NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF GROUND SITES USING SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF SURFACE WAVE TECHNIQUE
Department of Civil Engineering
Indian Institute of Science
Bangalore
by
Shubhrajit Maitra
Under the guidance of
Prof. Jyant Kumar
ORGANIZATION
• 
Introduction 
• 
Literature Review 
• 
Equipment details and description of sites 
• 
Data acquisition 
• 
Signal processing 
• 
Results 
• 
Concluding remarks 
• 
References 
2
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
• Insitu Surface Wave Methods (SWM) : Identification of soil properties at
large scale, under undisturbed conditions, at very low strain.
• Advantages of SWM
Nondestructive and noninvasive method
Saves time and money
Can detect lowvelocity layers
Can be used up to a considerable depth
• SWM
Active Source Methods
Passive Source Methods
• Spectral Analysis of Surface Waves (SASW) : Active source surface wave method that capitalize upon the dispersive nature of Rayleigh waves.
3
INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE
• Study the shear wave velocity (V _{S} ) profiles for site specific investigations
• Compare these profiles with available V _{S} profiles obtained from other tests, such as cross bore hole tests
• Study the variation of maximum depth of exploration with stiffness characteristics of the site
• Study the effect of change in impact energy at the source on depth of exploration
4
LITERATURE REVIEW
IN SITU NONDESTRUCTIVE METHODS FOR OBTAINING THE SUBSURFACE PROFILE OF THE GROUND
• Reflection survey
• Refraction survey
• Downhole and uphole seismic surveys
• Crosshole seismic survey
• Steady state vibration technique
• Surface wave methods
SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF SURFACE WAVES (SASW)
MULTICHANNEL ANALYSIS OF SURFACE WAVES (MASW)
5
LITERATURE REVIEW
SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF SURFACE WAVES (SASW)
• SURFACE WAVES
Propagates parallel to earth’s surface without spreading energy through the earth’s interior
Most of the energy propagates in a shallow zone, roughly equal to one wavelength (λ) (Richart et al., 1970)
More than twothirds of total seismic energy generated is imparted into Rayleigh waves (Richart et al.,1970)
• SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF SURFACE WAVES
Nonintrusive method to determine the shear wave velocity profile
Based on the geometric dispersion of surface waves
6
LITERATURE REVIEW
SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF SURFACE WAVES (SASW)
Fig. 1 Geometric dispersion of surface waves in nonhomogeneous medium
7
LITERATURE REVIEW
SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF SURFACE WAVES (SASW)
• 
METHODOLOGY 

Data Acquisition 
Evaluation of dispersion curve by phase unwrapping method
Determination of shear wave velocity profile by inversion process
• INVERSION ANALYSIS
Can be achieved using various numerical techniques proposed by several
researchers (Thomson, 1950; Haskell, 1953; Lysmer, 1970; Kausel & Röesset,
1981; Nazarian, 1984; Nazarian et al., 1988; Hossain & Drnevich, 1989; Tokimatsu et al., 1992a; Park et al., 1999; Xia et al., 2002; Kumar, 2011)
• SIMPLEST APPROACH TO INVERSION
According to Tokimatsu et al., 1997,
D=λ/3 (Heisey et al., 1982)
_{S} 1.1
V
C
(C=Phase Velocity)
D=λ/2 (Heukelum et al., 1960)
8
EQUIPMENT DETAILS AND DESCRIPTION OF SITES
EQUIPMENT FOR GENERATING AND CAPTURING SEISMIC WAVES
Fig. 2 Cylindrical dropping mass along
with tripod and pulley arrangement
Fig. 3 Sledgehammer of mass 20 lbs (9.07 kg)
9
EQUIPMENT DETAILS AND DESCRIPTION OF SITES
EQUIPMENT FOR GENERATING AND CAPTURING SEISMIC WAVES
Fig. 4 Geophone fixed to
the ground
Fig. 5 Data acquisition
system
Fig. 6 Connecting cable of
geophones to DAqS
Fig. 7 Base Plate
10
EQUIPMENT DETAILS AND DESCRIPTION OF SITES
DESCRIPTION OF SITES
• Testing was done on four sites (G1, G2, G3, G4)
• Location of sites: New BARC Campus, Visakhapatnam
• Sites G1 and G2:
Located near the foot of a hill
Separated by a distance of 300 m
• Sites G3 and G4:
Located in an open field close to sea
Separated by a distance of 120 m
11
DATA ACQUISITION
SOURCE DISTANCE (X)
• Planewave propagation of surface waves does not occur in most cases until
X 0.5
max
or,
max
2X
(Stokoe et al., 1994)
…Eq. (1)
• D=λ/3 (Heisey et al., 1982)…………………………………………………… Eq. (2)
• D=λ/2 (Heukelum et al., 1960)
Combining Eq. (1) and Eq. (2), we get
X 1.5D
For D=30 m,
_{X} _{} _{4}_{5}_{m}
Three values of S was considered (46 m, 56 m, 66 m).
