Kansas Geological Survey, Current Research in Earth Sciences, Bulletin 247,
part 1
Modeling Dielectric-constant Values of Geologic Materials: An Aid to Ground-penetrating Radar Data Collection and Interpretation
Table 3. Summary of dielectric mixing model categories (adapted from Knoll, 1996).
Category | Method | Types | Advantages | Disadvantages | References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Effective medium | Compute dielectric properties by successive substitutions | Bruggeman- Hanai-Sen (BHS) |
-Accurate for known geometries | - Cumbersome to implement - Need to choose number of components, initial material, and order and shape of replacement material |
Sen et al., 1981; Ulaby et al., 1986 |
Empirical and semi-empirical | Mathematical functional relationship between dielectric and other measurable properties | Logarithmic; Polynomial | -Easy to develop quantitative relationships -Able to handle complex materials in models |
-There may be no physical justification for the relationship -Valid only for the specific data used to develop the relationship and may not be applicable to other data sets |
Dobson et al., 1985; Olhoeft and Strangway, 1975; Topp et al., 1980; Wang and Schmugge, 1980 |
Phenomenological | Relate frequency dependent behavior to characteristic relaxation times | Cole-Cole; Debye | -Do not need component properties or geometrical relationships | -Dependent on frequency-specific parameters | Powers, 1997; Ulaby et al., 1986; Wang, 1980 |
Volumetric | Relate bulk dielectric properties of a mixture to the dielectric properties of its constituents | Complex Refractive Index (CRIM); Arithmetic average; Harmonic average; Lichetenecker-Rother; Time-Propagation (TP) | -Volumetric data relatively easy to obtain | -Do not account for micro-geometry of components -Do not account for electrochemical interaction between components |
Alharthi and Lange, 1987; Birchak et al., 1974; Brown, 1956; Knoll, 1996; Lange, 1983; Lichetenecker and Rother, 1937; Roth et al., 1990; Wharton et al., 1980 |