Reply to ‘Comment on “Dependence of shear wave seismoelectrics on soil textures: a numerical study in the vadose zone by F.I. Zyserman, L.B. Monachesi and L. Jouniaux” by Revil, A.’

In this paper we reply to a the comment made by Revil (2017) on our paper (2017, Geophys. J. Int., 208), where we describe seismoelectric phenomena in the vadose zone based on the theory of Pride empirically extended for unsaturated conditions. We analyse and answer each one of the enumerated critic...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Zyserman, Fabio Ivan, Monachesi, Leonardo Bruno, Jouniaux, L.
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2017
País:Argentina
Recursos:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
Repositorio:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/31122
Acesso em linha:http://hdl.handle.net/11336/31122
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:ELECTRICAL PROPERTIES
PERMEABILITY AND POROSITY
HYDROGEOPHYSICS
NUMERICAL APPROXIMATIONS AND ANALYSIS
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.5
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1
Descrição
Resumo:In this paper we reply to a the comment made by Revil (2017) on our paper (2017, Geophys. J. Int., 208), where we describe seismoelectric phenomena in the vadose zone based on the theory of Pride empirically extended for unsaturated conditions. We analyse and answer each one of the enumerated critics, and reaffirm the conclusions of our work. In particular, we prove that using the conductivity model suggested by Revil (2017) does not change our predictions significantly, contrary to what was argued in the comment. Further, in the light of previous and new theoretical and experimental results existing in the literature, we confirm the reasonability of having tested a non-monotonic saturation dependent streaming potential coefficient model besides the monotonic one, and discuss the suitability of assuming a linear relation between the permeability and the excess charge.