The search for graves

Geophysics ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 56 (9) ◽  
pp. 1310-1319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce W. Bevan

Over the decades, grave markers in old cemeteries have been lost. Geophysical exploration can sometimes locate the unmarked burials. The two techniques which may be best for this search are a ground‐penetrating radar survey and a soil conductivity survey. A ground‐penetrating radar survey, with its capability for estimating the depth and shape of buried objects, is particularly suitable. With an electromagnetic induction survey, the disturbed soil in the grave shaft can sometimes be detected as a change in electrical conductivity. Both of these surveys also can locate large metal objects. These surveys have limitations. At some sites, the radar cannot profile deeply enough; at others, the soil strata are so complex that graves cannot be distinguished. A conductivity survey can be degraded by metallic trash and other small objects in the topsoil; it can give the best results where the earth is distinctly stratified. Results from nine surveys are illustrated here. The sites are all in the U.S.A. and the graves are not older than the 17th century. Magnetic and resistivity surveys may be suitable for some sites, but they have not been very successful for the sites discussed here. The success of these surveys has ranged widely, from excellent to poor. While little archaeological excavation has followed these surveys, geophysical tests at marked graves show the capability of the instruments.

Geoderma ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 207-208 ◽  
pp. 310-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
François Jonard ◽  
Mohammad Mahmoudzadeh ◽  
Christian Roisin ◽  
Lutz Weihermüller ◽  
Frédéric André ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 844-850 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan van der Kruk ◽  
Nils Gueting ◽  
Anja Klotzsche ◽  
Guowei He ◽  
Sebastian Rudolph ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (11) ◽  
pp. 1437-1438
Author(s):  
Eder Ruiz ◽  
Daniel Chaparro-Arce ◽  
John Pantoja ◽  
Felix Vega ◽  
Chaouki Kasmiv ◽  
...  

In this paper, the singularity expansion method (SEM) is used to improve the signal-to-clutter ratio of radargrams obtained with a ground penetration radar (GPR). SEM allows to select the poles of the GPR signals corresponding to unwanted signals, clutter, and also reflections of specific buried objects. A highly reflective metallic material was used to assess the use of SEM as a tool to eliminate unwanted reflections and signals produced by a GPR. Selected clutter poles are eliminated from each frame of the SAR image in order to keep only desired poles for analysis. Finally, the reconstructed radargram obtained applying SEM is compared with the image obtained using a well-known processing technique. Results show that the proposed technique can be used to straightforwardly remove undesired signals measured with GPRs.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 675 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Gomez-Ortiz ◽  
Isabel Blanco-Montenegro ◽  
Jose Arnoso ◽  
Tomas Martin-Crespo ◽  
Mercedes Solla ◽  
...  

Convective hydrothermal systems have been extensively studied using electrical and electromagnetic methods given the strong correlation between low conductivity anomalies associated with hydrothermal brines and high temperature areas. However, studies addressing the application of similar geophysical methods to hot dry rock geothermal systems are very limited in the literature. The Timanfaya volcanic area, located on Lanzarote Island (Canary Islands), comprises one of these hot dry rock systems, where ground temperatures ranging from 250 to 605 °C have been recorded in pyroclastic deposits at shallow (<70 m) depths. With the aim of characterizing the geophysical signature of the high ground temperature areas, three different geophysical techniques (ground penetrating radar, electromagnetic induction and magnetic prospecting) were applied in a well-known geothermal area located inside Timanfaya National Park. The area with the highest ground temperatures was correlated with the location that exhibited strong ground penetrating radar reflections, high resistivity values and low magnetic anomalies. Moreover, the high ground temperature imaging results depicted a shallow, bowl-shaped body that narrowed and deepened vertically to a depth greater than 45 m. The ground penetrating radar survey was repeated three years later and exhibited subtle variations of the signal reflection patterns, or signatures, suggesting a certain temporal variation of the ground temperature. By identifying similar areas with the same geophysical signature, up to four additional geothermal areas were revealed. We conclude that the combined use of ground penetrating radar, electromagnetic induction and magnetic methods constitutes a valuable tool to locate and study both the geometry at depth and seasonal variability of geothermal areas associated with hot dry rock systems.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document