1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 18, Issue 6
  5. Article
Volume 18, Issue 6
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The inversion of active surface‐wave data is highly affected by the non‐uniqueness of the solution. While a deterministic approach is generally chosen due to certain advantages, there is the risk of getting trapped in a local minima, especially when no information is available about the sub‐surface geometry since the layer thickness is assumed fixed to . The fixed‐layer thickness in a deterministic inversion of the active surface‐wave raises significant issues, such as the relevance of the initial model geometry (the thickness of the intermediate layer and the total depth of the initial model) and the equivalence problems. Thus, the inversion result is inherently not reliable, even in the case of the normal dispersion medium, and the result could be unachievable in challenging sub‐surface situations. These issues could be reduced by using a joint inversion approach. The present paper first presents examples of issues through four case histories in Trabzon, Turkey. Then, two joint inversion approaches based on local search are carried out to handle the issues concerning individual inversion. The first approach combines active surface‐wave data with electric sounding data and the second includes travel times from seismic refraction data. In addition, an independent inversion is carried out with a neighbourhood algorithm for a global search to compare against the joint inversion results. The joint inversion schemes clearly reduce the ambiguities of the individual inversion of the active surface‐wave data, and the dependence on the initial model regarding the layer thickness is also mitigated. Moreover, the joint inversion approach provides an estimate of the complementary model parameters, namely electrical resistivity and the compressional wave velocity. It is shown that the proposed joint inversion approaches provide consistent results with former boreholes, seismic tomographic profiles and the known geologic features of the study area even in the absence of any information.

© 2020 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2020 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12126
2020-11-16
2024-04-25

