1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 23, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 23, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

Abstract

Levees provide critical flood protection, but are vulnerable to failure from internal erosion and piping. According to the risk assessment study performed by the US Army Corps of Engineers’, more than 20% of the levees in the United States are considered to have a very high risk of failure. Therefore, rapid noninvasive methods that can assess subsurface conditions over long distances are needed to identify the critical zones along the levees. This study evaluates electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) to characterize levee composition and detect anomalies indicative of defects arising from thin clay layers. ERT surveys were conducted on the Melvin Price reach of the Wood River Levee and compared to previously published multichannel analysis of surface wave (MASW) measurements and historical data. Longitudinal and transverse two‐dimensional (2D) ERT imaging revealed large‐scale stratigraphy related to old river channel deposits but lacked the resolution to discern fine‐scale layering details, including a discontinuous clay layer resolved in the MASW shear wave velocity profiles. This limitation is challenging because such features are critical for understanding internal erosion at the levee. Additionally, the 2D nature of ERT inversion is susceptible to bias caused by the complex three‐dimensional (3D) geometry of levee structures, which introduces artefacts that can affect the interpretation of resistivity data. These 3D effects are particularly pronounced for longitudinal lines with air on both sides of the levee or when resistivity contrasts are low. Forward modelling confirmed limitations in the ability of 2D ERT sections to resolve certain thin clay layers during inversion. However, ERT provided a rapid overview of subsurface stratification and moisture patterns; integrating with MASW, drilling data and advanced inversion methods that correct for 3D effects is recommended to improve characterization levee condition and defects. This study highlights both the potential and inherent challenges of geophysical methods for assessing critical flood protection infrastructure.

© 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70005
2025-05-21
2025-06-22

