Accuracy Assessment of GPR Data for Buried Objects with Different Pipes and Soil-Based Conditions

Q4 Social Sciences
{"title":"Accuracy Assessment of GPR Data for Buried Objects with Different Pipes and Soil-Based Conditions","authors":"","doi":"10.52939/ijg.v19i5.2651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In terms of accuracy and speed, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) is the best approach for detecting and identifying underground utilities. This technology can precisely find a wide range of underground utilities, including both metallic and non-metallic materials. It analyses the ground by emitting a signal from an antenna at various frequencies of electromagnetic (EM) pulses. However, undesirable echoes caused by heterogeneous materials, such as the wide range of soil properties and utilities, are always present in these reflected signals. The site's soil composition has a direct influence on the accuracy of the GPR signal image. Thus, this study is carried out to evaluate the accuracy of GPR data for buried objects with different types of pipes between PVC and iron pipe in different soil characteristics: fine sand, topsoil and silt soil. The objective is to interpret the resolution of radargram images on different soil types due to different soil based characteristics and to evaluate the accuracy of depth values between GPR and conventional survey data sets for different pipes and soils using the RMSE formula. GPR Electronic TriVue with high frequency (1GHz) was employed, and the resolution of the resulting radargram image was post-processed in ReflexW software to yield promising depth results. Based on this research, the radargram obtained shows different textures that provides different presentations of each soil on the radargram image. Accuracy assessment from RMSE depth difference for Iron pipe depth for the three different soil types are: topsoil is 0.025 m, silt soil is 0.032 m, and fine sand is 0.087 m. While for PVC pipe topsoil is 0.035 m, silt soil is 0.038 m, and fine sand is 0.093 m. These differences show that iron pipe is more accurate compared with PVC in terms of tendency and fine sand is suitable soil in detection compared with topsoil and silt soil. In conclusion, the type of pipe play role in the choice of utility and soil properties (texture, moisture, and electrical conductivity) that impact the most on the accuracy assessment of GPR Data.","PeriodicalId":38707,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Geoinformatics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Geoinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52939/ijg.v19i5.2651","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In terms of accuracy and speed, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) is the best approach for detecting and identifying underground utilities. This technology can precisely find a wide range of underground utilities, including both metallic and non-metallic materials. It analyses the ground by emitting a signal from an antenna at various frequencies of electromagnetic (EM) pulses. However, undesirable echoes caused by heterogeneous materials, such as the wide range of soil properties and utilities, are always present in these reflected signals. The site's soil composition has a direct influence on the accuracy of the GPR signal image. Thus, this study is carried out to evaluate the accuracy of GPR data for buried objects with different types of pipes between PVC and iron pipe in different soil characteristics: fine sand, topsoil and silt soil. The objective is to interpret the resolution of radargram images on different soil types due to different soil based characteristics and to evaluate the accuracy of depth values between GPR and conventional survey data sets for different pipes and soils using the RMSE formula. GPR Electronic TriVue with high frequency (1GHz) was employed, and the resolution of the resulting radargram image was post-processed in ReflexW software to yield promising depth results. Based on this research, the radargram obtained shows different textures that provides different presentations of each soil on the radargram image. Accuracy assessment from RMSE depth difference for Iron pipe depth for the three different soil types are: topsoil is 0.025 m, silt soil is 0.032 m, and fine sand is 0.087 m. While for PVC pipe topsoil is 0.035 m, silt soil is 0.038 m, and fine sand is 0.093 m. These differences show that iron pipe is more accurate compared with PVC in terms of tendency and fine sand is suitable soil in detection compared with topsoil and silt soil. In conclusion, the type of pipe play role in the choice of utility and soil properties (texture, moisture, and electrical conductivity) that impact the most on the accuracy assessment of GPR Data.
不同管道和土基条件下地埋物探地雷达数据精度评价
就精度和速度而言,探地雷达(GPR)是探测和识别地下设施的最佳方法。这项技术可以精确地找到各种地下设施,包括金属和非金属材料。它通过从天线发射不同频率的电磁脉冲信号来分析地面。然而,由非均匀材料引起的不良回波,如广泛的土壤性质和公用事业,总是存在于这些反射信号中。场地的土壤成分直接影响探地雷达信号成像的精度。因此,本研究对细砂、表土、粉土等不同土壤特征下PVC管与铁管之间不同管道埋设物的探地雷达数据精度进行了评价。目的是解释不同土壤类型上雷达图图像的分辨率,并使用RMSE公式评估不同管道和土壤的探地雷达和常规调查数据集之间深度值的准确性。采用高频(1GHz) GPR电子TriVue,并在ReflexW软件中对所得雷达图图像的分辨率进行后处理,得到了令人满意的深度结果。在此基础上,得到的雷达图呈现出不同的纹理,使得每种土壤在雷达图图像上呈现出不同的形态。利用RMSE深度差对三种土壤类型的铁管深度精度评价为:表土0.025 m,粉土0.032 m,细砂0.087 m。PVC管材表层土为0.035 m,粉土为0.038 m,细砂为0.093 m。这些差异表明,铁管比PVC的倾向性更准确,细砂比表土和粉土更适合检测。总之,管道的类型在选择用途和土壤性质(质地、湿度和电导率)方面发挥作用,这对GPR数据的准确性评估影响最大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Geoinformatics
International Journal of Geoinformatics Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信