Interpretation and Misinterpretation of Sonic Logging Test Results

Williams, H.T. & Jones, I.

Testconsult Limited, Warrington, Cheshire, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT: Cross-Hole Sonic Logging (CSL) is one of the most powerful methods of assessing the integrity and quality of cast in place foundations. It offers many advantages over low strain methods, in particular
the ability to determine the vertical and lateral extent of anomalies at any depth. In recent years 2 and 3 dimensional tomography is being applied to results to present a graphical visualisation of results, which are
easy for engineers to understand. In addition first arrival times can be automatically picked from response
signals. However, without understanding how these new developments are created, there is a real danger that
results can be misinterpreted. This paper explores the causes and effects of real and apparent defects in cast in
place piles on cross-hole sonic logging results.

1 INTRODUCTION
Cross-Hole Sonic Logging has been a common
method of assessing cast in place concrete foundations since the 1960s. It is now used extensively
throughout the world and on many significant construction projects.

This paper investigates the ways of differentiating

between true pile shaft defects and tube defects
when interpreting sonic logging results.
2 SONIC LOGGING INTERPRETATION

Its popularity can be attributed to two main factors

firstly, there is no depth limitation to the method and
secondly, the apparent ease of interpreting results,
compared with low strain type integrity tests.
However, if the equipment operator is not able to
view all of the raw data and select appropriate filters, it can be possible to come to the wrong conclusion and interpret results incorrectly. Is has not been
unknown for piles to be condemned and replaced,
because of problems with tube installation, such as:

Tube debonding
Poor tube joints
Joint wrapping
Bent tubes

These can all appear to alter the first arrival time of

the signal, even though the true velocity of the signal
in concrete between the tubes is normal.

Figure 1. Simple CSL Schematic

The principle of cross-hole ultrasonic logging is very

simple, in that it measure the time taken for a signal
to travel from one transducer to another, between
tubes cast into concrete. The time will depend on the
distance between transducers and the material between the transducers. The further apart the trans-

Proceedings of Fifth International Symposium on Deep Foundation on Bored and Augered Piles (BAPV), Ghent, Belgium, 8-10th Sept, 2008

ducers and the lower the density of material, the

longer the transit time.
In homogenous concrete, free of defects, the velocity
of sound is constant and in the order of 4000m/sec.
Concrete containing soil inclusions, bentonite, honeycombing etc has a lower sound propagation velocity. This means that measurements of wave speed or
transit time can be used as a non destructive method
of assessing the quality of buried concrete foundations. Anomalies in the concrete are indicated by a
change in signal arrival time or amplitude. A typical
signal is shown in Figure 2.

The wave speed of ultrasonic waves in concrete is

given by :
V2 =

E (1-)____ (Equation 1)
(1+ ) (1 2 )

Where: V = wave speed, = density, E = dynamic

modulus & = Poissons ratio
In practice, the transducers are placed in water filled
tubes, cast into the concrete. So the signal actually
has to pass through water/tube and tube/concrete interfaces twice on its journey.
First Cautionary Note: Each interface has the potential to alter the quality of the signal, independently from the quality of concrete between the tubes
the very thing we are trying to assess!
2.1 What is a significant change in first arrival
time (FAT)?

Figure 2: Typical CSL signal

More recently cross-hole tomography techniques

have been used to produce both two and three dimensional images of the pile shaft. Anomalies are
shown as different shaded coloured area on a visual
representation of the pile shaft.
A waterfall plot is usually produced, which is effectively a profile built up from modulated signals,
taken from each test level, see Figure 3.

Figure 3: Typical CSL waterfall plot

Correlations between test results and excavated/cored defects indicate that an increase in FAT
of 20% or more is significant. This corresponds to a
17% reduction in apparent signal velocity. So, concrete with a normal velocity of 4000 m/sec would
reduce to 3320m/sec.
Reductions in FAT of less than 10% are not considered to be significant. This corresponds to a 9% reduction in apparent signal velocity. So, concrete
with a normal velocity of 4000 m/sec would reduce
to 3640m/sec.
Reductions in FAT between 10-20% are of intermediate significance and the total number of profiles
should be taken into consideration. 2 and 3D tomography can be of assistance in visualising the lateral
extent of anomalies.