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70005
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aleardi, M., Vinciguerra, A., Stucchi, E. & Hojat, A. (2022) Stochastic electrical resistivity tomography with ensemble smoother and deep convolutional autoencoders. Near Surface Geophysics, 20(2), 160–177. https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.12194
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Arato, A., Vagnon, F. & Comina, C. (2022) First application of a new seismo‐electric streamer for combined resistivity and seismic measurements along linearly extended earth structures. Near Surface Geophysics, 20(2), 117–134.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Arosio, D., Hojat, A., Ivanov, V.I., Loke, M.H., Longoni, L., Papini, M. et al. (2018) A laboratory experience to assess the 3D effects on 2D ERT monitoring of river levees. In: 24th European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, Bunnik, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. pp. 1–5.
  4. ASCE. (2007) The New Orleans hurricane protection system: what went wrong and why. Reston: American Society of Civil Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Ball, J., Chambers, J., Wilkinson, P. & Binley, A. (2023) Resistivity imaging of river embankments: 3D effects due to varying water levels in tidal rivers. Near Surface Geophysics, 21(1), 93–110.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bedrosian, P.A., Burton, B.L., Powers, M.H., Minsley, B.J., Phillips, J.D. & Hunter, L.E. (2012) Geophysical investigations of geology and structure at the Martis Creek Dam, Truckee, California. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 77, 7–20.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bièvre, G., Oxarango, L., Günther, T., Goutaland, D. & Massardi, M. (2018) Improvement of 2D ERT measurements conducted along a small earth‐filled dyke using 3D topographic data and 3D computation of geometric factors. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 153, 100–112.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bonelli, S. (2013) Erosion in geomechanics applied to dams and levees. Hoboken, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Camarero, P.L., Moreira, C.A. & Pereira, H.G. (2019) Analysis of the physical integrity of earth dams from electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) in Brazil. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 176(12), 5363–5375.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Charlton, R. (2007) Fundamentals of fluvial geomorphology. Abingdon‐on‐Thames: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Fargier, Y., Lopes, S.P., Fauchard, C., François, D. & Côte, P. (2014) DC‐electrical resistivity imaging for embankment dike investigation: a 3D extended normalisation approach. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 103, 245–256.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Fernández‐Martínez, J.L., Fernández‐Muñiz, Z., Pallero, J.L.G. & Pedruelo‐González, L.M. (2013) From Bayes to Tarantola: new insights to understand uncertainty in inverse problems. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 98, 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2013.07.005
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Goetz, R. (2016) Background of the Melvin Price‐Wood River Levee problem seepage area. NHERI. https://utexas.designsafe‐ci.org/workshops/
  14. Hayashi, K., Inazaki, T., Kitao, K. & Kita, T. (2019) Statistical estimation of soil parameters in from cross‐plots of S‐wave velocity and resistivity obtained by integrated geophysical method. In: Levees and dams: advances in geophysical monitoring and characterization. Berlin: Springer, pp. 1–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Hojat, A. (2024) An iterative 3D correction plus 2D inversion procedure to remove 3D effects from 2D ERT data along embankments. Sensors, 24(12), 3759. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24123759
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Hojat, A., Arosio, D., Ivanov, V.I., Loke, M.H., Longoni, L., Papini, M. et al. (2020) Quantifying seasonal 3D effects for a permanent electrical resistivity tomography monitoring system along the embankment of an irrigation canal. Near Surface Geophysics, 18(4), 427–443.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Hojat, A., Arosio, D., Longoni, L., Papini, M., Tresoldi, G. & Zanzi, L. (2019) Installation and validation of a customized resistivity system for permanent monitoring of a river embankment. In: EAGE‐GSM 2nd Asia Pacific Meeting on Near Surface Geoscience and Engineering. Bunnik, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. pp. 1–5.
  18. Jodry, C., Lopes, S.P., Fargier, Y., Côte, P. & Sanchez, M. (2017) A cost‐effective 3D electrical resistivity imaging approach applied to dike investigation. Near Surface Geophysics, 15(1), 27–41.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Khalil, M.A., Barrick, D. & Joeckel, R.M. (2024) Characterization of seepage in an earthfill dam by the integration of geophysical surveys and geotechnical data. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 220, 105273.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Kolb, C.R. (1975) Geologic control of sand boils along the Mississippi river levees. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Lin, Y.C., Joh, S.H., Stokoe, K.H. (2014) Analyst J: analysis of the UTexas 1 surface wave dataset using the SASW methodology. In: Geo‐Congress: geo‐characterization and modeling for sustainability. ASCE, Reston, VA pp. 830–839.
