Ground probing radar has disadvantages include condition-dependent effectiveness, requirement for expert interpretation, and cost.

• A. Very fast results regardless of soil; inexpensive
• B. Disadvantage: works only under certain soil conditions, requires special expertise to interpret the results, and is very expensive
• C. Detects non-metallic pipes
• D. Requires no power supply

Answer: (B)

GPR’s main limitations are that its effectiveness depends on soil conditions, it requires trained interpretation, and it can be costly. In conductive soils, like clay or moist environments, radar energy is attenuated and reflections become less clear, reducing depth penetration and resolution. That makes results highly dependent on the ground being surveyed, so you can’t rely on a single clear outcome in every soil type. Interpreting GPR data isn’t straightforward; the radar returns can come from multiple buried features, layers, or moisture contrasts, so skilled technicians are needed to distinguish pipes and utilities from background clutter and to interpret the meaning of complex records. And the equipment, data processing, and expert analysis add up to a significant cost, including purchase, maintenance, and specialized operators. The other options either describe capabilities rather than drawbacks or make incorrect claims (for example, that GPR yields fast results regardless of soil, or that it requires no power).