Geophysical methods (in particular ERT technique) constitute an excellent tool for the detection of buried cavities. However the integration approach of e different geophysical methods could minimize the ambiguity of geophysical interpretation of the buried cavity. The technique of electrical tomography has been joined to the technique of seismic refraction tomography in order to obtain more robust interpretations. Many tests have been carried out using synthetic data and experimental ones. It was finally used a statistical approach based on cluster analysis of the P-wave velocity, the density of the seismic rays and the electrical resistivity of the synthetic and experimental models. Distribution maps of the cluster in multi-space were built, allowing to better define and interpret the anomalies of the subsoil.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Capizzi, P., Cosentino, P.L., Fiandaca, G., Martorana, R., Messina, P.
    [2005] 2D GPR and geoelectrical modelling: tests on man-made tunnels and cavities. 11th European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics of the Near Surface Geoscience Division of the EAGE, Near Surface 2005; Palermo; Code 104313, B036 1-4, ISBN 90-737-8191-4.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cardarelli, E., Fischanger, F., Piro, S.
    [2008] Integrated geophysical survey to detect buried structures for archaeological prospecting. A case-history at Sabine Necropolis (Rome, Italy). Near Surface Geophysics, 6, 15–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Cardarelli, E., Cercato, M., Cerreto, A., Di Filippo, G.
    [2010]. Electrical resistivity and seismic refraction tomography to detect buried cavities. European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. Geophysical Prospecting, 58, 685–695.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Fasani, G.B., Bozzano, F., Cardarelli, E., Cercato, M.
    [2013] Underground cavity investigation within the city of Rome (Italy): A multi-disciplinary approach combining geological and geophysical data. Engineering Geology, 152, 109–121.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Gallardo, L.A. and Meju, M.A.
    [2004] Joint two-dimensional DC Resistivity and Seismic travel time inversion with cross-gradient constraints. Journal of Geophysical Research, 109, doi:10.1029/2003JB002716.
    https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JB002716 [Google Scholar]
  6. Kotyrba, B. and SchmidtV.
    , [2014] Combination of seismic and resistivity tomography for the detection of abandoned mine workings in Münster/Westfalen, Germany: Improved data interpretation by cluster analysis. Near Surface Geophysics, 12, 415–425 doi: 10.3997/1873‑0604.2013056.
    https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2013056 [Google Scholar]
  7. Meju, M.A., Gallardo, L.A.
    [2003] Evidence for correlation of electrical resistivity and seismic velocity in heterogeneous near-surface materials. Geophysical research letters, 30(7), 1373.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Maraio, S., Bruno, P.P.G.
    [2015] Near-surface Voids in the Neapolitan Volcanic Tuff [Italy] Detected by Seismic Refraction Tomography. Near Surface Geoscience. EAGE. Turin, Ital, 6–10 September 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Riddle, G.I., Hickey, C.J., Schmitt, D.R.
    [2010] Subsurface tunnel detection using Electrical Resistivity Tomography and Seismic Refraction Tomography: a case study. Keystone, Colorado. SAGEEP 2010. 552–562.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Sheehan, J.R., Doll, W.E., Watson, D.B., Mandell, W.A.
    [2005] Application of Seismic Refraction Tomography to karst cavities. US Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, Rapid City, South Dakota, 12–15 September 2005, 29–38.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error