Carlo's v Castle

8/11/2019 Carlo's v Castle

1/16

Geophysical characterisation of Carlo's V Castle (Crotone, Italy)

M. Bavusi , A. Giocoli, E. Rizzo, V. Lapenna

IMAA-CNR - Hydrogeosite Laboratory, C.da. Fontanelle, 85052, Marsiconuovo (PZ), Italy

a b s t r a c ta r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:

Received 1 November 2007

Accepted 4 September 2008

Keywords:

Archaeology

Castle

Electrical resistivity tomography

Ground penetrating radar

Magnetic method

Time-slice

The Carlo's V Castle, located in Crotone Town, on the Ionian coast of the Calabria Region (Italy), date back to

the 13th century d.C. (Fig. 1). During its long life, the building changed several owners and sustained the

damages and the consequent reconstructions due to the innumerable naval battles. Moreover, the castle

suffered the action of the earthquakes which always afict the region.With the principal aim of detecting the location, depth and geometry of the rests of destroyed structures, a

systematic Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) survey was carried out in the area inside the boundary walls.

The results are sixty-two one-meter-spaced, ltered and migrated radargrams arranged in four 3D data-sets.

From each data-set, the most signicant time-slice was extracted.

To reduce the ambiguity in the GPR data interpretation, additional geophysical techniques, such as Magnetic

(M), and Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT), were carried out with a partial superimposition with the

GPR data. A comparison and a joint interpretation amongst different geophysical data pointed out some very

remarkable features associated to buried remains and possible buried cannonballs.

With the secondary aim to check the presence of an old military walkway linking two bastions a GPR prole

was carried out on the sea side boundary wall. The GPR results are in agreement with an ERT survey carried

out on the same prole and consistent with the presence of an underground passage.

2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The Carlo's V Castle, sited in the Crotone Town, on the Ionian coast

of the Calabria Region (Italy), suffered the damages due to the naval

battles and changes due to the evolution of the war art under several

owners: Carlo d'Angi in the 13th century, Ruffo family and Alfonso

d'Aragona in the 15th, Carlo IV di Borbone in the 18th. In the 19th

century the castle lost its military signicance and it was partially

dismantled owing to often earthquakes. In the 1960 some restoration

works were carried out. The boundary walls of the castle form a struc-

ture which shows a roughly quadrangularshape in plan view (Fig.1).At

four corners there are two bastions (S. CaterinaandS. Giacomo), placed

on the NW sea side, and two towers (Torre Comendante and Torre

Aiutante) situated on land. The inner area shows an irregular morphol-

ogy for the presence of topographical terraces connected by several

steep slopes (Fig. 1).

In this framework, a geophysical survey was planned in two steps:

1) check some features associated to buried remains of ancient

structures in the area inside the walls; 2) to check a military walkway

linking the two bastions in the sea side wall. Theeld work included a

3D Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) survey supported by Electrical

Resistivity Tomography (ERT) and magnetic surveys in order to reduce

the ambiguity in the interpretation of data.

2. Geophysical methods

In the recent years the geophysical methods have been rapidly

transformed; new sensors and technologies have made the instru-

ments able to acquire with high sensitivity and acquisition rate.

Moreover, new algorithm for data inversion is developed for all

geophysical parameters. There is currently a wide class of methods

and techniques that allow to obtain extremely detailed images of the

physical properties of the subsoil. Particularly, the magnetic, electro-

magnetic and electrical methods give fast, non-destructive and low

cost tools to obtain quick information for archeological research.

GPR method is appreciated for its non-destructivity and for its

ability to give a real-time, high resolution information (Basile et al.,

2000). In fact, the technique is based on the impulsive emission of

electromagnetic (e.m.) energy and on the reception of the reected

echoes which occurs at the buried discontinuity in the dielectric

constant and electric conductivity (Davis and Annan, 1989). The

acquisition consists in dragging an antenna along a free surface

(generally of the soil) while it emits and receives the e.m. signals. The

result of a GPR survey is a vertical section of the ground in terms ofX

(distance covered by the antenna) and two way time (double time

spent by the e.m. pulse to cover the path antenna/target/antenna.).

