In highly populated areas, the 3D resistivity surveys are limited by many physical obstructions and it is not possible to use normally implanted electrodes in a rectangular grid in such cases. Therefore, an alternative special 3D survey case is when the electrodes are confined to the perimeter of the survey area. Thus, many approaches have been proposed for such case. In this work, the performance of the optimized perimeter arrays and a new improvement of these arrays in case of adding the noisy-weight to the algorithm were demonstrated and compared with the conventional L and Corner arrays using two synthetic examples. the optimized perimeter arrays achieve better resolution and structure detectability than 'L and Corner' array. In addition, there is a slight improvement with the noise-weights optimized data set in terms of reflects a slightly higher resistivity values and lowest model misfit. It is noted that the horizontal resolution is better than the vertical resolution.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Baker, H.A., Djeddi, M., Boudjadja, A.G. and K.Benhamam
    , [2001] A different approach in delineating near surface buried structures. EAGE 63rd Conference & Technical Exhibition.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. LokeM.H., AcworthI. and DahlinT.
    [2003] A comparison of smooth and blocky inversion methods in 2D electrical imaging surveys. Exploration Geophysics, 34, 182–187.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Loke, M.H., Wilkinson, P.B., and Chambers, J.E.
    , [2010a] Fast computation of optimized electrode arrays for 2D resistivity surveys. Computers & Geosciences, 36(11), 1414–1426.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Loke, M.H., Chambers, J.E., Rucker, D.F., Kuras, O. and Wilkinson, P.B.
    , [2013] Recent developments in the direct-current geoelectrical imaging method. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 95, 135–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Loke, M.H., Wilkinson, P.B., Uhlemann, S.S., Chambers, J.E. and L.S.Oxby
    , [2014] Computation of optimized arrays for 3-D electrical imaging surveys. Geophysical Journal International, 199, 1751–1764.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Loke, M.H., Wilkinson, P.B., Chambers, J.E., Uhlemann, S.S. and J.P.R.Sorensen
    , [2015a] Optimized arrays for 2-D resistivity survey lines with a large number of electrodes. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 112, 136–146.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Loke, M.H., Wilkinson, P.B., Tejero-Andrade, A., and Kruse, S.
    [2015b] Optimized arrays for resistivity measurements confined to the perimeter of a survey area. NSG - 21st European meeting of environmental and engineering geophysics. Extended abstract.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Menke, W.
    , [1989] Geophysical data analysis: Discrete inverse theory. 45, Academic press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Tejero-Andrade, A., Cifuentes-Nava, G., Chávez, R., Lopez-Gonzalez, A. and C.Delgado-Solorzano
    , [2015] L- and CORNER-arrays for 3D electric resistivity tomography : an alternative for geophysical surveys in urban zones. Near Surface Geophysics, in press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhou, B. and T.Dahlin
    , [2003]. Properties and effects of measurement errors on 2D resistivity imaging surveying. Near Surface Geophysics, 1, 105–117.
    [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