Détermination par méthode électromagnétique de la concentration en sel d’un sol irrigué

Job, Jean-Olivier; Tabbagh, Alain; Hachicha, Mohamed

doi:10.4141/cjss95-067

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The CS60 instrument has a 27 960 Hz frequency, a 0.6 m intercoil spacing and is normally used in VCP (horizontal dipoles) coil configuration; when necessary it can be used in HCP (vertical dipoles) coil configuration to increase the investigation ability for deep layers. Its characteristics, coil orientation and spacing, were originally designed for irrigated salted soil studies (Job et al, 1995) and not for archaeology (for which PERP configuration would be better). Measurements can be achieved either point by point or by continuously pulling the apparatus on a cart (Figure 3).…”

Section: Test Site Control Data and Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Detection of resistive features using towed slingram electromagnetic induction instruments

Thiesson

Dabas²,

Flageul

2009

Archaeological Prospection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Slingram frequency domain electromagnetic (FDEM) instruments allow simultaneous measurement of both magnetic susceptibility and electrical conductivity, which should justify their widespread use in archaeological surveying. However, this is not the case and their application remains quite limited due to: (i) a lack of knowledge about the role of coil orientation and spacing in terms of the detection abilities for archaeological features (especially for resistive bodies); and (ii) a lack of instrumentation specifically designed for shallow targets.We present here a test of a new version of the CS60 instrument (VCP coil configuration and 0.6 m intercoil spacing) for shallow depth resistive feature detection. This experiment was undertaken on the Roman site of Vieil-Evreux where a complete series of control resistivity and radar data was obtained. Detection of buried Roman walls was successful, in accordance with what can be expected from three-dimensional modelling.This confirms that the application of this type of instrument in archaeological surveys merits to be extended significantly.

show abstract

Section: Test Site Control Data and Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Its characteristics, coil orientation and spacing, were originally designed for irrigated salted soil studies (Job et al, 1995) and not for archaeology (for which PERP configuration would be better). Measurements can be achieved either point by point or by continuously pulling the apparatus on a cart (Figure 3).…”

Section: Test Site Control Data and Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of resistive features using towed slingram electromagnetic induction instruments

Thiesson

Dabas²,

Flageul

2009

Archaeological Prospection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The CS60 is a Slingram geometry apparatus working in the frequency domain (Job et al , ). It comprises two coplanar coils, separated by 0.6 m. Its working frequency is 27 960 Hz.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating Magnetic Ghosts on an Early Middle Age Settlement: Comparison of Data from Stripped and Non‐stripped Areas

Simon¹,

Koziol²,

Thiesson³

2012

Archaeological Prospection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceStatute laws concerning preventative archaeology adopted in France in 2001 for threatened sites required development of evaluation techniques. The common methodology used during the past 10?years has been extensive excavation. This method delivers a direct record of the discovered archaeological features and of their distribution. However, the success of visual observation can be variable, depending on geological context and the feasibility of envisaging the entire archaeological settlement from the part that is observed. We report here a case study from an early Middle Age settlement located on a floodplain. It was partially excavated and the alluvial context makes the features difficult to recognize for archaeologists. We show how the geophysical survey complemented the archaeological survey and allowed the detection of previously unrecognized features. In a second step, we compare the results of surveys with magnetic and electromagnetic methods on a topsoil stripped area and the neighbouring surface. From this analysis we conclude that a significant part of the unrecognized features discovered were present above the level of stripping. This example underlines that the practice of topsoil stripping has to be reconsidered, and should be integrated with geophysical survey to limit the potential loss of archaeological information. Copyright (C) 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

show abstract

“…These experiments were achieved using the CS60 apparatus, a prototype device developed and manufactured in our lab (Job et al, 1995;Thiesson et al, 2009), in both VCP and VVCP configurations and a reference survey in each case.…”

Section: Field Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Slingram EMI prospection: Are vertical orientated devices a suitable solution in archaeological and pedological prospection?

Thiesson¹,

Rousselle²,

Simon³

et al. 2011

Journal of Applied Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Détermination par méthode électromagnétique de la concentration en sel d’un sol irrigué

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Detection of resistive features using towed slingram electromagnetic induction instruments

Detection of resistive features using towed slingram electromagnetic induction instruments

Investigating Magnetic Ghosts on an Early Middle Age Settlement: Comparison of Data from Stripped and Non‐stripped Areas

Slingram EMI prospection: Are vertical orientated devices a suitable solution in archaeological and pedological prospection?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About