Multilevel resistivity prospecting of architectural remains: the Schwarzach case study

Magnetic imaging and electrical resistivity tomography studies in a Roman military installation found in Satala archaeological site, northeastern Anatolia, Turkey

“…The conventional resistivity technique, which provides a map of apparent resistivity data for single or several levels of electrode separations, has been widely applied since 1960s (Atkinson, 1963;Clark, 1996;Herbich et al, 1997;Hesse et al, 1986). Today the acquisition of resistivity data is mostly carried out very quickly by conventional resistivity mapping surveys, which are performed by earth resistance systems that run with the standard twin-array, in archaeological prospection (Clark, 1996;Herbich et al, 1997).…”

“…Today the acquisition of resistivity data is mostly carried out very quickly by conventional resistivity mapping surveys, which are performed by earth resistance systems that run with the standard twin-array, in archaeological prospection (Clark, 1996;Herbich et al, 1997). By this technique a map is generally produced using the apparent resistivity data which is not only a function of the subsurface resistivity distribution but of the geometry of electrodes as well.…”

Geomagnetic and Geoelectric Prospection on a Roman Iron Production Facility in Hüttenberg, Austria ( Ferrum Noricum )

“…(ii) Geoelectric measurements. Stone constructions as well as slag deposits of the iron production process are characterized by a relatively high electrical resistivity compared with the underlying soils and rocks (Herbich et al, 1997;Dogan and Papamarinopoulos, 2006). Earlier electrical resistance tomography (ERT) surveys conducted on the Semlach-Eisner and Kreuztratte sites ( Figure 1) yielded resistivity values for the slag deposits that were two to three times higher than the surrounding soil (Walach, 2007).…”

Ground-penetrating radar and geo-electrical simulations of data from the Floridablanca archaeological site

“…Moreover, the investigation of geological deposits and buried landforms is useful for generating palaeoenvironmental information (e.g. Herbich et al, 1997;Silliman et al, 2000;Weston, 2001). Although these methods have been applied systematically in archaeology during the past 50 years, their implementation in Argentina is relatively new, having started in the middle of the 1990s (Carrara, 1996;Ponti et al, 1996).…”