12
DATA ACQUISITION
• RECEIVER SPACING
Fig. 8 Conventional way of using just two receivers
Fig. 9 Source and receiver distance configurations at sites G1, G2, G3 and G4
PURPOSE OF USING MORE NUMBER OF GEOPHONES
• Resolve the issue of phase unwrapping
• Quick generation of input data for several simultaneous values of X
13
DATA ACQUISITION
• FIELD TESTING
Fig. 10 Spike for fixing geophones
Fig. 11 Array of geophones fixed to ground
• ACQUISITION OF DATA
Fig. 12 Lifting and dropping of 65 kg mass at site G2
Sampling rate : 1024 data points per second
Mass was dropped sixseven times for each value of X
14
SIGNAL PROCESSING
• SPECTRAL CALCULATIONS IN SASW TECHNIQUE
• y _{1} (t) and y _{2} (t) are time domain records of two geophones separated by distance X.
• Measured time records were transformed into the frequency domain, Y _{1} (f) and Y _{2} (f) with the help of Fast Fourier Transform(FFT).
• As per Nazarian & Desai, 1993:
G
Y
1
Y
2
Y
1
*
(
f
).
Y
2
(
f
)
,
G
Y
1
Y
1
Y
1
*
(
f
).
Y
1
(
f
)
,
wrap
(
f
)
tan
1
[
(
imaginary G
Y
1
Y
2
)./(
real G
(
Y
unwrap
wrap
2
X
unwrap
,
2
n
C f
,
where, n= 0,1,2…
Coherence function
1
Y
2
G
Y
)]
2
Y
2
G
Y
1
Y
*
Y
2
(
f
2
(
f
)
2
).
Y
2
(
f
)
G
Y
1
Y
1
(
f
).
G
Y
2
Y
2
(
f
)
Here, G _{Y}_{1}_{Y}_{1} ,G _{Y}_{2}_{Y}_{2} are auto power spectra, G _{Y}_{1}_{Y}_{2} is cross power spectra. ϕ _{w}_{r}_{a}_{p} and ϕ _{u}_{n}_{w}_{r}_{a}_{p} are wrapped and unwrapped phase angle respectively. λ=Wavelength, C= Phase Velocity, f=frequency.
15
SIGNAL PROCESSING
• PHASE UNWRAPPING PROCEDURE
• It deals with calculating ϕ _{u}_{n}_{w}_{r}_{a}_{p} from ϕ _{w}_{r}_{a}_{p} .
unwrap
wrap
2
n
• n needs to be found out.
where, n= 0,1,2…
• For correct value of n, (ϕ _{u}_{n}_{w}_{r}_{a}_{p} /X) becomes constant for a given frequency.
• Thus, by making use of simultaneous records gathered by geophones (R _{1} , R _{2} ,R _{3} etc.), n can be found out by trial and error.
