Kay Lancaster prepared the diagrams. Assistance provided by the Sefton Coastal Ranger Service, the Sefton Coast
References (286)
- et al.
Integrated outcrop analogue studies for Triassic alluvial reservoirs: examples from southern Germany
J. Pet. Geol.
(1996) - et al.
Holocene meander-belt evolution in an active extensional basin, southwestern Montana
J. Sediment. Res., B
(1994) - et al.
Analysis of the karst aquifer structure of the Lamalou area (Hérault, France) with ground penetrating radar
J. Appl. Geophys.
(2002) Sedimentary Structures: Their Character and Physical Basis. Volume 1
(1982)- et al.
The effects of Holocene barrier-island evolution on water-table elevations, Hatteras Island, North Carolina, USA
Hydrogeol. J.
(2000) - et al.
Application of geomorphic analysis and ground-penetrating radar to characterization of paleoseismic sites in dynamic alluvial environments: an example from southern California
Tectonophysics
(2003) Practical Processing of GPR Data
(1999)- et al.
Impulse radar sounding in permafrost
Radio Sci.
(1976) - et al.
Design and development of a digital ground penetrating radar system
- et al.
The electromagnetic response of a low-loss, 2-layer, dielectric earth for horizontal electric dipole excitation
Geophysics
(1975)
Water table detection with ground penetrating radar
Ground-penetrating radar reflection profiling of groundwater and bedrock in an area of discontinuous permafrost
Geophysics
Aquifer architecture analysis using ground-penetrating radar: Triassic and Quaternary examples (S. Germany)
Environ. Geol.
Towards realistic aquifer models: three-dimensional georadar surveys of Quaternary gravel deltas (Singen Basin, SW Germany)
Sediment. Geol.
An initial attempt to map carbonate buildups using ground-penetrating radar: an example from the Upper Jurassic of SW-Germany
Facies
GPR investigations on active faults in urban areas: the Georisc-NZ project in Wellington, New Zealand
Earth Planet. Sci.
Ground-penetrating radar imaging of Pleistocene sediments, Boco Plain, western Tasmania
Aust. J. Earth Sci.
The structure of coastal dunes: observations from ground penetrating radar (GPR) surveys
Response of ground-penetrating radar to bounding surfaces and lithofacies variations in sand barrier sequences
Explor. Geophys.
Near-surface imaging using coincident seismic and GPR data
Geophys. Res. Lett.
Structure of a Pleistocene push moraine revealed by GPR: the eastern Veluwe Ridge, The Netherlands
Constant dielectric losses of ground-penetrating radar waves
Geophys. J. Int.
Modeling and filtering of surface scattering in ground-penetrating radar waves
First Break
Investigating alluvial and tectonic features with ground-penetrating radar and analyzing diffraction patterns
J. Appl. Geophys.
Radar structure of earthquake-induced, coastal landslides in Anchorage, Alaska
Environ. Geosci.
Applications of ground penetrating radar in assessing some geological hazards: examples of groundwater contamination, faults, cavities
J. Appl. Geophys.
Application of ground-penetrating-radar methods in hydrogeologic studies
Groundwater
Mapping the architecture of glaciofluvial sediments with three-dimensional georadar
Geology
Using two- and three-dimensional georadar methods to characterize glaciofluvial architecture
Sediment. Geol.
Diapiric origin of the Chessel-Noville Hills of the Rhone Valley interpreted from georadar mapping
Environ. Eng. Geosci.
Rock glaciers on Prins Karls Forland: II. GPR soundings and the development of internal structures
Permafr. Periglac. Process.
Three-dimensional sedimentary architecture of a large, mid-channel sand braid bar, Jamuna River, Bangladesh
J. Sediment. Res.
High-resolution characterization of vadose zone dynamics using cross-borehole radar
Water Resour. Res.
Ground-penetrating radar as a tool for mapping the phreatic surface, bedrock profile, and alluvial stratigraphy in the Sabie River, Kruger National Park
J. Soil Water Conserv.
Principles of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy
Evidence for dune reactivation from GPR profiles on the Maputaland coastal plain, South Africa
Description and interpretation of fluvial deposits: a critical perspective
Sedimentology
Ground-penetrating radar and coring used to study the large-scale structure of point-bar deposits in three dimensions
Sedimentology
Large-scale structure of Calamus River deposits (Nebraska, USA) revealed using ground-penetrating radar
Sedimentology
Facies analysis in the Lower Greensand using ground-penetrating radar
J. Geol. Soc.
Internal structure of aeolian dunes in Abu Dhabi determined using ground-penetrating radar
Sedimentology
Crevasse splays from the rapidly aggrading, sand-bed, braided Niobrara River, Nebraska: effect of base-level rise
Sedimentology
The sedimentary structure of linear sand dunes
Nature
The use of GPR in developing a facies model for a large sandy braided river, Brahmaputra River, Bangladesh
The structure and development of foredunes on a locally prograding coast: insights from ground penetrating radar surveys, Norfolk, UK
Sedimentology
Test of high-resolution seismic reflection and other geophysical techniques on the Boup Landslide in the Swiss Alps
Surv. Geophys.
Calibration and interpretation of ground penetrating radar data from around Sellafield, West Cumbria, UK
Eur. J. Environ. Eng. Geophys.
Quaternary deformation mapping with ground-penetrating radar
J. Appl. Geophys.
High-resolution subsurface (GPR) imaging and sedimentology of coastal ponds, Maine, USA: implications for Holocene back-barrier evolution
J. Sediment. Res.
Cited by (897)
Nonmatrix pores form high-permeability zones in carbonate layers: The Furna Feia cave in the Potiguar Basin, Brazil
2024, Marine and Petroleum GeologyFocus on the nonlinear infiltration process in deep vadose zone
2024, Earth-Science ReviewsPleistocene–Holocene climatic events on the inner coastal plain of southernmost Brazil in relation to marine isotopic stages
2024, Journal of South American Earth Sciences