Response to soil compaction of the electrical resistivity tomography, induced polarisation, and electromagnetic induction methods: a case study in Belgium

被引:2
作者
Mansourian, Danial [1 ,2 ]
Vanderhasselt, Adriaan [3 ]
Cornelis, Wim [3 ]
Hermans, Thomas [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ghent, Dept Geol, Ghent, Belgium
[2] Univ Oklahoma, Mewbourne Coll Earth & Energy, Sch Geosci, Norman, OK USA
[3] Univ Ghent, Dept Environm, Ghent, Belgium
关键词
controlled traffic; depth of investigation index; electrical resistivity tomography; electromagnetic induction; geophysical methods; induced polarisation; penetration resistance; soil compaction; GROUND-PENETRATING RADAR; DC RESISTIVITY; CONDUCTIVITY; DEPTH; FIELD; ERT; VARIABILITY; LANDSLIDES; VINEYARD; AQUIFER;
D O I
10.1071/SR22260
中图分类号
S15 [土壤学];
学科分类号
0903 ; 090301 ;
摘要
Context Soil compaction acts at different scales and is challenging to measure on field scales.Aims To evaluate soil compaction under a controlled traffic experiment, using three different geophysical methods.Methods Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT), Electromagnetic Induction (EMI), and Induced Polarisation (IP) were selected to map soil compaction. Two different ERT arrays and EMI geometries were selected with different spacings. The influences of configuration, electrode spacing, and the Depth of Investigation Index (DOI) were evaluated. Soil physical properties were measured in the Laboratory and in the field. Error models were developed to assess the accuracy of the ERT profiles and later correlated with EMI and soil physical results.Key results Penetration resistance measurements identified a compacted layer at 25 to 35 cm depth with a maximum value of 5 MPa under fixed tracks and bulk density of 1.52 Mg m-3, while lowest values were 1.4 MPa and 1.36 Mg m-3. The dipole-dipole (DD) 10 cm array was more accurate towards both soil properties and locating the zones of high resistivity. The IP method identified chargeability anomalies at the same depth as the resistivity anomalies, possibly indicating a similar origin. The EMI test was less successful in accurately determining the locations of the conductive areas.Conclusions A clear relationship between the absolute value of the resistivity/conductivity signals with the level of compaction was not found, yet patterns of lateral variations in resistivity were identified.Implications Further studies are needed to establish the concrete relationship between soil compaction and geophysical signals. Soil compaction was studied in this research using three different geophysical tools. We created a controlled traffic farm in Belgium that contains different zones of soil compaction and used geo-electrical methods to find out whether soil compaction can be accurately estimated using geophysics. Laboratory data were also assessed complementary to the geophysical data. We found resistivity variations and realised that soil compaction does indeed affect geophysical signals, yet a straightforward relationship is yet to be found.
引用
收藏
页数:21
相关论文
共 132 条
[1]   Soil compaction, root system and productivity of sugarcane under different row spacing and controlled traffic at harvest [J].
Aguilera Esteban, Diego Alexander ;
de Souza, Zigomar Menezes ;
Tormena, Cassio Antonio ;
Lovera, Lenon Henrique ;
Lima, Elizeu de Souza ;
de Oliveira, Ingrid Nehmi ;
Ribeiro, Naiade de Paula .
SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH, 2019, 187 :60-71
[2]  
Alvemar H, 2017, Advances in Animal Biosciences, V8, P749, DOI [10.1017/s2040470017001388, 10.1017/S2040470017001388, DOI 10.1017/S2040470017001388]
[3]   High-resolution imaging of a vineyard in south of France using ground-penetrating radar, electromagnetic induction and electrical resistivity tomography [J].
Andre, Frederic ;
van Leeuwen, Cornelis ;
Saussez, Stephanie ;
Van Durmen, Renaud ;
Bogaert, Patrick ;
Moghadas, Davood ;
de Resseguier, Laure ;
Delvaux, Bruno ;
Vereecken, Harry ;
Lambot, Sebastien .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED GEOPHYSICS, 2012, 78 :113-122
[4]  
Antille D. L., 2019, Agronomy Research, V17, P653, DOI [10.15159/ar.19.133, 10.15159/AR.19.133]
[5]   DEPTH OF DETECTION OF BURIED CONDUCTIVE TARGETS WITH DIFFERENT ELECTRODE ARRAYS IN RESISTIVITY PROSPECTING [J].
APPARAO, A ;
RAO, TG ;
SASTRY, RS ;
SARMA, VS .
GEOPHYSICAL PROSPECTING, 1992, 40 (07) :749-760
[6]   The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir characteristics [J].
Archie, GE .
TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF MINING AND METALLURGICAL ENGINEERS, 1942, 146 :54-61
[7]   DEPTH OF INVESTIGATION OF COLLINEAR SYMMETRICAL 4-ELECTRODE ARRAYS [J].
BARKER, RD .
GEOPHYSICS, 1989, 54 (08) :1031-1037
[8]  
Benoit S, 2019, HYDROGEOL J, V27, P395, DOI 10.1007/s10040-018-1862-7
[9]   Identifying the characteristic scales of soil structural recovery after compaction from three in-field methods of monitoring [J].
Besson, A. ;
Seger, M. ;
Giot, G. ;
Cousin, I. .
GEODERMA, 2013, 204 :130-139
[10]  
Bhamidipati RA, 2016, Use of laboratory geophysical and geotechnical investigation methods to characterize gypsum rich soils