<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">GI</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">GI</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Geosci. Instrum. Method. Data Syst.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2193-0864</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/gi-11-279-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>Developing a low-cost frequency-domain electromagnetic<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> induction instrument</article-title><alt-title>Low-cost frequency-domain electromagnetic induction</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Low-cost frequency-domain electromagnetic induction}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{G.~Wilson et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Wilson</surname><given-names>Gavin</given-names></name>
          <email>gswilson@mines.edu</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4312-0374</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Conrad</surname><given-names>Jacob</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Anderson</surname><given-names>John</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Swidinsky</surname><given-names>Andrei</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Shragge</surname><given-names>Jeffrey</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Department of Geophysics, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Now at Department of Earth Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Gavin Wilson (gswilson@mines.edu)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>5</day><month>August</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>11</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>279</fpage><lpage>291</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>4</day><month>March</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>21</day><month>March</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>14</day><month>May</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>29</day><month>June</month><year>2022</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 Gavin Wilson et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022.html">This article is available from https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e126">Recent advancements and the widespread availability of low-cost microcontrollers and electronic components have created new opportunities for developing and using low-cost, open-source instrumentation for near-surface geophysical investigations. Geophysical methods that do not require ground contact, such as frequency-domain electromagnetics, allow one or two users to quickly acquire significant amounts of ground resistivity data in a cost-effective manner. The Colorado School of Mines electromagnetic system (CSM-EM) is a proof-of-concept instrument capable of sensing conductive objects in near-surface environments, and is similar in concept to commercial-grade equipment while costing under USD 400 to build. We tested the functionality of the CSM-EM system in a controlled laboratory setting during the design phase and validated it over a conductive target in an outdoor environment. The transmitter antenna can generate a current of over 2.5 A, and emit signals that are detectable by a receiver antenna at offsets of up to 25 m. The system requires minor refitting to change the functioning frequency, and has been operationally validated at 0.4  and 1.6 kHz. The receiver signal can be measured by off-the-shelf digital multimeters. Future directions will focus on improving the electronic and mechanical stability of the CSM-EM with the goal of using acquired data to make quantitative measurements of subsurface resistivity.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e138">Near-surface geophysical surveying using electrical and electromagnetic (EM) methods has experienced growth in recent years due to increased interest in identifying groundwater resources <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx4" id="paren.1"/>, addressing environmental remediation concerns <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="paren.2"/>, and performing archaeological reconnaissance studies <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="paren.3"/>. These near-surface geophysical techniques provide non-invasive and cost-effective approaches for imaging subsurface structures and estimating earth properties, compared to direct methods such as drilling or excavation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16" id="paren.4"/>. Additional near-surface EM application examples include using resistivity data combined with soil sampling and satellite imagery to develop frameworks for farm irrigation management <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.5"/>, applying EM methods for environmental remediation to assess the location and areal extent of pollutants including landfills and radioactive waste disposal sites <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="paren.6"/>, and developing lightweight drone-based EM systems for detecting and classifying unexploded ordinance <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13" id="paren.7"/>, which opens up opportunities for drone-based EM surveying in environmental and agricultural applications.</p>
      <p id="d1e163">While geophysical methods can assist with subsurface investigations, the cost of commercial instruments required to perform such surveys can be prohibitively expensive and effectively form a “barrier to entry” for many potential users. The price constraints of many commercial-grade instruments stem from their hardware being designed for large-scale campaigns, industrial applications, and the capability to acquire high-quality data under extreme climate conditions (e.g., from the frozen Arctic to the hot desert). This leads to scenarios where commercial instruments are effectively “over-engineered” for many near-surface geophysical applications, when more elementary instrumentation and data acquisition procedures would suffice.</p>
      <p id="d1e166">The recent rapid growth of low-cost microcontrollers (e.g., Arduino and Raspberry Pi) and sensors as well as the proliferation of open-source software packages allow entry-level and expert practitioners alike to build high-accuracy sensor systems within a price range affordable for small-scale research and enthusiast projects. These tools have the potential to be leveraged in purpose-built low-cost geophysical equipment that can acquire data without exceeding the durability and budgetary constraints for many types of near-surface geophysical investigations. Examples following this low-cost instrumentation approach include direct-current (DC) resistivity <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5 bib1.bibx1 bib1.bibx14" id="paren.8"/>, seismic nodes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6 bib1.bibx15 bib1.bibx19" id="paren.9"/>, and magnetometers <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10 bib1.bibx12" id="paren.10"/>, each of which has demonstrated the possibility of acquiring data of comparable quality to commercial grade systems. While such home-grown instrumentation is neither as robust nor as likely to have fully in-built safety factors as commercial-grade instruments, it can lower the barrier-to-entry for many users, enable enthusiast, academic, or humanitarian geoscience applications, and be used to develop low-cost geophysical networks for time-lapse monitoring projects.</p>
      <p id="d1e178">Frequency-domain electromagnetic methods (FDEM) represent a class of geophysical techniques that are important for near-surface applications due to their sensitivity to subsurface variations in electrical resistivity (or its inverse, electrical conductivity) caused by, e.g., heterogeneity in geological material or variable fluid saturations. FDEM surveying is based on the principle of EM induction and requires only one or two operators to acquire data, meaning that the instrument need not be attached to the earth unlike grounded methods (e.g., DC resistivity, induced polarization, and seismic). This advantage allows users to acquire spatial FDEM geophysical data at greater rates than comparable ground-coupled methods, and furthermore makes the approach a strong candidate for EM drone-receiver-based investigations. Overall, developing a low-cost FDEM system prototype that provides accurate data could create significant opportunities for numerous near-surface geophysical applications.</p>
      <p id="d1e182">The primary goal of this study is to design, build, and validate a low-cost transmitter-receiver FDEM system for under USD 400. Our developed proof-of-concept instrument, the CSM-EM, is of comparable size and transmits similar signal strength to the commercially available Geonics EM-34 system, and can detect conductive objects using amplitude-based signal measurements via an autoranging digital multimeter (DMM). The instrument is straightforward to operate and can function at a variety of transmitter and receiver frequencies with minimal refitting. The paper starts by briefly describing the theory behind the FDEM method and its use in geophysical investigations. We then discuss our low-cost FDEM transmitter-receiver system design and provide details on its construction. We conclude by presenting validation results for the system prototype in both laboratory and outdoor conditions, and by discussing the cost breakdown and future refinements of the device, along with possible applications in near-surface geophysical investigations.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Methods</title>
      <p id="d1e193">The purpose of this section is to provide a brief review of the theoretical principles and some methodological considerations behind the FDEM technique. Readers interested in a more complete theoretical treatment are referred to standard reference texts on these subjects <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9 bib1.bibx16" id="paren.11"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>FDEM theory overview</title>
      <p id="d1e208">Electromagnetic methods measure ground resistivity through EM induction with separated transmitter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and receiver (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) antennas, allowing data acquisition without the need for ground contact. As detailed in the Instrument Design section, the two antennas are circular coils of wire connected to different electronic modules. FDEM methods are based on the principles of Ampere's and Faraday's Laws in a quasi-static regime, where an alternating current (AC) produces a magnetic field and an alternating magnetic field produces an electric field, respectively. As illustrated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>, FDEM uses a known and calibrated time-varying current in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil (blue loop) to produce an alternating primary magnetic field that is present in both the air and subsurface (solid gray lines). This field operates at a single frequency specified by the user. For scenarios involving conductive subsurface material, this alternating magnetic field will induce alternating eddy currents (orange lines) via Faraday's Law and Ohm's Law. As described by Ampere's Law, these eddy currents produce a secondary magnetic field (dashed black lines). The superimposed fields produce a time-varying current in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil (red loop), as per Faraday's Law. This signal will oscillate at the same frequency as the field generated by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and can be measured as a voltage drop across a capacitor attached in series with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna coil.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e282">The magnetic fields resulting from a horizontal coplanar <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> system configuration over a conductive body. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> electronics produce a time-varying current in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil (blue ring), which generates an alternating magnetic field (solid gray line) that is present in the air and subsurface.  This field will generate eddy currents in conductive subsurface material (orange lines) that create a secondary magnetic field (black dashed lines). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit (red ring) measures the combined effects of the time-varying primary and secondary magnetic fields as a voltage.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e346">When the system is over a uniform halfspace of a given resistivity, a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> configuration with a fixed offset and orientation will measure a constant voltage independent of the lateral position. However, the presence of lateral subsurface heterogeneity will affect the signal detected by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and introduce spatial dependence in the voltage measurements. This makes FDEM particularly effective at identifying lateral changes in soil-water content and at locating anomalous conductive bodies (such the conductive ellipsoid illustrated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>). Some commercial EM systems also use a tuneable third “bucking” coil to remove the primary field response from the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil, due to the large amplitude of the primary field compared to that of the secondary field (the latter of which contains the relevant information about ground resistivity).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Penetration depth</title>
