The detection of metallic particles in the subsurface has been an important field in applied geophysics for several decades, e.g. in the exploration of ore deposits or in monitoring measurements at bioremediation sites. Due to the comparably high conductivity and high polarizability of metallic particles, geophysical methods using the electrical conductivity and especially induced polarization are highly suitable methods for applications of this kind. To correctly interpret data measured in the field, a deep understanding of the underlying conduction and polarization mechanisms is necessary. Both, laboratory measurements with controlled experimental conditions and theoretical models describing the basic physical processes can help to achieve this kind of understanding. However, theoretical models usually are not suitable to be directly compared to laboratory measurements, because they usually consider idealized situations and exhibit a large number of free parameters that can not be controlled in measurements. To overcome this gap, we compare experimental data of a cm-sized metallic sphere embedded in water-saturated sand with a corresponding theoretical model. To explain the remaining differences between measured and modeled data, we discuss how different processes, e.g. the geometry of the measurement setup or dissolved metal ions in the fluid, might affect the measurement and adapt our model accordingly. By doing so, we are able to reproduce the experimental results with the predictions by our theoretical model.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kreith et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: