A new sensor for non-invasive soil moisture detection, based on the principle of prepolarized surface-nuclear magnetic resonance (PP-SNMR) (Splith, T., et al., 2024) was tested on a profile covering the transition from mineral to peat soil in the Gnarrenburger Moor in northwest Germany. This prototype has a size of 2.0m by 2.0m and consists of distinct coil systems for prepolarization, stimulation and detection of the NMR response of the protons of the soil water molecules in the Earth’s magnetic field. To provide ground truth for the in-situ measurements, we carried out laboratory NMR experiments using undisturbed soil samples from the PP-SNMR measurement positions at depths between 0.0m to 0.66m. However, the question arises how comparable the relaxation properties of PP-SNMR and laboratory NMR can be, because the latter works at artificial magnetic fields, i.e. at different Larmor frequencies (fL).
To identify a possible frequency-dependency of the resulting relaxation time distributions (RTD), we used two NMR devices in the laboratory: a single-sided NMR system (PM25, Magritek, fL =13.2 MHz) and a core scanner (Helios, Vista Clara, fL =0.5 MHz). The RTDs were calculated using the Matlab-based NUCLEUS-Software (Hiller, T., 2024), which provides confidence intervals for initial amplitude and logarithmic mean relaxation time to allow improved statistical analyses.
Within their individual confidence intervals, the T2 RTDs measured in the laboratory are in agreement to each other and also to the RTDs of T2* measured in the field for relaxation times >6 ms, which corresponds to the effective dead time of the PP-SNMR prototype. Correspondingly, the PP-SNMR moisture content from soil regions with significant amount of micropores with T2(*)<6 ms is underestimated, whereas the water content estimates from the two laboratory NMR instruments agree within their individual confidence intervals. Due to the lower magnetic field, the signal-to-noise ratio of the core scanner is strongly reduced compared to the single-sided device and leads thus to a higher uncertainty.
A reduction of the effective PP-SNMR dead time would be desirable to detect also the micropores of the soil. Apart from that, laboratory NMR and PP-SNMR provide comparable results, at least for the T2(*) relaxation, and we conclude that laboratory NMR studies can support PP-SNMR field campaigns. However, this observation does not hold for the T1 relaxation behavior, for which a strong frequency dispersion, at least for weakly decomposed peat soils, is evident. Our future studies aim on the relationship between NMR relaxation time distribution and the water retention properties of peat soils.
Acknowledgements
This research is funded by the German Research Foundation (CO 1738/1-1).
References
Hiller, T. (2024), ThoHiller/nmr-nucleus: Version v.0.2.1 (v.0.2.1). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10647253.
Splith,T., Hiller, T, Costabel, S., Müller-Petke, M., (2024), Soil moisture measurements with compact prepolarization surface NMR sensors, MRPM, 2024.