Geoelectric mapping of near-surface karstic fractures by using null arrays

Geophysics

Volumn 67, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 1769-1778

  Szalai, Sándor ^a   Szarka, László ^a   Prácser, Erno ^b   Bosch, Frank ^c   Müller, Imre ^c   Turberg, Pascal ^d  

^a GEODETIC AND GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Hungary)

^b GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INSTITUTE OF HUNGARY   (Hungary)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEUCHÂTEL   (Switzerland)

^d EPFL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARRAYS; DATA REDUCTION; ELECTRODES; LIMESTONE; MAPPING; BUILDINGS; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; ELECTRIC VARIABLES MEASUREMENT; GEOMETRY; LIME; ROCKS; SEDIMENTS;

GEOELECTRIC MAPPING; ARRAYS; DEPTH VARIATION; ELECTRODE CONFIGURATIONS; GEOPHYSICAL TECHNIQUES; HOMOGENEOUS HALF SPACE; POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE; SPATIAL VARIABILITY; SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES;

GEOPHYSICS; FRACTURE;

ANOMALY; FRACTURE; GEOELECTRIC FIELD; KARST;

JURA MOUNTAINS; SWITZERLAND;

EID: 0036867123     PISSN: 00168033     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1190/1.1527077     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Barker, R. D., 1979, Signal contribution sections and their use in resistivity studies: Geophys, J. Roy. Astr. Soc., 39, 123-129.
2. Brizzolari, E., and Bernabini, M., 1979, Comparison between Schlumberger electrode arrangement and some focused electrode arrangements in resistivity profiles: Geophys. Prosp., 27, 233-244.
3. Dey, A., and Morrison, H. F., 1979, Resistivity modelling for arbitrary shaped three-dimensional structures: Geophysics, 44, 753-780.
4. Gupta, R. N., and Bhattacharya, P. K., 1963, Unipole method of electrical profiling: Geophysics, 28, 608-616.
5. Habberjam, G. M., and Watkins, G. E., 1967, The use of a square configuration in resistivity prospecting: Geophys, Prosp., 15, 445-467.
6. Jakosky, J. J., 1960, Exploration geophysics: Trija Publ. Co.
7. Mathias, M. J. S., and Habberjam, G. M., 1984, A field example of the use of anisotropy parameters derived from resistivity soundings: Geophys. Prosp., 32, 725-739.
8. Militzer, H., Rösler, R., and Lösch, W., 1979, Theoretical and experimental investigations for cavity research with geoelectrical resistivity methods: Geophys. Prosp., 27, 640-652.
9. Prácser, E., 1999, Annual report about the activity of the geoelectric laboratory in 1988. 3D d.c. modeling: Eötvös Loránd Geophysical Institute Internal report (in Hungarian).
10. Spitzer, K., 1998, The three-dimensional de sensistivity for surface and subsurface sources. Geophys. J. Internat., 134, 736-746.
11. Szalai, S., 1993, Multielectrode de measurements for leakage monitoring: Diplom. work, Eötvös Loránd University (in Hungarian).
12. Szalai, S., and Szarka, L., 2000, An approximate analytical approach to compute geoelectric dipole-dipole responses due to a small burried cube: Geophys. Prosp., 48, 871-885.
13. Szarka, L., 1991, Detectability of high-conductivity plates by the CSAMT method on basis of analogue modelling results-An interesting analogue modelling experience: Acta Geod. Geoph. Mont. Hung., 26, 273-285.
14. Szarka, L., 1994, Three-dimensional electromagnetic imaging. Doc. Acad. diss., Geodetic and Geophysical Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (in Hungarian).
15. Szarka, L., and Menvielle, M., 1999, A possibility for an enhanced 3D parameter-sensitivity-The keyhole imaging: Geophys. Prosp., 47, 59-71.
16. Szarka, L., and Nagy, Z., 1992, A possibility of an electromagnetic technique to locate oil reservoir boundaries on basis of analogue modelling experiments: Acta Geod. Geoph. Mont. Hung., 27, 131-138.
17. Tsokas, G. N., Tsuorlos, P. I., and Szymanski, J. E., 1997, Square array resistivity anomalies and inhomogeneity ratio calculated by the finite element method: Geophysics, 62, 426-435.
18. Zwahlen F., and Doerfliger, N., 1995, Swiss report. COST 65 action, hydrogeological aspects of groundwater protection in karstic areas, in Final report of the COST 65 action: European Comission, Directorate General Science, Research and Development.