Quantitative Stability Analysis of Ground Penetrating Radar Systems

The hardware instability of a ground penetrating radar (GPR) system has a severe impact on the quantitative analysis of GPR data, which is aimed for material characterization and subsurface monitoring. In this letter, an instability index is proposed to quantify the stability performance of a GPR system and the influences of the GPR system type, warm-up time, environmental noise, and the antenna vibration on it are evaluated through a series of laboratory experiments on a sandbox model. It is found that the GPR signal recorded by a stepped-frequency GPR system based on a vector network analyzer is much more stable than that by a commercial impulse GPR system at a cost of more sweep time. A warm-up time of several minutes is enough for an impulse GPR system. Environmental noise has a negligible influence on the stability performance of a GPR system. Mechanical vibrations of GPR antennas have a severe impact on the stability performance of the GPR system, and the instability index and timing jitter can be increased by more than one order of magnitude in a vibrating condition over those in a static condition. The instability index of the direct signal has a negligible difference with that of the reflection signal from a metal plate; thus, a simple measurement of direct signal on the ground surface is suggested for the evaluation of the instability of a GPR system in field in the future.

[1]  John F. Hermance,et al.  Random and Non-Random Uncertainties in Precision GPR Measurements: Identifying and Compensating for Instrument Drift , 2005 .

[2]  Fabio Tosti,et al.  A signal processing methodology for assessing the performance of ASTM standard test methods for GPR systems , 2017, Signal Process..

[3]  A. Saintenoy,et al.  Evaluating GroundPenetrating Radar use for water infiltration monitoring , 2007, 2007 4th International Workshop on, Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar.

[4]  John F. Hermance,et al.  Assessing the Precision of GPR Velocity and Vertical Two-way Travel Time Estimates , 2004 .

[5]  Motoyuki Sato,et al.  in situ measurement of pavement thickness and dielectric permittivity by GPR using an antenna array , 2014 .

[6]  Fernando I. Rial,et al.  Checking the Signal Stability in GPR Systems and Antennas , 2011, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing.

[7]  A D Strange,et al.  A systematic method for characterizing the time-range performance of ground penetrating radar , 2013 .

[8]  R. Persico,et al.  A Reconfigurative Approach for SF-GPR Prospecting , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation.

[9]  Kong Fan-Nian,et al.  Performance of a GPR system which uses step frequency signals , 1995 .

[10]  Fernando I. Rial,et al.  Waveform Analysis of UWB GPR Antennas , 2009, Sensors.

[11]  L. Mertens,et al.  Determination of the stability of a pulse GPR system and quantification of the drift effect on soil material characterization by full-wave inversion , 2014, Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar.

[12]  A. Strange,et al.  What is the true time range of a GPR system? , 2012, 2012 14th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR).

[13]  Qing Huo Liu,et al.  Post-Earthquake Damage Inspection of Wood-Frame Buildings by a Polarimetric GB-SAR System , 2016, Remote. Sens..

[14]  A. P. Annan Chapter 1 – Electromagnetic Principles of Ground Penetrating Radar , 2009 .

[15]  J. Bradford Measuring Water Content Heterogeneity Using Multifold GPR with Reflection Tomography , 2008 .

[16]  Fernando I. Rial,et al.  Analysis of the Emitted Wavelet of High-Resolution Bowtie GPR Antennas , 2009, Sensors.

[17]  Guido Manacorda,et al.  Easy way of checking impulsive georadar equipment performances , 2000, International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar.