Login
Registrati
Reimposta password
Pubblica & Distribuisci
Soluzioni Editoriali
Soluzioni di Distribuzione
Temi
Architettura e design
Arti
Business e Economia
Chimica
Chimica industriale
Farmacia
Filosofia
Fisica
Geoscienze
Ingegneria
Interesse generale
Legge
Letteratura
Linguistica e semiotica
Matematica
Medicina
Musica
Scienze bibliotecarie e dell'informazione, studi library
Scienze dei materiali
Scienze della vita
Scienze informatiche
Scienze sociali
Sport e tempo libero
Storia
Studi classici e del Vicino Oriente antico
Studi culturali
Studi ebraici
Teologia e religione
Pubblicazioni
Riviste
Libri
Atti
Editori
Blog
Contatti
Cerca
EUR
USD
GBP
Italiano
English
Deutsch
Polski
Español
Français
Italiano
Carrello
Home
Riviste
Materials and Geoenvironment
AHEAD OF PRINT
Accesso libero
Empirical Relation Between Magnetic and Radiometric Survey in Bitumen Area, Ogun State, Nigeria
Fidelis Olatoyosi Ogunsanwo
Fidelis Olatoyosi Ogunsanwo
,
Jacob Dele Ayanda
Jacob Dele Ayanda
,
Amidu Olalekan Mustapha
Amidu Olalekan Mustapha
,
Abolaji Tobi Olatunji
Abolaji Tobi Olatunji
,
Vitalis Chidi Ozebo
Vitalis Chidi Ozebo
,
Oluwaseun Tolutope Olurin
Oluwaseun Tolutope Olurin
,
Afolabi Olufemi Alaka
Afolabi Olufemi Alaka
,
Itunu Comfort Okeyode
Itunu Comfort Okeyode
,
Johnson Olufemi Adepitan
Johnson Olufemi Adepitan
e
Joseph Adeniyi Olowofela
Joseph Adeniyi Olowofela
| 26 lug 2023
Materials and Geoenvironment
AHEAD OF PRINT
INFORMAZIONI SU QUESTO ARTICOLO
Articolo precedente
Articolo Successivo
Sommario
Articolo
Immagini e tabelle
Bibliografia
Autori
Articoli in questo Numero
Anteprima
PDF
Cita
CONDIVIDI
Article Category:
Original Scientific Article
Pubblicato online:
26 lug 2023
Pagine:
-
Ricevuto:
26 giu 2022
Accettato:
09 gen 2023
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/rmzmag-2023-0003
Parole chiave
bitumen
,
magnetic
,
uranium
,
survey
,
t-test
© 2023 Fidelis Olatoyosi Ogunsanwo et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Figure 1:
Geological map indicating the two traverses and the sampling points.
Figure 2:
Variation between the magnetic intensity and that of (a) Uranium concentration, (b) Thorium concentration, (c) Potassium concentration at T1.
Figure 3:
Variation between the magnetic intensity and that of (a) Uranium concentration, (b)Thorium concentration, (c) Potassium concentration at T2.
Figure 4:
Contour map showing the distribution of (a) magnetic intensity, (b) uranium concentration, (c) thorium concentration, (d) potassium concentration in T1.
Figure 5:
Contour map showing the distribution of (a) magnetic intensity, (b) uranium concentration, (c) thorium concentration, (d) potassium concentration in T2.
Figure 6:
3D Surface plot of (a) magnetic anomaly, (b) uranium concentration, (c) thorium concentration, (d) potassium concentration in T1.
Figure 7:
3D surface plot of (a) magnetic anomaly, (b) uranium concentration, (c) thorium concentration, (d) potassium concentration in T2.
Figure 8:
Regression plot between magnetic anomalous response to (a) uranium concentration, (b) thorium concentration, (c) potassium concentration.
Summary of t-test inferential statistics.
Survey parameters
t-calculated
t-critical
p
-value
r-value
Traverse 1
M – U
1.71
2.02
0.09
0.84
M – Th
0.87
2.02
0.39
0.79
M – K
−0.89
2.02
0.37
−0.47
Traverse 2
M – U
0.99
2.02
0.32
0.89
M – Th
0.04
2.02
0.96
0.74
M – K
−2.66
2.02
0.06
−0.24