2020
DOI: 10.5194/tc-14-4495-2020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The role of electrical conductivity in radar wave reflection from glacier beds

Abstract: Abstract. We have examined a general expression giving the specular reflection coefficient for a radar wave approaching a reflecting interface with normal incidence. The reflecting interface separates two homogeneous isotropic media, the properties of which are fully described by three scalar quantities: dielectric permittivity, magnetic permeability, and electrical conductivity. The derived relationship indicates that electrical conductivity should not be neglected a priori in glaciological investigations of … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
0
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The wavelength of MARSIS within the SPLD is roughly 200 m, and generally a contrast in permittivity would need to be on that scale to fully determine the reflection strength (Church et al., 2020, Figure 9). However, for a conductive interface, the thickness required is set by the conductive skin depth (Tulaczyk & Foley, 2020). For MARSIS frequencies and electrical conductivity of 10 −3 S/m, this thickness is ∼10 m. Thus, for a conductive material to be responsible for the reflection, it would only need to be a very thin layer at the base of the SPLD.…”
Section: Revisiting the Dependence Of Radar Reflection Coefficient On Conductivitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The wavelength of MARSIS within the SPLD is roughly 200 m, and generally a contrast in permittivity would need to be on that scale to fully determine the reflection strength (Church et al., 2020, Figure 9). However, for a conductive interface, the thickness required is set by the conductive skin depth (Tulaczyk & Foley, 2020). For MARSIS frequencies and electrical conductivity of 10 −3 S/m, this thickness is ∼10 m. Thus, for a conductive material to be responsible for the reflection, it would only need to be a very thin layer at the base of the SPLD.…”
Section: Revisiting the Dependence Of Radar Reflection Coefficient On Conductivitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(2015) and Foley et al. (2016); (c) Tulaczyk and Foley (2020) using Lyons et al. (2019) and Buchner et al.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similar to the conclusion of Palmer et al (2013), which was based on airborne radar, we infer this elevated reflectivity results from an ice-water in-terface. However, Tulaczyk and Foley (2020) show that subglacial materials with high conductivity can produce similar reflections to an ice-water interface. Additionally, Tulaczyk and Foley (2020) provide a method using information about phase and multiple frequencies to better distinguish among freshwater, brine, and water-or brine-saturated clay.…”
Section: Basal Seismic Reflectivitymentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Similarly, in Greenland subglacial lake systems also provide a reservoir for the storage of surface or basal meltwater and hence may be an important, but largely unknown, factor in global sea level change. Additionally, subglacial lakes are of interest due to their ability to harbor complex microorganisms adapted to extreme environments (Achberger et al, 2016;Campen et al, 2019;Vick-Majors et al, 2016) and paleoenvironmental information contained in subglacial lake sediments (Bentley et al, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Modelling conducted by Carter et al (2017) suggests that the water of active subglacial lakes may be stored in soft sediment which would not show as a bright specular surface in RES data. Tulaczyk and Foley (2020) cautioned that the electrical conductivity properties of deformable clay-rich materials as detected by lower frequency radar waves (5 MHz central frequency) could be falsely misinterpreted as subglacial water. The electrical conductivity properties of subglacial materials should thus be carefully accounted for when interpreting the presence or absence of subglacial water from RES data.…”
Section: Geophysical Surveys Of Active Subglacial Lakesmentioning
confidence: 99%