An assessment of miniaturised electrical imaging equipment to monitor pollution plume evolution in scaled centrifuge modelling

Depountis, Nikolaos; Harris, Charles; Davies, M. C. R.

doi:10.1016/s0013-7952(00)00091-0

Cited by 23 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Jones (1995) selected this method for detecting the scaling properties of a fracture system at different resolutions (i.e. inter-electrode spacing), from 20 cm to 16 m. Depountis et al (2001) reported a scale modelling experiment of a plume tracer by miniaturising the electrical device on a soil sample with dimensions of 75 cm x 22 cm x 12 cm, at a 3 cm resolution.…”

Section: Temporal Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When soil function is studied, the technical time of electrical data acquisition (temporal resolution) with respect to the kinetics of the process studied is a crucial factor (Depountis et al, 2001;. To maintain the advantages of non-destructive methods, one must choose the methods that allow a strictly reversible effect; that is the medium under study must be identical before and after the measurement (Tabbagh et al, 2000).…”

Section: Duration Of the Time Of Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Electrical resistivity survey in soil science: a review

Samouëlian

Cousin

Tabbagh³

et al. 2005

Soil and Tillage Research

889

528

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electrical resistivity of the soil can be considered as a proxy for the spatial and temporal variability of many other soil physical properties (i.e. structure, water content, or fluid composition). Because the method is non-destructive and very sensitive, it offers a very attractive tool for describing the subsurface properties without digging. It has been already applied in various contexts like : groundwater exploration, landfill and solute transfer delineation, agronomical management by identifying areas of excessive compaction or soil horizon thickness and bedrock depth, and at least assessing the soil hydrological properties. The surveys, depending on the areas heterogeneities can be performed in one-, two-or three-dimensions and also at different scales resolution from the centimetric scale to the regional scale. In this review, based on many electrical resistivity surveys, we expose the theory and the basic principles of the method, we overview the variation of electrical resistivity as a function of soil properties, we listed the main electrical device to performed one-, two-or three-dimensional surveys, and explain the basic principles of the data interpretation. At least, we discuss the main advantages and limits of the method.

show abstract

Section: Temporal Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Duration Of the Time Of Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrical resistivity survey in soil science: a review

Samouëlian

Cousin

Tabbagh³

et al. 2005

Soil and Tillage Research

889

528

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ERT has been traditionally used in geological prospecting (Shima 1992;Suzuki and Higashi 2001;Mahmut et al 2006), but is now also often applied in hydrological and environmental studies. Applications include the monitoring of solutes and fluid flow in porous media (Binley et al 1996;Fangary et al 1998;French et al 2002), the monitoring of vadose zone water flow (Daily et al 1992;Backer and Moore 1998;Park 1998;Benderitter and Schott 1999;Binley et al 2002) and soil pollution studies (Ahmed and Sulaiman 2001;Depountis et al 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of the spatial variability of root water uptake of maize and sorghum at the field scale by electrical resistivity tomography

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Saving water for crop production is an old, but ongoing, challenge which requires a better understanding of the in situ functioning of root systems. In particular, this requires a better quantification and understanding of the spatial and temporal variability of the root water uptake at the field scale. Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) is a nondestructive soil imaging technique, related to water content, which could help in spatializing active zones of water uptake. In this article, we evaluate ERT as an alternative method for quantifying and spatializing root water uptake at the field scale. To this aim, an experimental field study with maize and sorghum submitted to different water supply levels (Fully, Moderately or Poorly Irrigated treatments-FI, MI, PI zones) was conducted for 3 months with concomitant conventional, local, water balance measurements and 2D ERT imaging. ERT images showed an heterogeneous depletion of soil water by the crops, particularly, in the MI and PI zones with patches of high/low electrical resistivity (and thus water content) variations. This heterogeneity was greatest in the MI zone and points to spatial variations in rooting pattern and/or root efficiency. The 5-days difference in electrical resistivity could be quantitatively related to root uptake in the surface layer (down to 60 cm) but the relationship depends on the mean soil water content. At greater soil depth, in the water stressed zones, the water extraction front progressing downwards could not be assessed with the ERT surface setting used in this study. As a conclusion, ERT can be a useful, unique, technique for monitoring and estimating field water uptake by plant roots and its variability if combined water content measurements are available for in situ calibration and if the sensitivity/resolution of the technique is improved for estimation over the whole root zone.

show abstract

“…Godio andNaldi, 2003, Slater et al 2006). Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) is a powerful tool for investigating pore fluid properties (Olsen at al., 1999;Kemna et al, 2000;Depountis et al, 2001;Damanesco and Fratta, 2006; ) as shown in laboratory experiments (Comina et al, 2005) and for solute transport in undisturbed soil columns (Binley et al, 1996) and field sites (Slater et al, 2000;French et al, 2002, Binley et al 2005. How to estimate hydrogeophysical parameter is still one of the major challenges, state-of the art knowledge is described by Linde et al, (2006).…”

Section: Characterisation Of Contaminant Plumesmentioning

confidence: 97%