2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2016.09.018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combining geomorphological mapping and near surface geophysics (GPR and ERT) to study piping systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
32
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
3
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Pipes become visible on the surface when a pipe roof collapses, and their cross‐sections may change along the longitudinal profile. Previous research revealed that the length of pipes may be 6.5–9.2%, and even almost 50% longer than that suggested by surface mapping (Holden and Burt, ; Bernatek‐Jakiel and Kondracka, ). The soil pipes are not truly linear features but quite sinuous (Smart and Wilson, ; Wilson et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Pipes become visible on the surface when a pipe roof collapses, and their cross‐sections may change along the longitudinal profile. Previous research revealed that the length of pipes may be 6.5–9.2%, and even almost 50% longer than that suggested by surface mapping (Holden and Burt, ; Bernatek‐Jakiel and Kondracka, ). The soil pipes are not truly linear features but quite sinuous (Smart and Wilson, ; Wilson et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…sinkholes and blind gullies, is subtracted from total length of the pipe within a particular piping system in order to avoid the duplication of soil loss in the pipe and in CPs. The mass of soil loss due to piping in the study area was calculated assuming the value of soil bulk density in the Bereźnica Wyżna catchment equal to 1.45 g cm À1 (Bernatek-Jakiel and Kondracka, 2016). The piping erosion rates were related to the plots and the catchment area.…”
Section: Soil Loss Estimationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this method cannot provide complete information on the subsurface pipe network, its extension, lateral and vertical changes of a pipe size, length, and tortuosity. The mapping of PCs may lead to the underestimation of network density up to 50%, which was already reported in blanket peats in the Pennine Hills, UK [7] and in mid-altitude mountains in the Carpathians, Poland [8]. So far, research on soil pipes has presented only limited information on their morphometry and morphology, most often providing only a pipe diameter [5,6,9,10], although Terajima et al [11] found that the morphology of soil pipes can change rapidly over very short distances.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Among these methods, GPR has received the most attention, even though it seems that the potential of this method has not yet been fully exploited. Most reports have presented the preliminary results of GPR application in the detection of soil pipes [7,8,20], including only short conference abstracts [18,19]. On one occasion GPR was used to establish hydrological connectivity between pipes through the use of a tracer solution [21] and to estimate the pipe length [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results demonstrate that the proposed acoustic-based approach can effectively classify the blockage and damage conditions of siphons, and the recognition accuracy of the proposed method is higher than 94.4%. Therefore, this research has value for engineering applications.Recently, a series of methods have been developed for blockage or leakage detection in pipes, such as piezoelectric ultrasonic sensors technology [5], eddy current probes [6], closed-circuit television (CCTV) [7], sewer scanner evaluation technology (SSET) [8], and ground-penetrating radar (GPR) [9,10]. Piezoelectric ultrasonic sensors can detect minimal defects, and they have the advantages of being portable, non-polluting, and highly accurate for pipeline damage detection.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%