To cite this paper: Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sci. 3,1:3-,1, paper No. 339.

Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sci. Vol. 34, No. 3-4, 1997 ISSN 0148-9062
To cite this paper: Int, X RockMech. & M i n SoL 3 4 : 3 4 , Paper No. 339

STUDY OF DYNAMIC PROPERTIES OF ROCKS A R O U N D AN

U N D E R G R O U N D OPENING USING SEISMIC INVERSE
TECHNIQUES
Cliff X. Wu; Maurice B. Dusseault

Department of Earth Sciences, University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1 Canada

ABSTRACT
A reverse vertical seismic profiling/crosswell seismology (RVSP/CSW) inverse technique which is
based on an elastic model has been developed to quantify the dynamic mechanical parameters and map
the structural anomalies in a solid rock medium around an underground opening, and these dynamic
mechanical parameters and structural images are used to address the dynamic properties of the rock., for
example, stability analysis of a critical region of a tunnel. Higher quality and higher resolution seismic
data are required in the inverse technique to allow very small scale (less than 25cm) geo-engineering
targets to be suitably investigated and get the inverse algorithm convergent at a reasonable response
time. The corresponding data acquisition requirements and physical environmental conditions are
carefully considered and designed.
The results show that the proposed inverse technique has the potential to be used as a field monitoring
tool.
Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science L t d

KEYWORDS

R e v e r s e V S P c r o s s w e l l s e i s m o l o g y n o n - l i n e a r i n v e r s i o n h i g h e r r e s o l u l i o n elaslic w a v e
underground opening rock engineering

1. I N T R O D U C T I O N
Seismic methods have been used in geological engineering for several decades (Hagedoorn 1959), but
most of these activities were based on measuring-and-interpreting procedures (McDowell 1993).
Measurements can be achieved with very high accuracy using state-of-the-art equipment, but the
accuracy of interpretation is varying with interpreter's experience. Sometimes contradictory results may
not surprise people but do bother them. Although many efforts have been made in the petroleum industry
and some acceptable results have been accomplished, it seems it is not possible to directly use these
achievements without some modifications because of the different requirement in most rock engineering
investigations. In rock engineering, very small scale problems are targeted, therefore, very high
frequency (several kilohertz) sources should be used. This requirement is rarely used in a conventional
seismic survey due to attenuation (absorption), but in rock engineering, especially in a competent rock
mass, the condition for a high frequency survey can be well satisfied.
Higher quality and higher resolution seismic data are needed for this study. Data will not be

ISSN 01d8-9062
To cite this paper: Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sci. 34:3-4, paper No. 339. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

pre-processed by conventional seismic processing methods, such as stacking, NMOing, migrating, or

DMOing etc. Instead, a one-step inverse technique is used to convert raw data to a form which can be
used in final interpretation directly and quantitatively.
This inverse technique is implemented by a generalized preconditioning conjugate gradient
method(G-CG) (Wu 1994). This G-CG method is self-guaranteed to obtain the optimum results provided
that the initial input and the governing equations are appropriate (Tarantola 1986, Mora 1987). In
addition, this inverse technique is an viscoelastic wave equation based approach which is certainly better
than many others, such as ray tracing or acoustic based inversion.

2. N O N - L I N E A R INVERSION

2.1 Governing equations

Assuming that the material around an underground opening is an inhomogeneous, isotropic, viscoelastic
medium, then the model of the Kelvin/Voigt substance can be applied to this material, and the Hooke's
law can be written as:

cr = k e + 7 / i (1)

where: cr is a stress vector,

is a strain vector,
k is elastic coefficient,
11 is viscous-elastic coefficient.
In x-y coordinate, (1) can be stated as following,

3u , Off
a., = ~.0 + 2u-g--x + ,~'0 + 2** 5 7
Ov , Of,
cr,, = Z O + 21a -~y + Z'(J + 2 U -~y (2)

Ov o,,) ao or,
cr.y = lU(-~x + Oy + lU' (-ffffx+ -~y )

Combining with equations of motion, the 2-D viscoelastic wave equations can be written in terms of the
displacement U = (u,v) T (Wu 1995):

p&~_Ox(ZO+2lt.-~x)+--~[(i.t(-~+ )]+g()l, 0+2~t~xx)+g[#(-~+ )]+f, (3)