16
SIGNAL PROCESSING
• ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE ON PHASE UNWRAPPING
Fig. 13 Plot of signals from receiver R _{1} and R _{6} at site G1 for 65 kg drop mass and 46 m source to R _{1} distance
17
SIGNAL PROCESSING
• ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE ON PHASE UNWRAPPING
Fig. 14 Variation of wrapped phase angle with frequency
18
SIGNAL PROCESSING
• ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE ON PHASE UNWRAPPING
• For f < 22.3 Hz, n=0
• For 22.3 Hz < f < 50 Hz, n=1
Fig. 15 Variation of unwrapped and wrapped phase angle with frequency after filtering
out unwanted data
19
SIGNAL PROCESSING
• CONSTRUCTION OF FIELD DISPERSION CURVE
• After obtaining unwrapped phase Fourier spectrum, field dispersion curve is obtained using the procedure discussed below.
• Phase difference corresponding to one wavelength (λ) = 2π radians.
• Phase difference corresponding to receiver spacing X = ϕ _{u}_{n}_{w}_{r}_{a}_{p} radians.
X
unwrap
2
or,
2
X
unwrap
• Phase velocity (C) is then calculated using the expression:
C f
• Calculations done for all combinations of frequency (f), source to sensor distance (S), receiver spacing (X) and type of source used.
• Plot of C versus f and C versus λ is obtained.
20
SIGNAL PROCESSING
• CONSTRUCTION OF SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY PROFILE
As per Tokimatsu et al., 1997,
_{S} 1.1
V
C
(C=Phase Velocity, V _{S} =Shear Wave Velocity)
As per Heisey et al., 1982,
Equivalent depth (D) = λ/3
Thus, without doing any rigorous inversion analysis, rough estimate of shear wave velocity profile can be determined.
21
RESULTS
• COMPARISON OF SIGNALS IN TIME DOMAIN
Comparison between various sites
Fig. 16 (a) Signals shown by geophone R _{1} for S = 46 m and 65 kg drop mass used as source for Site G1 and Site G2
22
RESULTS
• COMPARISON OF SIGNALS IN TIME DOMAIN
Comparison between various sites
Fig. 16 (b) Signals shown by geophone R _{1} for S = 46 m and 65 kg drop mass used as source for Site G3 and Site G4
23
RESULTS
•
COMPARISON OF SIGNALS IN TIME DOMAIN
Comparison of signals for various values of source to sensor distance (S)
Fig. 17 Signals shown by geophone R1 at site G1 for (a) S = 46 m, (b) S = 56 m, (c) S =66 m for 65kg mass used as source
24
RESULTS
• COMPARISON OF SIGNALS IN TIME DOMAIN
Comparison of signals for different types of sources
Fig. 18 Signals shown by geophone R1 at site G1 for S = 46 m when (a) 65 kg mass dropped from a height of 4 m, (b) sledgehammer; was used as source
25
RESULTS
• COMPARISON OF SIGNALS IN FREQUENCY DOMAIN
Comparison between various sites
Fig. 19 Fourier amplitude spectrum of measured time records at geophone R _{1} for S=46m and 65 kg drop mass for (a) Site G1, (b) Site G2, (c) Site G3 and (d) Site G4
26
RESULTS
• COMPARISON OF SIGNALS IN FREQUENCY DOMAIN
Comparison of signals for different values of source to sensor distance (S)
Fig. 20 Fourier amplitude spectrum of measured time records at geophone R _{1} for 65kg drop mass at Site G2 for (a) S =46 m, (b) S = 56 m and (c) S = 66 m
27
RESULTS
• COMPARISON OF SIGNALS IN FREQUENCY DOMAIN
Comparison of signals for different types of sources
Fig. 21 Fourier amplitude spectrum of measured time records at geophone R1 for S=46m at Site G2 for (a) 65 kg drop mass and (b) 20 lbs sledgehammer
28
RESULTS
• DISPERSION CURVES
Fig. 22 Phase velocity (C) versus frequency (f) plots for sites G1, G2, G3 and G4
29
RESULTS
• DISPERSION CURVES
Fig. 23 Phase velocity (C) versus wavelength (λ) plots for sites G1, G2, G3 and G4
30
RESULTS
• DISPERSION CURVES
Comparison between four sites
Fig. 24 Comparison of dispersion curves for sites G1, G2, G3 and G4
31
RESULTS
• DISPERSION CURVES
Comparison for different types of sources
Fig. 24 Comparison of phase velocity versus wavelength plots for X= 46 m at site G2 for (a) 65 kg drop mass and (b) 20 lbs sledgehammer used as input energy at the source
32
RESULTS
• SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY PROFILE
Comparison between four sites
Fig. 24 Comparison of approximate Shear Wave Velocity profile for sites
G1, G2, G3 and G4
33
CONCLUDING REMARKS
• CONCLUDING REMARKS
• Using SASW method, exploration can be carried up to a greater depth on hard soil stratum as compared to soft stratum for the same input source energy.