The timedepth conversion is possible estimating the electrical

permittivity (r) of the ground. The spatial resolution depends on

the used frequency, constructive features of the used antenna, and the

sampling rate. The use of adequate antennas allows to detect buried

remains but to carry out non-destructive checks on the structures

Journal of Applied Geophysics 67 (2009) 386401

Corresponding author.

E-mail address:[email protected](M. Bavusi).

0926-9851/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2008.09.002

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Applied Geophysics

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / j a p p g e o
mailto:[email protected]://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2008.09.002http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09269851http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09269851http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2008.09.002mailto:[email protected]


2/16


3/16

be used, but in most cases a line separation of 1m is used to reducethe

time-consumption of the survey (Nuzzo et al., 2002).

Magnetic method is a passive technique appreciated for its

quickness and non-destructivity. Recently, the gradiometric cong-

uration and the use of very sensitive vapour caesium sensors allow

detection of buried remains up to 6m depth (Bavusi et al., 2004).

The technique detects the variations in the geomagnetic eld due

to the presence, in the subsoil, of the buried objects. In fact, all bodies

Fig. 3.Detailed plan view of area AofFig. 2with the traces of GPR, ERT and magnetic surveys.

Fig. 4.Detailed plan view of area

B

ofFig. 2with the traces of GPR and magnetic surveys.

388 M. Bavusi et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 67 (2009) 386401


4/16

modify locally the geomagnetic eld proportional to their magnetic

permittivity (r).

Metals provide a greater modication, denedmagnetic anomaly,

than terracotta and stones (Chianese, 2003). The acquisition consists

in walking with the sensor (or the sensors) along a zigzag pathdened by aline spacingand amark spacing. In this way, a large area

can be covered in short time. The result of a magnetic survey is a

magnetic (or gradiometric) map which shows the magnetic anomaly

on the horizontalXYplane. The spatial resolution along the cross-line

direction is dened by theline spacing, while the spatial resolution in

the in-line direction depends on the sampling frequency. Supposing

that onewalks with a velocity of 1 m persecond, a sampling frequency

of 10 Hz provides a spatial resolution of 0.1 m in the sampling

direction. The introduction of a constant mark spacing allows to

compensate possible velocity variations of the operator.

When the magnetometer is equipped with two sensors located at

different heights on the same vertical, it is possible to gain the vertical

gradient of the geomagnetic eld. The gradient allows to avoid the

corrections (for the altitude, latitude, and longitude of diurnalvariation) required for a non-gradiometric magnetic survey.

The ERT method is an active technique more time expensive but

more robust also than the previous ones, thanks to the availability of

inversion routine based on the nite difference.

The most popular inversion routine is the Res2DInv, based on the

smoothness-constrained least-squares method (Loke and Barker,

1996).

The technique is based on the injection of current (I) into the

ground by using a couple of electrode (dened A and B) and the

simultaneous measure of the potential (V) by a second couple of

electrodes (dened M and N). Thesearched parameter is the apparent

electrical resistivity. The inversion process allows to obtain a model in

terms of the real electrical resistivity consistent with the apparent

measured resistivities.

The usefulness of the ERT was demonstrated in the structural

geological geometries such as fault planes in tectonically active areas

(Caputo et al., 2003; Colella et al., 2004), and landslide bodies

(Lapenna et al., 2003). Recently, the ERT was used to improve the

constraint for the detection of archaeological buried features (Rizzoet al., 2005).

3. Survey design

To optimize the geophysical survey, the area inside the boundary

wallswas divided into three areas: A, B and C. Moreover, a fourth

zone, indicated with D, was selected on the sea side boundary wall

linking two bastions (Fig. 2). In each area the superimposition

amongst several techniques was not perfect for logistic problems. In

Fig. 5.Detailed plan view of area CofFig. 2with the traces of GPR and magnetic surveys.

