Electrical resistivity imaging of unknown bridge foundations

Arjwech, Rungroj; Everett, Mark E.; Briaud, Jean‐Louis; Hurlebaus, Stefan; Medina-Cetina, Zenón; Tucker, S.; Yousefpour, Negin

doi:10.3997/1873-0604.2013023

Cited by 24 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For civil engineering purposes, resistivity surveys have been used to detect and characterise sites, for example, to determine subsurface characterization (Soupios et al 2007), investigation of existing foundations (e.g. Cardarelli et al 2007;Arjwech et al 2013), or to monitor ground stabilisation procedures (e.g. Fischanger et al 2013;Apuani et al 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrical resistivity tomography array comparisons to detect cleared-wall foundations in brownfield sites

Eissa

Cassidy

Pringle

et al. 2019

QJEGH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electrical resistivity surveys are commonly used to detect and characterise near-surface buried objects in commercial developments of brownfield sites. 2D ERT profiles arrays predominate in such surveys due to their relatively rapid deployment, good penetration depths and fast data collection rates. However, there is a need to test the optimum array types in such surveys. A scaled-model was used to simulate a large cleared-building wall foundation in gravel-fill at a test facility, before multiple 2D ERT profiles were acquired using different array configurations. Results were used to generate 2D resistivity models using both least-square smoothness-constraint and robust inversion. 2D profile array comparisons showed that the Wenner and dipole-dipole arrays were the best in detecting the cleared-wall foundation, although dipole-dipole arrays better delineated the top of the wall foundation. This study suggests that both Wenner and dipole-dipole array configurations should be utilised to detect buried wall foundations for 2D resistivity surveys.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrical resistivity tomography array comparisons to detect cleared-wall foundations in brownfield sites

Eissa

Cassidy

Pringle

et al. 2019

QJEGH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They are used, for example, to characterise archeological remains, tunnels, gas station subsurface contamination, and other subsurface structures (e.g., Leucci and Negri ; Eppelbaum ). These methods have also been applied as an aid to civil engineering projects to investigate the subsurface for maintenance of large structures such as bridges or buildings (e.g., Karhunen et al , Arjwech et al , Niederleithinger, Abraham and Mooney ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the dipole -dipole configuration, this procedure usually provides accurate results using the same acquisition settings as for the direct measurements. However, for other common arrays, such as Wenner-α and Schlumberger, special care must be taken in determining the correct acquisition parameters for (e.g., Karhunen et al 2010, Arjwech et al 2013, Niederleithinger, Abraham and Mooney 2015.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different techniques for the assessment of geoelectrical data errors to improve the electrical images obtained at an industrial plant

Martinélli

Osella

Vega

et al. 2018

Near Surface Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this work was to characterise the bases of columns belonging to an industrial plant. We had to design a proper methodology for characterising these structures, in a place with limited available space and time for the deployment of sensors, and with other environmental constraints, such as high electromagnetic noise level, soil vibrations due to operating machines, and complex soil composition. In particular, the floor had a stainless steel cover about 1‐cm thick, below which there was first a layer of concrete about 30‐cm thick and then clay material used to absorb the oils of the machines. Finally, there was the natural soil on which the column bases stood. Given these characteristics, we performed dipole–dipole geoelectric profiles. Holes were drilled through the metallic cover and the concrete layer, with fixed spacings, to insert the electrodes. Because of this and the space and time restrictions, only one profile could be performed for each column. Since we knew that the data could have high noise levels and other errors negatively impacting the data quality, and also because there was a limitation to the length of the profiles, we optimised the measurement configuration by jointly using several electrode apertures, to ensure the best possible resolution and sufficient penetration depth. To obtain adequate error estimations, we performed direct and reciprocal measurements. As an alternative technique, we also carried out a second set of direct measurements, after removing and reinstalling the electrodes. Then, for each profile, we performed 2D inversions of the three datasets separately, without considering data errors. Besides, we inverted the datasets obtained by combining the first direct and the reciprocal measurements, and the first and second direct measurements, considering the two obtained error estimates. In addition, numerical simulations were made, combining direct 3D modelling with 2D inversions. To analyse the results, we took into account the knowledge we had in advance about the main characteristics of the structures. The first conclusion obtained is that, at least for this type of structures, inverting each dataset without considering data errors provided more realistic images. However, although the best results were obtained by inverting without considering errors, it was still fundamental to have different sets of data, for evaluating the reliability of the images and for discarding possible spurious artefacts. This is especially important in environmentally complex urban sites, where errors could be particularly high. Finally, through the numerical simulations, a more rigorous interpretation could be made, and also, the effect of data errors in the quality of the images could be assessed.

