1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 49, Issue 6
  5. Article
Volume 49 Number 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Hagedoorn developed the plus‐minus method with the objective of providing the exploration world with a simple and rapid approximation of Thornburgh's wavefront reconstruction method. Straightforward adding and subtracting produces depths and velocities at all geophones where the refracted waves from a set of reciprocal shots are first arrivals. Even though seismic refraction has not kept up with the revolutionary advance of reflection technology during the past decades, the method still has a lot to offer, especially in shallow engineering, and environmental, groundwater and sea‐bed surveying. Its strong points are the ease of application, the low costs, the effectiveness in the shallow zone, the unique ability to provide detailed velocity information on the deepest refractor and the capability for producing parameters for layer and rock characterization.Because of its simplicity, the plus‐minus method is ideally suited for real‐time processing of refraction data in the field, thus monitoring the data quality and the optimal shot configuration. Today, such field processing is easily performed with a laptop and dedicated software. ® is a software package that enables tailor‐made processing, offering a combination of a programming language, visualization tools and a large library of ready‐made functions. This paper presents a plus‐minus program developed in and illustrates its application with a case study in Yemen, where seismic refraction was used in a regional groundwater study. Here, refraction provided not only a detailed section across the recharge area of a coastal plain but also the additional information needed to reduce ambiguity in the interpretation of the vertical electrical soundings made in the area.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1964.tb01888.x
2008-07-07
2024-04-26

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1964.tb01888.x
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AndersonJ.2000. Continuous refraction seismic profiling (‘CRISP’); quantitative seabed sediment characterization for port, cable and pipeline projects. Hydro International January/February 2000, 30 – 33.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AstierJ.L.1971.Géophysique Appliquée à l'Hydrogéologie. Masson & Cie, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BamfordD., NunnK., ProdehlC., JacobB.1978. LISPB‐IV. Crustal structure of northern Britain. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society54, 43 – 60.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. ChrostonP.N., AllsopJ.M., CornwellJ.D.1987. New seismic refraction evidence on the origin of the Bouguer anomaly low near Hunstanton, Norfolk. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society46, 311 – 319.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. DuttaN.P.1984. Seismic refraction method to study the foundation rock of a dam. Geophysical Prospecting32, 1103 – 1110.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. HaeniF.P.1986.Application of Seismic‐Refraction Techniques to Hydrologic Studies. US Geological Survey Open‐File Report 84‐746.
  7. HagedoornJ.G.1954. A process of seismic reflection interpretation. Geophysical Prospecting2, 85 – 127.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. HagedoornJ.G.1959. The plus‐minus method of interpreting seismic refraction sections. Geophysical Prospecting7, 158 – 181.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. McCannD.M. & FenningP.J.1995. Estimation of rippability and excavation conditions from seismic velocity measurements. In: Engineering Geology of Construction (eds M.Eddleston , S.Walthall , J.C.Cripps and M.G.Culshaw ), pp. 335 – 343. Geological Society Engineering Geology Special Publication No. 10.
  10. PalmerD.1980.The Generalized Reciprocal Method of Seismic Refraction Interpretation. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, OK.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. ThornburghH.R.1930. Wavefront diagrams in seismic interpretation. AAPG Bulletin14, 185 – 200.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Van OvermeerenR.A.1975. A combination of gravity and seismic refraction measurements, applied to groundwater explorations near Taltal, Province of Antofagasta, Chile. Geophysical Prospecting23, 248 – 258.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Van OvermeerenR.A.1980. Tracing by gravity of a narrow buried graben structure, detected by seismic refraction, for groundwater investigations in North Chile. Geophysical Prospecting28, 392 – 407.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Van OvermeerenR.A.1981. A combination of electrical resistivity, seismic refraction, and gravity measurements for groundwater exploration in Sudan. Geophysics46, 1304 – 1313.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Van OvermeerenR.A.1987. The plus‐minus method for rapid field processing by portable computer of seismic refraction data in multi‐layer groundwater studies. First Break5, 83 – 94.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Van OvermeerenR.A.1989. Aquifer boundaries explored by geoelectrical measurements in the coastal plain of Yemen: a case of equivalence. Geophysics54, 38 – 48.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1964.tb01888.x
Loading
Hagedoorn's plus‐minus method: the beauty of simplicity
Geophysical Prospecting 49, 687 (2001); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1964.tb01888.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1964.tb01888.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1964.tb01888.x
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

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