Fig. 6.Picture of area

D

ofFig. 2with the traces of GPR (#66) and ERT (T4) surveys.

389M. Bavusi et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 67 (2009) 386401


5/16

Fig. 7.Comparison between raw (a) and processed (b) radargrams obtained onto line #7 of area A.


6/16


7/16

Fig. 9.Time-slices obtained in area Astarting from radargram #28#44. a) time-slice from 0 to 0.4 m; b) time-slice from 0.4 to 0.8 m; c) time-slice from 0.8 to 1.2 m; d) time-


8/16

Fig. 10.Time-slices obtained in area Bstarting from radargram #45#51. a) time-slice from 0 to 0.4 m; b) time-slice from 0.4 to 0.8 m; c) time-slice from 0.8 to 1.2 m; d) time


9/16

Fig. 11.Time-slices obtained in area Cstarting from radargram #52#65. a) time-slice from 0 to 0.4 m; b) time-slice from 0.4 to 0.8 m; c) time-slice from 0.8 to 1.2 m; d) time


10/16

fact, magnetic surveys were not extended where metallic objects, like

railings and fencing, were present. Instead, GPR surveys did not cover

all magnetic investigation areas because of the roughness of the

ground and the presence of several obstacles like walls and

depressions. The ERT surveys were carried out in a small zone of

area A and inarea D to reduce the time-consumption of the survey.

All GPR surveys were carried out by using the GSSI SIR 3000

georadar system equipped with a 400 MHz central frequency, single

fold antenna placed on a trolley equipped with survey wheels. TheGPR acquisitions consisted of several survey proles one-meter

spaced. The system was set with a range of 60ns, the automatic

control in rst reector position, a gain control on four points, low-

pass and high-pass lters of 800 and 30 MHz respectively. Moreover a

scan rate of 32 scans per second and a sampling of 512 samples per

scan were used.

Magnetic measurements were acquired by means of the magnet-

ometer Geometrics G-858 with gradiometric conguration. The

system was set to acquire in bi-directional mode with a sampling

frequency of 5 Hz (corresponding to a spatial resolution of about 0.5m

walking with a velocity of 1m/s) along 1m spaced parallel surveylines. The sensors werexed at a distance equal to 1.0m, the lower one

0.30m from the ground.

Fig. 12.Radargram carried out onto the head of the boundary wall linking S. Caterina and S. Giacomo bastions.

Fig.13.Map of the magnetic gradient of the area inside the boundary wall of the Carlo's V Castle. a) gradiometric map of area A; b) gradiometric map of area B; c) gradiometric

map of area

C

.



11/16

The ERT surveys were carried out by using the IRIS Syscal R2

georesistivimeter with a 32-multielectrode system, with an electrode

spacing of 1.0m.

3.1. Area A

Forty-four radargrams, grouped in two families (from #1 to #27

and #28 to #44 respectively), were acquired in this area. Moreover a

gradiometric map was carried out in the entire area (about4231 m2). Finally three parallel 2.0m spaced WS ERT proles (T1,

T2 and T3 corresponding to the GPR proles #25, #27 and #23) were

carried out to obtain a 2.5D representation (Fig. 3).

3.2. Area B

In area B a group of seven radargrams (from #45to #51) covering

an area of 614 m2 was partially superimposed to a gradiometric

survey which covered an irregular, L-shaped area. In fact, the high

slopesof this area impeded thefullcoverage by theGPR survey,while a

metallic fence limited the magnetic survey area (Fig. 4).

3.3. Area C

In this at area the superimposition between GPR and magnetic

surveywasgood.Fourteenradargrams(from#52 to #65) withdecreasing

lengths were acquired in areaCof about 1414 m2. The gradiometric

survey interested a smaller superimposed area of 10 13 m2 (Fig. 5).

3.4. Area D

Although named area, this zone is indeed a narrow corridor

located onto the head of the boundary wall linking S. Caterina and S.

