1887

Abstract

Summary

The aim of this work is to explore the potential of ERT to study the geometry and soundness of the geomembrane that is commonly placed below the waste deposits to prevent leachate propagation into the subsurface. We compare the results obtained from 3D inversion of synthetic and measured geoelectrical data starting from homogeneous and heterogeneous initial models. Real data were collected in an actual landfill site with loop-like electrode spreads and according to different quadrupole configurations. Synthetic data were modelled considering field conditions and performed surveys thanks to an open-source software capable of handling models created with unstructured meshes. Although a priori information obviously guides the inversion process, the inversion results using a homogeneous initial model indicate that measured data are not able to reconstruct a (relatively) high-resistivity volume below the landfill, differently from what is found with synthetic data. This may suggest potential issues related to the soundness of the geomembrane. Yet, chi2 values associated to different initial models are very similar. Therefore, further tests are necessary both using modelling software and by performing controlled field experiments, possibly exploring different conditions of the insulating liner, of the waste deposit as well as of leachate propagation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202177072
2021-11-30
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aguzzoli, A., Hojat, A., Zanzi, L. and Arosio, D. [2020] Two dimensional ERT simulations to check the integrity of geomembranes at the base of landfill bodies. 26th European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 1–5. doi: 10.3997/2214‑4609.202020203
    https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202020203 [Google Scholar]
  2. Arosio, D., Hojat, A., Ivanov, V.l., Loke, M.H., Longoni, L., Papini, M., Tresoldi, G. and Zanzi, L. [2018] A laboratory experience to assess the 3D effects on 2D ERT monitoring of river levees. 24th European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 1–5. doi: 10.3997/22144609.201802628.
    https://doi.org/10.3997/22144609.201802628 [Google Scholar]
  3. Chambers, J.E., Kuras, O., Meldrum, P.I., Ogilvy, R.D. and Hollands, J. [2006] Electrical resistivity tomography applied to geologic, hydrogeologic, and engineering investigations at a former waste-disposal site. Geophysics, 71(6), B231–B239.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Dahlin, T., Rosqvist, H. and Leroux, V. [2010] Resistivity-IP for landfill applications. First Break, 28(8), 101–105.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Hojat, A., Arosio, D., Longoni, L., Papini, M., Tresoldi, G. and Zanzi, L. [2019] Installation and validation of a customized resistivity system for permanent monitoring of a river embankment. EAGE-GSM 2nd Asia Pacific Meeting on Near Surface Geoscience & Engineering, 1–5. doi: 10.3997/22144609.201900421.
    https://doi.org/10.3997/22144609.201900421 [Google Scholar]
  6. Hojat, A., Arosio, D., Ivanov, V.I., Loke, M.H., Longoni, L., Papini, M., Tresoldi, G. and Zanzi, L. [2020] Quantifying seasonal 3D effects for a permanent electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) monitoring system along the embankment of an irrigation canal. Near Surface Geophysics, 18(4), 427443.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Hsuan, G.Y. [2000] Data base of field incidents used to establish HDPE geomembrane stress crack resistance specifications. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 18, 1–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Li, Y. and Oldenburg, D.W. [1999] 3-d inversion of dc resistivity data using an L-curve criterion, in 69th Annual Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 251–254.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Loke, M.H., Chambers, J.E., Rucker, D.F., Kuras, O. and Wilkinson, P.B. [2013] Recent developments in the direct-current geoelectrical imaging method. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 95, 135–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Meju, M.A. [2000] Geoelectrical investigation of old/abandoned, covered landfill sites in urban areas: Model development with a genetic diagnosis approach. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 44, 115–150.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Roy, A. and Apparao, A. [1971] Depth of investigation in direct current methods. Geophysics, 36(5), 943–959.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Rücker, C., Günther, T. and Wagner, F.M. [2017] pyGIMLi: An open-source library for modelling and inversion in geophysics. Computers and Geosciences, 109, 106–123.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Sahbi, H., Jongmans, D. and Charlier, R. [1997] Theoretical study of slope effects in resistivity surveys and applications. Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 795–808.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Sirieix, C., Martinez, J.F., Riss, J. and Genelle, F. [2013] Electrical resistivity characterization and defect detection on a geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) on an experimental site. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 90, 19–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Szalai, S. [2009] Depth of investigation and vertical resolution of surface geoelectric arrays. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 14(1), 15–23.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Tsourlos, P., Vargemezis, G.N., Fikos, I. and Tsokas, G.N. [2014] DC geoelectrical methods applied to landfill investigation: Case studies from Greece. First Break, 32, 81–89.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202177072
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202177072
Loading

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