English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study shows the results of a near-surface investigation conducted to compare pole-dipole with dipole-dipole array. The survey was carried out in a single profile, 40 meters long. In the dipole-dipole array, the inter-electrode spacings used were 2 m and 1 m. In the pole-dipole array, spacing was 1 m. The data collected from the dipole-dipole array were combined into a single section and then compared with the results of the pole-dipole array. The investigation levels used in each array were selected in order to achieve, a priori , the same depth in the subsurface. The corresponding apparent resistivity pseudosection (field data) and the model (obtained by an inversion procedure) were very similar, proving that the pole-dipole array is a possible alternative to the dipole-dipole array, since it provided similar results for resolution and depth of investigation, as shown in the final models.

O arranjo pólo-dipolo como alternativa ao dipolo-dipolo em levantamentos 2D de eletrorresistividade