Mutual induction and the effect of host conductivity on the EM induction response of buried plate targets using 3-D finite-element analysis

A finite-element analysis of electromagnetic induction (EMI) in the presence of multiple buried metal targets is undertaken for the purpose of unexploded ordnance (UXO) detection and discrimination. The effects of mutual coupling between metal targets and the host conductivity are shown to be important. At high frequencies, mutual coupling is strong, and effects of host conductivity are relatively minor. At lower frequencies near the resistive limit, EMI responses are very small, but the effect of host conductivity becomes important. This is due to the galvanic current flow in the host medium that dissipates charge accumulations on the host/target interfaces. Qualitative analysis of induced current patterns in metal targets demonstrates that mutual coupling is strongly affected by target orientation and skin depth. Rigorous forward modeling of EMI responses is essential to understanding UXO sensor signatures so that discrimination between live UXO items and harmless fragments and clutter may become possible.

[1]  Liang C. Shen,et al.  Effect of background fields on three‐dimensional finite element analysis of induction logging , 2001 .

[2]  Jack Stalnaker,et al.  Finite Element Analysis of Controlled-source Electromagnetic Induction For Near-surface Geophysical Prospecting , 2002 .

[3]  I. J. Won,et al.  Characterization of UXO-like targets using broadband electromagnetic induction sensors , 2003, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[4]  Keli Sun,et al.  Application of the method of auxiliary sources to the wide-band electromagnetic induction problem , 2002, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[5]  Liang C. Shen,et al.  3-D finite element analysis of induction logging in a dipping formation mark , 2001, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[6]  Liang C. Shen,et al.  3-D Finite Element Analysis of Induction Logging in a Dipping Formation , 2000 .

[7]  Qiushi Chen,et al.  A review of finite element open boundary techniques for static and quasi-static electromagnetic field problems , 1997 .

[8]  Mark E. Everett,et al.  An experimental study of the time-domain electromagnetic response of a buried conductive plate , 2005 .

[9]  Mark E. Everett,et al.  Geological noise in near‐surface electromagnetic induction data , 2002 .

[10]  D. Guptasarma,et al.  New digital linear filters for Hankel J0 and J1 transforms , 1997 .

[11]  G. F. West,et al.  1. Physics of the Electromagnetic Induction Exploration Method , 1991 .

[12]  J A MacDonald Cleaning up unexploded ordnance. , 2001, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  Yogadhish Das,et al.  Time Domain Response of a Sphere in the Field of a Coil: Theory And Experiment , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[14]  Oszkar Biro,et al.  Finite-element analysis of controlled-source electromagnetic induction using Coulomb-gauged potentials , 2001 .

[15]  T. Belytschko,et al.  Finite element derivative recovery by moving least square interpolants , 1994 .

[16]  Carl E. Baum,et al.  On the low-frequency natural response of conducting and permeable targets , 1999, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[17]  K. Preis,et al.  On the use of the magnetic vector potential in the finite-element analysis of three-dimensional eddy currents , 1989 .

[18]  Carl V. Nelson,et al.  Wide bandwidth time-domain electromagnetic sensor for metal target classification , 2001, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[19]  M. Everett,et al.  Geomagnetic induction in a heterogenous sphere: Azimuthally symmetric test computations and the response of an undulating 660‐km discontinuity , 1996 .

[20]  S. K. Runcorn,et al.  Interpretation theory in applied geophysics , 1965 .

[21]  Mark E. Everett,et al.  Target signal enhancement in near-surface controlled-source electromagnetic data , 2005 .

[22]  Jack Stalnaker,et al.  UXO Detection Improvements Using EM63 Synthetic Multi-receiver Array Geometries , 2003 .