HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (7) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Samouëlian, A. Articles by Bruand, A. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Samouëlian, A. Articles by Bruand, A. Agricola Articles by Samouëlian, A. Articles by Bruand, A. Related Collections Tomography Experiment Design Soil Physics

Electrical Resistivity Imaging for Detecting Soil Cracking at the Centimetric Scale

^a INRA, Unité de Science du Sol, Avenue de la Pomme de Pin, BP 20619, 45166 Olivet, Cedex, France
^b INRA, Unité d'Agronomie, Rue Fernand Christ, 02007 Laon Cedex, France
^c UMR 7619 "Sisyphe", Case 105, 4 place Jussieu, 75005 Paris, France
^d ISTO, Université d'Orléans, Géosciences, BP 6759, 45067 Orléans Cedex 2, France

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Electrical distribution of current lines (dashed) and equipotential surface between two current electrodes A and B; measure of electrical potential across the electrodes M and N in a Wenner configuration.

View larger version (31K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Electrode device.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. The measurement sequence for building up a pseudo-section.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Measurement map of an apparent electrical resistivity pseudo-section in a Wenner configuration of 15 electrodes.

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Arrangement of model blocks and apparent resistivity data points in a Wenner array.

View larger version (33K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Mathematical inversion of Res2dinv model.

View larger version (27K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Apparent resistivity pseudo-section for the five stages, crack localization between the Electrodes 8 and 9.

View larger version (27K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Resistivity anomalies during the different stages along the profile.

View larger version (33K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Interpreted resistivity pseudo-section for the Stages A, B, C, D, and E.

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Interpreted resistivity variation between the Electrodes 8 and 9 during the following cracking stages and for different depth investigation.

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   Fig. 11. Lateral variation of interpreted resistivity as a function of crack localization, for the first depth layer 0 to 0.8 cm.