Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EM Induction Sensor

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • EM Induction Sensor

    Hi everybody,

    As some of you have probably seen on the mag forum, we are now out of the design and prototyping stages of our Mark II project (i.e. a proton magnetometer) and in production phase.
    I plan my next challenging project to be the feasibility study followed eventually by the design and build of a "Multi-frequency EM Induction Sensor".
    I already have accumulated a pile of useful data on that subject and I have defined a number of possible design tracks.
    My simple question is: Is there anybody out there who is willing to make this trip with me?
    In that case, I am ready to uncover what I have already learned about the subject and what is the current status of my project.
    Thanks,

    Willy

    For those who are not yet documented about this, this is short functional description:


    What can an EMI sensor do?

    A magnetometer is used in a geophysical survey to measure magnetic susceptibility variations in earth. It is a passive sensor because it uses the ambient earth magnetic field as the source of excitation.

    An electromagnetic (EM) sensor operating below the radio frequency (RF), or in an EM induction (EMI) mode, is commonly used to measure electrical conductivity variations in earth. (An EM sensor operating above the RF, commonly called ground-probing radar or GPR, can measure variations in dielectric permitivity, which we do not consider here.)

    For this reason, an EMI sensor is often called a conductivity meter. It is an active sensor because it carries its own source of excitation. It has been common to consider that a magnetometer is the principal sensor for measuring magnetic susceptibility, and that an EMI sensor is the principal sensor for measuring electricalconductivity.

    An EMI sensor responds to both electrical conductivity and magnetic susceptibility. In fact, an EMI sensor operating at sufficiently low frequencies acts more as a magnetometer than as a conductivity meter. At the so-called “resistive limit” where the conductivity-frequency product is small, an EMI sensor responds only to magnetic susceptibility and ignores electrical conductivity. It would be a serious misnomer in this case to call an EMI sensor a conductivity meter. A correct designation would be an active magnetometer or, as we propose here, an electro-magnetometer.

    A properly designed electro-magnetometer can serve two simultaneous functions: that of a magnetometer and of a conductivitymeter.

    EMI surveys are used to:
    · Locate buried tanks and pipes
    · Locate pits and trenches containing metallic and/or nonmetallic debris
    · Delineate landfill boundaries
    · Delineate oil production sumps and mud pits
    · Map conductive soil and groundwater contamination
    · Characterize subsurface hydrogeology
    · Map buried channel deposits
    · Map geologic structure
    · Conduct groundwater exploration
    · Locate conductive fault and fracture zones

    See GEM-2 Data examples for a few typical multi-depth, apparent conductivity and apparent susceptibility profiling results.


    Old EMI Technology

    · The EMI instruments were originally made of two separate and quite distant coils due to the influence of the powerful transmitter magnetic field on the receiving coil. This made those instruments difficult to deploy and operate; two operators were necessary. The modern instruments use a bucking coil to cancel the transmitted field allowing assembling the coils in a more compact packaging that can be carried by a single operator.
    · Geometrical sounding versus frequency sounding.
    By technical necessity, most old frequency-domain (FD) EMI sensors have employed the principle of “geometrical sounding” where the coil separation is the only variable since all coils operate at a factory-set frequency. Because these coils are tuned to a particular frequency by their inductance and external capacitance, one cannot change the operating frequency without replacing all coils or associated electronics.
    A tuned coil derives its signal strength from its Q (called the figure of merit—the sharper the resonance, the higher the Q), a voltage amplification factor at the tuned frequency.
    Therefore, the only means left to the user of such a system is changing the coil separation, which often requires multiple operators tending separate coils connected by cables to a measuring console. Furthermore, the system must maintain a considerable coil separation to avoid RX saturation from the primary TX field. It is obvious that such a sensor cannot be made into a small, handheld package.
    In contrast, depth sounding by changing frequency (or “frequency sounding”) measures the earth response at multiple frequencies at a fixed TX-RX geometry. In frequency sounding, there is no exclusive relationship between the coil separation and the depth of exploration.
    · Multi-depth Profiling
    Measurements are taken at successive intervals along a profile with multiple or stepping frequencies. Data are presented as profiles or contour maps and interpreted qualitatively. The depth of the profile essentially depends on the operational frequency used to plot it (lower frequencies show deeper ground layers, higher frequencies show shallower ground layers).



    Objectives

    Advantages of a broadband, multi-frequency EMI sensor are obvious. The idea of using multiple frequencies stems from the so-called “skin-depth”, also known as the depth of exploration, which is inversely proportional to frequency: a low-frequency signal travels far through a conductive earth and, thus, "sees" deep structures, while a high-frequency signal can travel only a short distance and thus, "sees" only shallow structures. Therefore, scanning through a frequency window is equivalent to depth sounding. However, it is also possible to use the I and Q values coming from one particular frequency (i.e. one depth) to produce the 2D apparent Susceptibility and/or apparent Conductivity profile of the survey area at that depth.