Figure 4: Significant mid-shaft defect found in a retaining wall

in New Zealand.

Figure 4 shows 3 profiles from a test result showing

a significant increase in transit time. The FAT has
increased between 57 76% indicating a significant
defect over a vertical zone of approx 1m. By presenting results alongside each other, it is visually
apparent that the anomalies are connected. Signal
energy has also decreased by approx 20 24 dB.
It is important to view the individual signal within
defective zones, to ensure that the automatic FAT
calculation is taken from the correct first arrival.
Figure 5, below, shows a damped signal, however
the first arrival is still visible. It may be appropriate
to re-test a signal such as this with a higher signal
amplification.

Figure 5: Damped signal

2.2 Base Defects

Figure 6 shows a result from a pile with contamination at the base. This type of defect tends to occur
with tremied piles cast under bentonite, when it is
difficult to clean the base.
The signal does not disappear suddenly, but gradually increases in transit time. This could indicate peripheral contamination; however with an increase in
excess of 150% it is probably significant enough to
affect the whole of the pile section. This was confirmed by the other 5 profiles.

Figure 6. CSL profile of base defect in London

2.3 Measurement of Concrete Velocity and Bent

Tubes
It is not uncommon for CSL to be used to determine
concrete velocity and hence give an indication of
concrete modulus. However, the test does not measure velocity directly, it measures the transit time between the probes. Converting this to velocity involves assuming a path length. The path length is
only known accurately at the top of the pile, where
the distance between tubes can be accurately measured. In practice the tubes can bend over the length
of the pile, giving rise to gradual changes in transmission time. If the path length is assumed to be
constant, then velocity calculations will be incorrect
and misleading. If the tube spacing is known, an apparent velocity can be calculated by dividing the
tube spacing by the transit time. It must be remembered however, that this apparent velocity includes
the water and the tubes. It should also be noted that
a signal travelling around a void could yield the
same velocity as one travelling through a zone of
low modulus material.
Figures 7a & 7b, show the results for a pile with
bent tubes. Figure 7a shows a maximum increase in
transit time of 43%. Assuming that the tubes are
straight this would correspond to a reduction in concrete velocity of 30%, i.e. to 2800m/sec if normal
velocity is 4000m/sec. This would be comparable to
much weaker concrete. This is clearly misleading
and could lead to the pile being condemned incorrectly. The corresponding profile shown in Figure
7b shows a matching reduction in transit time. It is
unlikely that concrete properties have increased so
dramatically!

Figure 7a. Tubes bend out Figure 7b. Tubes bend in

Proceedings of Fifth International Symposium on Deep Foundation on Bored and Augered Piles (BAPV), Ghent, Belgium, 8-10th Sept, 2008

As a general guide if tubes are bent, signal transit

time will tend to change gradually. If the tube is severely bent or kinked, it is unlikely the transducer
will pass anyway. The increase may also be matched
by an opposing decrease by other profiles. Increases
in transit time caused by voids or contamination,
tend to appear more abruptly.
Second Cautionary Note: Calculation of concrete
velocity from sonic logging results should be
treated with caution, and clearly state they are apparent.
2.4 First Arrival Time versus Signal Energy
Most modern CSL systems have the ability to view
not just the individual signal, but also a modulated
waterfall plot. A first arrival time (FAT) can then
usually be determined and plotted out against depth
(on some systems this is all that is displayed). The
energy in the signal can also be calculated by measuring the area under the curve and plotted out
against depth.
First Arrival time is generally considered to be the
most important measurement with CSL. For this reason it is important to understand exactly where it is
being measured. On modern digital systems, the
FAT is measured automatically. It does this by setting two signal amplitude thresholds. The lower
threshold is set to ignore background signal noise.
The upper threshold is set to catch the first significant signal arrival.

