Question 2: State Main Problems that can be resolved in ground investigation

using Geophysical Methods?

Geophysical methods are routinely used in the search for oil, water and

metalliferous minerals, to identify prospects to be investigated directly by more

expensive drilling and excavation. They are less often used to investigate the ground

conditions for engineering projects. For shallow-depth ground investigations on land

in particular, the use of direct methods has often been preferred to this combined

approach, except when a desk study has indicated the possible presence of potential

hazards, such as mine shafts or groundwater pollution plumes. This may have been

due to a lack of appreciation of geological variation (McCann et al, 1997) or to the

disappointing results of geophysical surveys through misapplication or misuse. The

significant improvement in geophysical techniques in recent years has resulted in

greater costeffectiveness and increased confidence in their use.

Broadly speaking, geophysical surveys are used in one of two roles:

1. To allow a choice to be made rapidly and economically between a numbers

of alternative sites for a proposed project, prior to a detailed design.

2. To complement a programme of drilling and trial pits as part of the detailed

site ground investigation at the chosen site.

Geophysical investigations assist the subsequent direct investigation by

identifying areas of the site where anomalous geophysical data are obtained and these

areas hould be investigated by drilling. On sites where contamination is suspected, a

geophysical survey may form part of a preliminary risk assessment prior to drilling or

sampling. During the drilling programme on the site, geophysical surveys may be

used to check the interpretation of the geological structure between the boreholes. At

a later stage in the ground investigation, further geophysical surveys may be carried
out both within and between the boreholes and on the ground surface to determine the

geological, hydrogeological and geotechnical properties of the ground where the

engineering construction is proposed.

There are four primary objectives of engineering geophysical surveys in

ground investigations:

1. Geological investigation

2. Resource assessment

3. Hazard assessment

4. Determination of engineering properties of the ground.

Question No 3: Suitable Geophysical Methods for following problems?

Geophysical methods used in ground investigation to solve various geological,

resource, buried and artifact problem are given below.

Question 4 : State the suitable methods used in case of Unexploded ordinance

(UXO) locations or landmine, state the advantages and Limitations of these

methods?
 The most frequently used methods for UXO location surveys are total field

magnetometers (TFM) and “simple" time domain electromagnetic induction (TDEM)

instruments. Simple

1. Magnetic Method

2. Electromagnetic Method

3. Ground-Penetrating Radar (gpr) Method

4. Electrical Resistivity Method

1. Magnetic Method:

The Earth's magnetic field induces a secondary magnetic field in

ferromagnetic objects. This secondary field distorts the Earth's magnetic field around

the object. Magnetometers measure the intensity of the total magnetic field, which is

about 35,000 nT (nano Tesla) at the equator and 60,000 nT at the magnetic poles.

Distortions to this field may be only fractions of one nT for small ordnance to tens or

hundreds of nT for large ordnance. The anomaly magnitude decreases with distance

from its source. The most commonly used method for survey is Aero magnetic or

using blimp.

Fig: Total magnetic field strength and Analytic Signal anomalies

Advantages:

The magnetic method is fairly easy to use and provides and anomalies from

both near surface UXO and those buried at some depth, depending on their size
Limitations:

1- The magnetic method detects anomalies only from ferromagnetic sources.

Objects made from stainless steel, copper, or aluminum will not provide a

magnetic anomaly.

2- If the diurnal variations in the Earth's magnetic field are high, it may be

difficult to remove its influence completely from the data.

3- Using magnetic method, it is usually not possible to obtain any of the

parameters (length, diameter) of the source.

2. Electromagnetic Method

Electromagnetic method has wide verity of applications especially in conductivity

and polarization measurements. The UXO presents a conductive material buried very

near to surface.

Fig: General principle of electromagnetic surveying

Advantages

The electromagnetic method reliably detects buried UXO and is not influences

by diurnal variations as is magnetic data.

