1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 16, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 16, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Nowadays, most planned large infrastructure projects increasingly use multi‐technique geophysical methods integrated with geotechnical surveys to assess detection and exploration of karst‐related systems. This article focuses on the case of a large sinkhole found during the geophysical surveys that were carried out along Riyadh’s new Metro Line 3 (Saudi Arabia). This line is the longest (41 km) of the six that are currently under construction in the framework of the largest public rail infrastructure project, the Riyadh Metro Project (176 km).

A multi‐technique geophysical survey combining seismic (1040 m of seismic refraction tomography and four downhole tests), electrical (1035 m of electrical resistivity tomography), and electromagnetic methods (1040 m of ground penetration radar) was conducted to shed light on the subsurface geology along the section of this case study. The combination of the geophysical methods led to early identification of a subsurface area of lower resistivity and seismic velocity than the background values of the carbonate bedrock. It also revealed smaller fractures that could lead to future sinkhole formation. A subsequent dense investigatory borehole grid (14 boreholes, five probeholes, 38 standard penetration tests, nine TV‐logging, and five pressuremeter tests) further confirmed the presence of a buried sinkhole.

This paper shows the results of each individual geophysical method as well as the final geotechnical interpretation based on the combination of geophysical methods with borehole drilling. It concludes that the use of a single method for karst assessment, whether a geophysical method or borehole drilling, does not allow a sufficiently detailed geotechnical profile of the ground. This case study provides basic guidance on the most suitable and accurate techniques to detect similar karstic features across Riyadh.

