Integrated geophysical studies in the upper part of Sardis archaeological site, Turkey

Drahor, Mahmut G.

doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2005.10.008

Cited by 83 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The question of which is the most effective array is a matter of some debate in the literature (see for example the discussions in studies by Zhou et al, 2000;Zhou and Dahlin, 2003;Dahlin and Zhou, 2004;Drahor 2006;Pá nek et al, 2010). Some authors consider that the Wenner array is most sensitive to changes in the vertical resistivity of the subsoil (Griffiths and Turnbull, 1985;Griffiths and Barker, 1993), the average reliable depth for investigation being around half that of the spacing (Edwards, 1977).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrical Tomography Applied to the Detection of Subsurface Cavities

Martines-López¹,

Rey²,

Dueñas³

et al. 2013

JCKS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:We have analyzed the geoelectric response produced by three cavities cut into different geological substrata of granite, phyllite, and sandstone that had previously been characterized by direct methods. We also examined a mining void excavated in granite. In each case, we applied three different geoelectric arrays (Wenner-Schlumberger, Wenner and dipole-dipole) and several inter-electrode spacings. The survey results suggest that electrical resistivity tomography is a viable geophysical tool for the detection and monitoring of mining voids and other subsurface cavities. The results vary depending on a wide range of factors, such as the depth and diameter of the cavity, the multi-electrode array used, the inter-electrode spacing, the geological model, and the density of the data. The resolution capacity of the Wenner-Schlumberger array for the detection of these cavities was greater than that of the Wenner array and slightly better than the dipole-dipole. There is a direct relationship between inter-electrode spacing and diameter of the cavity. In general, we observed a loss of resolution as the distance between the electrodes increased. The most efficient detection was achieved when the inter-electrodes distance was less than or equal to the diameter of the cavity itself. In addition, cavity detection became increasingly less precise with its depth beneath the surface. Cavities with a radius of about 1.5 m were located by both the WennerSchlumberger method and the dipole-dipole at depths of more than 4.6 m, which means that prospecting can be carried out at depths 3 times the radius of the cavity.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrical Tomography Applied to the Detection of Subsurface Cavities

Martines-López¹,

Rey²,

Dueñas³

et al. 2013

JCKS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) is a technique that can detect and characterize layers by exploiting resistivity contrasts between different layers using electrical current. The aim of the electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) technique is to scan the subsurface along the survey line using a selected electrode array [1], [2]. It is an advanced geophysical method used to determine the subsurface resistivity distribution by making measurements on the ground surface.…”

Section: Description Of the Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Complex Geophysical Prospection – Electrical Resistivity Tomography and Geomagnetic Survey for Detecting Limestone Inclusions in Mini Maritsa Iztok Ead

Grigorova¹,

Tzankov²,

Kisyov³

et al. 2017

Geobalcanica Proceedings 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The presence of consolidated limestone inclusions in Mini Maritsa Iztok EAD has great influence on the pace of productivity and becomes an issue of primary importance. Complex geophysical prospections were performed in order to collect information about the presence, location and characteristics of the solid limestone bodies incorporated in the mostly clayey medium. The use of selected high-resolution geophysical methodselectrical resistivity tomography (ERT) and geomagnetic survey proved to be very effective in the non-destructive survey of the investigated area.Keywords: electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), geomagnetic survey, electromagnetic field, limestone inclusions. INTRODUCTIONMini Maritsa Iztok EAD is the largest coal mining company in the Republic of Bulgaria. It works the Maritsa Iztok lignite field. Coal seams in the Maritsa Iztok basin are located relatively low at 6-10 m to 110 -120 m below the surface. The total thickness of the coalfield complex is around 35 -40 m and is divided by clay layers into three seams. The medium (second) seam is the main coal carrier with an average thickness of 15 -25 m. The deposit is operated by three opencast mines -Troyanovo-1, Troyanovo-North and Troyanovo-3. The present study helps in understanding the geological conditions in opencast Troyanovo-3. Troyanovo-3 mine is located in the southern part of the Maritsa Iztok Basin and is in the form of a rectangle with west-east orientation, a length of 12 kilometers and a width of about 2,5-3 km. The payable reserves are calculated at 336,230,000 tonnes. The coal layer is located at an average depth of 70-80 m. Extraction conditions in the opencast Troyanovo-3 become harder because of presence of solid limestone inclusions. These solid limestones bodies make extraction operations extremely challenging. This study is focusing on opencast coal exploration in the area of Mini Maritsa Iztok EAD. The usefulness of geophysical methods in mapping the hard rock inclusions in the overburden of the lignite mines is outlined.

show abstract

“…Th e integrated use of geophysical methods has developed rapidly in the last fi fteen years in archaeological prospection (Brizzolari et al, 1992;Gaff ney et al, 2004;Drahor, 2006;Casana et al, 2008). Th e combined application of diff erent geophysical techniques supplies useful information about buried archaeological contexts, particularly höyük(tell, tepe)-type archaeological settlements.…”

Section: Archeosciences Revue D'archéométrie Suppl 33 2009 P 29mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Th e magnetic method is very sensitive to magnetic susceptibility changes within the soil and to strongly magnetic features like all kinds of burnt archaeological structures, kilns, pottery deposits, etc., which are characterized by thermoremanent magnetization and which are very common in archaeological sites (Drahor, 2006). Magnetic studies were carried out using a practicable fl uxgate gradiometer.…”

Section: Archeosciences Revue D'archéométrie Suppl 33 2009 P 29mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In an archaeological study, resistivity variations between soil types and stones are important, whereas in geological studies these variations are generally important between the diff erent rock types. Th e electrical imaging technique has recently become an effi cient tool in investigating shallow archaeological structures (Drahor, 2006). Th e ERT method was applied using fi ve diff erent arrays (Wenner, WennerSchlumberger, dipole-dipole, pole pole and pole-dipole) to display buried archaeological structures for various measuring and line intervals (0.5, 1 and 2 m).…”

Section: Archeosciences Revue D'archéométrie Suppl 33 2009 P 29mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation