FOCUS ARTICLE

Coordinated by Mostafa Naghizadeh / Fereidoon Vasheghani

Geophysical Applications to Construction

Engineering Projects
Alastair McClymont, Paul Bauman, Eric Johnson, and Laurie Pankratow
ADVISIAN (WORLEYPARSONS CANADA SERVICES LTD.), CALGARY, ALBERTA, CANADA

“Drill, baby, drill!” It’s an often

quoted line, made famous by
Geophysical methods have been a part of the construction engineering toolbox for decades
(e.g., seismic methods for foundation design; Peck et al., 1974) and, although adoption of the
former US Vice-Presidential candidate, Sarah technology over this time has been slow, their use on major infrastructure projects has now
Palin. For those of us who work in the field of become routine. New developments in instrumentation and methodology have enabled
engineering geophysics, the mantra should geophysical data to be acquired over increasingly larger areas, at greater density, and in more
be “drill sparingly, baby, drill sparingly”. While dimensions (including time). With these advancements, it has become possible to obtain non-in-
there is no substitute for direct sampling of vasive, spatially continuous measurements of the subsurface, which can be used to interpolate
the ground, the goal of a good engineering between and extrapolate from boreholes, geological exposures, and excavations.
geophysics survey should be to provide
enough indirect evidence to reduce the need Here, we summarize just a few examples of the application of various geophysical methods
to drill boreholes or excavate test pits, and in to construction engineering projects. Our intention is to show a broad array of engineering
so doing minimize environmental impacts. geophysical methods and applications using clear examples. These examples include geophys-
ical assessments for foundation design, mapping overburden and soil thicknesses for site
Construction engineering involves the
designing, planning, construction, and
management of physical infrastructure, which
may include roads, bridges, buildings, dams
and utilities. All of these types of facilities
have a physical footprint that requires some
type of modification of the ground, whether
that involves the insertion of anchors, ground
compaction or excavation. They are also
subject to potential geohazards including,
seismic, landslide and flooding hazards.

Most construction engineering projects

generally require information on subsurface
ground conditions to maximum depths of only
50 metres (m) or so below the ground surface.
This zone can encompass soil, groundwater,
unconsolidated sediments, weathered rock,
and competent bedrock. It can also contain
products of our own invention, including
utilities, buried waste, and contaminants.
Typical parameters of interest to designers
and engineers are the thickness and extent
of layers, the physical properties of layers and
any variability within them, and any structures
Figure 1. Photos showing engineering geophysics methods used in different environments. (a) A geophone
within the ground. Having an understanding of landstreamer is used for a seismic survey in a parking garage. (b) ERT surveying in remote and mountainous
what lies beneath before breaking ground can terrain. (c) Inserting electrodes for an ERT survey on a frozen river. (d) Using a buffalo gun source for a seismic
save significant costs to a construction project. survey within an intertidal coastal area.

16 C SEG RECORDER APRIL 2 016

grading and volumetric calculations of expected construction fill of the Rayleigh waves, which can be generated by the same seismic
and spoil, characterizing geology beneath waterways for optimizing source (see Park et al. (1999) for a detailed explanation of the method).
pipeline crossings, and mapping potentially hazardous abandoned Tomographic inversion software packages (e.g, Rayfract or SurfSeis) are
mine workings. then used to produce 2D models of P-wave and S-wave velocities.