Giacomo bastions. For this reason a single radargram (#66) was

superimposed to an ERT WS survey along the same prole (Fig. 6).

4. Data processing and results

A GPR data, as well as the ERT data, are generally provided likevertical sections of the ground in the planesXt2or YZrespectively. In

this way it is very hard to compare them with a magnetic or

gradiometric map, which is, on the contrary, a representation of local

geomagneticeld in thehorizontalXYplane. Moreover, since the large

amount of GPR data a compact manner to show them was needed. To

quickly compare all data and provide a compact form to show them,

each GPR data-set was processed to obtain a data volume whose

extract the so-calledtime-slices, is a representation of reectivity of

the ground in the XYplane at a xed time. For the same reason, the

ERTsurvey, whencarried out along several parallel lines, was arrangedto provide several maps at different depths. However, comparison

between GPR and ERT data in the vertical plane was sometimes

necessary.

4.1. GPR data processing and results

All radargrams were subjected to a processing including: static

correction, for the correct positioning of time-zero; remove header

gain, to depurate the data from the eld gains; energy decay, to restore

a correct gain along each wavelet and compensate the energy

spreading;time cut, to show the data up to 50ns; fk-lter, for cutting

high dipping and back scattered noise; bandpass frequency lter,

between 100 and 600 MHz to remove the low and high frequencies

noise; migration with a velocity of 0.15m/ns; trace resampling at

0.05m; andbackground removalto cut the horizontal noise.

Fig. 7 shows a raw data (a) compared with processed data (b).

Although a migration velocity of 0.13m was selected, the radargrams

are showed in terms of time. In fact, the migration velocity represents

an arrangement of several velocities which allow collapse of a great

many hyperbolas. Not necessarily this velocity corresponds to the true

velocity in all radargrams.

So-processed radargrams were interpolated to build a data volume

for each family of parallel radargrams. In this way two data volumes

were obtained for area Aand one each for areas Band C.

Fig. 8 showsve time-slices obtained each 10nsin area A starting

from radargram #1#27 (Fig. 8ae). The greyscale used shows

qualitatively the absolute amplitude of reections: white colour

represents high-amplitude reections; dark-grey, absorption. Some

reective areas start to be delineated between 10 and 20ns (Fig. 8c).Other reective areas are visible between 30 and 40ns (Fig. 8d).The

Fig. 14.Test results between DD and WS devices of tomography T1 carried out in area

A

.



12/16

radargrams #28#44 of area Awere used to build the time-slices of

Fig. 9.In this case also, very remarkable features are visible between

10 and 20ns and between 30 and 40ns respectively (Fig. 9c,d).

In area Bthe time-slices built starting from radargram #45#51

show main reections between 10 and 20ns (Fig. 10c).

The radargrams #52#65 were used to build ve time-slices in

area C (Fig. 11). The highest amplitude is shown between 20 and

30 ns (Fig. 10c), although some remarkable features are visible

between 30 and 40 ns (Fig. 11d). Finally, a radargram (#66) was

carried out onto the head of the boundary wall of area D(Fig. 12).

The radargram shows a chaotic zone upto 30ns. Between 18 and 29 m

along x a riche reection zone is highlighted in the rectangle r.Below 30 ns, horizontal, parallel reectors can be noted (q).

4.2. Magnetic data processing and results

Magnetic data processing included the cleaning of spikes and the

cutting of data between 110 and + 110nT/m. In this way it was

possible to highlight both metallic and non-metallic anomalies with

the same colour scale. The so-ltered data were interpolated by using

the Kriging method with a grid of half meter mesh in both Xand Y

directions. The in-line direction is lightly undersampled, while the

cross-line direction is not much oversampled. In this manner the

spatial resolution in two directions is the same and no stretching

occurs in the pattern of magnetic anomalies. Fig. 13 shows the

magnetic gradient of all areas. The pattern of area A is formed by

several strong ( 110nT/m) dipolar anomalies aligned along different

directions which can be related to buried metal objects (Fig. 13a). In

area B, gradient values are high also in all investigated area, but in

the eastern zone several dipoles seem to form a horseshoe shaped

structure (Fig. 13b). Finally, in area C a strong positive anomaly is

present in the southern zone of the map. Moreover, several dipoles, as

well as the complex structure in the northern zone appear in otherzonesFig. 13c).

