Information Last Revised: 5/21/92
TTP Reference Number: ID-121213
1. Technical Name of Technology: Rapid Geophysical Surveyor
2. Common Name of Technology: RGS
3. PI and Telephone No: L.G. Roybal, (208) 526-5744
4. Affiliation: Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (EG&G Idaho, Inc.)
5. Technology Category: Characterization
6. Developers: L.G. Roybal, N.E. Josten, G.S. Carpenter
7. Application
7.1. Where (in-situ/ex-situ): In-situ waste site characterization.
7.2. Media: Soil
7.3. Targeted Contaminants: Ferrous buried wastes.
8. Scope of project (feasibility study, treatability, bench, pilot, field):
Developed and field tested.
9. Integrated Demonstration (ID) Need/Requirements:
The DOE complex has a number of hazardous, mixed hazardous, and radioactive waste sites that require remediation and restoration to comply with Federal and State environmental regulations. Many of these sites are approaching 50 years old and historical records of the burial sites are often sketchy and inaccurate. Site characterization is a required and important first step in the remediation process of these sites. Spatially dense data sets, like those collected with the Rapid Geophysical Surveyor, are required to fully characterize buried waste sites and begin to answer the questions about burial depth, object size and object orientation.
10. Objective
10.1. Objective of technology:
This technology collects high resolution geophysical data required for accurate buried waste site characterization in an automated and economical fashion.
10.2. Baseline (baseline technology to which it is compared):
Hand Held Instruments (Hand Held Inst.)
11. Process Description:
The RGS is a hand pushed non-ferrous vehicle that consists of magnetic sensors, a data logger, data storage hardware, and software. Magnetic data are automatically collected and stored at user specified intervals as close as 2-in. apart along survey profile lines. These form a high resolution data base capable of locating individual objects and potentially object orientation, shape, and depth to burial.
11.1. Input:
No input required. The system is totally passive.
11.2. Output:
The output of the RGS is a set of spatially correlated magnetic data.
12. Summary of Technology Advantages (relative to the baseline: faster, better, cheaper, safer):
The RGS can perform geophysical magnetic surveys more quickly (30 - 300 times faster) and economically (25 cents versus $5.00 per data point) than with hand held instruments. Also, since the RGS is an automated system, the RGS can collect spatially denser data sets than previously thought possible, thereby providing a higher resolution picture of the state of the buried waste site.
13. Limitations of Technology (relative to the baseline: faster, better, cheaper, safer):
The RGS is currently limited to sites that are fairly flat with little or no vegetation on the surface.
14. Major Technical Challenges:
The two technical challenges associated with the RGS are 1) processing and presenting large amounts of geophysical data effectively, and 2) interpreting the results of the data processing such that correlation between data and buried objects is achieved.
15. Technical Effectiveness:
15.1. Performance
15.1.1. Remaining Contamination: (contamination mobility reduction, volume reduction, toxicity reduction)
Summary (20 words or less): No contamination results from this process.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.2. Process Waste
15.1.2.1. Status of waste (mobility, volume, hazard, recyclability)
Summary (20 words or less): No process waste from this process.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.2.2. Treatment (needed, available)
Summary (20 words or less): Not applicable
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.2.3. Decontamination / Decommissioning
Summary (20 words or less): No decontamination of equipment is anticipated by using the RGS concept.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.2.4. Disposal (needed, available)
Summary (20 words or less): Not applicable
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.3. Practicality
15.1.3.1. Foreclose Future Options
Summary (20 words or less): No impact on future options.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.3.2. Reliability
Summary (20 words or less): The RGS is technologically a simple device and very reliable.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.3.3. Failure Control
Summary (20 words or less): There are no adverse consequences due to RGS failure.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.3.4. Ease of Use
Summary (20 words or less): The system is menu driven and easy to use.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.3.5. Infrastructure
Summary (20 words or less): No infrastructure required.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.3.6. Versatility
Summary (20 words or less): The system is currently restricted to sites that are flat with little or no vegetation.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.3.7. System Compatibility
Summary (20 words or less): Not applicable
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.3.8. Off-the-Shelf (procurement ease)
Summary (20 words or less): The RGS consists of off-the-shelf components with the exception of the data logger software.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.3.9. Maintainability
Summary (20 words or less): Maintenance of the equipment consists primarily of occasional lubrication of moving parts.
Further Description (unlimited length): Magnetometers are sealed by the manufacturer and require no further calibration. The distance wheel is calibrated on an ongoing basis during operations.