One of the biggest challenges in our line of work has been to adapt Reliable measurements of P-wave and S-wave velocities can also be
geophysical survey methods to an increasingly diverse range of obtained by completing downhole seismic surveys within boreholes.
environments. A typical engineering geophysics survey may take These measurements provide valuable ground truth to seismic velocity
place anywhere from a parking garage, to a frozen river, to remote models determined from seismic refraction and MASW surveys.
mountainous or coastal locations (Figure 1). In meeting these challenges, Moreover, they can be completed within existing boreholes purposed
equipment has had to become lighter and more durable, and new for geotechnical sampling, allowing for direct correlation with lithology
technology and surveying methods have been developed to facilitate logs. For geotechnical boreholes that extend over depths shallower
obtaining geophysical information in areas that may not have been than about 30 m, a standard downhole seismic surveying approach
accessible previously, or would have required significant environmental involves advancing a 3-component geophone within the borehole, and
disturbance. To demonstrate these advances, we also show examples measuring the arrival time of P-wave and S-wave energy generated at
of how new and innovative approaches have been incorporated into the ground surface. Care must be taken to ensure that the borehole is
engineering projects. completed to allow downhole seismic data to be measured accurately,
by either leaving the borehole open or installing PVC casing using a
Seismic Surveys for Geotechnical grout that mimics the properties of the formation.

Site Characterization Figure 2 displays typical P-wave and S-wave downhole seismic records,
Geotechnical site characterization is a term used to describe the process measured from the proposed site of a natural gas pipeline compressor
of understanding soil, bedrock, and groundwater conditions at a station (both logs were measured within the same borehole). Analysis of
proposed construction site. For major infrastructure projects like dams, these data is fairly rudimentary and involves simple slope fitting. While
bridges, and plant sites, it is an essential practice for determining the
feasibility of a site and for establishing the most cost-effective design of
the infrastructure. Geotechnical site characterization normally includes
the drilling of geotechnical boreholes and the excavation of test pits to
sample subsurface soil, rock, and water properties. From these data, a
site model can be produced that establishes the likely thicknesses and
extents of subsurface layers and their physical properties.

On uncomplicated sites with layer-cake geology, a reliable geotech-

nical site model can be produced from a few sparse boreholes. With
increasing geological complexity, a greater density of boreholes is
required to properly characterize the site, resulting in increased environ-
mental impacts. Geophysical methods have thus become attractive for
site characterization projects because they can fill in the gaps between
boreholes without disturbing the ground and at a much lower cost than
for an expanded geotechnical drilling program. Moreover, geophysical
surveys can be conducted prior to a drilling program, with the goal of
optimizing locations for subsequent boreholes.

Seismic methods are most commonly utilized for geotechnical site

assessments because seismic velocity measurements can be used
to infer soil and rock strength. Seismic refraction and multichannel
analysis of surface wave (MASW) techniques are complementary and
can provide independent measurements of compressional (P-wave)
and shear (S-wave) velocities using the same survey design. For both
methods, data collection is achieved using a linear array of geophones
and a seismic source. While the seismic refraction method involves
measuring the travel-times of the first-arriving P-waves, the MASW Figure 2. Example downhole seismic records with interpretations of (a) P-wave
method is based on analysing the frequency-dispersion characteristics velocity with depth and (b) S-wave velocity with depth.