4.3. ERT data processing

Acquired ERT data form the so-called pseudosection, a vertical

section of the ground in terms of apparent electrical resistivity.

Obtaining the distribution of true resistivity is made possible by

inverting the data using several algorithms. The used inversion

routine is Res2DInv, based on the smoothness-constrained least-

Fig. 16.ERT T4 carried out on the head of the boundary wall in area

D

.

Fig. 15.2.5 D representation of electrical resistivity obtained by tomographies T1, T2 and T3 of area A.



13/16

squares method (Loke and Barker, 1996) which yields a resistivity

model able to generate a synthetic pseudosection very much alike

with the acquired one. A eld ERT test was applied to check the best

array between DipoleDipole (DD) andWennerSchlumberger (WS)

in area A. The WS technique was chosen because it has shown a

better S/N ratio and larger investigation depth (Fig 14). Before the

inversion process, data areltered to improve the convergence of the

model. For the ERT survey carried out in area A it was possible to

build a data volume interpolating three WennerSchlumberger

tomograpies. The result is shown inFig. 15where the distribution of

resistivities is provided at seven depths starting from 0.25 m. The area

covered by three tomograpies is 4 31 m2, but the interpolation was

performed onto an area of 531 m2 expanding half meter outside for

tomographies T2 and T3. A strongly resistive nucleus is visible

Fig. 17.Combination of data in area A. a) GPR time-slices between 0.8 and 1.2 m for the radargrams #1 #27 and between 1.2 and 1.6 m for the radargrams #28#44; b) map of

magnetic gradient; c) ERT maps at o.75 and 1.27 m respectively.



14/16

between 9 and 13m alongxat depths of 0.75 and 1.27 m. Finally, a WS

ERT was carried out onto the boundary wall linking S. Caterina and S.

Giacomo bastions in area D(Fig. 16). From 1.5 m to 15 m, a resistive

(500,m) and at zone is present up to a depth of 1.8 m where the

base is indicated with q. In it, a very high resistive nucleus is present

between 8 and 13 m along x (p). Below 2.5 m along z, a very low

resistive zone (s) can be related to the presence of water inltration.

The high resistivities (t) located from 16 m to the end along x are

probably due to a strong edge effect consequent the ramp ofFig. 6.Then, they were considered not signicant.

5. Joint interpretation

The last step of this workwas thejoint interpretation ofdata for each

area. A compact form to show the data is required to select more

signicant GPR time-slicesas wellas theERT maps. The most signicant

GPRdata arelocated between 20 and30 ns forall areas.The selected ERT

maps are at 0.75 and 1.27m respectively. Then, GPR data, and ERT data

when present, are compared for areas A, Band Cin form of maps.

For area Dthe comparison was possible in section view.

5.1. Data interpretation of area A

InFig. 17a 3D view of all data is provided. The most signicant

reections are indicated by p, qand t, while an absorption zone

is indicated by rand s(Fig. 17a). Reectionpcorresponds to the

highresistivebodyin the ERT maps (Fig.17c).Sincethe time-slices are

included between 20 and 30 ns and the ERT are at 0.751.27m, we can

calculate a velocity of 0.08 m/ns and a consequent relative electrical

permittivity of about 13. Magnetic anomaly related to object p is

very low (10nT/m) indicating a non-magnetized body. Conductive

zones around zone pcorrespond to the absorption zone in the time-

slices (Fig. 17a,b). Reection qis related to a transition zone with a

value of 50nT/m in the magnetic map (Fig. 17b). On the contrary, the

absorptionzone r is related with a very high magnetic gradient value

indicating the presence of conductive metal objects. The transitionzone between q and r is characterized by a gradient both in the

GPR and in magnetic data. The absorption zone sis located onto a

strong dipolar anomaly in the magnetic map (Fig. 17b). Finally the

reection t is located onto transition zone between a very high-

magnetized zone and area with low values of magnetic anomaly.

