Towards a common terminology in radioglaciology
Over the past 70 years, many different components of the cryosphere have been imaged with a variety of radar systems using increasingly sophisticated processing techniques. These systems use various pulse lengths, signal frequencies and, in some cases, modulated signals. The increasing diversity of...
| Published in: | Annals of Glaciology |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://epic.awi.de/id/eprint/58058/ https://epic.awi.de/id/eprint/58058/1/Schlegel_etal_2023_AnnGlac-radar-teminology.pdf https://doi.org/10.1017/aog.2023.2 https://hdl.handle.net/10013/epic.b57ea75c-2097-4fa3-bef0-187fd07d33be |
| Summary: | Over the past 70 years, many different components of the cryosphere have been imaged with a variety of radar systems using increasingly sophisticated processing techniques. These systems use various pulse lengths, signal frequencies and, in some cases, modulated signals. The increasing diversity of radar systems has created the potential for confusion due to the use of non-consistent terminology. Here we provide an overview of state-of-the-science radar technologies and suggest a simplified and unified terminology for use by the cryosphere community. We recommend a terminology that is target independent but specifies the characteristics of the signal. Following this recommendation, commercial impulse systems that penetrate the subsurface should be referred to as ground-penetrating radar (GPR), and pulse radars as radio-echo sounding (RES). Continuous-wave (CW) radar systems should be referred to as ground-penetrating CW radars. We further suggest any additional characterisation of the system be expressed using descriptors that specify the platform it is mounted on (e.g. airborne) or the frequency range (e.g. HF (high frequency)) or modulation (e.g. FM (frequency modulated)). |
|---|