1887

Abstract

Summary

We performed a geophysical study in a historical site in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The main objective was to localize and characterize an old tunnel. Considering the complex characteristics of the buried structure and the urban localization of the study area, we performed prefeasibility studies to determine the usefulness of different geophysical methods. We first applied the EMI method then the electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) method. The EMI results showed a large amount of anomalies associated to varied facilities that helped us not to do false interpretations in the ERT results.

Regarding ERT results, in the three lines a resistive anomaly was found. These anomalies were aligned in the presumed direction of the tunnel. The joint inversion acquired with four different electrode spacings (a = 1, 2, 3 and 4 m) provided good lateral and vertical resolutions, as well as enough penetration depth, in which the contours of the anomaly associated to the tunnel appear fairly well delimited.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201802618
2018-09-09
2020-07-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Beetham, P. and Hutchinson, R.
    [2009] A geophysical investigation of a deep tunnel rock bore in Nottingham, UK. 24th European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, SAGEEP, 2, 741–749.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bonomo, N., Osella, A., Martinelli, P., De la Vega, M., Cocco, G., Letieri, F. and Frittegotto, G.
    [2012] Location and characterization of the Sancti Spiritus Fort from geophysical investigations. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 83, 57–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Leucci, G. and Negri, S.
    [2006] Use of ground penetrating radar to map subsurface archaeological features in an urban area. Journal of Archaeological Science, 33, 502–512.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Loke, M. H. and Barker, R.
    [1996] Rapid least-squares inversion of apparent resistivity pseudosections by quasi-Nexton method. Geophysical Prospecting, 44, 131–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Martinez-Lorenzo, J. A., Rappaport, C.M. and Quivira, F.
    [2011] Physical limitations on detecting tunnels using underground-focusing spotlight synthetic aperture radar. IEEE transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 49, 65–70.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Osella, A., Martinelli, P., Grunhut, V., De la Vega, M., Bonomo, N. and Weissel, M.
    [2015] Electrical imaging for localizing historical tunnels at an urban environment. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 12, 674–685.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Tawfik, M., Farag, K. S. and Ibraheem, I. M.
    [2011] The efficiency of (VLF-EM) method in detecting buried old tunnels in the Egyptian Nile delta. 24th European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 5434–5436.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Won, I. J., Kreiswetter, D. A., Fields, G. R. A. and Sutton, L.
    [1996] Electromagnetic induction spectroscopy for clearing landmines. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 39(4), 703–709.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201802618
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201802618
Loading

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