The apparent conductivity and susceptibility maps help identify ferrous and

nonferrous metallic objects against false anomalies caused by magnetic basement and

isolated boulders.

Limitations
 The resolution for the location of the source of any anomaly is diluted slightly

by the area of the transmitter and receiver coils. This may be somewhat more

significant with the EM61, which has coils with quite a large surface area.

3. Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR) Method

GPR radiates EM signal into the grounds. When it reaches an object, or interface with

different dielectric properties, part of the wave is reflected back to the ground surface,

where it is recorded by the receiving antenna .

Advantages

Probably the biggest advantage is that this method can detect both metal and

plastic (non metal) buried UXO:

Limitations

GPR cannot be used in areas with high soil moisture and dense forest

vegetation because water absorbs the GPR energy, thus interfering with the reflection

of the energy and detection of UXO.

4. Electrical Resistivity Method

Advantages

A principal advantage of the electrical resistivity method is that, quantitative

modeling is possible using either computer software or published master curves. The

resulting models can provide accurate estimates of depths, thickness and electrical

resistivities of subsurface layers. The layer electrical resistivities can then be used to

estimate the electrical resistivity of the saturating fluid, which is related to the total

concentration of dissolved solids in the fluid.

Limitations

Resistivity method require contacting with the Earth surface which is not

preferred in the UXO detection. Resolution of the resistivity method depends on the
electrode separation, therefore in the UXO detection very small electrode separation is

required. The method is effective in the areas of low resistivity

Question 5 : Write effective tools for

-Mapping shallow lava tubes and similar void spaces?

Lava tubes are natural conduits through which lava travels beneath the surface

of a lava flow. When the supply of lava stops at the end of an eruption or lava is

diverted elsewhere, lava in the tube system drains downslope and leaves partially

empty conduits beneath the ground. The ability to accurately map the presence,

location and dimensions of lava tubes provides valuable information for the

geotechnical and design engineers. The main objective of this investigation was to

determine the most economical and time effective geophysical imaging technologies

for utilization during roadway site investigation. Four geophysical methods were used

to delineate known void geometries and locations. These methods were GPR,

magnetic, electrical resistivity, and high resolution shear wave seismic reflection.

The results of some investigations indicates that some of the geophysical

methods are effective in detecting voids, while other methods were limited due to the

localized geological setting and void geometries. Several geophysical methods are

suitable for mapping shallow lava tubes including magnetic, seismic, gravity, DC-

resistivity and GPR. In Hawaiian Islands for lava tubes investigation the two sites

investigated, GPR was chosen for the following reasons: the work was performed

over paved surfaces, accurate measurements of size and depth of the lava tubes were

required, and large areas of roadway were required to be surveyed. The GPR provided

best result for given appropriate site conditions, including a relatively smooth ground

surface and resistive surface materials.

 GPR is an effective tool for mapping shallow lava tubes and similar void

spaces. In good site conditions, GPR can provide accurate estimates of the thickness

of the lava tube roof (depth to the top of the open space) and the lateral dimensions of

the lava tube. The height of the void space is often difficult to estimate due to the high

reflectivity of the basalt/air interface at the top of the lava tube. This interface reflects

most of the GPR signal back to the surface. What little signal passes through this

interface may be additionally affected by multi-pathing interference from within the

void geometry. Some additional factors should be considered when working in

volcanic environments resulting from the complex interlaced flow structures that

occur with lava flows. The complexity of the flow is manifest by strong lateral and

vertical heterogeneity in material properties including porosity, fracturing and particle

size. These features can affect the accuracy of time-to-depth conversions along a data

profile due to both vertical and horizontal changes in the average dielectric constant

of the material. Additionally, signal scattering can also be significant depending on

particle size in relation to the wavelengths of the EM pulse and is characterized by

numerous overlapping diffractions. Overall, the GPR as nonintrusive tool provided

invaluable subsurface information in imaging the presence of near-surface voids

aiding in the design of engineering structures, thus improving the safety, repair and

construction.