Tag Archives: magnetometry survey

Neat and tidy

Due to being rained off on our last day, a small team of us decided to go out and finish off some things on Bank Holiday Monday. Many thanks to Pauline, Judith, Ruth, Dave and Jim for turning out to do “just one more grid.”  I think it must be a geophysicists ailment that we always would like to be able to just a little bit more…

The mag team completed an impressive ten grids including two awkward partials.  Figure 1 shows the entire survey at the end of the 2018 season.

Figure 1: the mag survey after day 19.

The team have managed to add 19 ha to the survey in the last month.  Figure 2 shows the southern area that we have been surveying this week.  (This field is, confusingly, called “Prae Wood”.)

Figure 2: the southern area (Prae Wood) after day 19.

The team have picked-up an area of intense ferrous noise.  This looks like a small historic period site.  We will have to check out some old maps to see if we can work out what that might be.  The one hiccup in a brilliant last day of work is a single line of data where the sensor froze.  It is very annoying and I’ll have to find some way of fudging that until next summer!

The Earth Resistance survey had one last little block left to make the plot look all neat and tidy.  Many thanks to Pauline and Judith for helping me fill that in (Figures 3 and 4)!

Figure 3: Kris, Judith and Pauline (out of shot) extended the resistance survey. Image © Mike Smith.

Figure 4: the main block of Earth Resistance data collected 2016–2018.

The data collected shows some faint indications of buildings in that corner (Figure 5).

Figure 5: the northern area of the res survey. The NW corner was completed on day 19.

Although my trick of spreading the remote probes wide apart has worked on the whole, this year there is a bit of an edge.  This is because we started with a block in the SW corner, worked eastwards, and then when we had got to the corner, worked back along the hedge line westwards.  Between when we started this block and yesterday we have had in excess of 100mm of rain (or about 4 inches in old money) so it isn’t surprising this shows in the results.

We have now cleared away all the pegs and flags, packed-up the machines and left Gorhambury for another year.  It is a beautiful place to work and we are very grateful to Lord and Lady Verulam and their family for allowing us to extend the survey, to those who work the estate and put up with us getting in the way, and to the estate managers, especially Stuart Gray. Thanks to the Institute of Archaeology, UCL, for lending us the dGPS and the res meter, and SEAHA for the loan of the GPR.  I hope everyone involved thinks the results are worth all the effort. Most of all I would also like to thank all the volunteers who came this year, whether you only managed a day or two, or you came for the whole season.  You are what makes this project so much fun!

 

Advertisements

A busy day

Anyone new to this blog or geophysics in archaeology is recommended to read the material on the “Geophysical survey in archaeology” page.

We had a large team today and as a result we managed ten mag grids, two and a bit GPR grids and seven earth resistance grids. Good job everybody!

First to the mag.  The team extended their survey in the field to the south of Mobbs Hole.  Figure 1 shows the overall survey and Figure 2 zooms in on this field.

Figure 1: the 2018 magnetometry survey.

Figure 2: the survey in the field to the south after day 2.

I have annotated Figure 2.  The red arrows indicate the line of the ditch of the Fosse.  It is salutary to note that a feature as big as the Fosse barely shows in the mag data.  Clearly the upper fills of the ditch are largely the same soil as the surrounding topsoil.  We can normally see pits and ditches on archaeological sites because they are filled with more organic, and thus more magnetic, soils, the result of nearby human occupation.  The green arrow shows a “blob” of higher magnetic readings. The rather diffuse edges to this feature make me suspicious that this might be a “tree throw”, i.e., where a tree has blown down.  The yellow arrow marks two strongly magnetic parallel lines.  At first I thought these might be something metallic but checking their actual values shows they vary from -10 to +29 nT.  Certainly strong, but unlikely to be metal.  The blue indicates something which is definitely metal; it has values of -1543 to +680nT!  The dark pink arrows indicate a faint line, possibly an old fence line.

The res team consisting of Deborah, Tim, Julia and Anne completed seven squares.  Figure 3 shows the whole survey from 2016–2018.

Figure 3: the earth resistance survey 2016–2018.

