A new look at Greenland's ice sheet and the bedrock below

From NASA: Airborne Radar Looking Through Thick Ice During NASA Polar Campaigns

The bedrock hidden beneath the thick ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica has intrigued researchers for years. Scientists are interested in how the shape of this hidden terrain affects how ice moves — a key factor in making predictions about the future of these massive ice reservoirs and their contribution to sea level rise in a changing climate.

NASA has been monitoring Antarctic and Arctic ice since 2009 with the Operation IceBridge airborne mission. Although the primary objective is to continue the data record of ice sheet surface elevation changes from NASA’s Ice, Cloud and Land Elevation Satellite, or ICESat, which stopped functioning in 2009, IceBridge is also gathering data on other aspects of polar ice from snow on top to the bedrock below.  One radar instrument on these flights that is currently headed to Antarctica for another year of observations is revealing insights about the bedrock hidden beneath the ice sheet.

IceBridge is carrying a suite of radar instruments designed, built and operated by scientists, engineers and university students with the Center for the Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets (CReSIS), a National Science Foundation-funded center based at the University of Kansas.

Image showing ice surface, internal layering and bedrock (jagged line at bottom of image) in thick ice between Dome C and Vostok.
Image showing ice surface, internal layering and bedrock (jagged line at bottom of image) in thick ice between Dome C and Vostok. Data gathered by the Multichannel Coherent Radar Depth Sounder during IceBridge’s Nov. 27, 2013 survey flight. Image Credit: CReSIS / Theresa Stumpf

This bedrock-mapping radar is known as the Multichannel Coherent Radar Depth Sounder or MCoRDS. MCoRDS measures ice thickness and maps sub-glacial rock by sending radar waves down through thick polar ice. This ice-penetrating radar is the result of efforts that started with a collaboration between NASA and the National Science Foundation 20 years ago.

In the early 1980s, researchers started showing interest in using radar to measure ice thickness and map sub-ice rock. Among the interested was NSF’s Office of Polar Programs, which provided the initial funding for a thickness-measuring instrument. “We were given one year to prove it would work,” said Prasad Gogineni, scientist at CReSIS. CReSIS researchers used that funding to build their first radar depth sounder, which started flying aboard NASA aircraft in 1993. Over the years, CReSIS has built a number of instruments – each more advanced that the last – leading to the radar IceBridge relies on today.

Through the Ice

One of the biggest obstacles faced when building an ice-penetrating instrument like MCoRDS is the nature of radar itself. Radar works by sending out radio waves and timing how long it takes for them to reflect back. Radio waves travel through air virtually unimpeded, but materials like metal, rock and water act almost as mirrors.

Ice, on the other hand reacts differently depending on the radar’s frequency. It reflects high-frequency radio waves, but despite being solid, lower frequency radar can pass through ice to some degree. This is why MCoRDS uses a relatively low frequency—between 120 and 240 MHz. This allows the instrument to detect the ice surface, internal layers of the ice and the bedrock below. “To sound the bottom of ice you have to use a lower frequency,” said John Paden, CReSIS scientist. “Too high a frequency and signal will be lost in the ice.”

These radio waves are sent out in rapid pulses through an array of downward-pointing antennas mounted beneath the aircraft. This array of multiple antennas, up to 15 on NASA’s P-3, allows researchers to survey a larger area and record several signals at once to get a clearer picture.

One of the MCoRDS underwing radar antenna arrays mounted beneath the wing of NASA’s P-3B.
A MCoRDS’s underwing radar antenna arrays mounted beneath the wing of NASA’s P-3 aircraft at McMurdo Station’s airfield. MCoRDS uses arrays beneath the wings and fuselage of the plane, giving a total of 15 antennas that can send and receive signals used to map polar ice and bedrock. Image Credit: NASA/George Hale

The 15 element array is the largest ever flown on the P-3 and is was built as part of a joint effort between NASA, the University of Kansas and private industry. The design and construction of this array, much of which was done by University of Kansas undergraduate and graduate students, took about six months.

Radar pulses travel down to the surface, through the ice to bedrock below and back up through the ice to MCoRDS’s array, where they are routed to the instrument’s receiver and recorded on solid state drives aboard the aircraft.