      <p id="d1e403">The penetration depth of any EM method is dependent on a variety of subsurface physical properties as well as the frequency of the inducing magnetic field produced by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. For FDEM field applications, the effect of these properties can be quantified using a proxy value known as the skin depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M18" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          which represents the depth in the subsurface at which the field strength has decayed to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>e</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (37 %) of the surface value. Skin depth is dependent upon the subsurface electrical resistivity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, magnetic permeability <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the instrument operating frequency, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. Electrical resistivity is related directly to subsurface geological structure, as well as any fluids that might be saturating the associated pore space. In most near-surface geological situations, the magnetic permeability <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> can be assumed to equal the magnetic permeability of free space <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> H m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. This means that we can increase or decrease the depth of investigation by changing the functioning frequency of the instrument.</p>
      <p id="d1e528">While the frequency of the EM system can be used to alter the penetration depth of the inducing fields, different relative orientations of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coils can be used to change the EM field radiation patterns and achieve different subsurface sensitivities. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/> illustrates three common <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> “fully coupled” orientations, with the horizontal coplanar (HCP) being the most common investigation set-up and the one used in the validation tests reported herein.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e579">Fully coupled orientations for coplanar and coaxial <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> loops. The purple lines and arrows represent the magnetic field generated by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna. Top: vertical coplanar. Middle: horizontal coplanar. Bottom: vertical coaxial.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e622">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> has a significant effect on signal decay. For a uniform half-space of resistivity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and an HCP configuration, the signal of frequency <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is related to the vertical magnetic field strength detected by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16" id="paren.12"><named-content content-type="post">Eq. 4.56</named-content></xref>. Changes in the vertical magnetic field can be measured as a voltage <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This value is related to offset <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> by the general equation:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M42" display="block"><mml:mtable class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mo mathsize="2.0em">[</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo mathsize="2.0em">]</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> current, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the areas and the number of wire turns around the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antennas, respectively. This equation is valid for both near- and far-field situations. While <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> solely account for the magnetic field strength at the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil in an HCP <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> orientation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> component parameters) affect the magnetic field strength and the value measured across <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by a DMM. In this setting, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the permittivity of free space.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Instrument sensitivity</title>
      <p id="d1e1137">The choice of component parameters (i.e., the effective areas of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antennas) were based on the dimensions of the EM-34 conductivity meter due to its in-house availability and large size. Before building the prototype, the antenna parameters were tested by modeling the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> voltage over a range of half-space resistivity values using a Python script to determine whether the CSM-EM range and resolution (0.1 mV–9.0 V) allowed the instrument to delineate between different geologic environments. This testing modeled the variation in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal, which measures the time rate of change of the total vertical magnetic field, over a half-space as a function of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>a). We also examined how the secondary field, containing the information related to ground resistivity, changed with variable resistivity for a range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offsets (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>b). The total field voltage response modeling (i.e., the value measured by the instrument) shows that signals over different half-space resistivity values fall within CSM-EM resolution for most offsets from 1  to 50 m. The only half-space resistivity falling outside the CSM-EM resolution was the simulated perfect conductor (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m). By considering a perfect resistor (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m), which shows a similar voltage response to that of the primary field, we observed that most realistic ground resistivities have a minute effect on the voltage response of the device. This exercise demonstrated that the effect of the secondary field is difficult to detect for most half-space resistivities in the presence of the primary field. The secondary field response, however, showed that different half-space resistivities can be determined given the resolution of the CSM-EM system. While this can only be observed on the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m curve, other half-space curves show the same sign reversal response at larger offsets. The secondary field was calculated by subtracting the primary (free space) field from the total field. This calculation showed that subsurface resistivity variations ranging from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m would be detectable within the CSM-EM resolution at most <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offsets. However, more resistive environments (e.g., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) would generate an insufficient secondary field to create a voltage change detectable by the CSM-EM, given that most DMMs measure voltages to within a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.1 mV precision. The dip shown at 42 m on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m curve (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>b) is due to a sign reversal of the signal, where the difference between the primary and total field amplitudes is at a minimum. This event can be observed in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>a at 42 m as the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m curve intersects the perfect resistor voltage response curve.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1429"><bold>(a)</bold> The absolute value of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> voltage measured by a horizontal coplanar (HCP) configuration, corresponding to the change in the total vertical magnetic field, resting on a half-space of variable conductivity as a function of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset.  All <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> electronic parameters (resistance, inductance, capacitance, amplifier gain) are as indicated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>, with a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> frequency of 1680 Hz, a current of 2.0 A, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil areas of 0.29 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> each with 100 turns. The dashed horizontal lines indicate the upper (9.0 V) and lower (0.1 mV) limits of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> amplifier power supply and DMM resolution, respectively. <bold>(b)</bold> Difference between free-air and half-space voltages (effectively the amplitude change of the secondary field) for an HCP configuration with all parameters identical to those shown in <bold>(a)</bold>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=503.61378pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Instrument design</title>
      <p id="d1e1556">The primary goals in the design of the low-cost CSM-EM FDEM system are to: (1) construct an adaptable device able to function at multiple signal frequencies and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offsets similar to commercial FDEM instrumentation, (2) use basic and easily sourced electrical components, and (3) maintain a sub-USD 400 instrument build cost. While the use of low-cost components sacrifices some of the durability found in commercial systems, easily procurable components facilitate replacement or even the construction of multiple EM systems to work independently or jointly and at low capital expenditure.</p>
      <p id="d1e1581">The design goals for the low-cost CSM-EM device require that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> frequency can be adjusted with minor hardware changes and that the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal is comparable in strength to that offered by a commercial FDEM system <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Functionality and workflow</title>