Summarizing area A shows: 1) reections associated to non-

magnetized areas or to transition zones between high and low values

of magnetic gradient. Moreover these reections are associated to

high resistive bodies; 2) absorption zones associated to high-

magnetized and very low resistive zones. First evidence can be

explained with the presenceof buriedremainslike drystone walls; the

second one with the presence of conductive, metallic objects.

5.2. Data interpretation of area B

The superimposition between GPR and magnetic data for area B

was very poor because of logistic problems. Reections indicated bypcan be related to a transition zone in the magnetic gradient, while

Fig. 18.Combination of data in area

B

. a) GPR time-slices between 0.8 and 1.2 m; b) map of magnetic gradient.



15/16

the absorption zones q and r correspond to a very high dipolar

anomaly (Fig. 18a,b).

5.3. Data interpretation of area C

Superimposition between GPR and magnetic data in the area C

was very good anda lotof correspondences canbe found between two

kinds of patterns. Absorption zones p and r correspond perfectly to

anomalous zones in the magnetic

eld with high values (Fig. 19a,b).The reection named qin the time-slice corresponds, instead, to a

transition zone in the magnetic gradient with values centered around

zero. Finally, the absorption zone in the time-slice indicated by s

shows very high values of magnetic gradient and the shape seems the

same in two maps. In areaCalso, main reections correspond to the

transition zones into the magnetic eld, while the absorption zones

show a good correspondence with high dipolar magnetic anomalies

related to the presence of magnetic objects.

5.4. Data interpretation of area D

Fig. 20shows the comparison between GPR and ERT data in areaD. Some correspondence can be found between two kinds of data;

reections indicated by pcan be related to the resistive body in the

ERT. The reector q at about 30 ns can be associated to a level placed

at about 1.80m. The GPR data shows that q crosses all the radargram

indicating that the resistive zone t is an artifact due to the edge

effect. Below this level, the high conductive zone scan be related to

an absorption zone in the radargram. Finally, the feature named ris

well represented in both GPR and ERT data. These features are

compatible with a buriedpassageway; in fact the reection r and q

can be related respectively to the top and bottom of a tunnel. The

resistivities included between two features are compatibles with acavity partially lled.

6. Conclusions

Combined geophysical measurements carried out in the Castle of

Crotone were performed to check primarily buried remains (in the

areas A, B and C) and secondly to detect a possible buried

walkway in a portion of the boundary walls (in area D).

A systematic GPReld survey interested the areas A, Band C

with four data-sets of one-meter-spaced radargrams. A complex

sequence processing was performed to enhance the reections and

build a data volume for each data-set. In this way ve time-slices were

built for each area. Then magnetic and ERT (only for areas Aand D)

were carriedout trying to obtain thebestsuperimposition.Unfortunately,

Fig. 19.Comparison between GPR and ERT data for area

C

. a) GPR time-slices between 0.8 and 1.2 m; b) map of magnetic gradient.



16/16

logistic problems impeded a good superimposition for areas A and B.

In area D only a prole was useful to carry out both GPR and ERT

surveys. Finally, the joint interpretation of data for each area allows to

sketch thefollowing conclusions:1) reective zone of theGPR survey can

be related with resistive and nonmagnetic zones. Objects like drystone

walls are compatible with the presence of these signals; 2) absorptive

zones in the time-slices can be related with high dipolar or complex

magnetic anomalies. In these zones, the ERT survey showed very high

conductivities. The intense presence of isolated dipolar magneticanomalies suggests the presence of small metallic objects. Since in the

past, some cannons andcannonball were found in thearea, they couldbe

a candidateto explaintheseevidences. 3) GPR data showed that themost

signicant reections are included between 20 and 30 ns for areas A,B and C; ERT surveys showed signicant resistive objects between

about 0.75 and 1.27m for area A. Matching these data we can infer a

velocity of the medium in area A equaling to 0.08 m/ns and

consequently a relative electrical permittivity of about 13; 4) nally, the

GPR and ERT datain areaD are consistent with thepresence of a tunnel.