We have now covered 6.3ha.  For a resistance survey at 0.5m spacing between readings, that is pretty impressive.  Res has always been a poor third to mag and GPR in this survey.  We didn’t get started until a year after the other techniques when UCL purchased a new RM85, and we have had problems with weather.  Hopefully we can fill in the top corner on Saturday.

Figure 4 shows a detail of the area completed this year.

Figure 4: the northern area completed so far this season.

The street shows very clearly in Figure 4 running SW-NE, and slightly more faintly we can see the buildings either side. One problem to tackle in processing data is that very high areas, like the road, can make the more subtle stuff harder to see.  If we “clip” the image to bring-up the details of the buildings, the road area becomes one big black blob!  One way to get around this is to use a high-pass filter.  Figure 5 shows the same area with the high-pass filter applied.

Figure 5: the 2018 survey area after the application of a high-pass filter.

As you can see, the buildings show much more clearly but the road much less so.  Especially with resistance data, it is worth looking at several versions of the data processing to get the most detail from the survey.

The GPR crew finished off the grid from yesterday and did another 40x80m block.  Figures 6 and 7 are the time slices from the two days.

Figure 6: time slices from day 16 of the GPR survey.

Figure 7: time slices from day 17 of the GPR survey.

As you can easy see, we have some sweet buildings showing.  Figure 8 is a rough composite of the sites in this area.

Figure 8: composite of slices in the area of the day 16 and 17 survey blocks.

I need to do some cleaning-up of the various blocks as they were processed at different times and with different software packages, but in general you can see the mass of buildings crowding along this section of road.  Very nice!

Signing off now so we can go and start day 18.  This may be our last day as the weather forecast for Sunday is dire…

 

Seven red kites, two fire engines and a microlight

Anyone new to this blog or geophysics in archaeology is recommended to read the material on the “Geophysical survey in archaeology” page.

It was an eventful day. At lunch seven red kites descended on some tasty tit-bit not far from where we were sitting, and in the afternoon two fire engines drove up the drive and we were “buzzed” by someone in a microlight. None of this has anything to do with the geophysics, however!

The mag team completed the last two grids in Mobbs Hole (for now), and have started on the field to the south.  The first six grids were all wheel-spinning partials too.  They have, however, only one partial left and then there are eleven whole grids laid-out and waiting.  Partials are not the Foerster’s strong point.  The lack of an “end line” function means hours are wasted spinning the wheel to fool the odometer into thinking we have completed the line.  Open fields, however, are its strength and the team will be glad to be out in the wilds again.  Figures 1 and 2 show the results from Mobbs Hole.

Figure 1: the Mobbs Hole survey in its entirety.

Figure 2: the southern area completed today and the start of the next field.

The GPR team had a partial around the water trough this afternoon and so they didn’t quite complete their usual 80x40m block (I knew I should have kept quiet yesterday).  The next two figures are nine time slices of the western and eastern halves of the block.

Figure 3: time slices from the day 16 GPR data, western block.

Figure 4: Day 16 GPR data, eastern block.

The western block seems to be yet-more blobby stuff, although with some very strong reflections.  The western block, however, has some clearly recognisable Roman-style corridor houses.  Yay! Finally some buildings we can recognise!

The last two images show slice 6 in context, firstly on the mag data, and then the mag data with an outline of the location of the GPR blocks.

Figure 5: GPR data from day 16, slice 6.

Figure 6: mag data with the location of the Day 16 GPR data indicated by the red box.

The huge black and white feature in the middle of the mag plot (Figure 6) is the water trough. As you can see, some of the walls of the buildings show in the mag data, but are much clearer in the GPR data.  Some only show in the GPR.  I know I am beginning to sound like a stuck record, but that is the strength of multi-method survey.

Tomorrow is our antepenultimate day (I had to get that in once again), so fingers crossed for dry weather.

Many thanks to the whole team for their wonderful effort and commitment.

Back to the fire

Anyone new to this blog or geophysics in archaeology is recommended to read the material on the “Geophysical survey in archaeology” page.

Week three started well with all three machines collecting data.  The Earth Resistance survey was the poor cousin as regards person-power but Ellen and I, helped by Rhian, completed three grid squares after lunch.

Figure 1: Ellen and an earth resistance meter.

The grids are over the fascinating burnt building seen in the mag.  Figure 2 shows the mag data in this area.