Continued on Page 18

APRIL 2 016 C SEG RECORDER 17

FOCUS ARTICLE

Continued from Page 17

downhole seismic testing of this type has lower vertical resolution than crosshole approaches that required for the site-specific infrastructure.
measure travel times between holes, the analysis is straightforward, less prone to error, and the field For example, in this setting large, heavy
surveys do not require a second borehole to be drilled at significant additional expense. Further- storage tanks would require removal of top
more, for most infrastructure projects, engineers typically only require an estimate of average soil soil, compaction of ground and the use of piles
and/or bedrock velocities. to eliminate the risk of structural failure by
differential settlement. In contrast, infrastruc-
An example of surface and downhole seismic testing methods used in combination for site ture with lighter loads may only require slab
characterization is shown in Figure 3. In order to provide design recommendations for new foundations. Without the geophysical data, the
processing plant infrastructure for a potash mine, an integrated geotechnical and geophysical project engineers would likely have to consider
assessment was completed. Seismic refraction and MASW data were acquired simultane- an expanded drilling program in order to
ously along two 500 m long profiles that traversed the footprint of the proposed plant site. To achieve the level of confidence required to
sample the low-frequency Rayleigh waves and to measure first breaks accurately, the surface proceed to the design phase.
seismic data were recorded using geophones with a natural frequency of 4.5 Hz. For a first-order
understanding of bedrock elevation and soil properties, geotechnical boreholes were drilled at
intervals of approximately 100 m.
Non-Seismic Surveys
for Geotechnical Site
The resulting P-wave and S-wave velocity cross-sections are shown in Figure 3. Based on correla-
tion with borehole lithology logs and confirmatory downhole seismic tests, the top of extremely
Characterization
weathered clay shale bedrock is effectively flat and exhibits no incised channels that would In addition to more traditional seismic
impact foundation designs. In addition, the velocity cross-sections and downhole seismic data methods, other geophysical techniques can
show that the shallow shale bedrock has relatively low strength, with P-wave and S-wave velocities be used to evaluate site conditions prior to
of less than 2000 m/s and 500 m/s, respectively. The seismic data can also be used to determine designing physical infrastructure. On many
estimates for soil and bedrock elastic moduli that would otherwise be derived from lab testing proposed construction sites, seismic methods
of borehole samples. In particular, Poisson’s ratio can be calculated directly from the P-wave and may not be suitable or cost effective. For
S-wave velocity measurements, which can then be compared with laboratory derived estimates. example, in areas of rough terrain with poor
seismic soil coupling (e.g., wetlands or boggy
By having a robust understanding of the bedrock elevation profile and the strength of the areas), acquiring seismic data can be imprac-
bedrock, engineers can proceed with designing foundations and the ground modifications tical. On such sites, alternative methods like
electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) can
provide valuable information on bedrock
depths and overburden properties.

The ERT method involves injecting electrical

current into the ground through a pair of
electrodes and measuring the resulting
potential differences via another pair of
electrodes. By varying the locations and
spacing between electrodes, measurements
can be obtained for different spatial locations
and depths. Recent developments in the form
of multicore cables and multichannel acquisi-
tion ERT systems now make it possible to
rapidly acquire thousands of measurements
along arrays of electrodes to depths of greater
than 200 m. Inversion algorithms can then
be used to solve for a 2-D (or 3-D) electrical
resistivity model of the subsurface that best fits
the measured data.

Figure 4 shows an example of using ERT

for bedrock and soil mapping for charac-
Figure 3. Example P-wave and S-wave velocity models produced from a combined seismic refraction and
terization of an approximately 20 hectare
MASW survey. Also shown are lithology logs and S-wave velocities measured by downhole seismic testing
within three of the boreholes. site in northwestern British Columbia. The

18 C SEG RECORDER APRIL 2 016

 water saturated peat. A portion of the resulting
interpolated organic soil thickness map is
shown in Figure 5b and shows the significant
variability over the site, from areas with little to
no organic soil, to thicknesses of nearly 10 m.
From the thickness map, an accurate estimate
of organic soil volume can be determined, and
hydrologically significant peatland areas can
be identified.