  22. Maalouf, Y., Bièvre, G., Voisin, C. & Khoury, N. (2022) Geophysical monitoring of a laboratory‐scale internal erosion experiment. Near Surface Geophysics, 20(4), 365–383.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Maniscalco, S.J. & Ebel, J.E. (2025) Geophysical imaging of the subsurface seismic structure of the Chestnut Hill Reservoir earth embankment dam (Massachusetts). Near Surface Geophysics, 23(2), 105–120.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Martin, S.M. (2014) Geologic controls of sand boil formation at Buck Chute. Mississippi: Mississippi State University.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Mofarraj Kouchaki, B., Bernhardt‐Barry, M.L., Wood, C.M. & Moody, T. (2018) A laboratory investigation of factors influencing the electrical resistivity of different soil types. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 42(4), 829–853.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Nguyen, F., Garambois, S., Chardon, D., Hermitte, D., Bellier, O., & Jongmans, D., (2007) Subsurface electrical imaging of anisotropic formations affected by a slow active reverse fault, Provence, France. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 64(4), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2007.03.003
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Rahimi, S., Moody, T., Wood, C., Kouchaki, B.M., Barry, M., Tran, K. et al. (2019) Mapping subsurface conditions and detecting seepage channels for an embankment dam using geophysical methods: a case study of the Kinion Lake Dam. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 24(3), 373–386.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Rahimi, M., Wood, C.M. & Befus, K.M. (2025) Investigating seepage through earthen dams using electrical resistivity tomography: case studies from Hindsville Lake Dam and Elmdale Lake Dam, Arkansas. In: Geotechnical Frontiers 2025. ASCE, Reston, VA. pp. 123–137.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Rahimi, S., Wood, C.M., Coker, F., Moody, T., Bernhardt‐Barry, M. & Mofarraj Kouchaki, B. (2018) The combined use of MASW and resistivity surveys for levee assessment: a case study of the Melvin Price Reach of the Wood River Levee. Engineering Geology, 241, 11–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Rahimi, S., Wood, C.M. & Teague, D. (2021) Performance of different transformation techniques for MASW data processing considering various site conditions, near‐field effects, and modal separation. Surveys in Geophysics, 42, 1197–1225.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Ramirez, A.L., Nitao, J.J., Hanley, W.G., Aines, R., Glaser, R.E., Sengupta, S.K. et al. (2005) Stochastic inversion of electrical resistivity changes using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 110(B2). https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JB003449
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Shadie, C.E. & Kleiss, B.A. (2012) The 2011 Mississippi River flood and how the Mississippi River and tributaries project system provides “room for the River”. In: World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2012: Crossing Boundaries. Reston, ASCE. pp. 1664–1676.
  33. Sheishah, D., Kiss, T., Borza, T., Fiala, K., Kozák, P., Abdelsamei, E. et al. (2023) Mapping subsurface defects and surface deformation along the artificial levee of the Lower Tisza River, Hungary. Natural Hazards, 117(2), 1647–1671.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Singh, A.K. (2016) Stability analysis of the downstream slope of a levee. Geomechanics and Geoengineering, 11(2), 125–134.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Sjödahl, P., Dahlin, T. & Zhou, B. (2006) 2.5 D resistivity modeling of embankment dams to assess influence from geometry and material properties. Geophysics, 71(3), G107–G114.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Tsourlos, P., Papadopoulos, N., Yi, M.J., Kim, J.H., & Tsokas, G. (2014) Comparison of measuring strategies for the 3‐D electrical resistivity imaging of tumuli. Journal of applied Geophysics, 101, 77–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Tucker‐Kulesza, S., Rutherford, C. & Bernhardt‐Barry, M. (2019) Electrical resistivity at internal erosion locations in levees. ISSMGE International Journal of Geoengineering Case Histories, 5(2), 55–69.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Wathelet, M. (2008) An improved neighborhood algorithm: parameter conditions and dynamic scaling. Geophysical Research Letters, 35(9). https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL033256
     [Google Scholar]
  39. White, A., Boyd, J., Wilkinson, P., Unwin, H.E., Wookey, J., Kendall, J.M. et al. (2024) Assessing the effect of offline topography on electrical resistivity measurements: insights from flood embankments. Geophysical Journal International, 239(2), 1117–1132.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. White, A., Wilkinson, P., Boyd, J., Wookey, J., Kendall, J.M., Binley, A. et al. (2023) Combined electrical resistivity tomography and ground penetrating radar to map Eurasian badger (Meles Meles) burrows in clay‐rich flood embankments (levees). Engineering Geology, 323, 107198.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Wood, C.M. & Cox, B.R. (2012) A comparison of MASW dispersion uncertainty and bias for impact and harmonic sources. In: GeoCongress 2012: State of the Art and Practice in Geotechnical Engineering. Reston, ASCE. pp. 2756–2765.
  42. Zywicki, D.J. (1999) Advanced signal processing methods applied to engineering analysis of seismic surface waves. Doctoral dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology.
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70005
Loading
Challenges of 2D electrical resistivity tomography for detecting thin clay layers under levees: A case study of Melvin price reach of the wood river levee on the Mississippi river
Near Surface Geophysics 23, 173 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.70005
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70005
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70005
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): electrical resistivity tomography; embankment; MASW; near‐surface

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