1 de 2

http://www.masw.com/DataAcquisition.html

Field procedure for active MASW survey is explained here. The field procedure for passive MASW is different and explained under Passive MASW section. The active survey is
the most common type of MASW survey that can produce a 2-D Vs profile. The overall setup is illustrated in Fig. 1. The maximum depth of investigation (Zmax) that can be
achieved from the survey is usually in the 10-30 m range, but this can vary with site and type of active sources used. Field procedures and data processing steps are briefly
explained in Park et al. (1999). Surface waves are best generated over a flat ground within at least one receiver-spread length (D) (Fig. 2). If this is the case, then overall
topographic variation within an entire survey line should not be critical. However, any surface relief whose dimension is greater than, say, 10% of D will cause a significant
hindrance to surface wave generation.
The following describes most of parameters related to data acquisition. A slight variation in any parameter can always be expected. A summary of optimum acquisition
parameters is displayed in separate tables. Optimum parameters for active MASW are also described in Park et al. (2002). They have been, however, continuously updated by
investigators and practitioners, and those most-recently used are listed in tables.

Fig. 1. Schematic of the active MASW field survey.

Source
Maximum investigation depth (Zmax) will be determined by the longest wavelength (Lmax) of surface waves
used for the analysis as Zmax 0.5Lmax. Lmax is then governed by the impact power of the seismic
source, which can be a controlled type like a sledge hammer in an active survey (or a car moving over a
road bump in the case of roadside passive survey). In general, a longer Lmax (therefore, a deeper Zmax) is
achieved with a greater impact power.
A fairly heavy sledge hammer (e.g., 20 lb) will be a good choice, although other more-sophisticated
sources that can deliver more impact power into ground (e.g., a weight drop) can be an advantage over a
sledge hammer because of its potential to generate lower (longer) frequencies (wavelengths) of surface
waves. The gain from using these other sources is often not enough to warrant cost of the equipment and
inconvenience in field operation unless they are carefully designed and built. For example, a mere
increase of impact power not accompanied by a careful consideration of energy coupling mechanism
many not achieve the goal. Using an impact plate (also called base plate) will help the source impact point
intrude less into soil. A detailed study on the role of the base plate in surface wave generation has not yet
been undertaken and needs to be done in the near future. See tables for optimum source for different
investigation depth.
(Right ) Fig. 2. Typical terrain conditions favorable and unfavorable for the MASW survey.
Recently, it has been reported that a non-metallic plate (e.g., a firm rubber plate) can generate noticeably stronger energy at the lower frequency part of surface waves (e.g., <
10 Hz) than a conventional metallic plate. This seems related to the speculation that car tire may act as an effective shock-absorber that releases impact power gradually,
resulting in a larger-scale deformation of surface around the source point by avoiding permanent (plastic) deformation caused by an abrupt release of impact power. For
unusually shallow investigation, a relatively light source has to be used so that the dominant frequency can be shifted towards higher frequencies.
Vertical stacking of multiple impacts can suppress ambient noise significantly and is therefore always recommended, especially if the survey takes place in an urban area.
The optimum number of stacking impacts can be determined when there is little change in signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) in the displayed seismic record during the stacking. 3-5
vertical stacks are often used. This number, however, should increase as the ambient noise level increases and/or total receiver array length (D) increases.
Receivers
Vertical (instead of horizontal) phones must be used. Low-frequency geophones (e.g., 4.5 Hz) are always recommended. The high end of geophone frequency is not as
critical as in the reflection survey where any minor drop in sensitivity may become critical. For instance, recording and analysis of surface waves up to 450 Hz have been
reported by using 4.5-Hz geophones (Miller et al., 2000). Effectiveness of somewhat higher-frequency phones (e.g., 10-20 Hz), however, is often comparable to that of much
lower-frequency phones. Although spike-coupled geophones always give the highest sensitivity, the coupling provided by a land streamer can be equally efficient and is a
significant convenience in field operation (Fig. 3). In fact, using a land streamer can speed data acquisition by orders of magnitude; nowadays, it is becoming one of the
routine field apparatus, often operated with a small field vehicle (Fig. 3). See tables for optimum type of receiver for different investigation depth.
Fig. 3. Schematic illustration of
receivers on a land streamer.