Geophysical Surveys
for Trenchless Pipeline
Water Crossings
Figure 4. An ERT resistivity model plotted as a semi-transparent overlay on an approximately coincident
processed GPR cross-section. Note the resistivity contrasts associated with the interface between clay and silt Because pipelines carrying hydrocarbons can
overburden and metamorphic bedrock, and between the organic soil layer and the clays and silts. The contact cover extensive distances through variable
between the water saturated organic soil and the underlying mineral soil is evident as a strong reflection in the terrain, they typically cross numerous environ-
GPR data. mentally sensitive water bodies, including
rivers, streams and creeks. As such, careful
remote location, complex geology, and rugged terrain made it extremely challenging to obtain engineering is required to ensure that pipelines
the required subsurface information at the Site through remote sensing or intrusive drilling don’t rupture close to water nor are they
techniques. Because the site was also covered in large part by environmentally sensitive bogs degraded by erosion. This is usually achieved
and peatlands for which seismic geophone coupling was predicted to be poor, it was deemed by placing the pipeline at sufficient depth
impractical to use seismic methods as the primary geophysical investigation technique. For beneath the water body to prevent erosion
these reasons, a combination of seismic and ERT profiles were acquired in advance of an intrusive (e.g., by horizontal directional drilling (HDD) or
drilling program. In most places, the gneiss and schist metamorphic bedrock could be distin- microbore tunnelling), or by constructing an
guished on the basis of relatively high electrical resistivity relative to the overlaying low resistivity aerial crossing to route the pipeline above the
clay and silt overburden. Furthermore, the resistivity cross-sections could also be used to differ- river. In either case, pipeline engineers need a
entiate between the relatively resistive organic soils overlaying the clays and silts (Figure 4). By good understanding of subsurface conditions,
integrating the interpreted ERT data with results from a few sparse seismic lines and lithology including bedrock elevation, bedrock lithology,
logs from a subsequent borehole drilling program, bedrock elevation could be more accurately weak layers within overburden that may lead to
determined across the site. slope failure, and, critically, the locations and
depths of coarse-grained deposits like gravels
In addition to establishing bedrock elevation, further information was desired on the approximate
and cobbles that would impact the effective-
volume of construction fill and spoil that would result from proposed ground level modifications
ness of an HDD or microboring method.
at this site for site grading. A detailed understanding of the spatial variability and thickness of
peat (organic soil) was also required to obtain accurate estimates of spoil volumes and to evaluate Unlike other engineering applications, the
changes in hydrology associated with their removal. use of geophysics for trenchless pipeline
crossings has become standard (e.g., Bauman
Provided the pore water is not overly saline, ground-penetrating radar (GPR) is an excellent tool and Nahas, 2007). Typically, geotechnical
for mapping organic soil. This is because water saturated peat has such a high water content (and boreholes will be drilled on either side of the
consequently high dielectric contrast) relative to the underlying mineral soil, and this boundary water body, and ERT or seismic refraction
is usually clearly distinguished as a high-amplitude reflection on GPR reflectivity sections (e.g., methods profiles will be used to extrapolate
as shown in the gray scale background image in Figure 4). In addition, recent developments in lithological boundaries beneath the proposed
GPR rough terrain antenna systems and their integration with GPS units now make it possible to crossing alignment. These methods are highly
acquire kilometres of GPR data over densely vegetated, mountainous terrain, without the need complementary because ERT cross-sections
to clear line paths, as may have been required for less robust earlier versions of the technology will yield information on lithological changes
(Figure 5a). within overburden, including the thickness
and extent of clays and silts versus sands
Approximately 200 line km of GPR data were acquired at the site, along lines with an approximate
and gravels, whereas seismic refraction can
spacing of 20 m. From the processed GPR cross-sections, the organic soil/mineral soil horizon was
be used to unambiguously delineate depth
picked (e.g., Figure 4) and converted to depth, based on an estimated average velocity for the

Continued on Page 20

APRIL 2 016 C SEG RECORDER 19

FOCUS ARTICLE

Continued from Page 19

Figure 6c). The water provides excellent

electrical coupling, eliminating the need to
insert electrodes into soil. It is a relatively simple
idea but requires careful planning and coordi-
nation to do so safely and avoid damaging the
ERT cable. Even though it is usually imprac-
tical to acquire continuous seismic refraction
data across the water, a good line of seismic
refraction data on one side of the water
body is usually enough to ‘calibrate’ the ERT
cross-section, and allow bedrock elevation to
be interpreted with confidence along the ERT
profile. This is demonstrated on the left side of
Figure 6a, where a relatively low resistivity layer
correlates with P-wave velocities of greater than
3000 m/s and siltstone bedrock logged in a
nearby borehole.

