1887
Volume 12 Number 6
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

Pseudo‐2D surface wave profiling (MASW) has become a powerful state‐of‐the‐art tool for the characterization of near‐surface features in recent years. The rapid gathering and interpretation of surface wave data, i.e. Rayleigh waves, that this method offers is applicable to many investigations and environments. However, most studies only perform unidirectional active surface wave profiling, i.e. without data evaluation by measuring the same profile in the opposite direction. Uncertainties arising from using the MASW method are connected to the one‐dimensional inversion of a two‐dimensional subsurface. Moreover, the occurence of lateral inhomogeneities and dipping layers distort the flat‐layered 1D assumption used in surface wave inversion. In this study, we present data from two different MASW surveys. For both locations, we reveal shot‐geometrical effects and prove the necessity of bidirectional profiling, especially since these check shots can be implemented with only little extra effort. The results of this investigation show that, in general, more attention should be paid to data evaluation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2014029
2014-06-01
2024-04-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BodetL., van WijkK., BitriA., AbrahamO., CôteP., GrandjeanG.et al.2005. Surface‐wave inversion limitations from laser‐Doppler physical modeling. Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics10(2), 151–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BoxbergerT., PicozziM. and ParolaiS.2011. Shallow geology characterisation using Rayleigh and Love wave dispersion curves derived from seismic noise array measurement. Journal of Applied Geophysics75, 345–354.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. DebegliaN., BitriA. and ThierryP.2006. Karst investigations using microgravity and MASW; Application to Orléans, France. Near Surface Geophysics4(4), 215–225.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. DikmenU., ArisoyM.Ö. and AkkayaI.2010. Offset and linear spread geometry in the MASW method. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering7, 211–222.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Geometrics.
    Geometrics.2012. SeisImager/SW Surface Wave Data Analysis Software.http://www.geometrics.com (24.10.2012).
  6. HausmannJ., SteinelH., KreckM., WerbanU., VienkenT. and DietrichP.2013. Two‐dimensional geomorphological characterization of a filled abandoned meander using geophysical methods and soil sampling. Geomorphology201, 335–343.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. HayashiK. and SuzukiH.2004. CMP cross‐correlation analysis of multi‐channel surface‐wave data. Exploration Geophysics35, 7–13.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. HoffmannR. and DietrichP.2004. An approach to determine equivalent solutions to the geoelectrical 2D inversion problem. Journal of Applied Geophysics56(2), 79–91.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. IsmailA. and AndersonN.2007. Near‐surface characterization of a geotechnical site in north‐east Missouri using shear‐wave velocity measurements. Near Surface Geophysics5(5), 331–336.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. LessoffS.C., SchneidewindU., LevenC., BlumP., DietrichP. and DaganG.2010. Spatial characterization of the hydraulic conductivity using direct‐push injection logging. Water Resources Research46(12), 9 p.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. LouY., XiaJ., LiuJ., XuY. and LiuQ.2009. Research on the middle‐of‐receiver‐spread assumption of the MASW method. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering29, 71–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. O’NeillA., CampbellT. and MatsuokaT.2008. Lateral resolution and lithological interpretation of surface‐wave profiling. The Leading Edge27, 1550–1563.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. O’NeillA., SafaniJ. and MatsuokaT.2006. Landstreamers and Surface Waves: Testing and Results. 19th EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems,1065–1074.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. PaascheH., WerbanU. and DietrichP.2009. Near‐surface seismic traveltime tomography using a direct‐push source and surface‐planted geophones. Geophysics74(4), G17–G25.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. ParkC.B., MillerR.D. and XiaJ.1999. Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics64, 800–808.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. ParkC.B. and ShawverJ.B.2009. MASW survey using multiple source offsets. 22nd EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems,639–649.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. ParolaiS., PicozziM., RichwalskiS.M. and MilkereitC.2005. Joint inversion of phase velocity dispersion and H/V ratio curves from seismic noise recordings using a genetic algorithm, considering higher modes. Geophysical Research Letters32, 4 p.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. PicozziM., ParolaiS. and RichwalskiS.2005. Joint inversion of H/V ratios and dispersion curves from seismic noise: Estimating the S‐wave velocity of bedrock. Geophysical Research Letters32, 2–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. PilzM., ParolaiS., PicozziM., WangR., LeytonF., CamposJ.et al.2010. Shear wave velocity model of the Santiago de Chile basin derived from ambient noise measurements: A comparison of proxies for seismic site conditions and amplification. Geophysical Journal International182, 355–367.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. RivaM., GuadagniniL., GuadagniniA., PtakT. and MartacE.2006. Probabilistic study of well capture zones distribution at the Lauswiesen field site. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology88, 92–118.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. RoyS. and StewartR.2012. Near‐surface seismic investigation of Barringer (Meteor) Crater, Arizona. Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics17, 117–127.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. SamynK., BitriA. and GrandjeanG.2012. Imaging a near‐surface feature using cross‐correlation analysis of multi‐channel surface wave data. Near Surface Geophysics10, 39p.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. SoccoL.V., BoieroD., CominaC., FotiS. and WisénR.2008. Seismic characterization of an Alpine site. Near Surface Geophysics6(4), 255–267.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. SoccoL.V., JongmansD., BoieroD., StoccoS., MaraschiniM., TokeshiK.et al.2010. Geophysical investigation of the Sandalp rock avalanche deposits. Journal of Applied Geophysics70, 277–291.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. SoccoL.V. and StrobbiaC.2004. Surface‐wave method for near surface characterization: a tutorial. Near Surface Geophysics2(4), 165–185.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. StrobbiaC. and FotiS.2006. Multi‐offset phase analysis of surface wave data (MOPA). Journal of Applied Geophysics59, 300–313.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. VignoliG. and CassianiG.2010. Identification of lateral discontinuities via multi‐offset phase analysis of surface wave data. Geophysical Prospecting58, 389–413.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. XiaJ., MillerR.D., ParkC.B. and IvanovJ.2000. Construction of 2‐D vertical shear‐wave velocity field by the multichannel analysis of surface wave technique. Proceedings of the Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems,1197–1206.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. XiaJ., MillerR.D., ParkC.B. and TianG.2003. Inversion of high frequency surface waves with fundamental and higher modes. Journal of Applied Geophysics52, 45–57.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. YamakawaY., KosugiK., MasaokaN., SumidaJ., TaniM. and MizuyamaT.2012. Combined geophysical methods for detecting soil thickness distribution on a weathered granitic hillslope. Geomorphology145–46, 56–69.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2014029
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2014029
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