  • #2
    EM Inductor sensor : The technology

    Willy,
    This is a great project, and I am interested in the technology.
    Please keep us posted on the happennings.

    Best wishes.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Atul,

      I surely will update the forum community about the progresses of my project but I would prefer to hear comments, questions and suggestions from some of you, forum members.
      At the beginning of my long PPM project, I already tried to trigger such discussions and I published all my findings but received very few feed-back from the forum. It is obvious that people are reading the posts but most, if not all of them stay silent and inactive. I would much prefer to get positive reactions, not only posts like: "Great project, go on with it!!" but also constructive remarks and suggestions. I also do not refuse any negative comments or clarifications/corrections on what I wrote about my project.
      In short, to give me the motivation to continue to write here on this forum, I would prefer to call it 'our project' rather than 'my project'.
      As an example, I have asked a simple question: 'Is there anybody out there who is willing to make this trip with me?' in my first posting and nobody has made the effort to answer anything yet.
      I want this new project to be fun during its course. I do not necessarily see it giving any financial results at its end. Actually, I do not even know whether it will finally generate any really working prototype.

      All the good or bad experience gathered during its process is part of the 'fun' but it is much more fun when these experiences are lived in team, even very loosely coupled like that can be over a public forum.

      I know that this EMI project is rather ambitious. There are a lot of design strategy decisions to be taken before the actual technical design work can start.
      Up to now, I have just defined what I would like to do with such an instrument (if it works one day). I want it to be a complement of the magnetic surveys for archaeological work. That means detecting the structures and artifacts which can not be found with a mag. This includes: non-magnetic metallic objects, changes of underground conductivity due to old pits, wells or trenches and voids due to tunnels or cellars. The maximum depth of the surveys could be limited to around 2 meters as, in my experience, this is the maximum depth where all the interesting structures and artifacts are to be found on an archaeological site in Europe.

      There are a number of commercial instruments doing exactly that and manufactured by different companies in Europe and in the USA. All these instruments have something in common, they are 'too expensive' for an amateur archeologist or for a local archaeological association like ours.
      Thus, I am already sure that this technology is not only possible but it works. However, with my readings, I discovered that some commercial instruments are working better than others, sometimes because of a different, better, simpler design but sometimes because of a better implementation of a proven design architecture.
      Thus, my next task is to make some good decisions about design architectures after having got sufficient valid information about the subject.
      I know very well that this world is full of marketing boasts about the specifications and capabilities of commercial products. The ideal would be to hear about the actual experiences of real and independent users of those instruments in the field. The gathering of this information would already give an indication on the design solutions which are working best and those which should be avoided at all cost.
      In that view, I am now in contact with an archaeologist (the only one having reacted to my first EMI post) who has a lot of experience in using geophysical instruments applied on archaeology. His comments are invaluable.

      If a real discussion thread is going to be established on that subject, I could ask the forum manager to create a specific EMI chapter where all the posts could be put and answered.

      Willy

      Comment


      • #4
        Some patents on Google patents search can help you for go ahead on your project. These patents can give you more ideas. For example:
        4,019,126. In some part I have this patent that uses on oscillator Nuvistor tube.
        http://www.google.com/patents?id=ET41AAAAEBAJ&dq=4019126

        2,167,630
        http://www.google.com/patents?id=0Q5QAAAAEBAJ&dq=4019126

        3,068,400
        http://www.google.com/patents?id=zkFqAAAAEBAJ&dq=4019126

        3,187,252
        http://www.google.com/patents?id=m15TAAAAEBAJ&dq=4019126

        3,388,323
        http://www.google.com/patents?id=2DdqAAAAEBAJ&dq=4019126

        3,510,757
        http://www.google.com/patents?id=rIdzAAAAEBAJ&dq=4019126

        3,609,521
        http://www.google.com/patents?id=nH51AAAAEBAJ&dq=4019126

        These patents has reference to other number patents, so you can found many infos in Google patents.
        Attached Files

        Comment


        • #5
          EM technology :

          Willy,

          You are right about the interest of the people, which seems to be more towards treasure hunting than geo/archeo surveys and related technology.

          I know that your project (and related adventure) is of importance to a lot of people across the world. In India with a culturaly active civilisation for past 5000 years, we need such equipment to unearth our history, we have neglected our past for too long.

          Please continue the good work. I am sure that your contribution will be of great value, commercially and other wise.

          May I suggest that you get in touch with archeologists across the world, who already know the value of such instruments.

          Regards and best wishes.
          Atul

          Comment


          • #6
            Atul,
            Thanks,
            Willy

            Comment


            • #7
              Esteban,

              Thanks for the info.
              However, all these patents are related to bore-hole applications and I only have archaeological survey application in mind for my project.

              Willy

              Comment

              Working...
              X