% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Lavou:11993,
author = {Lavoué, F. and van der Kruk, J. and Rings, J. and André,
F. and Moghadas, D. and Huisman, J. A. and Lambot, S. and
Weihermüller, L. and Vanderborght, J. and Vereecken, H.},
title = {{E}lectromagnetic induction calibration using apparent
electrical conductivity modelling based on electrical
resistivity tomography},
journal = {Near surface geophysics},
volume = {8},
issn = {1569-4445},
address = {Houten},
publisher = {EAGE},
reportid = {PreJuSER-11993},
pages = {553 - 561},
year = {2010},
note = {We acknowledge the support by the SFB/TR 32 'Pattern in
Soil-Vegetation-Atmosphere Systems: Monitoring, Modelling
and Data Assimilation' funded by the Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). This project was initiated
during a three-month internship of F. Lavoue at the
Forschungszentrum Juelich. F. Lavoue acknowledges the
support of the Ecole Normale Superieure de Lyon, France. Two
anonymous reviewers helped to improve the manuscript.},
abstract = {Electromagnetic parameters of the subsurface such as
electrical conductivity are of great interest for
non-destructive determination of soil properties (e.g., clay
content) or hydrologic state variables (e.g., soil water
content). In the past decade, several non-invasive
geophysical methods have been developed to measure
subsurface parameters in situ. Among these methods,
electromagnetic (EM) induction appears to be the most
efficient one that is able to cover large areas in a short
time. However, this method currently does not provide
absolute values of electrical conductivity due to
calibration problems, which hinders a quantitative analysis
of the measurement. In this study, we propose to calibrate
EM induction measurements with electrical conductivity
values measured with electrical resistivity tomography
(ERT). EM induction measures an apparent electrical
conductivity at the surface, which represents a weighted
average of the electrical conductivity distribution over a
certain depth range, whereas ERT inversion can provide
absolute values for local conductivities as a function of
depth. EM induction and ERT measurements were collected
along a 120-metre-long transect. To reconstruct the apparent
electrical conductivity measured with EM induction, the
inverted ERT data were used as input in an electromagnetic
forward modelling tool for magnetic dipoles over a
horizontally layered medium considering the frequencies and
offsets used by the EM induction instruments. Comparison of
the calculated and measured apparent electrical
conductivities shows very similar trends but a shift in
absolute values, which is attributed to system calibration
problems. The observed shift can be corrected for by linear
regression. This new calibration strategy for EM induction
measurements now enables the quantitative mapping of
electrical conductivity values over large areas.},
keywords = {J (WoSType)},
cin = {ICG-4 / JARA-ENERGY},
ddc = {550},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)VDB793 / $I:(DE-82)080011_20140620$},
pnm = {Terrestrische Umwelt},
pid = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK407},
shelfmark = {Geochemistry $\&$ Geophysics},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000285399200013},
doi = {10.3997/1873-0604.2010037},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/11993},
}