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

The Downhole (DH) seismic test is an important geophysical exploration method and has become an essential tool for determining subsurface dynamic properties and seismic site class. To analyse the acquired data, an approximation of a straight raypath is often assumed between the source and receiver, which neglects refractions along the travel path due to changes in subsurface properties. Further investigation is needed to fully understand the effects of subsurface refraction on the determination of total travel length and average S‐wave velocity (). Hence, DH tests at several locations up to a depth of over 30 m were conducted in this study. Average profiles were determined considering a straight travel path and refraction occurring along the travel path. It was observed that the average values remain fairly independent of the inversion method used. The total refracted raypath length up to 30 m depth also shows no significant difference compared to a straight raypath. Similar observations were noted when the average and raypath length from surface up to sediment depth and bedrock depth was calculated. Further, the ambiguity associated with the selection of a model for DH data reduction was studied, and minimal change was observed in average with a change in depth of different subsurface interfaces. This observation concludes that the travel time from the source up to the 30 m depth and bedrock depth are sufficient for site classification if a detailed profile is not needed immediately. Further, the average values obtained from DH tests were compared with commonly used MASW tests. The difference in average up to bedrock and sediment depth from MASW and from DH test, considering both refracted raypath and straight raypath, was observed to be high for shallow bedrock sites. To study the effect of error in arrival time picking on average profiles, random error within ±0.50 ms was introduced in arrival time data and profiles were estimated.