      <p id="d1e1635">The CSM-EM instrument is composed of independent <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> units. During data acquisition, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> hardware module generates an AC signal that is amplified and transmitted through the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna. Both the primary EM field from the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit and secondary fields generated by conductive subsurface heterogeneity are measured by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna. The composite signal is filtered and then amplified so that voltage changes can be sensed with a 0.1 mV resolution DMM (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/> shows the system resolution limits) capable of measuring AC signals. The multimeter records an approximate root mean square (RMS) voltage, which is a simple measure of the signal magnitude generated by the primary <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> field and any secondary EM fields. The design and functionality of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> units are described later. The specific component values represented in CSM-EM design can be easily modified and are based on the calibrated inductance and resistances of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coils. The resistances of the coils were measured using a DMM (resistance setting). Coil inductances were measured by using a precision capacitor in series with the coil to create an RLC circuit, scanning through a range of input frequencies until achieving resonance in the coil, and finally back-solving for coil inductance (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) using Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>). By tailoring component values to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> properties, the CSM-EM can be constructed using easily substituted parts.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Transmitter design</title>
      <p id="d1e1806">The series of hardware modules of the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit and the circuitry design behind each module are presented in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>a and b, respectively. The resistor-capacitor (RC) oscillator and power amplifier modules are powered by two 12 V motorcycle batteries. Alternatively, the system could be powered by four 12 V batteries with two pairs connected in series to obtain a larger <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> current; however, following this approach may shorten instrument longevity in the field.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1835"><bold>(a)</bold> Low-cost CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> system powered by two 12 V motorcycle batteries. The RC oscillator generates an AC signal at a given frequency, which is amplified by the power amplifier before being passed into the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil to generate an AC signal and corresponding magnetic field. The DMM (ammeter setting) measures the alternating current passing through the 0.61 m diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil. <bold>(b)</bold> CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> circuit diagram that can be split into three primary modules: the RC oscillator, the power amplifier, and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil (with tuning capacitor). The circuit is composed of basic electronic components along with an OPA549 power amplifier breakout board. Resistor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was included to allow sustained regenerative feedback in the circuit and is not part of a specific <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> module.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1927">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> system generates an AC signal using an RC oscillator module. An RC oscillator generates an AC signal using EM noise, RC circuit feedback, and signal amplification (see, e.g., Alexander and Sadiku, 2007). Any EM noise encountered by the module is filtered through several RC stages that introduce a phase shift at a given angle depending on the chosen RC component values and the number of stages <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> within the circuit. The cumulative RC signal conditioning creates a 180<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> phase shift. The resulting signal is subsequently amplified by an inverting operational amplifier, which causes another 180<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> phase shift. This shift creates regenerative feedback, allowing a stronger AC signal to be generated solely from ambient EM fields and a DC power source. The desired frequency <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RC</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (in Hz) of the AC signal can be calculated using
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M135" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is resistance, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is capacitance, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of RC stages. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> components in each stage of the RC oscillator must have the same respective resistance and capacitance values, meaning that in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>b <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. RC oscillators commonly have three RC stages to maintain signal stability <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.13"/>, which is reflected in our CSM-EM oscillator module. Representative values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nF, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> generate an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.64</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> kHz. The output frequency of the CSM-EM system can be modified by switching out modular capacitor units with differing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values and changing the tuning capacitor attached to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna.</p>
      <p id="d1e2208">The stability of the signal output also depends on the applied amplifier gain. Gain is a unitless value that describes the ratio between the voltage of the output signal from an operational amplifier (op-amp) to that of the input signal. The signal gain <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mi>G</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of the output voltage <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">out</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is dependent on the values of resistors <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> attached to the op-amp and on the voltage of the input signal <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, as follows for a simple inverting amplifier:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M155" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">out</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e2301">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>b uses this set-up within the RC oscillator assembly with a gain <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">31</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which is controlled by resistors <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>b. The op-amp gain of an RC oscillator must be <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">29</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to main signal stability <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.14"/>; however, a value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>≫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">29</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> tends to distort the AC signal.</p>
      <p id="d1e2381">The small AC signal generated by the RC oscillator is impractical at any field scale <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.15"/>. The high-voltage, high-current op-amp device (OPA549) can supply a current up to 8.0 A to any load attached to the output. The OPA549 has been driven to saturation as a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12 V square wave, the maximum signal gain allowable by the power supplies, and does not follow Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>). This specialized power amplifier is required for signal amplification needed to generate measurable field-scale signals. The power amplifier is part of a prefabricated breakout board with DC power supply regulating capacitors and a heat sink. We initially built a heat-sink attachment in-house (central unit in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>b), but the prefabricated unit (power amplifier in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>a) proved to be safer, more durable, and reliable under field conditions.</p>
      <p id="d1e2423">Finally, the amplified signal is passed into the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna, consisting of 100 turns of 14 gauge wire around a 0.61 m (2 ft) diameter coil. To generate resonance in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil at the same frequency as the RC oscillator, we must include a tuning capacitor. The resulting RLC circuit uses a tuning capacitor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the inherent inductance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna to provide an effective bandpass filter. The filtered output frequency <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is related to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> via
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><label>5</label><mml:math id="M172" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e2550">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna had a measured inductance of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mH that when combined with a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">770</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nF tuning capacitor created a bandpass filter with a peak frequency of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.57</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> kHz. The RLC circuit ensures that when the square-wave signal passes through the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna, it is transmitted as a monochromatic sinusoidal wave. Although RLC filters theoretically pass a single frequency, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> wire itself has a fixed resistance value; when combined with the RLC filter inductance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the resistance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> dictates the filter pass-band width <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">width</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (i.e., the frequency range about the peak value that is still passed through the filter). Whereas too broad pass band would weaken the resonance of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna, a too narrow pass band may decrease the signal strength at frequencies close to, but not exactly at, the peak frequency. This poses a significant challenge because low-cost hardware components are often imprecise. The pass-band width is proportional to the ratio of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> wire resistance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and inductance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><label>6</label><mml:math id="M186" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">width</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e2751">Because the CSM-EM instrument <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil has an inductance of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mH and a resistance of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.2</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the RLC filter pass band is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">width</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">38.