Figure 8a. CSL result for pile with de-bonded tubes over the
upper 5m of pile.

Figure 8b shows the FAT and Energy plots using a

correctly selected low threshold, however Figure 8c
shows the same result with the threshold set too
high. The signal at its most damped part has been incorrectly interpreted as having a 72% increase in
signal transit time. On its own it could have lead to
an incorrect interpretation. For this reason it is
much more reliable to assess anomalous areas by
viewing the waterfall plot and also the individual
signal.

A problem can occur if you are testing a large diameter pile or diaphragm wall unit with a large path
length, especially if the system is not sensitive
enough or emitter strength is insufficient. Because
of the higher signal to noise ratio, the selection of a
correct threshold is imperative for a correct FAT
measurement. If it is set too high, it will miss the
true first arrival and falsely indicate a problem.
Another reason for a low signal to background noise
ratio is tube debonding. Where tube debonding occurs, the actual path length of the signal through
concrete is unchanged. A small gap is introduced between the tube and the concrete, which effectively
reduces the amplitude of the signal.
Signal amplitude is therefore of secondary importance to FAT and cannot be relied upon on its own,
as a measure of concrete quality. It can however be
used to back up FAT measurements. Figure 8 shows
a sonic logging test result from a pile with tube
debonding over the upper 5m of pile shaft. Signal
amplitude is clearly significantly reduced, however
the first arrival can be seen, albeit very faintly on the
waterfall plot.

Figure 8b. Good Threshold

Figure 8c. High Threshold

Plastic tubes have a tendency to de-bond from concrete more readily than steel. They are also more
prone to damage during breading out. For this reason
metal tubes generally give better results. On deeper
piles, plastic tubing may also suffer from heat of hydration or pressure and collapse.

2.7 What is signal skipping?

Third Cautionary Note: Do not rely purely on plots
of first arrival against depth
2.5 Vertical Resolution Distance apart of
readings
This varies from system to system. The smaller the
vertical interval between readings, then the smaller
the defect you will be able to detect, without staggering probes. Some systems take a reading every
20cm, whereas other take readings every 1 or 2cm.
Whilst it is quite difficult to detect horizontal cracks
in concrete piles with CSL, due to signal skipping,
with 1cm spacing it is more likely you will detect
some change in signal. With the power and memory
of current computers, testing and storing results at
1cm intervals is no longer an issue and is probably
best used as standard.
2.6 Poor Joints?
Screwed and socketed steel tubing is the best.
Welded joints can lead to transducers becoming
stuck (very expensive!) or unable to pass. Another
problem that can be encountered are wrapped joints.
Site engineers in good faith may wrap joints with
densotape type material to ensure a waterproof joint,
unaware that the signal find it difficult to pass
through this interface. Figure 9 shows a CSL result
from such a case. This was clearly identified however by the precisely spaced anomalies coinciding
with the joint spacing!

As you would expect, signals tend to take the shortest and easiest route wherever possible. If the transducers are aligned exactly on the same level as a
very thin crack, then the signal will simply travel up
the tube a little and through the good concrete above
or below. Even if the probes are staggered this will
occur, although a slight shift in FAT and signal energy may be observed.
2.8 So how can thin cracks be detected?
It is recommended that low strain integrity testing is
used if cracks are suspected. The signal from this
type of test is unable to pass cracks and is travelling
in the vertical plane rather than horizontally. This
does presume however that there is good access to
the top of the concrete.
2.9 When to Test?
7 days is the recommended minimum time that concrete should be left to cure before testing. However,
assuming that you are not relying on the test to
measure concrete velocity (which would be inadvisable as discussed above), CSL can be used as a
comparative test and used to test concrete piles at 3
days. This would be purely to check that signal transit times are constant and no changes exist. If that is
the case then anomalous areas are not likely to suddenly appear. If however, an area of increased FAT
is measured, it would be advisable to re-test the pile
again after at least 7 days, during which time concrete strength may have improved.
2.10 Tube Layout what are you missing?
The main drawback of CSL, is the requirement to
pre-install tubes in foundations during construction
(although in emergencies it is possible to core or
drill holes in concrete for testing). The layout and
number of tubes must therefore be chosen to suit the
information that is required by the engineer. For example, if 3 tubes are used and attached equidistant to
the reinforcement cage, then only 3 profiles are possible and it is impossible to take a measurement
across the centre of the pile. This may be critical if
the pile is tremied, when core defects are more likely
to occur. With 4 tubes, 6 profiles are possible,
around the periphery and across the cores which is
why it is the most widely used configuration.