Each survey flight yields a great deal of data, often as much as two terabytes, that then needs to be downloaded, archived and backed up. The computing infrastructure needed to handle this data is managed by people from the University of Indiana, which is also a partnering organization in CReSIS. During each campaign, University of Indiana personnel support the mission by staying up through the night to ensure that the data collected each day is successfully stored and backed up.

Processing Pictures

After returning from an IceBridge campaign, CReSIS researchers spend months processing the archived data to build a detailed view of ice sheets and bedrock. First, researchers tease out the return signals from the ice surface and bed. Because thick ice attenuates, or weakens, radar  so researchers need to filter the data to pick out the weak return signal from the bed, which would otherwise be drowned out by  the much stronger surface return and any noise in the data.

After finding the ice surface and bedrock, researchers use something called synthetic aperture radar processing. This combines many readings from a radar antenna as it moves over the surface researchers can create a large simulated array. “You can make an aperture one kilometer long by moving the radar one kilometer,” said Paden. As with camera lenses, bigger is better, and a larger array lets researchers see more detail.

This sort of processing yields a detailed, but narrow, swath of the ice and sub-ice terrain for each antenna. Building a wider view is more complicated than just combining these separate signals. Although MCoRDS records signals coming back from the left and right of the plane’s flight path, it cannot determine which side the signals are coming from. To overcome this, CReSIS researchers use something known as tomography, a technique that uses specialized computer software to calculate the position and distance of signals returned from the bedrock. Once researchers can tell where terrain features are relative to the array they can combine the several channels to build a swath of terrain data useful for creating three-dimensional representations of the bedrock.

The Road Ahead

These terrain data are helping scientists better understand what’s under ice sheets. In the past year, researchers have produced new maps of Greenland’s and Antarctica’s bedrock and discovered a large and previously undetected canyon under Greenland’s ice sheet. Better information on sub-ice terrain will help researchers develop the next-generation ice sheet models needed to project future changes to glaciers, and better understand the flow of water at ice sheet bases.

As IceBridge continues to add to the record of sub-ice terrain measurements through its surveys over Greenland and Antarctica, scientists, engineers and students at CReSIS will keep making more advances. Improvements such as larger antenna arrays and improved data-processing techniques promise to make radar depth sounding even more effective. And in the future, uninhabited aerial vehicles like NASA’s Global Hawk, could greatly increase the amount of terrain that can be covered from the air.

Exactly what the future holds remains to be seen, but researchers have made great strides in probing polar ice thanks to a decision made by one person, former NASA program manager Bob Thomas, who provided Gogineni and his team the opportunity to prove that their instrument worked and funding from NASA’s PARCA initiative. “Without that, we would not have a depth sounder and imager program at KU,” said Gogineni. “It took both agencies to make it to the stage we are today.”

For more information about Operation IceBridge, visit:

www.nasa.gov/icebridge

For more about the ice-penetrating radar used by IceBridge, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/icebridge/instruments/mcords.html

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
37 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
tty
December 3, 2013 10:23 am

Paul Coppin says:
“That topo map of Greenland makes it look like Greenland is a impact crater, tectonically squashed… The density layers might correlate with vulcanism on nearby Iceland…”
No. Greenland is unusual since it has escarpments caused bu rifting and oceans opening on both coasts, so it was always rather high at the edges and low in the middle (like southern Africa). Then the weight of the ice has depressed the center even more. It is this bowl-shape that makes the Greenland ice-sheet so uniguely stable. It can’t calve out in any direction. The only way it can disappear is by melting in place.

Mac the Knife
December 3, 2013 11:47 am

Ed Mr. Jones says:
December 3, 2013 at 7:21 and 7:25 am
Looks like the DC 3 Got a PT-6 Gas turbine power plant upgrade – another exercise in engineering perfection.
Ed,
There’s a company called Basler Turbo Conversions up in Oshkosh WI that retrofits DC3s with modern turboprop engines, refurbishes and ‘zero times’ the airframes, adds ‘plugs’ to stretch the fuselage, and provides ski packages for polar operations. The plane shown may be one of their conversions. http://www.baslerturbo.com/
Enjoy!
MtK

george e. smith
December 3, 2013 12:44 pm

“””””…..“a key factor in making predictions about the future of these massive ice reservoirs and their contribution to sea level rise in a changing climate”……..”””””
Would it still be a key factor in making predictions about the future of these massive water reservoirs, and their contribution to sea level fall, in a changing climate ??

ssat
December 3, 2013 1:43 pm
Steve from Rockwood
December 3, 2013 1:46 pm

I am a little suspicious of the image. There are no faults or fractures in the overlying ice. I recall seeing a radar image from the late 1970s, early 1980s over water in Europe. Several linear features were mapped in several hundred feet of water that corresponded exactly with buried pipelines. This was satellite data. It seems hard to believe that subtle variations in ice layering could be imaged to depths of 3.5 km although I believe the bedrock interface could be located. But what else can a sceptic say?