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Hz. While the 38.4 Hz bandwidth combined with a 1.57 kHz peak frequency, in theory, would prevent the 1.64 kHz RC oscillator signal from generating a sufficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal strength, we found that these components did produce high currents (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.0 A) in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil. The calculated transmitter and receiver RLC gains are shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>, indicating that a 1.64 kHz signal would still experience 10 dB transmitter signal gain when voltage is measured across the capacitor and a 15 dB signal gain over the receiver. While the full bandpass curve shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/> provides the most insight, Eqs. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>) and (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E6"/>) are useful for approximating the expected frequency when substituting electronics or making field modifications.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e2856">Response of the RLC circuit present in the transmitter unit, with inductance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mH, capacitance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">770</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nF, and resistance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.2</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and across the receiver unit, with inductance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mH, capacitance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">770</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nF, and resistance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.7</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The filtered signal can be measured over any of the components; however, both antennas measure the signal across the capacitor component. This is due to the small gain across the resistor component, and that the inductor in the RLC circuit is the antenna coil.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Receiver design</title>
      <p id="d1e2971">The CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna coil (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>a) has the same dimensions, wire wraps, and wire gauge as the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna, although due to material heterogeneity the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil resistance and inductance differ slightly from those of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil. The transmitted signal measured by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit is filtered through an RLC circuit that can be easily refitted to enable the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit to pass different frequencies (bandpass curve examples is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil has an intrinsic inductance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mH, a resistance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.7</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, connected to a tuneable capacitor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">770</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nF (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>b). The resulting RLC filter has a calculated peak frequency of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.61</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> kHz and a pass-band width of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">width</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">33.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Hz due to the finite resistance of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil.</p>
      <p id="d1e3150">The filtered <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal (modeled in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>a) is amplified using an inverting amplifier configuration powered by two 9 V batteries (see Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>). Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>b illustrates the amplifier set-up with a gain <inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, set by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is a variable resistor that allows the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> gain to be changed without hardware refits. The op-amp gain increases the signal amplitude, allowing the user to observe minute signal changes on a readable scale. The signal gain shifts the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> input signal up by two orders of magnitude, making any changes in the secondary field more easily observable on a 0.1 mV resolution multimeter (shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>b). The filtered and amplified signals are measured as an RMS voltage by a DMM connected across the amplifier output.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e3253"><bold>(a)</bold> Low-cost CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> system. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil (with attached tuning capacitor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">coil</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) acts as an RLC bandpass filter for a given frequency. The signal is passed through an inverting amplifier and an RMS voltage is measured by a DMM. <bold>(b)</bold> Low-cost CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> circuit diagram consisting of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coil/tuning capacitor, an OPA741 inverting amplifier powered by two 9 V batteries, and a DMM. Two single pole switches are attached to the batteries to prevent unwanted power drain. The switches are not intended to function independently and can be replaced with one double pole switch; however, single pole switches are more widely available in most areas.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Construction and cost considerations</title>
      <p id="d1e3331">Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/> presents the itemized cost for all instrument components. The only tools and resources required for the build are a soldering iron, wire strippers, electrical tape and zip ties for structural integrity, and containers for electrical modules. The basic components used in the device build allow the user to substitute most components for those available, which has the potential to significantly lower costs. In most situations, the largest cost contributor – wire – can be repurposed from other sources. While the OPA549 power amplifier unit can be built from scratch (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>b), prefabricated boards likely provide greater <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> system durability, improve the modularity of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> design, and facilitate refits and repair.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e3363">Cost breakdown (in USD) for parts required to construct and operate the system. Note that this estimate assumes all products are bought new. Many components (especially wire) can be repurposed, allowing the system to be built at a lower overall cost.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Item</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Cost (USD) per unit</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"># of units</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Cost (USD) per item</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">14 Gauge wire</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.38/m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">400 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">152.00</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Coil frame</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">12.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">24.98</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Breadboard, wires, banana plugs</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">12.50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">12.50</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">9 V batteries</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.56</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">12 V motorcycle batteries</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">29.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">59.34</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Switches</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.20</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Electrical components</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.97</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">741 Op-amp module</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.38</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">549 Power amp module</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">40.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">40.00</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Multimeters</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">29.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">59.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">TOTAL</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">362.87</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Validation</title>
      <p id="d1e3574">The CSM-EM design goals specify that the system can function at frequencies and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offsets similar to those found in commercially available FDEM instruments. We used the Geonics EM-34 commercial <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for validation and comparison purposes. The CSM-EM system was set to function at 1.67 kHz because of its size and compatibility with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> frequencies available on the EM-34. We ensured device functionality through laboratory tests designed to observe whether the CSM-EM could: (1) function at the desired frequencies, (2) emit stable <inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signals at amplitudes comparable to (or even greater than) the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and (3) detect conductive objects in a free-air environment at reasonable <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offsets. After successfully validating functionality in the laboratory environment, the CSM-EM instrument has been tested in an outdoor setting by performing a survey over an area containing a known conductive anomaly.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Laboratory validation tests</title>
