1887

Abstract

Summary

Cave detection and mapping is one of the most common targets of the resistivity method since the infinite resistivity of the air filled void of the cave is at a high contrast to the resistivity of any geological structure. In the case studies presented in this work (Maroneia and Andritsa, Greece) the caves are formed in limestone because of the karstification in addition to the local tectonics.

The geophysical method applied in both case studies is the Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT). The existing chambers have been observed in the resistivity models and new chambers are detected.

However, resistivity values attributed to the caves are of wide range. In Maroneia values of several thousand of Ohm.m have been measured while in Andritsa the values characterizing the chambers are small (maximum of 1610 Ohm-m).

The different behaviour of resistivities can be explained by the different geological formation hosting the caves and emphasizes the need for calibration measurements. This can be overcome with ERT measurements on the same geological formation but far from the surveyed area in order to measure the resistivity of the formation itself. In this case a forward modelling will suggest the expected values in the presence of a void.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201414132
2015-10-05
2024-04-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Basheer, A.A., Atya, M.A., Shokri, M. and Abu shady, M.M.
    [2012] Application of ERT and SSR to detect the subsurface cave at 15th May City, Helwan, Egypt. NRIAG Journal of Astronomy and Geophysics, 1, 23–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Gambetta, M., Armadillo, E., Carmisciano, C., Stefanelli, P., Cocchi, L. and Tontini, F.C.
    [2011] Determining geophysical properties of a near-surface cave through intergrated microgravity vertical gradient and electrical resistivity tomography measurements. Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, 73(1), 11–15. DOI: 10.44311/jcks2009ex0091.
    https://doi.org/10.44311/jcks2009ex0091 [Google Scholar]
  3. Kim, J.H.
    [2009] DC2DPro-2D interpretation system of DC Resistivity Tomography, User’s Manual and Theory. KIGAM, S. Korea.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Kormazopoulou, L. and Hatzilazarou, D.
    [2005] Andritsa Cave: Fateful Refuge (Athens).
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Putiska, R., Nikolaj, M., Dostal, I. and Kusnirak, D.
    [2012] Determination of cavities using electrical resistivity tomography. Contributions to Geophysics and Geodesy, 42(2), 201–211.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Tsourlos, P.I.
    [1995] Modelling interpretation and inversion of multielectrode resistivity survey data. Ph. D. Thesis, University of York, U.K.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201414132
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201414132
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