Low induction number, ground conductivity meters: A correction procedure in the absence of magnetic effects

Abstract Ground conductivity meters, comprising a variety of coil–coil configurations, are intended to operate within the limits provided by a low induction number (LIN), electromagnetic condition. They are now routinely used across a wide range of application areas and the measured apparent conductivity data may be spatially assembled and examined/correlated alongside information obtained from many other earth science, environmental, soil and land use assessments. The theoretical behaviour of the common systems is examined in relation to both the prevailing level of subsurface conductivity and the instrument elevation. It is demonstrated that, given the inherent high level of accuracy of modern instruments, the prevailing LIN condition may require operation in environments restricted to very low (

[1]  James R. Wait.  Mutual coupling of loops lying on the ground , 1954 .

[2]  Scott B. Jones,et al.  Comparing bulk soil electrical conductivity determination using the DUALEM-1S and EM38-DD electromagnetic induction instruments , 2007 .

[3]  F. Frischknecht,et al.  Fields about an oscillating magnetic dipole over a two-layer earth, and Application to ground and airborne electromagnetic surveys , 1967 .

[4]  Kenneth A. Sudduth,et al.  Estimating depths to claypans using electromagnetic induction methods , 1994 .

[5]  Kenneth A. Sudduth,et al.  Mapping Depth to Argillic Soil Horizons Using Apparent Electrical Conductivity , 2010 .

[6]  Montanarella Luca,et al.  Site Specific Land Management; General Concepts and Applications , 2009 .

[7]  J. Triantafilis,et al.  Mapping clay content variation using electromagnetic induction techniques , 2005 .

[8]  Robert S. Freeland,et al.  Mapping agricultural fields with GPR and EMI to identify offsite movement of agrochemicals , 2001 .

[9]  Walter L. Anderson,et al.  Computer program; numerical integration of related Hankel transforms of orders O and 1 by adaptive digital filtering , 1979 .

[10]  Eran Segal,et al.  Comparison of Sampling Strategies for Characterizing Spatial Variability with Apparent Soil Electrical Conductivity Directed Soil Sampling , 2010 .

[11]  James R. Wait,et al.  Mutual Electromagnetic Coupling of Loops Over a Homogeneous Ground , 1955 .

[12]  R. W. Groom,et al.  Vertical Spatial Sensitivity and Exploration Depth of Low‐Induction‐Number Electromagnetic‐Induction Instruments , 2007 .

[13]  Niels B. Christensen,et al.  Optimized fast Hankel transform filters , 1990 .

[14]  Brian R. Spies,et al.  Depth of investigation in electromagnetic sounding methods , 1989 .

[15]  J. Triantafilis,et al.  Inversion of Conductivity Profiles from EM Using Full Solution and a 1-D Laterally Constrained Algorithm , 2010 .

[16]  Peter J. Shouse,et al.  Minimizing Drift in Electrical Conductivity Measurements in High Temperature Environments using the EM-38 , 2004 .

[17]  D. Corwin,et al.  Application of Soil Electrical Conductivity to Precision Agriculture , 2003 .

[18]  A. Tabbagh.  WHAT IS THE BEST COIL ORIENTATION IN THE SLINGRAM ELECTROMAGNETIC PROSPECTING METHOD , 1986 .

[19]  David Beamish,et al.  An evaluation of combined geophysical and geotechnical methods to characterize beach thickness , 2006, Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology.

[20]  N. Kitchen,et al.  Accuracy issues in electromagnetic induction sensing of soil electrical conductivity for precision agriculture , 2001 .

[21]  Fernando A. Monteiro Santos,et al.  1-D laterally constrained inversion of EM34 profiling data , 2004 .

[22]  J. Reid,et al.  Application of the EM-31 terrain conductivity meter in highly-conductive regimes , 2001 .

[23]  Kenneth A. Sudduth,et al.  Mapping of sand deposition from 1993 midwest floods with electromagnetic induction measurements , 1996 .

[24]  L. Cockx,et al.  Comparing the EM38DD and DUALEM‐21S Sensors for Depth‐to‐Clay Mapping , 2009 .

[25]  D. Beamish.  Airborne EM footprints , 2003 .

[26]  J. D. Mcneill,et al.  Rapid, Accurate Mapping of Soil Salinity by Electromagnetic Ground Conductivity Meters , 2012 .

[27]  Bridget R. Scanlon,et al.  Evaluation of Electromagnetic Induction as a Reconnaissance Technique to Characterize Unsaturated Flow in an Arid Setting , 1999 .

[28]  G. W. Hohmann,et al.  4. Electromagnetic Theory for Geophysical Applications , 1987 .

[29]  Roger A. Eigenberg,et al.  Electromagnetic Induction Sensor Data to Identify Areas of Manure Accumulation on a Feedlot Surface , 2009 .

[30]  A. Tabbagh.  Applications and advantages of the Slingram electromagnetic method for archaeological prospecting , 1986 .