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12126
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Al‐Shuhail, A.A. and Adetunji, A. (2016) Joint inversion of ground‐penetrating radar and seismic velocities for porosity and water saturation in shallow sediments Al‐Shuhail and Adetunji: joint inversion of GPR and Seismic velocities. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 21, 105–119.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Aster, R.C., Borchers, B. and Thurber, C.H. (2004) Parameter Estimation and Inverse Problems. 1st edition. Amsterdam/Boston: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Babacan, A.E. (2013) The determination of engineering properties of volcanic rocks of Kabakoy Formation (Trabzon) with seismic tomography method. MSc Thesis in Turkish, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon.
  4. Başokur, A.T. (1984) A numerical direct interpretation method of resistivity soundings using the Pekeris model. Geophysical Prospecting, 32, 1131–1146.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Boiero, D. and Socco, L.V. (2014) Joint inversion of Rayleigh‐wave dispersion and P‐wave refraction data for laterally varying layered models. Geophysics, 79, EN49–EN59.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Carter‐McAuslan, A., Lelièvre, P.G. and Farquharson, C.G. (2015) A study of fuzzy c ‐means coupling for joint inversion, using seismic tomography and gravity data test scenarios. Geophysics, 80, W1–W15.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Cercato, M. (2009) Addressing non‐uniqueness in linearized multichannel surface wave inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 57, 27–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Comina, C., Foti, S., Sambuelli, L., Socco, L. and Strobbia, C. (2002) Joint inversion of VES and surface wave data. Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems. pp. HRR6–HRR6. Environment and Engineering Geophysical Society.
  9. Coutant, O., Bernard, M.L., Beauducel, F., Nicollin, F., Bouin, M.P. and Roussel, S. (2012) Joint inversion of P‐wave velocity and density, application to La Soufrière of Guadeloupe hydrothermal system. Geophysical Journal International, 191, 723–742.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Feng, X., Nilot, E., Liu, C., Zhang, M., Yu, H., Zhao, J., et al. (2018) Joint inversion of seismic and audio magnetotelluric data with structural constraint for metallic deposit. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 23, 159–169.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Foti, S., Lai, C.G., Rix, G.J. and Strobbia, C. (2014) Surface Wave Methods for Near‐Surface Site Characterization, 1st edition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Foti, S., Parolai, S., Albarello, D. and Picozzi, M. (2011) Application of surface‐wave methods for seismic site characterization. Surveys in Geophysics, 32, 777–825.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Fregoso, E., Palafox, A. and Moreles, M.A. (2019) Initializing cross‐gradients joint inversion of gravity and magnetic data with a Bayesian surrogate gravity model. Pure and Applied Geophysics.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Gallardo, L.A. (2004) Joint two‐dimensional inversion of geoelectromagnetic and seismic refraction data with cross‐gradients constraint. PhD thesis, University of Lancaster.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Garofalo, F., Foti, S., Hollender, F., Bard, P.Y., Cornou, C., Cox, B.R., et al. (2016) InterPACIFIC project: comparison of invasive and non‐invasive methods for seismic site characterization. Part I: Intra‐comparison of surface wave methods. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 82, 222–240.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Garofalo, F., Sauvin, G., Socco, L.V. and Lecomte, I. (2015) Joint inversion of seismic and electric data applied to 2D media. Geophysics, 80, EN93–EN104.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Ghosh, D.P. (1971) Inverse filter coefficients for the computation of apparent resistivity standard curves for a horizontally stratified earth. Geophysical Prospecting, 19, 769–775.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Greenhalgh, S.A., Bing, Z. and Green, A. (2006) Solutions, algorithms and inter‐relations for local minimization search geophysical inversion. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 3, 101–113.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Hering, A., Misiek, R., Gyulai, A., Ormos, T., Dobroka, M. and Dresen, L. (1995) A joint inversion algorithm to process geoelectric and surface wave seismic data. Part I: Basic ideas1. Geophysical Prospecting, 43, 135–156.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Johansen, H.K. (1975) An interactive computer/graphic‐display‐terminal system for interpretation of resistivity soundings. Geophysical Prospecting, 23, 449–458.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Johansen, H.K. (1977) A man/computer interpretation system for resistivity soundings over a horizontally stratified earth. Geophysical Prospecting, 25, 667–691.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Julia, J., Ammon, C.J., Herrmann, R.B. and Correig, A.M. (2000) Joint inversion of receiver function and surface wave dispersion observations. Geophysical Journal International, 143, 99–112.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Koefoed, O. (1970) A fast method for determining the layer distribution from the raised kernel function in geoelectrical sounding. Geophysical Prospecting, 18, 564–570.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Kul Yahşi, B. and Ersoy, H. (2018) Site characterization and evaluation of the stability of the Yesilyurt Landslide (Trabzon, NE Turkey) using back analysis method. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 15, 927–937.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Lai, C.G. and Rix, G.J. (1998) Simultaneous Inversion of Rayleigh Phase Velocity and Attenuation for Near‐Surface Site Characterization. Georgia Institute of Technology‐School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, U.S.
  26. Lo Presti, D., Lai, C. and Foti, S. (2004) Geophysical and geotechnical investigations for ground response analyses. In: A.Ansal (Ed.) Recent Advances in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering and Microzonation. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 101–137.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Loke, M.H. (2002) Tutorial: 2‐D and 3‐D Electrical Imaging Surveys. Geotomo Software
  28. Mackie, R.L. (2019) Geologically consistent inversion of geophysical data; a role for joint inversion. International Workshop on Gravity, Electrical and Magnetic Methods and Their Applications, Xi'an, China, May 19–22. SEG Global Meeting Abstracts, pp. 1–4.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Marquardt, D.W. (1963) An algorithm for least‐squares estimation of nonlinear parameters. Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 11, 431–441.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Menke, W. (1989) Geophysical Data Analysis: Discrete Inverse Theory. Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Monteiro Santos, F.A., Afonso, A.R.A. and Dupis, A. (2007) 2D joint inversion of dc and scalar audio‐magnetotelluric data in the evaluation of low enthalpy geothermal fields. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 4, 53–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Moorkamp, M., Heincke, B., Jegen, M., Roberts, A.W. and Hobbs, R.W. (2011) A framework for 3‐D joint inversion of MT, gravity and seismic refraction data. Geophysical Journal International, 184, 477–493.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Pan, Y., Xia, J. and Zeng, C. (2013) Verification of correctness of using real part of complex root as Rayleigh‐wave phase velocity with synthetic data. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 88, 94–100.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Park, C.B. (2005) MASW horizontal resolution in 2D shear‐velocity (Vs) mapping. Kansas Geological Survey, University of Kansas, Kansas.
  35. Piatti, C., Socco, L.v., Boiero, D. and Foti, S. (2013) Constrained 1D joint inversion of seismic surface waves and P‐refraction traveltimes. Geophysical Prospecting, 61, 77–93.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Reynolds, J.M. (1997) An Introduction to Applied and Environmental Geophysics. Wiley.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Roma, V. (2001) Soil properties and site characterization by means of Rayleigh waves. PhD thesis, Politecnico di Torino.
  38. Roy, L., Sen, M.K., McIntosh, K., Stoffa, P.L. and Nakamura, Y. (2005) Joint inversion of first arrival seismic travel‐time and gravity data. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 2, 277–289.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Rucker, M.L. (2002) Seismic refraction interpretation with velocity gradient and depth of investigation. Second Int. Conf. on the Application of Geophysical and NDT Meth. to transportation Facilities and Infrastructure, Los Angeles, California.
  40. Senkaya, M. and Karsli, H. (2015) The sensitivity analysis as a non‐uniqueness indicator in the inversion of Rayleigh‐wave dispersion curve. Proceedings of Near Surface Geoscience, Torino‐Italy.
  41. Senkaya, M. and Karslı, H. (2016) Joint inversion of Rayleigh‐wave dispersion data and vertical electric sounding data: synthetic tests on characteristic sub‐surface models. Geophysical Prospecting, 64, 228–246.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Socco, L.V. and Boiero, D. (2008) Improved Monte Carlo inversion of surface wave data. Geophysical Prospecting, 56, 357–371.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Socco, L.V., Boiero, D., Foti, S. and Wisén, R. (2009) Laterally constrained inversion of ground roll from seismic reflection records. Geophysics, 74, G35–G45.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Socco, L.V., Mabyalaht, G. and Comina, C. (2015) Robust static estimation from surface wave data. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 5222–5227
  45. Tarantola, A. (2005) Inverse Problem Theory and Methods for Model Parameter Estimation. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Telford, W.M., Geldart, L.P. and Sheriff, R.E. (1990) Applied Geophysics. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Wagner, F.M., Mollaret, C., Günther, T., Kemna, A. and Hauck, C. (2019) Quantitative imaging of water, ice and air in permafrost systems through petrophysical joint inversion of seismic refraction and electrical resistivity data. Geophysical Journal International, 219, 1866–1875.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Wathelet, M., Jongmans, D. and Ohrnberger, M. (2004) Surface‐wave inversion using a direct search algorithm and its application to ambient vibration measurements. Near surface geophysics, 2, 211–221.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Xia, J., Miller, R.D. and Park, C.B. (1999) Estimation of near‐surface shear‐wave velocity by inversion of Rayleigh waves. Geophysics, 64, 691–700.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Yilmaz, Ö. (2001) Seismic Data Analysis. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12126
Loading
Obtaining reliable S‐wave velocity depth profile by joint inversion of geophysical data: the combination of active surface‐wave, seismic refraction and electric sounding data
Near Surface Geophysics 18, 659 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.12126
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12126
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12126
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Dispersion curve; Electric sounding; Joint inversion; Seismic refraction; S‐wave velocity

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