Geophysical Surveys to
Figure 5. (a) Photo of an RTA GPR system used for mapping organic soil thickness in densely vegetated
Detect Buried Infrastructure
muskeg terrain. (b) Resulting map of organic soil thickness produced from analysis of the GPR data. Many construction projects take place on
brownfield sites, where previous industrial or
to competent bedrock. Although it is relatively straightforward to acquire these datasets on commercial activities have taken place. As part
either side of a water body, it has been difficult to obtain the requisite information from beneath of a thorough site assessment, it is important to
the water body itself. In some cases waterborne ERT or GPR methods can be used to fill in this establish potential liabilities including areas of
data gap but, without a continuous model across the water body, it can be difficult to establish contamination or buried infrastructure that could
lithological or structural changes beneath the crossing. This can be especially problematic where pose a hazard during or post construction. Near
the water course follows a major tectonic feature like a fault, and consequently there are abrupt surface geophysical methods are commonly
changes in lithology from one side of the water body to the other. employed to map areas of contamination (e.g.,
electromagnetic (EM) and ERT surveys to map
To overcome this issue, we have adopted an approach that involves stringing an ERT cable saline plumes), detect buried utilities or tanks
across the water body and dangling electrode leads from cable takeouts into the water (e.g., (e.g., EM and GPR) or detect tunnels or other
voids. Numerous geophysical methods can be
used for void detection, but their efficacy is
dependent on the size of the void, whether it
is air or water filled, and the properties of the
surrounding lithology. Commonly employed
methods for void detection include microgravity,
GPR, MASW or ERT surveys.

An example of the use of ERT for tunnel detection

is shown in Figure 7. This example comes from a
proposed construction site in Alberta, slated for
development of a sewerage pumping station.
Historical coal mining operations in the area
had resulted in an extensive tunnel network of
unmapped abandoned mine shafts and stopes
(Figure 7a). Because of concerns over future
Figure 6. (a) Example electrical resistivity cross-section produced from a continuous ERT profile over a
proposed pipeline river crossing; P-wave velocity contours resulting from the model shown in (b) are plotted ground settlement or sinkhole development,
above the ERT section and show that siltstone bedrock correlates with a relatively low resistivity layer. (b) A a geophysical survey was commissioned to
P-wave velocity cross-section produced from a seismic refraction survey acquired along a portion of the ERT map any voids under the footprint of the Site.
profile shown in (a). (c) photo showing an ERT cable suspended over a river with electrode leads dangling into
the river.

20 C SEG RECORDER APRIL 2 016

 Alastair
McClymont
• is a professional geophysicist with Advisian (a division of
WorleyParsons Canada Services Ltd). He has over 13
years of experience in the application of diverse
near-surface geophysical techniques to geotechnical site
characterization, groundwater exploration, contami-
nated site remediation, seismic hazard assessments,
archeological investigations and other projects. Prior to
joining Advisian, Alastair completed a postdoctoral
fellowship in the Department of Geoscience at the
University of Calgary, where his research focused on
geophysical applications in groundwater and permafrost
projects. He has a B.Sc.(Hons.) in Geology from Victoria
University of Wellington (1998), an M.Sc. in Geophysics
from the University of British Columbia (2004) in
Vancouver, and a Ph.D. in Geophysics from ETH Zurich
(the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology; 2008).
Alastair has extensive experience in western Canada and
has worked on a number of international projects in the
United States, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Kenya,
Australia and New Zealand.

Figure 7. Example of ERT surveys used to detect abandoned coal mine shafts and
stopes (a) photo showing the entrance to a shaft. (b) and (c) ERT cross-section showing
high-resistivity anomalies associated with voids.

