Few words about GPR....

This is one of my first time slices that dates back to 10 years ago.

I remember how happy I was once I made the software work to get that image I couldn't see on site. It shows an old and peculiar reinforced concrete column in one of the first building in reinforced concrete built after a strong earthquake (M: 7.3) occured in my town at the beginning of the 20th century.

After 10 years, however, I have to say that in the construction industry still GPR is sometimes, too often, not known for what it can do and how, but more for what it cannot do and therefore considered useless a priori.

There is too much misinformation about capabilities and limitations and sometimes other devices are preferred for a specific problem/survey, despite the fact they have more intrisic limitations (i.e. they do not produce images, exploration depth of few millimeters etc) or there are not suitable at all.

The worst comes when GPR is not properly used, for example when we rely to much on the automatic setting of the control units or on 3D images directly on site with no processing or careful analysis of radargrams. Not all the features are easy targets or immediately visible.

Failures and wrong messages are then passed on to clients and potential clients ending up in refusing to employ it again as technique for a specific issue and, in general, in a misconception about the GPR method.

A trained person is always needed for a proper use, no matter how old or modern the technology of the control unit is.

GPR cannot provide an answer for everything by itself (nobody can hear a conversation using his/her eyes), but it is one of the most versatile methods. A trial may surprise you.