      <p id="d1e3673">The first laboratory trial tested whether the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> could detect a clear sinusoidal signal at a given frequency with a visible change in the signal amplitude when a conductor was placed nearby. For the trial, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit was placed in a near free-air environment (i.e., elevated on a mobile stand in the laboratory) at 10 m offset from the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were set to function at 1.6 kHz. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/> shows the plotted oscilloscope results of the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal with and without introducing a piece of sheet metal near the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal is a total field measurement, a superposition of the primary <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> field and secondary fields generated from nearby conductive materials. As shown on the oscilloscope display, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal had a frequency of 1.67 kHz, with an RMS voltage of 271.9 mV, and a peak-to-peak (Pk-Pk) amplitude of 880.0 mV without the sheet metal present (blue curve). After the conductive body was placed between the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the signal amplitude decreased to less than half of the previous amplitude (orange curve). This is because the secondary field created by conductive bodies destructively interferes with the primary signal, attenuating the total field measured by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The RMS voltage was well within the resolution of a standard DMM. The initial test demonstrated that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measured a stable field very close to the expected <inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> frequency with an amplitude of several 100 mV, which is sufficiently observable on commercial DMMs. The test also indicates that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> responds to the destructive interference of secondary fields from the conductor, and that the amplitude change can be measured by a DMM as an RMS voltage.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e3858">CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal measured on an oscilloscope using an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> gain of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at a 10 m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset with (orange curve) and without (blue curve) introducing a piece of sheet metal near the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antenna. The signal with the sheet metal present is less than half the amplitude of that without metal present. The CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> generated the signal for both measurements.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3946">Next, we tested the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit for its ability to produce a stable signal of comparable strength to that of the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit. The system was set up in the same orientation as the former laboratory trial, but using an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> gain of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at a 5 m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset. The signal frequency in this trial was, as expected, nearly identical to the measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal from the previous trial (1.67 kHz). The RMS voltage was 3.42 V and the Pk-Pk amplitude was 9.9 V using the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and decreased to less than half the original amplitude when using the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (blue and orange curves in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>, respectively), demonstrating that the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> can produce a stable signal of comparable strength to that of the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e4078">Low-cost CSM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal (attached to oscilloscope) using an amplifier gain <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at a 5 m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset with the EM34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (orange) and low-cost CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (blue). The amplitude of the signal received from the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is over twice that of the EM34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Field validation tests</title>
      <p id="d1e4185">Field validation testing involved completing an outdoor field survey over a shallow metallic target to test system sensitivity to a conductive object, and a qualitative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset test. The field survey target was a manhole cover located at the surface in the outdoor Colorado School of Mines Geophysical Discovery Laboratory (GDL). The GDL is a flat sod-covered area with a thin layer of soil 0.5 m deep covering the surface. Backfill underneath the soil continues to a depth of 2 m, with thick shale units extending beyond the near-surface environment <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17" id="paren.16"/>. While the GDL can be considered geologically homogeneous for near-surface FDEM surveying applications, there is a large amount of electrical and plumbing infrastructure running throughout the area.</p>
      <p id="d1e4213">The survey consisted of two primary transects: (1) an east-west test line over the manhole cover, and (2) a parallel control line 4 m to the north of the test line (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>a). The first trial used the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on the test line. The second trial combined the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> units again on the test line. Finally, a third trial used the combined CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> system but on the control line for calibration purposes. All <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> units were set to function at 1.6 kHz. The CSM-EM system for all trials was oriented along the two survey lines shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>a with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> units separated by a fixed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.0</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula> m offset and starting at 25.0  and 30.0 m easting, respectively. Measurements proceeded westward every 0.5 m and stopped when the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit reached the 0.0 m easting coordinate. The CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> current and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> RMS voltage were measured at each survey location. The current measurements ensured that the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit exhibited a stable output throughout the survey. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>b shows the current in the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> over the test line (blue curve) and over the control line (green curve). Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>c presents RMS voltages measured by the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and shows a significant anomaly detected in both the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> trials (blue and orange curves, respectively) when either the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> or the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> passed directly over the target. In comparison, the CSM-EM control line data (green curve) exhibited no significant voltage drop.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e4457">Geometry and results from the CSM-GDL field validation test using a 1.6 kHz <inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> frequency. <bold>(a)</bold> Survey geometry showing the 0.75 m diameter manhole cover surface target located at 18.5 m easting on the test line. The control line is parallel to and 4 m north of the test line. The only other known nearby conductive body is a sprinkler box located close to the survey area. <bold>(b)</bold> The blue and orange curves show CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> current for the test and control lines, respectively. Along the test line, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> current dips when the antenna is directly over the manhole cover, as well as at 6.5–7.0 m easting. <bold>(c)</bold> The green and blue curves show the test line voltage data for the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  combinations, respectively. Both curves show significant RMS voltage reductions when either the -<inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> passes over the target. The orange curve presents the control line data unaffected by the surface metal objects.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=503.61378pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/11/279/2022/gi-11-279-2022-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4572">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset testing was conducted in the GDL area away from the manhole cover, so that measurements could be made over a homogeneous subsurface. The CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> output was observed using an oscilloscope to gauge signal stability and a DMM to measure RMS voltage. Both the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> devices were set to the same system parameters from the manhole cover field test. The CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were tested separately, with the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in an HCP coupled orientation. Measurements took place at 5.0 m intervals. The EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> paired with the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was tested starting at a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset of 10.0 m, and continuing until the sinusoidal <inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal was no longer resolvable on the oscilloscope. At 10.0 m the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> generated a clean signal with an RMS voltage of 150 mV, representing the total field strength. When the system was moved to a 15.0 m offset, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal was very weak and had an RMS voltage of less than 60 mV. Because the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> generated a larger signal in laboratory testing compared to the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coupled with the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was tested at larger offsets. At 20.0 m, the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> generated a clean signal with a 130 mV RMS voltage, greater than the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal at 10.0 m offset from the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. At 25.0 m the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal was still resolvable from the background noise, but the RMS voltage had dropped to 80 mV. At 30.0 m offset, the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal was very weak, with an RMS voltage of 60 mV. The offset test demonstrated that the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> can produce a resolvable <inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal at up to 25.0 m offset from the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e4886">The CSM-EM system provided a variety of results from the engineering design process and the prototype validation tests. We initially designed the CSM-EM unit to be a tilt-angle EM system prototype <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8" id="paren.17"/>; however, early laboratory tests suggested that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> system was capable of conducting amplitude-based FDEM measurements when connected to a DMM measuring RMS voltage. While the laboratory and field test results present a proof of concept that the CSM-EM unit is capable of acquiring field-scale FDEM data, they also highlight several challenges experienced during CSM-EM data acquisition and analysis as well as opportunities for further research.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1">
  <label>5.1</label><title>Proof of concept</title>
