Inquiry Regarding B-scan Hyperbola Vertex Positions in Different Soil Layers
31 views
Skip to first unread message
Y D
Feb 22, 2025, 6:59:34 AM2/22/25
to gprMax-users
Dear All,
I hope this message finds you well. I’ve encountered a discrepancy in my simulations. I expected the B-scan hyperbola vertex for a target in soil layer 2 (dielectric constant 16) to appear at twice the depth of the target in soil layer 1 (dielectric constant 4), but the results deviate.
Simulation 1 (385 MHz Ricker Wavelet): Top target: soil layer 1 (dielectric constant 4)
Bottom target: soil layer 2 (dielectric constant 16)
Coordinates: top = 1229, bottom = 658 (ratio ≈ 0.53)
Simulation 2 (85 MHz Ricker Wavelet):
Top target: soil layer 1 (dielectric constant 4)
Bottom target: soil layer 2 (dielectric constant 16)
Coordinates: top = 1094, bottom = 1639 (ratio ≈ 0.6674)
Figures 1, 2, and 3 (attached) show the models and B-scan results (background-subtracted), along with the .in files and original data in TXT format.
Your insights would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Ding Yang
I hope this message finds you well. I’ve encountered a discrepancy in my simulations. I expected the B-scan hyperbola vertex for a target in soil layer 2 (dielectric constant 16) to appear at twice the depth of the target in soil layer 1 (dielectric constant 4), but the results deviate.
Simulation 1 (385 MHz Ricker Wavelet): Top target: soil layer 1 (dielectric constant 4)
Bottom target: soil layer 2 (dielectric constant 16)
Coordinates: top = 1229, bottom = 658 (ratio ≈ 0.53)
Simulation 2 (85 MHz Ricker Wavelet):
Top target: soil layer 1 (dielectric constant 4)
Bottom target: soil layer 2 (dielectric constant 16)
Coordinates: top = 1094, bottom = 1639 (ratio ≈ 0.6674)
Figures 1, 2, and 3 (attached) show the models and B-scan results (background-subtracted), along with the .in files and original data in TXT format.
Your insights would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Ding Yang
0 new messages