In 2015, airborne transient electromagnetic (ATEM) surveys at four areas were conducted to study feasibility of using the method for identification of areas with possible presence of quick clay in Sweden. Here we present the results from survey in area 3. Using resistivity models from 1D inversion of ATEM data ground investigations were planned. These include radio magnetotelluric (RMT), electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), and cone penetration tests with resistivity (CPTR) measurements together with core samplings. The RMT models show the best correlation with the CPTR measurements in the upper 10 meters of the boreholes however they lack sensitivity to resolve underlying resistive bedrock. The ATEM models show the same resistivity variations seen in the CPTR data and RMT models at shallower depths with less resolution. They also demonstrate reasonable sensitivity to detect bedrock. At locations where 1D assumption is not valid the ATEM models are biased and the depths to the bedrock are underestimated and do not coincide with the observations in the boreholes. Our analyses reveal that the ATEM data contain valuable information to use for identifying areas with quick clay provided that geotechnical data are available for calibration of models and interpretations in the survey areas.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. AnschützH., BazinS., PfaffhuberA.
    , 2015. Towards Using AEM for Sensitive Clay Mapping — A Case Study from Norway. Near Surface Geoscience, Turin, Italy. Paper AEM04, DOI: 10.3997/2214‑4609.201413863
    https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201413863 [Google Scholar]
  2. HydroGeophysics Group, Dept. of Earth Sciences University of Aarhus
    HydroGeophysics Group, Dept. of Earth Sciences University of Aarhus, 2011. Guideline and standards for SkyTEM measurements, processing and inversion, version 2.5, pp. 51.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. DahlinT., LöfrothH., SchälinD., and SeurP.
    , 2013. Mapping of quick clay using geoelectrical imaging and CPTU-resistivity. Near Surface Geophysics, 11, 659–670, doi: 10.3997/1873‑0604.2013044.
    https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2013044 [Google Scholar]
  4. Hughes, A.L.C., Gyllencreutz, R., Lohne, Ö.S., Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I.
    , 2016. The last Eurasian ice sheets — a chronological database and time-slice reconstruction, DATED-1. Boreas45, 1–45.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Nadim F.S., Pedersen A.S., Thomé P.S., SigmundssonF., and EngdahlM.
    , 2008. Natural hazards in Nordic countries. Episodes, 31, 176–184.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. RankkaK., Sköld Y.A., HulténC., LarssonR., LerouxV., and DahlinT.
    , 2004. Quick-clay in Sweden. Swedish Geotechnical Institute, Technical report no. 65.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. ShanC., BastaniM., MalehmirA., PerssonL., and EngdahlM.
    , 2014. Integrated 2D modeling and interpretation of geophysical and geotechnical data to delineate quick clays at a landslide site in southwest Sweden. Geophysics, 79, EN61–EN75.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Stevens, R.
    , 1990. Proximal and distal glacimarine deposits in southwestern Sweden: contrasts in sedimentation., in: Dowdeswell, J.A., Scourse, J. D. (Eds.), Glacimarine Environments: Processes and Sediments. Geological Society, pp. 307–316.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Sørensen, K. I., and Auken, E.
    , 2004. SkyTEM A new high-resolution helicopter transient electromagnetic system: Exploration Geophysics, 35, 194–202. doi: 10.1071/EG04194
    https://doi.org/10.1071/EG04194 [Google Scholar]
  10. ViezzoliA., ChristiansenA.V., AukenE., and S0rensen K.I.
    , 2008. Quasi-3D modelling of airborne TEM data by spatially constrained inversion. Geophysics, 73, F105–F113.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

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