Figure 2: the mag data in the area of the res survey.

The black line snaking across Figure 2 from top-left to bottom-right is the aqueduct.  The very bright black-and-white area in the NW corner of that figure is probably a burnt building which was never replaced in stone.  Figure 3 shows the Earth Resistance data.

Figure 2: the Earth Resistance data.

Figure 3 is a crude composite of the data collected in 2016, 2017 and 2018.  The three squares at the north edge are this year’s grids.  We have clearly picked-up a long wall running NW-SE, and some square areas of higher resistance (?floors, maybe).  This survey makes an interesting comparison to the GPR in this area (Figure 4).

Figure 4: the GPR survey in the same area as Figures 1 and 2.

There is a lot of work to do tracing off walls and features from the three surveys.

The GPR crew completed another 80x40m block, although the slope was quite a challenge.  Figure 5 shows the time slices.

Figure 5: day 11 GPR time slices.

Slices 4 and 5 (top-right and middle left) seem the most interesting.  No stunningly clear buildings but lots going on.  Figures 6 and 7 compare the fifth slice with the mag data.

Figure 6: Fifth time slice from day 11 (indicated by the purple line).

Figure 7: the mag data in the area of the day 11 GPR data (shown by the purple box).

Notice how the square of higher mag response shown in darker tones towards the bottom of the purple rectangle are an area of light “low reflections” in the GPR data.  It is possibly something like an earth floor?  Off the west corner of that square in the mag data is a lighter coloured line running to the SW which is matched by a black line of high reflections in the GPR data.  That is clearly a wall, probably made of flint. The very narrow section of the aqueduct which runs east-west across the plot shows very clearly in the GPR data whereas the broader sections do not.  Something odd happens with the aqueduct at the eastern edge of the GPR plot. A  great deal more to tease out.

One problem we have had this year is the sheep.  In general they keep away from us.  The main issue is that some of them think the flags are tasty… (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Tasty! A nibbled flag in Mobbs Hole with the mag crew in the background.

The mag crew consisting of Jim West, Peter Alley and Dave Minty had three annoying partials to do before marching eastwards across the field.  I’m afraid I have not finished processing those annoying squares but I have added in the complete ones to Figure 9 so you can see progress.

Figure 9: mag data in Mobbs Hole after day 11.

Unfortunately, today was a bust as it rained 8.5mm.  The forecast for tomorrow is looking good though.

End of week two, part 1

Anyone new to this blog or geophysics in archaeology is recommended to read the material on the “Geophysical survey in archaeology” page.

Despite the unpromising weather forecast (and the unpromising weather at about 8.30am), we managed a whole day of survey including mag, GPR and a little bit of earth resistance. There was some drizzle around about lunchtime, but other than that is was an OK day, if a little windy at times.

The GPR team were working on “sawtooth” edges to the theatre field.  As we have a couple of days off, I will post the results of their efforts tomorrow.

The mag team completed twelve grids, including two partials and despite one case of “sensor freeze”; a super effort (Figure 1).

Figure 1: the mag crew, consisting of Ruth Halliwell, Jim West and Dave Minty, operate the Foerster in Mobbs Hole.

Figure 2 shows all the areas surveyed so far at Verulamium.

Figure 2: all the mag survey so far.

This really shows that the strength of the Foerster cart system is when one has large open fields.  So far, according to TerraSurveyor, we have completed 9.8ha of Mobbs Hole over ten days, but remember we only had part of an afternoon on day 1 and lost parts of two days this week to rain.  Compare that to surveying in Verulamium Park with all its trees, hedge lines, park benches and so forth.  There we surveyed just under 30ha in 45 days.

Figure 3 zooms into the area surveyed over the last few days.

Figure 3: mag survey after day 10.

So far the results are curious.  There are linear features associated with the line of the Fosse, plough scars running NW–SE down the slope, a few large “blobby” anomalies (pits, maybe?) and some bits of old iron.  Very little which could be interpreted as structures has been found.  Why build an enormous ditch and bank around nothing?  Ploughing may have removed some superficial features, but there is very little that could be seen as pits or ditches either.  The Fosse remains a mystery.