Some horizontal reectors could be related to the top and bottom of a

possible buried passageway and the ERT data showed an associated at

resistive body. Moreover, the GPR survey carried out in areaDallowed

to overcome an interpretative problem lied to a strong edge effect in the

ERT data.

Acknowledgment

This work has been supported by the Municipality of Crotone and

the Archaeological Superintendency of Calabria Region.

References

Basile, V., Carrozzo, M.T., Negri, S., Nuzzo, L., Quarta, T., Villani, A.V., 2000. A ground-penetrating radar survey for archaeological investigations in an urban area Lecce,Italy. Journal of Applied Geophysics 44, 1532.

Bavusi, M., Chianese, D., Giano, S.I., Mucciarelli, M., 2004. Multidisciplinary investiga-tions on the Roman aqueduct of Grumentum (Basilicata, Southern Itlay). Annals ofGeophysics 47 (6), 17911801.

Caputo, R., Piscitelli, S., Oliveto, A., Rizzo, E., Lapenna, V., 2003. High-resolutionresistivity tomographies in active tectonic studies. Examples from the TyrnavosBasin, Greece. Journal of Geodynamics 36, 1935.

Chianese, D., Lapenna, V., Lorenzo, P., Perrone, A., Piscitelli, S., Rizzo, E., Sdao, F., 2003.Joint geophysical measurements to investigate the Rossano of Vaglio archaeologicalsite affected by landslide phenomena (BasilicataRegion, Southern Italy). EGS-AGU-EUG Joint Assembly. Nizza, Francia. 0611 April.

Colella, A., Lapenna, V., Rizzo, E., 2004. High-resolution imaging of the High Agri ValleyBasin (Southern Italy) with electrical resistivity tomography. Tectonophysics 386,2940.

Conyers, L.B., Goodman, D., 1997. Ground-penetrating radar an introduction forarchaeologists (AltaMira Press, A Division of Sage Publications, Inc.), p. 232.

Davis, J.L., Annan, A.P., 1989. Ground-penetrating radar for high-resolution mapping ofsoil and rock stratigraphy. Geophys. Prospect 37, 531551.

Edwards, W., Masaaky, O., Goodman, D., 2000. Investigation of a Subterranean Tomb inMiyazaki, Japan. Archaeological Prospection Archaeol. Prospect. 7, 215224.

Lapenna, V., Lorenzo, P., Perrone, A., Piscitelli,S., Sdao,F., Rizzo, E., 2003. High-resolutiongeoelectrical tomographies in the study of the Giarrossa landslide (Potenza,Basilicata). Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 62 (3), 259268.

Loke, M.H., Barker, R.D., 1996. Rapid least-squares inversion of apparent resistivitypseudosections by a quasi-Newton method. Geophysical Prospecting 44, 131152.

Nuzzo, L., Leucci, G., Negri, S., Carrozzo, M.T., Quarta, T., 2002. Application of 3Dvisualization techniques in the analysis of GPR data for archaeology. Annals ofGeophysics 45 (2), 321337.

Rizzo, E., Chianese, D., Lapenna, V., 2005. Magnetic, GPR and geoelectrical measure-ments for studying the archaeological site of Masseria Nigro (Viggiano, SouthernItaly) near surf. Prospect 3, 1319.

Fig. 20.Comparison between GPR and ERT data for area D. a) radargram #66; b) tomography T4.


Date post:	02-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	virnando-nainggolan
View:	221 times
Download:	0 times

Carlo's v Castle

Documents