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

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70009
2025-05-21
2025-06-22

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70009
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anbazhagan, P., Kumar Katukuri, A., Reddy, G.R., Moustafa, S.S.R. & Al‐Arifi, N.S.N. (2018) Seismic site classification and amplification of shallow bedrock sites. PLoS ONE, 13(12), e0208226, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208226.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Areias, L. & Van Impe, W.F. (2006) Effect of travel path in the SCPT test method. In: Site and geomaterial characterization, Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 236–242. https://doi.org/10.1061/40861(193)30
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bajaj, K. & Anbazhagan, P. (2023) Effective input velocity and depth for deep and shallow sites for site response analysis. Geomechanics and Geoengineering, 18(3), 193–207, https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2021.2023766.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bang, E.S., Cho, S.J. & Kim, D.S. (2014) Mean refracted ray path method for reliable downhole seismic data interpretations. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 65, 214–223, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.06.009.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bautista, P. & Aguilar, Z. (2023) Interpretation methods for seismic downhole test in inclined boreholes. Civil Engineering Journal, 9(10), 2592–2611, https://doi.org/10.28991/CEJ-2023-09-10-016.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Boore, D.M., Gibbs, J.F. & Joyner, W.B. (2021) Damping values derived from surface‐source, downhole‐receiver measurements at 22 sites in the San Francisco bay area of central California and the San Fernando valley of southern California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 111(4), 2158–2166, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120200225.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Boore, D.M. & Thompson, E.M. (2007) On using surface‐source downhole‐receiver logging to determine seismic slownesses. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 27(11), 971–985, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2007.03.005.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Borcherdt, R.D. (1994) Estimates of site‐dependent response spectra for design (methodology and justification). Earthquake Spectra, 10(4), 617–653, https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585791.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Butcher, A.P., Campanella, R.G., Kaynia, A.M. & Massarsch, K.R. (2005) Seismic cone downhole procedure to measure shear wave velocity‐a guideline prepared by ISSMGE TC10: geophysical Testing in geotechnical engineering. In: Proceedings of the XVI international conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Osaka, Japan, 2005.
  10. Campanella, R.G. & Stewart, W.P. (1992) Seismic Cone Analysis Using Digital Signal Processing for Dynamic Site Characterization. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 29(3), 477–486, https://doi.org/10.1139/t92-052.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Castellaro, S., Mulargia, F. & Rossi, P.L. (2008) Vs30: proxy for seismic amplification?Seismological Research Letters, 79(4), 540–543, https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.79.4.540.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Crice, D. (2011) Near‐surface, downhole shear wave surveys—a primer. The Leading Edge, 30(2), 164–171, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3555327.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. D7400‐19 . (2019) Standard test methods for downhole seismic testing. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Deere, D.U. & Deere, D.W. (1988) The rock quality designation (RQD) index in practice. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM Special Technical Publication, https://doi.org/10.1520/STP48465S.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Ghione, F., Köhler, A., Dichiarante, A.M., Aarnes, I. & Oye, V. (2023) Vs30 and depth to bedrock estimates from integrating HVSR measurements and geology‐slope approach in the Oslo area, Norway. Frontiers in Earth Science, 11, 1–19, https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2023.1242679.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Hallal, M.M. & Cox, B.R. (2019) Theoretical evaluation of the interval method commonly used for downhole seismic testing. In: Geo‐congress 2019. Reston, VA, American Society of Civil Engineers. pp. 376–386, https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784482131.038.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Howard, J.K., Fraser, W.A. & Schultz, M.G. (2008) Probabilistic use of arias intensity in geotechnical earthquake engineering. In: Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics IV. Reston, VA, American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1061/40975(318)6.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Joh, S.H. & Mok, Y.J. (1998) Development of an inversion analysis technique for downhole seismic testing and continuous seismic CPT. Journal of Korea Geotechnical Society, 14(3), 95–108.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Kalinski, M.E. (2012) A small, lightweight borehole receiver for crosshole and downhole seismic testing. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 35(2), 363–366, https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ104156.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Kim, D.S., Bang, E.S. & Kim, W.C. (2004) Evaluation of various downhole data reduction methods for obtaining reliable VS profiles. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 27(6), 585–597, https://doi.org/10.1520/gtj11811.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Kim, J.H. & Park, C.B. (2002) Processing of downhole S‐wave seismic survey data by considering direction of polarization. Journal of the Korean Geophysical Society, 5(4), 321–328.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Kumar, A. & Anbazhagan, P. (2023) Integration of downhole data reduction techniques for determination of Vs profiles. In: Geo‐congress 2023. Reston, VA, American Society of Civil Engineers. pp. 152–161, https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784484678.005.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Kumar, A. & Anbazhagan, P. (2025) Seismic site characterization of shallow bedrock sites in peninsular India using multiple geophysical methods. Acta Geotechnica, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-025-02534-w.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Michaels, P. (2001) Use of principal component analysis to determine down‐hole tool orientation and enhance SH‐waves. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 6(4), 175–183, https://doi.org/10.4133/jeeg6.4.175.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Park, C.B., Miller, R.D. & Xia, J. (1998) Imaging dispersion curves of surface waves on multi‐channel record. In: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 1998, Houston, TX, Society of Exploration Geophysicists. pp. 1377–1380, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1820161.
  26. Park, C.B., Miller, R.D. & Xia, J. (1999) Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics, 64(3), 800–808, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444590.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Stokoe, K.H., Hwang, S., Roberts, J.N., Menq, F.M., Keene, A.K., Lee, R.C. et al. (2017) Deep downhole seismic testing using a hydraulically‐operated, controlled‐ waveform vibroseis, 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 16WCEE 2017, Santiago Chile, January 9th to 13th 2017 Paper No. 4582.
  28. Stokoe, K.H., Li, S., Cox, B., Menq, F.‐Y. & Rohay, A. (2008) Deep downhole seismic testing for earthquake engineering studies. In: 14th world conference on earthquake engineering: innovation, practice, safety, 12‐17, Beijing, China.
  29. Vergniault, C. & Mari, J.‐L. (2020) 1 Shear velocity measurement in boreholes. In: Well seismic surveying and acoustic logging, Les Ulis: EDP Sciences, pp. 15–48, https://doi.org/10.1051/978-2-7598-2263-8.c003.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Wang, H., Wu, S., Qi, X. & Chu, J. (2021a) Modified refracted ray path method for determination of shear wave velocity profiles using seismic cone. Engineering Geology, 293, 106330, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106330.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Wang, H., Wu, S., Qi, X. & Chu, J. (2021b) Site characterization of reclaimed lands based on seismic cone penetration test. Engineering Geology, 280(2), 105953, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105953.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Wang, J.S., Hwang, J.H., Lu, C.C. & Deng, Y.C. (2022) Measurement uncertainty of shear wave velocity: a case study of thirteen alluvium test sites in Taipei Basin. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 155, 107195, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107195.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Wu, W., Liu, J., Guo, L. & Deng, Z. (2020) Methodology and assessment of proxy‐based Vs30 estimation in Sichuan Province, China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 11(1), 133–144, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-020-00253-2.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Xia, J., Miller, R.D. & Park, C.B. (1999) Estimation of near‐surface shear‐wave velocity by inversion of Rayleigh waves. Geophysics, 64(3), 691–700, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444578.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70009
Loading
Influence of subsurface refraction and wave travel path on the estimation of average VS profiles from the seismic downhole test
Near Surface Geophysics 23, 229 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1002/nsg.70009
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70009
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.70009
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): data processing; refraction; site characterization; S‐wave; traveltime

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