0% 0 Ov 0 Ov ~ 0 ,. ,o~ 0 ,o~ ~ (4)

_ 0+ 2U-~) +-~tu ( ~ + )l + f~

where O=Ou/Ox +0v/0y,

L, L', g, g', Lame coefficients, are all the ftmction o f x and y,

ISSN0148-9062
To cite this paper: Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sci. 34:3-4, paper No. 339. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

is a derivative to t as 0/0t, and

fl, f2 are external forces.
when equations (3) and (4) are combined with proper initial and boundary conditions, they form an
initial-boundary value problem of partial differential equations. These equations fitlly state the
mechanisms of viscoelastic wave propagation in a given medium. A finite element method (FEM) has
been applied to solve this partial differential equation problem, refer to as a seismic forward problem
(Wu 1995).
Equations (3) and (4) can be equivalently expressed in the following concise form:

U = G(m) (5)
where U is the model space data set (U,V)T,
m is the parameter space data set, and
G is a general non-linear operator.
In the following, (5) will be used for simplicity.

2.2 Non-linear inversion

The inversion of typical seismic problems is used to give real seismic parameters of the rock mass out
some distance from an opening, providing some apriori knowledge of the medium is available.
Furthermore, the inversion will provide geometric details of the rock mass structure (bedding, zonations,
and fractured regions), providing these structures can be characterized by different seismic parameters.
The scale of resolution which the inversion provides depends on the seismic array, the frequency of the
seismic energy, and the sampling rate of the transducers. This inverse method implementation is
comprises the core of this research activity.

2.2.1. The non-linear least squares criterion

We use vector U 0 to denote the observed values, and the data covariance operator is Cv. Given C U, a
natural response to the question of how close a given data vector U is to observed values U 0 is given by
the norm (often called the L2 norm):

[U - Uo~2 = (U - u o ) r c[,t(U - Uo) (6)

Assume now that a priori information is available for the model, and that this a priori information can be
conveniently described using the apriori model m0, and the covariance operator in the model space C m.
Intuitively, m o represents a model from which we do not wish our inverse solution to differ too much. C o
thus represents how much we are prepared to accept our solution being different from m 0.

Similar to the case of the data space, a natural measure of discrepancy between the apriori model m o and
an arbitrary model m is given by the norm:

Im--nlo~ 2 -- (m-mo)r c~,l ( m - mo) (7)

ISSN 0148-9062
To cite this paper: Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sci. 34:3-4, paper No. 339. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

Given the observed values U0, the covariance operator Cu in the data space, the a priori model m0, the
covariance operator Cm in the model space, and the non-linear operator G(m) representing the solution of
the forward problem, we can state the inverse problem as the problem of obtaining the model which
minimizes the expression:

2s(v,,,,) =[]O(m)-Uol + 8)
where the solution of the problem is notated as mest, and is named the least squares estimator.

2.2.2. Non-linear inverse algorithm

Taking the derivative of the square error fimctional (6) with respect to the model vector m, the gradient
vector g is obtained:

g = ~ ( 2 S ( U , m ) ) = DTcjvlAU + C~=lAm (9)

where: D = 0U/&n is the Frechet derivative matrix, DWis the transpose matrix of D, AU = U-U 0 = G(m) -
U0, and Am = m -m 0.
Using a generalized conjugate gradient method (G-CG) (Wu 1994), all iterative algorithm of the model
parameters is obtained:

m.+ 1 = m. + or,,s. (10)

where % is the step length, sn is a line search direction, and set s 1 = - gl.

Often, by using some apriori knowledge or constraint, it is possible to modify the gradient direction g in
some sensible way, thus, greatly speeding convergence. This may also help avoid local minima and
resolve the null-space problem.
Let the new preconditioned gradient (a modification of the original gradient) be denoted (Mora 1987):
p = p(g) (11)

and assume P(g) = Cmg (reasonable). In order to perform the inversion by iteratively updating the model
in the direction Pn(Cmgn), we must determine the step length 0%. Denote the updated model

m.+l = mn + anPn (12)

Assuming linearity of U(m) in the vicinity of the current model m, the new data after the model
perturbation are

V,,+t = U ( m . + , ) = U. +a.Dp. (13)

