2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.07.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combined GPR and ERT exploratory geophysical survey of the Medieval Village of Pancorbo Castle (Burgos, Spain)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The 2D ERT has been developed during the last three decades for the exploration of complex geology, especially when the conventional VES or other techniques become unsuitable (Griffiths and Barker, 1993). It has been progressively used in shallow prospecting and intermediate depths for different aspects, including environmental, hydrogeology, engineering, archaeology, and mining (Dahlin, 1996;Thabit and Al-Hameedawie, 2014;Al-Zubedi and Thabit, 2015;Amini and Ramazi, 2016;Al-Menshed and Thabit, 2017;Fernández-Álvarez et al, 2017). The conventional VES method does not consider the lateral changes in the subsurface materials, while the ERT allows both lateral and vertical changes in the subsurface to be imaged accurately.…”
Section: Materials Methods and Fieldworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 2D ERT has been developed during the last three decades for the exploration of complex geology, especially when the conventional VES or other techniques become unsuitable (Griffiths and Barker, 1993). It has been progressively used in shallow prospecting and intermediate depths for different aspects, including environmental, hydrogeology, engineering, archaeology, and mining (Dahlin, 1996;Thabit and Al-Hameedawie, 2014;Al-Zubedi and Thabit, 2015;Amini and Ramazi, 2016;Al-Menshed and Thabit, 2017;Fernández-Álvarez et al, 2017). The conventional VES method does not consider the lateral changes in the subsurface materials, while the ERT allows both lateral and vertical changes in the subsurface to be imaged accurately.…”
Section: Materials Methods and Fieldworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the case of Spain a large part of the geophysical prospection work done so far has been focused on Roman or protohistoric sites characterized by the use of dense and long‐lasting building materials, as noted in a recent overview on the use of non‐destructive techniques in the evaluation of archaeological sites (Mayoral Herrera, 2016). Despite this the list of sites investigated by non‐invasive methods has increased substantially in recent years, in particular with regard to ‘central places’ belonging to Iron Age, Roman period and Late Mediaeval Ages (e.g., Álvarez Martínez et al, 2016; Carreras Monfort, 2016; Fernández‐Álvarez et al, 2017; García‐García et al, 2017; Novo et al, 2016; Ruiz Zapatero et al, 2012; Soto Cañamares, 2016; Torres‐Martínez et al, 2016). However, very few multiperiod sites potentially involving mediaeval occupations have been studied in this way (but see Fernández‐Álvarez et al, 2017; Henning et al, 2019) and there are as yet no examples of similar diagnostic work and analyses having been carried out on single‐period early mediaeval or later‐prehistoric sites, both characterized by weak structural and material evidence.…”
Section: Backdropmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, much attention has been given to the development of GPR and ERT instrumentation to improve their sensitivity and acquisition speed, while archaeological prospecting has appreciated major advances in this respect (Arka et al, 2019;Deiana et al, 2018;Ortega-Ramírez et al, 2020). The use of both techniques in archaeological prospecting, either individually or in combined use, is extensively discussed in several recent publications (e.g., Arka et al, 2019;de Silva et al, 2014;Drahor et al, 2011;Fernández-Alvarez et al, 2017;Küçükdemirci et al, 2017;López et al, 2015;Ortega-Ramírez et al, 2020;Utsi, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%