      <p id="d1e4921">The CSM-EM unit can function at multiple frequencies at field scale <inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offsets in an outdoor environment with a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal strength comparable to that of the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The low-cost components required to construct the system are easily procurable; many parts also could be substituted to further decrease costs. The CSM-EM system is easy to adapt to a wide range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> frequencies with minor hardware changes, and can acquire data using a voltmeter. The system measurements can be connected to the analog-to-digital converter available on most microcontrollers (e.g., an Arduino Uno) for cost-effective, lightweight digital recording.</p>
      <p id="d1e4991">Field testing demonstrated that the complete CSM-EM system is sensitive to conductive objects and can produce similar amplitude-based data to the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> combination. The CSM-EM field trials show that the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> produces larger <inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> voltages and more prevalent anomalies than the commercial <inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> data have a variance of 0.118 V<inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the test line, excluding data points over the target, and a variance of 0.029 V<inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the control line. The data for the EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> have a variance of 0.011 V<inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the test line, excluding data points over the target. The higher variance of the data measured using the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is significant enough to prevent the system from detecting small-scale near-surface resistivity changes, such as those caused by geological or fluid content variations. The CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> current (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>c) exhibits similar trends to the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> voltage when the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is directly over the manhole cover. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> current signal showed a variance of 0.012 A<inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the control line and 0.036 A<inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the test line. Along with higher data variance using the combined CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, limited sampling of DMM readings make any kind of noise analyses difficult.</p>
      <p id="d1e5216">Noise present in the CSM-EM field data indicates a lack of stability in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> current, which may be due to numerous factors including the lower build quality and reduced rigidity of the CSM-EM antennas, as well as the precision of the low-cost hardware (e.g., resistors, capacitors, inductors, repurposed wiring) used in the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> build. The CSM-EM antennas were constructed around plastic liners and easily deform, which can affect the stability of signal transmission and could account for the greater observed variance in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> antennas (the antennas were held flat in the HCP orientation to mitigate these effects during trials). The quality and tolerances of the hardware used in the CSM-EM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> unit may have affected signal quality during testing. Issues with the hardware component connections could be mitigated by moving the components from a breadboard prototype to a printed circuit board.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2">
  <label>5.2</label><title>Future development</title>
      <p id="d1e5294">The testing performed on the prototype CSM-EM system enables several future developments. While the CSM-EM system resembles the EM-34 in size and shape, next-generation designs could use the same circuitry on a miniaturized scale to create a system more similar in size to lightweight single-operator EM systems. A miniaturized system would require less material (specifically antenna wire) and could function as a single rigid structure. Along with miniaturization, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> tuning capacitors and RC oscillator capacitors could be attached to rotary switches, which would permit the frequency range of the device to be changed without any hardware modifications.</p>
      <p id="d1e5319">Microcontroller inboard analog-to-digital converters are capable of voltage and current measurements when combined with basic electrical components <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="paren.18"/>. This would allow the CSM-EM system to digitally record measurements. Including a microcontroller module (e.g., an Arduino or Raspberry Pi) opens up the possibility of future CSM-EM versions to be operated remotely which, when combined with the system's potentially lightweight nature, creates opportunities for multi-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> experiments.</p>
      <p id="d1e5347">By combining a more robust build with rapid autologger sampling, we aim to decrease noise during data acquisition and better analyze more densely recorded data through processing. With an improved system, we can determine whether the CSM-EM design is sensitive to small-scale resistivity variations due to geology or subsurface fluid content. We plan to perform more robust <inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> offset tests with the future system to gauge performance improvements due to mechanical and electronic updates. Modifications are underway to perform phase-based measurements for a more direct comparison to commercial instruments. These mechanical and data collection improvements will dictate future applications of the CSM-EM system in near-surface geophysical investigations.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>6</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e5378">The primary goals of this study were to design, build and validate a low-cost transmitter-receiver FDEM system for under USD 400 that is of comparable size and signal transmission strength to commercial grade systems. The CSM-EM device costs USD 363 for the current design when using all new parts and can detect conductive objects in a field environment using amplitude-based signal measurements. The modular design of the unit allows users to easily change components and to replace the DMM system with a microcontroller-based autologger. The CSM-EM functions at a variety of frequencies with minimal hardware adjustments and produces a stable signal of comparable strength to commercial systems (e.g., the Geonics EM-34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). This proof of concept device provides a foundation for the future development and use of low-cost FDEM systems for near-surface geophysical and other related investigations.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e5396">Generated data are available and can be requested by emailing the corresponding author.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e5402">GW, JC, JA, and AS designed, built, and tested the instrument. GW and JS were responsible for the preparing and writing the manuscript with contributions from other co-authors. AS and JS were responsible for completing manuscript revisions.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e5408">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e5414">Publisher’s note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e5420">We would like to thank   Reza Mir for valuable electronics advice during the construction of the CSM-EM system, and for reviewing this article. We would also like to thank   James Clark for reviewing this article and for his valuable contributions to the development of low-cost geophysical instrumentation.</p></ack><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e5425">This paper was edited by Alessandro Fedeli and reviewed by Reza Mir, James Clark, and Valentina Schenone.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Ahmad et~al.(2019)Ahmad, Iqbal, Maqbool, and Arshad}}?><label>Ahmad et al.(2019)Ahmad, Iqbal, Maqbool, and Arshad</label><?label Ahmad2019?><mixed-citation>Ahmad, M. N., Iqbal, F., Maqbool, S., and Arshad, M. B.: Low-Cost Resistivity
Meter for Groundwater Exploration Using High Voltage Experimentations,
Int. J. Econ. Environ. Geol., 10, 35–39,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.46660/ijeeg.vol10.iss3.2019.306" ext-link-type="DOI">10.46660/ijeeg.vol10.iss3.2019.306</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Alexander and Sadiku(2007)}}?><label>Alexander and Sadiku(2007)</label><?label alexander2021?><mixed-citation>
Alexander, C. and Sadiku, M.: Fundamentals of Electric Circuits, McGraw-Hill
Higher Education, Boston,
McGraw-Hill Higher Education, ISBN 10  1260226409,
ISBN 13  9781260226409,
2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{analogRead function(2022)}}?><label>analogRead function(2022)</label><?label analogread?><mixed-citation>analogRead function: Analogread, Arduino IDE Reference,
<uri>https://www.arduino.cc/reference/en/language/functions/analog-io/analogread/</uri>, last access: 15 January  2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Boaga(2017)}}?><label>Boaga(2017)</label><?label jboaga2017?><mixed-citation>Boaga, J.: The use of FDEM in hydrogeophysics: A review, J. Appl.
Geophys., 139, 36–46, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.02.011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.02.011</ext-link>,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Clark et~al.(2016)}}?><label>Clark et al.(2016)</label><?label clark2016?><mixed-citation>Clark, J. A., Page, R. T., Franklin, R., Miller, N. M., and Morken, M. O.:
Appropriate geophysics technology: Inexpensive instruments for water
exploration at a local level in developing nations, Geol. Soc. Am.,  520,   171–181,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1130/2016.2520(16)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1130/2016.2520(16)</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Dean et~al.(2017)Dean, Nguyen, Kepic, Armitage, and
Rossiter}}?><label>Dean et al.(2017)Dean, Nguyen, Kepic, Armitage, and
Rossiter</label><?label Dean2017?><mixed-citation>Dean, T., Nguyen, N., Kepic, A., Armitage, B., and Rossiter, H.: The
democratization of seismic acquisition, in: SEG Technical Program Expanded
Abstracts 2017,  Soc. Expl. Geophys., 201–205,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2017-17634981.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1190/segam2017-17634981.1</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Fontaine et~al.(2018)Fontaine, Percy, Oware, Bosompemaa, Gbedzi, and
Lane}}?><label>Fontaine et al.(2018)Fontaine, Percy, Oware, Bosompemaa, Gbedzi, and
Lane</label><?label fontaine2018?><mixed-citation>Fontaine, J. M., Percy, A., Oware, E. K., Bosompemaa, P., Gbedzi, V., and Lane,
J. W.: Application of electromagnetic induction to develop a precision
irrigation framework to facilitate smallholder dry season farming in the
Nasia-Kparigu area of northern Ghana, in: SEG Technical Program Expanded
Abstracts 2018, Soc. Expl. Geophys., 2491–2495,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2018-2997867.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1190/segam2018-2997867.1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Frischknecht et~al.(1991)Frischknecht, Labson, Spies, and
Anderson}}?><label>Frischknecht et al.(1991)Frischknecht, Labson, Spies, and
Anderson</label><?label frischknecht1991?><mixed-citation>Frischknecht, F. C., Labson, V. F., Spies, B. R., and Anderson, W. L.: 3.
