1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 9, Issue 5
  5. Article
Volume 9 Number 5
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Derelict coal mine workings at Apedale in Staffordshire, United Kingdom were the focus for a multi‐disciplinary geophysical and intrusive site investigation. Objectives were to: 1) locate the surface entrance to a coal mine access shaft, 2) determine the inclined shaft’s changing depth below present ground level, 3) determine if it was open, partly or fully filled, 4) locate it beneath a known shaft if (1) was unsuccessful and finally 5) compare geophysical mineshaft detection techniques in difficult ground conditions.

After initial site reconnaissance, desktop study and modelling, field work collected surface micro‐gravity and electrical resistivity imaging (ERI) 2D profiles to locate the shaft and entrance area. The made‐ground nature of the site made identification of clear geophysical anomalies challenging. Subsequent intrusive investigations to locate the entrance were unsuccessful. A second phase of fieldwork down a known mineshaft imaged three geophysical anomalies beneath this shaft floor; after comparison with modelled data, subsequent intrusive investigations of the ERI anomaly successfully located the target shaft. Collapsed material was progressively cleared to the surface and a new shaft entrance stabilized.

Surface micro‐gravity 2D profiles surprisingly did not produce clear target anomalies, likely to be due to the target depth below ground level and the variety of above‐ground, relict mine structures present. Surface ERI 2D profiles were less affected by above‐ground structures but investigated anomalies were found to be heterogeneous ground materials. Comparisons of 2D micro‐gravity, ERI and ground‐penetrating radar profiles collected within a mineshaft showed ERI data were optimal. 2D micro‐gravity and ERI modelling were shown to aid geophysical interpretations.

© European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers © 2011 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2011028
2018-12-18
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2011028
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Antonio‐CarpioR.G., Pérez‐FloresM.A., Camargo‐Guzmán and Alanís‐AlcantarA.2004. Use of resistivity measurements to detect urban caves in Mexico City and to assess the related hazard. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences4, 541–547.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. BranstonM.W. and StylesP.2003. The application of time‐lapse micro‐gravity for the investigation and monitoring of subsidence at Northwich, Cheshire. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology36, 231–244.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. CardarelliE., Di FilippoG. and TuccinardiE.2006. Electrical resistivity tomography to detect buried cavities in Rome: A case study. Near Surface Geophysics4, 387–392.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. ChambersJ.E., WilkinsonP.B., WellerA.L., MeldrumP.I., OgilvyR.D. and CauntS.2007. Mineshaft imaging using surface and crosshole 3D electrical resistivity tomography: A case history from the East Pennine Coalfield, UK. Journal of Applied Geophysics62, 324–337.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. GrandjeanG., GourryJ.C. and BitriA.2000. Evaluation of GPR techniques for civil‐engineering applications: Study on a test site. Journal of Applied Geophysics45, 141–156.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. LokeM.H., AcworthI. and DahlinT.2003. A comparison of smooth and blocky inversion methods in 2D electrical imaging surveys. Exploration Geophysics34, 182–187.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. LokeM.H. and BarkerR.D.1996. Rapid least‐squares inversion of apparent resistivity pseudosections using a quasi‐Newton method. Geophysical Prospection44, 131–152.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. McCannD.M., JacksonP.D. and CulshawM.G.1987. The use of geophysical surveying methods in the detection of natural cavities and mineshafts. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology22, 59–73.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. MilsomJ.2007. Field Geophysics,3rd edn. John Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. NicholD. and ReynoldsJ.M.2001. Ground‐penetrating radar survey to detect sub‐slab voids beneath the East Promenade at Rhyl. Water and Maritime Engineering148, 47–56.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. PringleJ.K., LenhamJ.W. and ReynoldsJ.M.2009. GPR investigations to characterise Medieval and Roman foundations under existing shop premises: A case study from Chester, Cheshire, UK. Near Surface Geophysics7, 93–100.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. PringleJ.K., StimpsonI.G., ToonS.M., CauntS., LaneV.S., HusbandC.R., JonesG.M., CassidyN.J. and StylesP.2008. Geophysical characterisation of derelict coalmine workings and mineshaft detection: A case study from Shrewsbury, United Kingdom. Near Surface Geophysics6, 185–194.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. ReynoldsJ.M.1997. An Introduction to Applied and Environmental Geophysics.John Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. RuffellA., KulessaB. and GlynnD.2003. Geophysical investigation of abandoned salt mine hazards. Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics14, 14–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. TuckwellG., GrosseyT., OwenS. and StearnsP.2008. The use of micro‐gravity to detect small distributed voids and low‐density ground. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology & Hydrology41, 371–380.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. WilkinsonP.B., ChambersJ.E., MeldrumP.I., OgilvyR.D., MellorC.J. and CauntS.2005. A comparison of self‐potential tomography with electrical resistivity tomography for the detection of abandoned mineshafts. Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics10, 381–389.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2011028
Loading
Geophysical and intrusive site investigations to detect an abandoned coal‐mine access shaft, Apedale, Staffordshire, UK
Near Surface Geophysics 9, 483 (2011); https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2011028
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2011028
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2011028
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

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