Figure 4 shows where the Fosse enters the wood.  The dip in the fence marks the ditch.  Once inside the wood the Fosse does a sharp left turn and heads southwards.

Figure 4: the dip in the line of the fence shows where the Fosse enters the woodland.

Tomorrow I will report on the earth resistance and GPR surveys in the theatre field.

Many thanks to everyone who has helped this season.  We are already half way through.  Doesn’t time fly?

 

One hundred and fifty

Anyone new to this blog or geophysics in archaeology is recommended to read the material on the “Geophysical survey in archaeology” page.

We managed a full day today, and I’m just about keeping up! The mag team completed two grids yesterday, half of one in the aforementioned deluge. Today they completed 11 grids: three partials and eight complete ones. Way to go! Well done everyone. Figure 1 shows the survey so far.

Figure 1: the mag survey after day 9.

One really does wonder if that break in the mag data is an entrance.  It doesn’t seem like it on the ground.  I have downloaded the LiDAR data but haven’t had a chance to process it yet.

The GPR crew finished their 80x40m block, and then did some of the next “sawtooth” section, another 14m worth.  Figure 2 shows the time slices.

Figure 2: day 9, time slices 3 to 6.

Nothing jumps out at one, although there are some curious “light” lines in the fourth slice (top-right) which are parallel to the aqueduct.  Figure 3 shows that slice in context.

Figure 3: GPR survey after day 9, slice 4.

After all the rain I thought it would be worth trying the Earth Resistance survey (Fig. 4).  I spent the morning laying in grids for the mag, but managed some survey in the afternoon.

Figure 4: Earth Resistance survey in action.

Although the rain has softened the surface, it won’t have penetrated 50cm yet, and I was concerned that there would be no contrast at that depth.  I decided to survey a grid where we knew there was a building.  Fig. 5 shows the comparison between the GPR survey and the two squares of res I managed to complete (thanks Anne!).

Figure 5: Earth resistance survey compared to GPR results.

Given the drought, the results are pretty good.  It would be interesting to compare these to results from a normal English summer!

Tomorrow isn’t looking great.  We might get some work done in the morning.  Fingers crossed.

Many thanks to everyone who helped out today.  Especially big thanks to Mike, Ellen, Jim and Ruth who take on the responsibility of shipping the equipment back and forth.

By the way, this is the 150th blog post…

7.2mm

Anyone new to this blog or geophysics in archaeology is recommended to read the material on the “Geophysical survey in archaeology” page.

That is the quantity of rain which fell on Lamer Park today up to when I started writing this posting.  It is now at 10.3mm! No wonder we gave-up at lunch time all feeling a bit cold and damp.

The mag team did manage three grid squares before lunch (Fig. 1).

Figure 1: mag survey after day 7.

There is a interesting possibility that we have detected a break in the Fosse, maybe some form of entrance.  I have noticed that some of the maps of the Fosse show a break, and some do not.  Perhaps we may be able to resolve this.

The GPR crew managed their usual 40x40m block before the rain drove us away at lunch time.  Figure 2 shows four time slices.

Figure 2: GPR data from day 7.

There is a quite substantial feature showing in slices 3 and 4 (top row) to the west.  This “big blob” is on the edge of the aqueduct, but I am not sure what it is.  Finally, however, we have some clearer looking buildings, best seen on the east side of slice 4 (top-right of Figure 2).  Figures 3 and 4 show this slice in context.

Figure 3: GPR from day 7 in context, slice 4.

Figure 4: the mag data for the same area as Figure 3.

As we have seen before, the buildings in this part of town show in the GPR data but not in the mag data.

On an unrelated note, this week’s Herts Advertiser (dated August 9th) carries a short letter from me about the project.  It also carries the news that the school at Batford has been given the go-ahead (see https://wp.me/p3AAk9-gy for our survey there).

Getting from the Theatre Field to Mobbs Hole is a bit of a problem because some pesky Romans built a wall between them.  There is, however, a gate we can use which is moderately convenient, which we have dubbed “The Manikin Gate”.

Figure 5: the Manikin Gate.

The weather tomorrow morning looks OK according to the Met Office, but we may be rained off again in the afternoon.  On the bright side, it might be possible to break out the earth resistance meter soon!