Profiling Methods Using Small Sources, in: Electromagnetic Methods in Applied
Geophysics, Soc. Expl. Geophys., 2,  105–270,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802686.ch3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1190/1.9781560802686.ch3</ext-link>, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Purcell(1966)}}?><label>Purcell(1966)</label><?label PurcellEdwardM1966EaM?><mixed-citation>Purcell, E. M.: Electricity and Magnetism, Am. J. Phys., 34, p. 830, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139012973" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/CBO9781139012973</ext-link>, 1966.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Schofield et~al.(2012)Schofield, Connors, and
Russell}}?><label>Schofield et al.(2012)Schofield, Connors, and
Russell</label><?label Schofield2012?><mixed-citation>Schofield, I., Connors, M., and Russell, C. T.: NetPICOmag: A low-cost
networked magnetometer and its applications, Earth  Planet. Space, 64, 279–297, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5047/eps.2011.10.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5047/eps.2011.10.001</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Sea and Ernenwein(2020)}}?><label>Sea and Ernenwein(2020)</label><?label sea2021?><mixed-citation>Sea, C. D. and Ernenwein, E. G.: Frequency domain electromagnetic induction:
an efficient method for investigating Fort Ancient village dynamics,
Archaeol. Prospect., 28, 73–87, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/arp.1798" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/arp.1798</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Shahsavani(2018)}}?><label>Shahsavani(2018)</label><?label Shahsavani2018?><mixed-citation>Shahsavani, H.: Comparison of a low-cost magneto-inductive magnetometer with a
proton magnetometer: A case study on the Galali iron ore deposit in western
Iran, Near Surf. Geophys., 17, 69–84, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.12026" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/nsg.12026</ext-link>,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Shubitidze et~al.(2021)Shubitidze, Saparishvili, Barrowes,
Shubitidze, and Prishvin}}?><label>Shubitidze et al.(2021)Shubitidze, Saparishvili, Barrowes,
Shubitidze, and Prishvin</label><?label shubitidze2021?><mixed-citation>Shubitidze, F., Saparishvili, G., Barrowes, B., Shubitidze, T., and Prishvin,
M.: ULEMA: Ultra-Light ElectroMagnetic Array system for UXO detection
and classification, in: Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to
Engineering and Environmental Problems 2021, Symposium on the
Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems
Proceedings, p. 21, Denver, Colorado, US, Environmental &amp; Engineering Geophysical Society, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.33-012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4133/sageep.33-012</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Sirota et~al.(2021)Sirota, Shragge, Krahenbuhl, Swidinsky, Yalo, and
Bradford}}?><label>Sirota et al.(2021)Sirota, Shragge, Krahenbuhl, Swidinsky, Yalo, and
Bradford</label><?label sirota2022?><mixed-citation>Sirota, D., Shragge, J., Krahenbuhl, R., Swidinsky, A., Yalo, N., and Bradford,
J.: Development and validation of a low-cost direct current resistivity meter
for humanitarian geophysics applications, Geophysics, 87, WA1–WA14,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2021-0058.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1190/geo2021-0058.1</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Soler-Llorens et~al.(2019)Soler-Llorens, Galiana-Merino,
Nassim-Benabdeloued, Rosa-Cintas, Zamora, and Giner-Catulra}}?><label>Soler-Llorens et al.(2019)Soler-Llorens, Galiana-Merino,
Nassim-Benabdeloued, Rosa-Cintas, Zamora, and Giner-Catulra</label><?label seismic2019?><mixed-citation>Soler-Llorens, J., Galiana-Merino, J., Nassim-Benabdeloued, B., Rosa-Cintas,
S., Zamora, J., and Giner-Catulra, J.: Design and Implementation of an
Arduino-Based Plug-and-Play Acquisition System for Seismic Noise
Measurements, Electronics, 8, 1035, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8091035" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/electronics8091035</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Ward and Hohmann(1988)}}?><label>Ward and Hohmann(1988)</label><?label Ward1988?><mixed-citation>Ward, S. H. and Hohmann, G. W.: Electromagnetic Theory for Geophysical
Applications, in: Electromagnetic Methods in Applied Geophysics, Soc. Expl. Geophys., 1,
130–311,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802631.ch4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1190/1.9781560802631.ch4</ext-link>, 1988.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Weimer(1973)}}?><label>Weimer(1973)</label><?label weimer1973?><mixed-citation>
Weimer, R.: A guide to uppermost Cretaceous stratigraphy, central Front Range,
Colorado: deltaic sedimentation, growth faulting and early Laramide crustal
movement,   Mountain Geol., 10, 53–97, 1973.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{White et~al.(2016)}}?><label>White et al.(2016)</label><?label white2016?><mixed-citation>White, E., Day-Lewis, F., Johnson, C., and Lane, J.: Application of frequency-
and time-domain electromagnetic surveys to characterize hydrostratigraphy and
landfill construction at the Amargosa Desert Research Site, Beatty, Nevada,
in: Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and
Environmental Problems 2016, Soc. Expl. Geophys.