Solving for the % which minimizes the new error fimctional 2S' corresponding to the perturbed model

min2S'= min[OU,,+l-Uol 2 +1/~+1- ~11~1 (14)

ISSN 0148-9062
To cite this paper: Int. I. Rock Mech. ,% Min. Sci. 34:3-4, paper No. 339. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

Solving for the derivative of 2 S' with respect to o% yields:

3
7---(2S') = -[prDrcju'(AU-o~DP~)+ prC~'(Am-c~P~) (15)

From (13), we have

pr (Dr C~'AU + C2,'Am)

~n r T
----
pAD C~, Dp,, + p,,f C.~-: p,,
-t

T
(16)
Pn gn
-- T T -I T -1
p, D Cv Dp, + p, C2 p,

For the inversion of the elastic wave equation, if the number of points in the data space and model space
are very large, it is extremely difficult to compute the matrix D =0U / Olrl directly. In order to calculate
the gradient, we must find another method which does not compute the matrix D directly. In this study,
however, it is appropriate to calculate the matrix D because of the smaller data set we are using.
The inverse algorithm can be summarized as following:
f o r n = 1 tok
U n = U(m~) = G(m~) compute data (forward
modeling)
AU n = U n - U0, Amn = m n - m 0 compute residua

gn = DTnC'IuAU +Cm'lAmn compute gradient

ifgnTgn < S, converged, stop,

otherwise,
Pn = Cmgn, preconditioning
T
P.g. calculate step length
CI[~ = - - T r . . r ~ - l ~ 7" ".b--

mn+ 1 = m n +(XnPn update model

end for
where m o : the a priori model
U 0 : field data.

3. A R R A Y D E S I G N A N D M O D E L T E S T S

3.1 Equipment and physical environment concerns

The essential acquisition components of a reverse vertical seismic profiling (RVSP) or crosswell
seismology (CWS) survey are boreholes, energy sources, geophones (accelerometers), and recording
systems.

ISSN 0148-9062
To cite this paper: Int. X. Rock Mech. ,% Min. Sd. 34:3-4, paper No. 339. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

For a 2-D small region survey (around a ttmnel wall), a minimum of three boreholes is required. These
boreholes should be smooth-walled, and 3.5-4m long. One hole will serve as a source hole, and the other
two boreholes will be equipped with geophones (accelerometers).
Appropriate downhole seismic sources are very important in this study. Generally spealdng, the expected
source (energy) should meet the following conditions:
1 Can be operated in an empty borehole;
2 Can propagate as far as 4-8m in a competent rock mass with frequency range up to 5-6kHz;
3 Should not destroy the source hole itself and the ttmnel wall;
4 Can be well clamped to the wall of a borehole;
5 Can produce a complete wavefield to satisfy the requirement of elastic wave field imaging;
6 Can minimize the generation of tube waves and,
7. Should be constant.
In this theoretical study, seismic sources should satisfy the above conditions. Other factors (such as
geophones, recording systems) are also assumed to satisfy appropriate conditions (Wu 1995). In addition,
when collecting data, a very quite environment is required to avoid various unwanted noises.

3.2 M o d e l tests
In the following computational modeling, P-wave and S-wave velocities and density are used instead of
Lame coefficient ~, tx etc. since the following formula are true for a elastic medium (viscous effect is
ignored temporarily).

Vp = V, = (17)

Figure 1 is a multiple-layered RVSP model. The results in terms of P-wave and S-wave velocities are
shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3, and density changes are not concerned. Other models including
crosshole layout can be found in a reference (Wu, Dusseault 1996).
The results clearly show that the inverse results match the real model very well, and the algorithm is also
quite efficient (convergent at several iterations). Complicated models are in progress in this research.

4. D I S C U S S I O N S A N D C O N C L U S I O N S
The use of seismic inverse techniques is a new approach in rock engineering activities. The results of
inverse algorithm directly and quantitatively provide us the structures of wave speeds and density of the
investigated geomedia. From this point, many dynamic elastic parameters can be calculated from P-wave
and S-wave velocities and the density of the corresponding rock mass, such as dynamic Poisson's ratio v,
dynamic modulus of rigidity C~ dynamic bulk modulus K, and dynamic Young's modulus E, etc.
In addition, the Q-value, a measure of attenuation in the rock mass, can be obtained from changes in
P-and S-wave amplitude spectra. It is possible that fracture state and in situ stresses will also be
addressed in terms of the wave velocities, densities and Q-values of the corresponding medium, and we
also can see this from equation (2).