© European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers © 2018 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018003
2018-04-01
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018003
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abd ElAal A.2017. Identification and characterization of near surface cavities in Tuwaiq Mountain Limestone, Riyadh, KSA, “detection and treatment”.Egyptian Journal of Petroleum26, 215–223.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. AbdeltawabS.2013. Karst limestone geohazards in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.International Journal of Geoengineering Case histories2, 258–269.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Al‐MutairiK.F. and Al‐ArifiN.S.2008. Using GPR and resistivity methods to detect subsurface karst cavities.GEO 2008 Middle East Conference and Exhibition, Manama, Bahrain.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Al‐SayariS.S. and ZötlJ.G.1978. Quaternary Period in Saudi Arabia. 1. Sedimentological, Hydrogeological, Hydrochemical, Geomorphological and Climatological Investigations in Central and Eastern Saudi Arabia. New York, NY: Springer‐Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. ASTM D2487–00
    ASTM D2487–002000. Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. ASTM D4719–07
    ASTM D4719–072007. Standard Test Methods for Prebored Pressuremeter Testing in Soils. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. ASTM D1586–08
    ASTM D1586–082008. Standard Test Method for Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and Split‐Barrel Sampling of Soils. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. ASTM D7400–08
    ASTM D7400–082008. Standard Test Methods for Downhole Seismic Testing. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. BamousaA.O., MemeshA.M. and DiniS.M.2014. Morphotectonic development of Mesozoic carbonates and evaporites of Ath‐Thumamah depression in central Arabia.Carbonates and Evaporites29, 65–72.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. BataynehA.T., AbueladasA.A. and MoumaniK.A.2002. Use of ground‐penetrating radar for assessment of potential sinkhole conditions: an example from Ghor al Haditha area, Jordan.Environmental Geology41, 977–983.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. BieniawskiZ.T.1989. Engineering Rock Mass Classifications: A Complete Manual for Engineers and Geologists in Mining, Civil and Petroleum Engineering. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. BowlesJ.E.1968. Foundation Analysis and Design. New York, NY:McGraw‐Hill, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. ChalikakisK., PlagnesV., GuerinR., ValoisR. and BoschF.P.2011. Contribution of geophysical methods to karst‐system exploration: an overview.Hydrogeology Journal19, 1169–1180.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. ChamberlainA.T., SellersW., ProctorC. and CoardR.2000. Cave detection in limestone using ground penetrating radar.Journal of Archaeological Science27, 957–964.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. ConstableS.C., ParkerR.L. and ConstableC.G.1987. Occam's inversion: a practical algorithm for generating smooth models from electromagnetic sounding data.Geophysics52, 289–300.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. DahlinT. and ZhouB.2004. A numerical comparison of 2D resistivity imaging with 10 electrode arrays.Geophysical Prospecting52, 379–398.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. DeereD. and MillerR.1966. Engineering classification and index properties for intact rock. Tech. Report No AFWL ‐ TR‐65–116, Air Force Weapons Lab., Kirtland Air Base, New Mexico.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. DeGroot‐HedlinC. and ConstableS.1990. Occam's inversion to generate smooth, two‐dimensional models from magnetotelluric data.Geophysics55, 1613–1624.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. DollW.E., NyquistJ.E., CarpenterP.J., KaufmannR.D. and CarrB.J.1998. Geophysical survey of a known karst feature, Oak Ridge Y‐12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.American Society of Civil Engineering Conference on Karst, Urbana, IL, June 1999.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. DollW.E., CarrB.J., SheehanJ.R. and MandellW.A.2005. Overview of karst effects and karst detection in seismic data from the Oak Ridge Reservation, Tennessee.Proceedings of the U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group, Rapid City, SD, September 12–15, 2005, pp. 20–29. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005‐5160.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. DollW.E., SheehanJ.R., MandellW.A. and WatsonD.B.2006. Seismic refraction tomography for karst imaging.International Conference on Environmental and Engineering Geophysics (ICEEG), Wuhan, P.R. China, June 4–9, 2006.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. El‐QadyG., HafezM., AbdallaM.A. and UshijimaK.2005. Imaging subsurface cavities using geoelectric tomography and ground‐penetrating radar.Journal of Cave and Karst Studies67, 174–181.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. GolebiowskiT., PorzucekS. and PasierbB.2016. Ambiguities in geophysical interpretation during fracture detection—Case study from a limestone quarry (Lower Silesia Region, Poland).Near Surface Geophysics14, 371–384.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. ISRM International Society for Rock Mechanics
    ISRM International Society for Rock Mechanics1978. Suggested methods for the quantitative description of discontinuities in rock masses.International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts15, 319–368.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. LokeM.H.2001. Tutorial: 2D and 3D electrical imaging surveys. Universiti Sains Malaysia, Unpublished course notes.http://www.geoelectric.com
  26. MarinosP. and HoekE.2000. GSI: a geologically friendly tool for rock mass strength estimation.Proceedings of the GeoEng2000 at the International Conference on Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 1422–1446. Technomic Publishers, Lancaster.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. McMechanG.A., LoucksR.G., ZengX. and MescherP.1998. Ground penetrating radar imaging of a collapsed paleocave system in the Ellenburger dolomite, central Texas.Journal of Applied Geophysics39, 1–10.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. MemeshA., DiniS.M., GutiérrezF. and WallaceC. A.2008. Evidence of large‐scale subsidence caused by interstratal karstification of evaporites in the Interior Homocline of Central Saudi Arabia. European Geosciences Union General Assembly Geophysical Research Abstracts 10.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. NouiouaI., BoukelloulM.L., FehdiC. and BaaliF.2013. Detecting sinkholes using ground penetrating radar in Dräa Douamis, Cherea Algeria: a case study.Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering18, 1337–1349.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. OlonaJ., PulgarJ.A., Fernández‐ViejoG., López‐FernándezC. and González‐CortinaJ.M.2010. Weathering variations in a granitic massif and related geotechnical properties through seismic and electrical resistivity methods.Near Surface Geophysics8, 585–599.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. PalackyG.J.1988. Resistivity characteristics of geologic targets. In: Electromagnetic Methods in Applied Geophysics. Investigations in Geophysics (ed M.N.Nabighian ), pp. 52–129. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. PandoL., PulgarJ.A. and Gutiérrez‐ClaverolM.2013. A case of man‐induced ground subsidence and building settlement related to karsti‐fied gypsum (Oviedo, NW Spain).Environmental Earth Sciences68, 507–519.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. PowersR.W., RamirezL.F., RedmondC.D. and ElbergE.L.Jr.1966. Geology of the Arabian Peninsula: sedimentary geology of Saudi Arabia, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. ShariefF.A., KhanM.S. and MagaraK.1991. Outcrop‐subcrop sequence and diagenesis of Upper Jurassic Arab‐Hith Formations, Central Saudi Arabia.Journal of King Abdulaziz University‐Earth Sciences4, 105–136.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. SheehanJ.R., DollW.E., WatsonD.B. and MandellW.A.2005. Application of seismic refraction tomography to karst cavities.Proceedings of the U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group, Rapid City, SD, September 12–15, 2005, pp. 29–44. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5160.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. SmithD.V.2005. The state of the art of geophysics and karst: a general literature review.Proceedings of the U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group, Rapid City, SD, September 12–15, 2005, pp. 10–16. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report2005–5160, 296.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. VasletD., Al‐MuallemM.S., MaddahS.S., BrosseJ., FourniquetJ., BretonJ. et al. 1991. Geologic map of the ArRiyadh Quadrangle, Sheet 24I, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Deputy Ministry for Mineral Resources, Jeddah, Geoscience Map GM‐121.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. YoussefA.M., El‐KalioubyH.M. and ZabramawiY.A.2012. Integration of remote sensing and electrical resistivity methods in sinkhole investigation in Saudi Arabia.Journal of Applied Geophysics87, 28–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. YoussefA.M., Al‐HarbiH.M., GutiérrezF., ZabramwiY.A., BulkhiA.B., ZahraniS.A. et al. 2016. Natural and human‐induced sinkhole hazards in Saudi Arabia: distribution, investigation, causes and impacts.Hydrogeology Journal24, 625–644.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. ZhangJ. and ToksözM.N.1998. Nonlinear refraction travel time tomography.Geophysics63, 1726–1737.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018003
Loading
Karst‐induced sinkhole detection using an integrated geophysical survey: a case study along the Riyadh Metro Line 3 (Saudi Arabia)
Near Surface Geophysics 16, 270 (2018); https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2018003
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018003
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2018003
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Geotechnical; Multi‐technique geophysical survey; Riyadh; Sinkhole

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error