• Exploration up to considerable depth can be achieved by
proper configuration of equipment in fields,
proper choice of parameters during testing,
In order to explore up to greater depth, higher values of source to sensor
distances needs to be considered.
• An increase in input impact energy at the source results in increase of value of λ _{m}_{a}_{x} .
• Higher sampling rate is not necessary for exploration up to a greater depth in case of ground sites.
34
CONCLUDING REMARKS
• SCOPE FOR FURTHER WORK
• 
Determination of the stiffness profiles of various layers needs to be done using 
an inversion analysis. This would allow obtaining shear wave velocity profile 

more accurately. Sharp changes in values of shear wave along depth can be detected. 

• 
Obtained shear wave velocity profile can be then compared with available 
cross bore hole data to validate the results obtained. 

• 
More field tests needs to be done on various kinds of ground conditions to validate the results obtained. The primary aim is to explore more number of 
sites more effectively.
35
REFERENCES
• Banab, K.K., & Motazedian, D., 2010. On the efficiency of the multichannel analysis of
surface wave method for shallow and semideep loose soil layers. International Journal of
Geophysics, Volume 2010, Article ID 403016, doi:10.1155/2010/403016.
• Ceballos, M.A., & Prato, C.A., 2011. Experimental estimation of soil profiles through spatial phases analysis of surface waves. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 31,
91–103.
• Chen, L., Zhu, J., Yan, X., & Song, C., 2004. On arrangement of source and receivers in SASW testing. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 24, 389–396.
• Haskell, N.A., 1953. The dispersion of surface waves on multilayered media. Bull. Seismol
Soc Am, 43(1), 17–34.
• Heisey, J.S., Stokoe II, K.H., Hudson, W.R., & Meyer, A.H., 1982b. Determination of in situ shear wave velocities from spectral analysis of surface waves. Summary report 256 2(S), Project 3880256, Center for Transportation Research, Bereau of Engineering Research,
The University of Texas at Austin, November 1982.
• Heukelom, W., & Foster, C.R., 1960. Dynamic testing of pavements. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations, ASCE, Vol. 86, No. SM1, Part 1, 23682372. _{3}_{6}
REFERENCES
• Nazarian S., 1984. In situ determination of elastic moduli of soil deposits and pavement systems by spectralanalysisofsurfacewaves method. Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
• Park, C.B., Miller, R.D., & Xia, J., 1999. Multichannel analysis of surface waves, Geophysics,
64(3), 800–808.
• Rakaraddi, P.G., 2012. Nondestructive testing of ground and pavement sites using surface wave technique. PhD thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science.
• Tokimatsu, K., Kuwayama, S., Tamura, S., & Miyadera, Y., 1991. Vs determination from steady state Rayleigh wave method. Soils and Foundations, 31 (2), 153–163.
• Tokimatsu, K., 1997. Geotechnical site characterization using surface waves. Earthquake
Geotechnical Engineering, Ishihara (ed.), Balkema, Rotterdam, 1333 – 1368.
• Jones, R., 1962. Surface wave technique for measuring the elastic properties and thickness of roads: Theoretical development. British Journal of Applied Physics, 13, 2129.
37
THANK YOU
38
Mult mai mult decât documente.
Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.
Anulați oricând.