Figure 9. Pile with lagged joints at 3m intervals

On diaphragm walls, the tube layout will again depend on panel dimensions. It is recommended however that tube spacing does not exceed 1.5m to ensure good strength signals.
The more tubes, the better the lateral extent of defects can be determined.

Proceedings of Fifth International Symposium on Deep Foundation on Bored and Augered Piles (BAPV), Ghent, Belgium, 8-10th Sept, 2008

2.11 Tomography how useful is it?

As a quick overview of where anomalous areas are,
tomography software is a useful tool. 2D tomography can also give you a clearer idea of the lateral extent. However, they do not give an actual measurement of change in FAT. To do this, you must be
able to ideally view each individual signal or if not a
good waterfall plot. A simple FAT plot is no good
unless you are confident it picked correctly see
section 2.4 above.
First arrival time is king and should be the main basis of all interpretation and used to quantify the severity of defects along with the number of profiles
affected at the same depth.
2.12 Operator Error
The most common operator errors are:

Starting tests with slack cables

Carrying out tests without transducers level
Not topping up tubes with water on long piles
Pulling transducers up too fast

When commencing tests, particularly on longer

piles, the slack should be taken out of cables and
held just in tension before taking data. Figure 10
shows a result with approx 400mm of cable slack,
which is evidenced by a perfectly aligned modulated
signal at the base. The winch is moving but the
transducers are not lifting. This will produce a test
profile longer than the actual pile.

Many systems have a maximum speed that transducers can be raised. The signal acquisition time should
be such that data is processed and stored before the
next signal is triggered. This is governed usually by
warning lights, however with much faster computers
being available, this is less of a problem. If warning
lights are ignored however, signals may not to stored
or processed, before the next one is acquired. This
would lead to shorter profiles than expected.
On long piles, the cables will displace quite a lot of
water. It is therefore necessary to top up the tubes
being tested, before the transducers reach the top.
The signal will not transmit through air and part of
the pile profile will be lost if the water level is low.
To ensure that the full length of the pile is tested, we
would recommend that the tube length is plumbed
with a tape measure (if a metal weight the same size
of the transducer is used, it may prevent jammed
transducers). The tube top level and pile toe level
should also be determined. By comparing all reading it is possible to confirm that the tubes go to the
base of the pile, that the tubes are not blocked and
that the tested length is correct.
3 CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, the interpretation of cross-hole sonic
logging results has been discussed and potential pitfalls have been explored. Incorrect interpretation can
be caused by many factors if care is not taken.
Users should not rely too heavily on calculated values such as apparent signal velocity, automatically
picked first arrival time plots, signal energy plots
and tomography profiles. Whilst these do give valuable additional information, the severity of any
anomaly should always be assessed mainly on the
change in first arrival time, so the original signal
should always be available for interpretation after
testing.
Where anomalies are suspected, the possibility of
this being caused by the tube bonding, joints, loss of
water, lagging, or bending should also be considered.

Figure 10: cable slack at base of pile

To ensure that the transducers are level, they should

either be lowered together to the base, or when at the
base, the signal should be viewed, and one transducer raised and lowered until the transit time is at a
minimum (this is best done say 2m from the base, in
case of base contamination.

REFERENCES
Stain, R.T. and Williams, H.T. (1991) Interpretation of Sonic
Coring Results: a research project, Proceedings of the 4th
International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations,
Stressa. Vol. 1, pp633-640.
Turner, M.J. 1997, Ciria Report 144, Integrity testing in piling
practice