ISSN 0148-9062
To cite this paper: Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sci. 3,1:3-,1, paper No. 339. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

These parameters fundamentally characterize the properties of the rock masses. If a permanent array of
well coupled transducers are installed in a location where rock degradation with time is expected,
repeated surveys will allow the evolution of zones to be tracked quantitatively. These data will aid in
rock support decisions and permit the physical processes involved in rock mass loosening or damage to
be analyzed.
This wave equation based inverse technique uses not only arrival time data, but also waveform data. It
could be a very robust technique since it collects as much information as possible, although this inverse
method is far more complicated. Nonetheless, It seems to yield much better results than many other
techniques, such as seismic tomography, etc.
In this paper, we demonstrate that the developed RVSP/CWS technique is a pragmatic approach in the
case of am underground tunnel or other openings. Direct inverse methods are very therefore promising.

FIGURES

ISSN 01d8-9062
To cite this paper: Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sei. 34:3-4, paper No. 339. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

Paper 339, Figure 1.

Location (m) R~e!','ers 10

Vs -- 230J ~je's
p ,= 2.5gfcn{

Vp = 5400 mrs

p = 2.6 ~i~:ni~
.I

.i
Vy, --- 5SC'{1I'J',.,"~
Vs = .~{-%, :rds
r "~
P = z.5 ~,cJ:l-

i ,g
Vp = 6070 ~t'd~
Vs = 350C. nu'~
p = 2.6 ,_4t,~'ln3
f ]~S~

Figure 1. A multi-layered model

ISSN 0148-9062
To cite this paper: Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sei. 34:3-4, paper No. 339. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

Paper 339, Figure 2.

LocaIion ~2 (m)

6,00~-

5- f
.
.s

,,

...,,

t"
450O
.. f'

4000 ..,"

I .. j. I ,, 1. J-
3500 ~ "
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
o 1

Figure 2. P-velocity results: solid line:true model, dashdot line: initial model, dotted line inverse result

ISSN 0148-9062
To cite this paper: Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sei. 34:3-4, paper No. 339 Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

Paper 339, Figure 3.

j"
.,.,-
J

,.. J j.~
.p
3600
j"

3,~00

3~10 .. J
,J
.J

-~ 3ooo
,t#
_"
2800 ,t.,,

/
,i

,e,"

2400 ~

1 2 3 4 5 6 f

Figure 3. V-velocity results: solid line:true model, dashdot line: initial model, dotted line: inverse result

References

References
1 Hagedoorn J.G. 1959, Theplus-minus method of interpreting seismic refraction sections, Geophys. Prospect.
7, 158-182.
2 Hardage B.A. 1991, Crosswellseismology & reverse VSP, Vol. 1, Bureau of Economic Geology, Austin,
Taxes,USA.
3 McDowell P.W. 1993, Seismic investigation for rock engineering, Comprehensive rock engineering,
Pergamon Press Ltd, UK, Vol. 3, P619-634.
4 Mora P. 1987. Nonlinear2-D elastic inversion ofmulti-offsetseismic data, G-eophysics,52,1010-1202.
5 Tarantola A. 1986, A strategy for nonlinear elastic inversion of seismic reflection data,
Geophysi cs, 51,1893-1903.
6 Wu C.X. 1994, Implementation of a generalized conjugate gradient algorithm, course proj ect.
7 Wu C.X. 1995, A quasi-3D RVSP/CWS data acquisition system for an underground tunnel, research report.
8 Wu C.X. 1995, Ph.D. thesis research proposal, University of Waterloo, Canada.

ISSN 0148-9062
To cite this paper: Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sci. 34:3-4, paper No. 339. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

Wu C.X., Dusseault M.B. 1996, Quantitative study in rock mass around a tunnel using an R KSP/CSW
inverse technique, Prediction and Performance in R o c k Mechanics and R o c k Engineering, pp.335 340.
E U R O C K ' 9 6 , Sept. 2-5, Torino, Italy.

ISSN 0148-9062