15.1.3.10. Safety Measures
Summary (20 words or less): There are no safety hazards associated with the RGS.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.1.4. "Works" (functions as intended):
Summary (20 words or less): The RGS was field demonstrated in September 1992 and functioned as designed.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.2. Cost
15.2.1. Start-Up Cost
Summary (20 words or less): The costs of using the RGS on a waste site is proportional to the size of the site and man-hours required to perform a survey. Total system cost is under $200K.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.2.2. Operations and Maintenance Cost
Summary (20 words or less): Operations cost are strictly man-hours to perform a survey. Maintenance costs are unknown but expected to be small.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.2.3. Life-cycle cost
Summary (20 words or less): Not known at this time.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.3. Time
15.3.1. Years Until Available
Summary (20 words or less): The prototype system is available now.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.3.2. Speed/Rate
Summary (20 words or less): The RGS can collect magnetic data at rates up to 25,000 data points per hour. This is 30 - 3000 times faster than baseline technologies.
Further Description (unlimited length):
15.3.3. Years to Finish
Summary (20 words or less): It is estimated that a robust positioning system could be incorporated onto the RGS within a year.
Further Description (unlimited length):
16. Environmental Safety and Health
16.1. Worker Safety
16.1.1. Exposure to Hazardous Materials/Hazards
Summary (20 words or less): None from the RGS. Exposure to hazardous materials is possible directly from survey sites.
Further Description (unlimited length):
16.1.2. Physical Requirements
Summary (20 words or less): The user is required to push a 20-lb cart to collect magnetic data.
Further Description (unlimited length):
16.1.3. Number of People Required
Summary (20 words or less): A survey with the RGS can be done with one person but is more time-efficient with two people.
Further Description (unlimited length):
16.2. Public Health and Safety
16.2.1. Accidents
Summary (20 words or less): Not applicable
Further Description (unlimited length):
16.2.2. Routine Releases
Summary (20 words or less): Not applicable
Further Description (unlimited length):
16.2.3. Transportation
Summary (20 words or less): Not applicable
Further Description (unlimited length):
16.3. Environmental Impacts
16.3.1. Ecological Impacts
Summary (20 words or less): No impact.
Further Description (unlimited length):
16.3.2. Aesthetics
Summary (20 words or less): No impact.
Further Description (unlimited length):
16.3.3. Natural Resources
Summary (20 words or less): No impact.
Further Description (unlimited length):
16.3.4. Energy Demands
Summary (20 words or less): The RGS operates on two 12 volt gel cell batteries and draws about 1/2 watt continuous power.
Further Description (unlimited length):
17. Socio-Political Interests
17.1. Public Perception
17.1.1. Proponent Reputation
Summary (20 words or less): The use of the RGS should have no adverse public relations effect.
Further Description (unlimited length):
17.1.2. Familiarity / Understandability
Summary (20 words or less): The operational principals of magnetic sensing are fairly simple and can be explained to a wide audience.
Further Description (unlimited length):
17.2. Tribal Rights / Future Land Use
17.2.1. Capacity for Unrestricted Use (terrestrial, aquatic)
Summary (20 words or less): Not applicable
Further Description (unlimited length):
17.3. Socio-Economic Interests
17.3.1. Economic Impacts
Summary (20 words or less): The use of the RGS will enhance site specific logistics and waste knowledge, thereby reducing the costs of waste site remediation.
Further Description (unlimited length):
17.3.2. Labor Force Demands
Summary (20 words or less): No impact foreseen.
Further Description (unlimited length):
18. Regulatory Objectives
18.1. Compatibility with Cleanup Milestones
Summary (20 words or less): The RGS is ready to support Environmental Restoration characterization activities and their associated milestones.
Further Description (unlimited length):
18.2. Regulatory Infrastructure / Track Record
Summary (20 words or less): The EPA considers magnetic sensing a recommended technology for hazardous waste site characterization.
Further Description (unlimited length):
18.3. Regulatory Compliance
Summary (20 words or less): The RGS will assist in meeting necessary site characterization requirements.
Further Description (unlimited length):
19. Industrial Partnerships
19.1. Company Names:
None
19.2. Rationale:
19.3. Contract Mechanism:
19.4. Other Potential Companies:
19.5. International:
20. Intellectual Property
20.1. Patent Ownership:
A patent disclosure has been made. There has been no decision as to whether this device is a patentable invention.
20.2. Other Owners:
20.3. Patent Number:
21. Cost Sharing:
The initial development work for the RGS was supported by the DOE Office of Technology Development. Field demonstration was partially funded by the DOE Office of Environmental Restoration.
22. Background on this technology (Where did the idea come from? Who else is doing similar work? What have the results been to date? What is the most significant competitor to this technology?):
Geophysical data has played an important role in site characterization for several years with hand held instruments. The RGS was conceived by INEL scientists and engineers as a way to automate the tedious nature of collecting data by hand. The RGS concept was successfully demonstrated in September of 1992.
23. Reference Documents:
Roybal, L.G., Josten, N.E., Carpenter, G.S., "Rapid Geophysical Surveyor", EG&G Idaho, Inc. Internal Report, EGG-WTD-10566, January 1993.