Geotechnical boreholes had encountered voids at some locations (Figure 7b),

which provided valuable ground truth and established that the voids of concern
Paul
were restricted to an interval of clay, shale and coal seams. Five 160-m-long ERT Bauman
profiles were acquired across the site and were oriented to intersect with existing
boreholes. Several high-resistivity anomalies were identified as potential voids,
including one beneath the proposed location of the pumping station. Based
• is the Technical Director of the Near Surface Geophysics
group at WorleyParsons, in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
on these results, a follow-up drilling program was proposed to target the voids Paul started the group in 1990, and has since managed
mapped using ERT. or co-managed the group. Paul is a Professional
Geophysicist and Professional Engineer with over 30
Summary years of geophysical exploration experience in the
For deliberate reasons, all of the examples we have presented required some environmental, engineering, water resource, mining, oil
level of ground truth, from geological exposures, excavations, or boreholes. and gas, and archaeology sectors. Paul has a B.Sc.E. in
In our experience engineers will rightfully question any geophysical interpre- Geological Engineering from Princeton, and an M.Sc. in
tation without confirmatory sampling. We have also provided a variety Earth Sciences from the University of Waterloo. He is
of examples to demonstrate that there is no one size fits all approach to best known for his archaeogeophysical work which has
engineering geophysics. There are numerous other construction engineering been featured in a number of movies including the
geophysical applications that, for the sake of brevity, we have not been able National Geographic Television movie entitled Finding
to include. These include geophysical surveys for construction aggregate Atlantis, a NOVA DOCUMENTARY (Ancient Refuge in
mapping, seismic hazard evaluation, dam and levee assessments, permafrost
the Holy Land), and the documentary Deadly Deception
mapping, UXO detection, and locating buried utilities.
at Sobibor.

Continued on Page 22

APRIL 2 016 C SEG RECORDER 21

 FOCUS ARTICLE

Continued from Page 21

Finally, we wish to stress that, for pragmatic reasons,

designers and engineers do not require overly detailed
geophysical models of the subsurface with painstakingly
constructed estimates of model uncertainties. One of the
most important skills for a geophysicist to learn is how to
Eric communicate effectively with an engineer. More often than
Johnson not, simple answers are required to straightforward questions.
Is bedrock deep or shallow? Is the bedrock highly weathered

• has eight years of near-surface geophysics experience,

including proposal writing, designing, managing, data
or competent rock? Is the soil soft or dense? Where are
fine-grained and coarse-grained sediments? Where are the
acquisition, data processing, interpretation, report writing, best places to drill/excavate and sample the ground? While
and client meetings. Project experience includes impact nothing in life is certain (except construction project overruns),
assessments of hydrocarbon or saline contaminates, cost-effective geophysical surveys that are designed to
provide clear answers and manage expectations will add value
mapping the depth of muskeg, shallow lake bathymetry
to most construction engineering projects.
through ice, locating buried pipes, metal detection,
archaeological surveys, and exploration of oil, groundwater,
gravel, and shallow gas. Other practiced techniques include Acknowledgements
aerial and satellite image analysis, topographic surveys, We wish to thank our numerous confidential clients for
aerial photogrammetric surveys, and resource and contami- allowing us to show some examples of our work. We also
nant volumetric calculations. He has worked throughout thank the many Advisian, WorleyParsons, and client staff who
Canada, as well as in Singapore, California, New Zealand, have assisted us on these projects.
Israel, and Madagascar.

References
Bauman, P.Nahas, C., 2007, Near surface geophysics as an aid to
horizontal drilling for pipeline construction, CSEG RECORDER,
December, 2007, pp 40-43.
Park, C., Miller, R.D., Xia, J., 1999, Multichannel analysis of surface waves.
Geophysics, 64, 800-808.

Laurie Peck, R.B., W.F. Hanson, T.H. Thornburn, 1974. Foundation Engineering
(2nd edition), John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Pankratow
• is a professional geophysicist, with more than ten years’
experience designing, managing and executing a variety of
geophysical projects within various sectors, including
hydrocarbons, water, and infrastructure. She is currently a
Principal Geophysicist with Advisian and manages the
Geophysics group in Canada. Her experience includes the
application of near-surface geophysics to contaminated
site characterization, ground-water studies, geotechnical
investigations, geohazard identification, resource
exploration, bedrock characterization, oil sands tailings
characterization and consolidation monitoring, and
archaeological investigations. Since graduating from the
University of Alberta with a B.Sc. in Geophysics, she has
worked extensively throughout Alberta and northern
British Columbia, as well as in Nunavut and Yukon
Territories, California, Ireland, Spain, and New Zealand.

22 C SEG RECORDER APRIL 2 016