Evaluating the multiple coil configurations of the EM38DD and DUALEM-21S sensors to detect archaeological anomalies

Archaeological Prospection

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 91-102

  Simpson, David ^a   van Meirvenne, Marc ^a   Saey, Timothy ^a   Vermeersch, Hans ^a   Bourgeois, Jean ^a   Lehouck, Alexander ^a   Cockx, Liesbet ^a   Vitharana, Udayakantha W A ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Electrical conductivity; Electromagnetic induction; Geoarchaeology; Magnetic susceptibility; Multiple coil sensors; Near surface geophysics

Indexed keywords

EID: 67651095896     PISSN: 10752196     EISSN: 10990763     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/arp.349     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Benech C, Marmet E. 1999. Optimum depth of investigation and conductivity response rejection of the different electromagnetic devices measuring apparent magnetic susceptibility. Archaeological Prospection 6: 31-45.
2. Callegary JB, Ferré TPA, Groom RW. 2007. Vertical spatial sensitivity and exploration depth of low-induction-number electromagnetic-induction instruments. Vadose Zone Journal 6: 158-167.
3. Cockx L, Ghysels G, Van Meirvenne M, Heyse I. 2006. Prospecting frost-wedge pseudomorphs and their polygonal network using the electromagnetic induction sensor EM38DD. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 17: 163-168.
4. Conyers LB, Ernenwein EG, Grealy M, Lowe KM. 2008. Electromagnetic conductivity mapping for site prediction in meandering river floodplains. Archaeological Prospection 15: 81-91.
5. Fröhlich B, Gugler AIM, Gex P. 1996. Electromagnetic survey of a Celtic tumulus. Journal of Applied Geophysics 35: 15-25.
6. Gee GW, Bauder JW. 1986. Particle-size analysis. In Methods of Soil Analysis. Part I: Physical and Mineralogical Methods, Klute A (ed.). Soil Science Society of America: Madison; 383-411.
7. Geonics Limited. 1999. Application of 'Dipole-Dipole' Electromagnetic Systems for Geological Depth Sounding. Technical Note TN-31, Geonics Limited: Mississauga.
8. Keller GV, Frischknecht FC. 1966. Electrical Methods in Geophysical Prospecting. Pergamon Press: Oxford. Kvamme KL. 2006. Integrating multidimensional geophysical data. Archaeological Prospection 13: 57-72.
9. Kvamme KL. 2006. Integrating multidimensional geophysical data. Archaeological Prospection 13: 57-72.
10. Linford NT. 1998. Geophysical survey at Boden Vean, Cornwall, including an assessment of the microgravity technique for the location of suspected archaeological void features. Archaeometry 40: 187-216.
11. McNeill JD. 1980. Electromagnetic Terrain Conductivity Measurement at Low Induction Numbers. Technical Note TN-6, Geonics Limited: Mississauga.
12. Simpson D, Lehouck A, Van Meirvenne M, Bourgeois J, Thoen E, Vervloet J. 2008. Geoarchaeological prospection of a medieval manor in the Dutch Polders using an electromagnetic induction sensor in combination with soil augerings. Geoarchaeology 23: 305-319.
13. Tabbagh A. 1984. On the comparison between magnetic and electromagnetic prospection methods for magnetic features detection. Archaeometry 26: 171-182.
14. Tabbagh A. 1985. The response of a three-dimensional magnetic and conductive body in shallow depth electromagnetic prospecting. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 81: 215-230.
15. Tabbagh A. 1986. What is the best coil orientation in the Slingram electromagnetic prospecting method? Archaeometry 28: 185-196.
16. Tabbagh A. 1990. Electromagnetic prospecting. In Archaeological Prospecting and Remote Sensing, Scollar I (ed.). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
17. Tabbagh A, Bossuet G, Becker H. 1988. A comparison between magnetic and electromagnetic prospection of a Neolithic ring ditch in Bavaria. Archaeometry 30: 132-144.
18. T'Jonck G, Moormann FR. 1962. Verklarende tekst bij het kaartblad Veurne 50E. Bodemkaart van België. IWONL: Gent.
19. Wait JR. 1962. A note on the electromagnetic response of a stratified earth. Geophysics 27: 382-385.