2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2019.103563
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Derivation of empirical relationships between geotechnical parameters and resistivity using electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) and borehole data at Sohag University site, upper Egypt

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
1
6
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, upon closer inspection of these findings, it is evident that most of the variables have coefficients of variation that range from 0.12 for the liquid limit WL to 0.41 for the swelling amplitude εg. Based on the research conducted by Abdelmalek et al [ 29 ] and Mohammeda et al [ 9 ], this result is in line with factors that contribute to measurement errors in laboratory test methods. For instance, the coefficient of variation in relation to the fines percentage (0.05) is considerably lower than that of the plasticity index (0.16), confirming the difficulty of determining the Atterberg limits in comparison to the particle size analysis [ 30 ].…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, upon closer inspection of these findings, it is evident that most of the variables have coefficients of variation that range from 0.12 for the liquid limit WL to 0.41 for the swelling amplitude εg. Based on the research conducted by Abdelmalek et al [ 29 ] and Mohammeda et al [ 9 ], this result is in line with factors that contribute to measurement errors in laboratory test methods. For instance, the coefficient of variation in relation to the fines percentage (0.05) is considerably lower than that of the plasticity index (0.16), confirming the difficulty of determining the Atterberg limits in comparison to the particle size analysis [ 30 ].…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Different studies have investigated the correlation between geotechnical parameters and electrical resistivity. Mohammeda et al [ 9 ] showed that there is a good correlation between geophysical methods and geotechnical tests in the characterization of swelling soils. Sivelle [ 10 ] demonstrates that there is no direct correlation between electrical resistivity and dynamic tip resistance.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is one of the most widely used geophysical methods 8,9 . At present, it has been widely used in geology 10,11 , hydrology 12,13 , geotechnical engineering 14 , mineral exploration 15 environmental engineering 16 , coal mine water inrush monitoring 17 , environmental pollution monitoring 18,19 , archaeology 20, and other fields, and has achieved good results. The resistivity tomography measuring device usually contains four electrodes.…”
Section: Principle Of Resistivity Tomographymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two-dimensional surface electrical resistivity tomography (2-D surface ERT) is an advanced geophysical method producing true cross-sections of subsurface electrical resistivity [26,27]. It is well-suited to the investigation of heterogeneous and discontinuous aquifers [28][29][30][31][32] and continues to be widely used [33][34][35][36]. However, ERT equipment is expensive.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%