show abstract

“…Detecting existing buried structural objects such as foundation piles and sheet metal piling walls is an early‐stage exploration target in these construction projects. For this purpose, electrical resistivity imaging (Arjwech et al ) may be useful for foundation pile location. To evaluate a foundation pile, several methods such as pile driving monitoring are used (Rausche and Robinson ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probe rotation effects on direction of arrival estimation in array‐type directional borehole radar

Ebihara

Wada

Karasawa

et al. 2017

Near Surface Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the relationship between feeding line delay compensation and direction of arrival estimation in an array-type directional borehole radar. In this radar, since the space available for an array antenna is limited by the borehole diameter, direction of arrival estimation is based on small travel time differences among array elements, and an accurate compensation of feeding line delays is important. Computer simulation confirmed that the radar probe rotation in a borehole leads to errors in the direction of arrival estimation of greater than 15° if the delays associated with the feeding array antenna elements are not compensated to within 0.1 ns. This may be caused by a failure to measure the time delays of electrical circuits around the feeding points of the antenna elements. In this case, we suggest that the lengths of system components other than the coaxial cables should be kept to less than 3 cm. Based on these investigations, we developed an array-type directional borehole radar for a geotechnical project to locate foundation piles. In a field experiment, we confirmed that direction of arrival estimation errors were below about 15°, although the radar probe rotated through more than 180° during the measurement, thanks to correct compensation of the cables. With the correct compensation, we demonstrated three-dimensional location of a buried cylindrical conducting object, which was located at 2 m from the radar in wet soil. We were able to estimate the reflection point position with an accuracy of 34 cm, which is the averaged error of the three-dimensional location, while allowing the radar probe to rotate. tool used in such projects (Daniels 2004). Soundings made with GPR have provided valuable information on objects buried in the subsoil up to several metres below the ground surface. Due to the sounding depth limitation of GPR, borehole radar has started to be utilised at construction sites. Borehole radar is a type of GPR (Slob, Sato and Olhoeft 2010) in which frequencies between 20 MHz and 100 MHz are used for long-range detection. Most conventional borehole radar systems for single borehole application use two vertical dipole antennae, which are omnidirectional. This type of radar has been applied to the detection of buried foundation piles (Yamashita and Toshioka 2002), and it is useful in two-dimensional space measurement for the determination of the depth and the radial distance (range) of targets parallel to the measurement borehole. However, to detect and range objects such as foundation piles in three-dimensional (3D) space using a single borehole, a directional borehole radar system is needed. As a directive antenna for the directional borehole radar, a cavity-backed antenna has been used; this system mechanically rotates the antenna inside the borehole

show abstract

Electrical resistivity imaging of unknown bridge foundations

Cited by 24 publications

References 9 publications

Electrical resistivity tomography array comparisons to detect cleared-wall foundations in brownfield sites

Electrical resistivity tomography array comparisons to detect cleared-wall foundations in brownfield sites

Different techniques for the assessment of geoelectrical data errors to improve the electrical images obtained at an industrial plant

Probe rotation effects on direction of arrival estimation in array‐type directional borehole radar

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About