December 3, 2013 1:49 pm

The bedrock looks too jagged. I wonder why they don’t use seismograph equipment. A slow speed sound transmitter like ice above high speed bedrock should give a fair profile of the bedrock ice interface I would think. There are probably geophysicists here who can say why I might be wrong. My formal education was back when geologists were also geophysicists. I did a Bachelors thesis on profiling of glacial till and Lake Agassiz clay thicknesses over bedrock in Manitoba. We used the first electronic portable “hammer” seismograph. The impulse was imparted by a sledgehammer on a steel plate on the ground that set off a counter – flashing lights in milliseconds; which stopped when a distant geophone received the sound back. Since I have done my share of electromagnetic (EM), magnetometer and scintillometer surveys over promising mineral ground.

Duster
December 3, 2013 2:09 pm

Steve from Rockwood says:
December 3, 2013 at 1:46 pm
I am a little suspicious of the image. There are no faults or fractures in the overlying ice. I recall seeing a radar image from the late 1970s, early 1980s over water in Europe. Several linear features were mapped in several hundred feet of water that corresponded exactly with buried pipelines. This was satellite data. It seems hard to believe that subtle variations in ice layering could be imaged to depths of 3.5 km although I believe the bedrock interface could be located. But what else can a sceptic say?

There are two potential sources of those lines in the image. One is variation in ice density. The other is interference between radar pulses. Similar images are used in oil exploration all the time to even greater depths and with considerable success, so there’s no need to overwork your scepticism.

December 3, 2013 3:16 pm

Duster says:
December 3, 2013 at 2:09 pm
There are two potential sources of those lines in the image. One is variation in ice density.
That is the main reason: for high accumulation ice sheets, the winter and summer ice shows differences in density which can be counted and are visible on sonar and radar.
For the low accumulation ice sheets that are longer colder and warmer periods, but the deepest ice is too compressed to see any layers.
The layered ice sheet goes back to ~420 kyr. Below that the ice sheet is disturbed because the flow is over the bedrock ridge (left at the figure). Just under the middle of the figure, there is lake Vostok. A schematic view of the Vostok ice core taken years ago and lake Vostok is here:
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~mstuding/new_vostok_cartoon_high.jpg

Steve from Rockwood
December 3, 2013 6:38 pm

Duster says:
December 3, 2013 at 2:09 pm
Steve from Rockwood says:
December 3, 2013 at 1:46 pm
[snip]
There are two potential sources of those lines in the image. One is variation in ice density. The other is interference between radar pulses. Similar images are used in oil exploration all the time to even greater depths and with considerable success, so there’s no need to overwork your scepticism.
—————————————————-
Duster. I’m not an expert in radar but…unlike seismic, radar is an electromagnetic technique that is sensitive to variations in conductivity and dielectric properties. I’m trying hard to believe that annual variations in fresh water ice composition can be so accurately mapped. It looks too good to believe. Just sayin…

Brian H
December 3, 2013 7:15 pm

Um, that pic is not Greenland, dudes. Vostok is in Antarctica. All you “analyses” are of anal origin.

Brian H
December 3, 2013 7:15 pm

typo: you your

December 4, 2013 2:34 am

Steve from Rockwood says:
December 3, 2013 at 6:38 pm
radar is an electromagnetic technique that is sensitive to variations in conductivity and dielectric properties.
Besides differences in density, winter and summer snow/ice show differences in conductivity too. That is used to count the yearly layers if too small to be seen with the naked eye. For Vostok the yearly layers are too small anyway and the difference is in colder and less colder periods in the glacial and interglacial periods. The resolution of the age of the ice then is in the decades. The resolution of the gas bubbles is ~600 years.
But the advantage of a small deposit per year (a few mm ice equivalent/year) is that one can go back over 420,000 years before reaching disturbed ice/bedrock.