Environ. Eng. Geophys. Soc., 2016, p. 657, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.29-024" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4133/sageep.29-024</ext-link>,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Wilson et~al.(2021)Wilson, Young, Bernstein, and
Shragge}}?><label>Wilson et al.(2021)Wilson, Young, Bernstein, and
Shragge</label><?label wilson2021?><mixed-citation>Wilson, G., Young, C., Bernstein, B., and Shragge, J.: Developing low-cost open
seismic nodal design for humanitarian groundwater investigations, in:
Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental
Problems 2021, Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems, 2021, p. 349, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.33-092" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4133/sageep.33-092</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Developing a low-cost frequency-domain electromagnetic induction instrument</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Ahmad et al.(2019)Ahmad, Iqbal, Maqbool, and Arshad</label><mixed-citation>
Ahmad, M. N., Iqbal, F., Maqbool, S., and Arshad, M. B.: Low-Cost Resistivity
Meter for Groundwater Exploration Using High Voltage Experimentations,
Int. J. Econ. Environ. Geol., 10, 35–39,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.46660/ijeeg.vol10.iss3.2019.306" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.46660/ijeeg.vol10.iss3.2019.306</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Alexander and Sadiku(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Alexander, C. and Sadiku, M.: Fundamentals of Electric Circuits, McGraw-Hill
Higher Education, Boston,
McGraw-Hill Higher Education, ISBN 10  1260226409,
ISBN 13  9781260226409,
2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>analogRead function(2022)</label><mixed-citation>
analogRead function: Analogread, Arduino IDE Reference,
<a href="https://www.arduino.cc/reference/en/language/functions/analog-io/analogread/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 15 January  2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Boaga(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Boaga, J.: The use of FDEM in hydrogeophysics: A review, J. Appl.
Geophys., 139, 36–46, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.02.011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.02.011</a>,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Clark et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Clark, J. A., Page, R. T., Franklin, R., Miller, N. M., and Morken, M. O.:
Appropriate geophysics technology: Inexpensive instruments for water
exploration at a local level in developing nations, Geol. Soc. Am.,  520,   171–181,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1130/2016.2520(16)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1130/2016.2520(16)</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Dean et al.(2017)Dean, Nguyen, Kepic, Armitage, and
Rossiter</label><mixed-citation>
Dean, T., Nguyen, N., Kepic, A., Armitage, B., and Rossiter, H.: The
democratization of seismic acquisition, in: SEG Technical Program Expanded
Abstracts 2017,  Soc. Expl. Geophys., 201–205,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2017-17634981.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2017-17634981.1</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Fontaine et al.(2018)Fontaine, Percy, Oware, Bosompemaa, Gbedzi, and
Lane</label><mixed-citation>
Fontaine, J. M., Percy, A., Oware, E. K., Bosompemaa, P., Gbedzi, V., and Lane,
J. W.: Application of electromagnetic induction to develop a precision
irrigation framework to facilitate smallholder dry season farming in the
Nasia-Kparigu area of northern Ghana, in: SEG Technical Program Expanded
Abstracts 2018, Soc. Expl. Geophys., 2491–2495,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2018-2997867.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2018-2997867.1</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>Frischknecht et al.(1991)Frischknecht, Labson, Spies, and
Anderson</label><mixed-citation>
Frischknecht, F. C., Labson, V. F., Spies, B. R., and Anderson, W. L.: 3.
Profiling Methods Using Small Sources, in: Electromagnetic Methods in Applied
Geophysics, Soc. Expl. Geophys., 2,  105–270,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802686.ch3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802686.ch3</a>, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>Purcell(1966)</label><mixed-citation>
Purcell, E. M.: Electricity and Magnetism, Am. J. Phys., 34, p. 830, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139012973" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139012973</a>, 1966.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Schofield et al.(2012)Schofield, Connors, and
Russell</label><mixed-citation>
Schofield, I., Connors, M., and Russell, C. T.: NetPICOmag: A low-cost
networked magnetometer and its applications, Earth  Planet. Space, 64, 279–297, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5047/eps.2011.10.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5047/eps.2011.10.001</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Sea and Ernenwein(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Sea, C. D. and Ernenwein, E. G.: Frequency domain electromagnetic induction:
an efficient method for investigating Fort Ancient village dynamics,
Archaeol. Prospect., 28, 73–87, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/arp.1798" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/arp.1798</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Shahsavani(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Shahsavani, H.: Comparison of a low-cost magneto-inductive magnetometer with a
proton magnetometer: A case study on the Galali iron ore deposit in western
Iran, Near Surf. Geophys., 17, 69–84, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.12026" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.12026</a>,
2018.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>Shubitidze et al.(2021)Shubitidze, Saparishvili, Barrowes,
Shubitidze, and Prishvin</label><mixed-citation>
Shubitidze, F., Saparishvili, G., Barrowes, B., Shubitidze, T., and Prishvin,
M.: ULEMA: Ultra-Light ElectroMagnetic Array system for UXO detection
and classification, in: Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to
Engineering and Environmental Problems 2021, Symposium on the
Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems
Proceedings, p. 21, Denver, Colorado, US, Environmental &amp; Engineering Geophysical Society, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.33-012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.33-012</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>Sirota et al.(2021)Sirota, Shragge, Krahenbuhl, Swidinsky, Yalo, and
Bradford</label><mixed-citation>
Sirota, D., Shragge, J., Krahenbuhl, R., Swidinsky, A., Yalo, N., and Bradford,
J.: Development and validation of a low-cost direct current resistivity meter
for humanitarian geophysics applications, Geophysics, 87, WA1–WA14,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2021-0058.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2021-0058.1</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Soler-Llorens et al.(2019)Soler-Llorens, Galiana-Merino,
Nassim-Benabdeloued, Rosa-Cintas, Zamora, and Giner-Catulra</label><mixed-citation>
Soler-Llorens, J., Galiana-Merino, J., Nassim-Benabdeloued, B., Rosa-Cintas,
S., Zamora, J., and Giner-Catulra, J.: Design and Implementation of an
Arduino-Based Plug-and-Play Acquisition System for Seismic Noise
Measurements, Electronics, 8, 1035, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8091035" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8091035</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>Ward and Hohmann(1988)</label><mixed-citation>
Ward, S. H. and Hohmann, G. W.: Electromagnetic Theory for Geophysical
Applications, in: Electromagnetic Methods in Applied Geophysics, Soc. Expl. Geophys., 1,
130–311,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802631.ch4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802631.ch4</a>, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Weimer(1973)</label><mixed-citation>
Weimer, R.: A guide to uppermost Cretaceous stratigraphy, central Front Range,
Colorado: deltaic sedimentation, growth faulting and early Laramide crustal
movement,   Mountain Geol., 10, 53–97, 1973.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>White et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
White, E., Day-Lewis, F., Johnson, C., and Lane, J.: Application of frequency-
and time-domain electromagnetic surveys to characterize hydrostratigraphy and
landfill construction at the Amargosa Desert Research Site, Beatty, Nevada,
in: Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and
Environmental Problems 2016, Soc. Expl. Geophys.
Environ. Eng. Geophys. Soc., 2016, p. 657, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.29-024" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.29-024</a>,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Wilson et al.(2021)Wilson, Young, Bernstein, and
Shragge</label><mixed-citation>
Wilson, G., Young, C., Bernstein, B., and Shragge, J.: Developing low-cost open
seismic nodal design for humanitarian groundwater investigations, in:
Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental
Problems 2021, Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems, 2021, p. 349, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.33-092" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4133/sageep.33-092</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
