1887

Abstract

Summary

In some survey problems, particularly in urban areas, the electrodes are confined to the perimeter of the survey area due to physical obstructions. This significantly limits the electrode arrangements that can be used for resistivity survey measurements. Previous methods in designing arrays for such surveys are dependent on the shape of the perimeter, such as rectangles. We use a modification of the ‘Compare R’ array optimization technique to automatically generate electrode arrays that provide the optimal resolution for perimeters of any shape. The array optimization algorithm is modified by using a weighting function to preferentially select arrays that improve the resolution of structures within the survey perimeter. Plots of the model resolution and point-spread-function help to illustrate the capabilities of the survey technique. It is shown that the vertical resolution is significantly poorer than the horizontal resolution that can be achieved with resistivity surveys. In a synthetic model test with shallow and deep high resistivity blocks in a homogeneous medium, the optimized arrays achieve better resolution of the structures compared to standard arrays designed for a square survey perimeter.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413793
2015-09-06
2024-04-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  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. Carpenter, E.W. and Habberjam, G.M.
    [1956] A tri-potential method of resistivity prospecting. Geophysics, 11, 455–469.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Kuras, O., Beamish, D., Meldrum, P.I. and R.D.Ogilvy
    [2006] Fundamentals of the capacitive resistivity technique. Geophysics, 71, G135–G152.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Loke, M.H., Chambers, J.E., Rucker, D.F., Kuras, O. and P.B.Wilkinson
    [2013] Recent developments in the direct-current geoelectrical imaging method. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 95, 135–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Loke, M.H., P.B.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., P.B.Wilkinson, P.B., Chambers, J.E., Uhlemann, S.S. and J.P.R.Sorensen
    [2015] Optimized arrays for 2-D resistivity survey lines with a large number of electrodes. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 112, 136–146.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Oldenborger, G.A. and P.S.Routh
    [2009] The point-spread function measure of resolution for the 3D electrical resistivity experiment. Geophysical Journal International, 176, 405–414.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 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]
  9. 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]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413793
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413793
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