Environmental and engineering geophysics e . aGeophysical imaging methods provide solutions to a wide range of environmental and engineering problems: protection of soil and groundwater from contamination; safe disposal of chemical and nuclear waste; geotechnical site testing for underground vaults, subways, dams, reservoirs and power plants; landslide and ground subsidence hazard detection; location of archaeological artifacts. After an introductory chapter, this book describes each method of geophysical surveying; gravity, magnetic, seismic, self-potential, resistivity, induced polarization, electromagnetic, ground-probing radar, radioactivity, geothermal, and geophysical borehole logging. A final chapter is devoted to inversion theory and tomography. Each chapter takes the reader from the theory behind the method, through data acquisition and on to interpretation, and is supported by a large number of richly illustrated case histories. The book contains many topics not included in current texts on geophysical exploration. These include microgravimetry, shallow reflection seismic profiling, the generalized reciprocal method (GRM) of interpretation, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and radio- imaging, radon emanometry, cross-hole tomography, and special techniques for fracture and fluid flow detection. There are copious references for those wishing to delve deeper into particular subject areas. This is an ideal textbook for senior undergraduate and postgraduate courses in environmental and applied geophysics, and a supplementary course-book for students of geology, engineering geophysics, civil and mining engineering. It is also a valuable reference work for professional earth scientists, engineers and town planners.Environmental and engineering geophysicsEnvironmental and engineering geophysics Prem V. Sharma Emeritus Professor, Niels Bohr Institute University of Copenhagen 3] CAMBRIDGE 9) UNIVERSITY PRESSPUBLISHED BY THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA 477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia Ruiz de Alarcén 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa http://www.cambridge.org. © Cambridge University Press 1997 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 1997 Reprinted 2002 Typeset in 912/13' Swift Regular [sE] A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data Sharma, P. Vallabh. Environmental and engineering geophysics / Prem V. Sharma. Pp. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0 521 57240 1 (hardbound). - ISBN 0521 57632 6 (pbk.) 1. Engineering geology. 2. Environmental geotechnology. L Title. TA705.$515 1997 624.1'51-de21_ 96-37797 CIP ISBN 0 521 57240 1 hardback ISBN 0 521 57632 6 paperback Transferred to digital printing 2004To Baba with love and gratitudePreface Contents Acknowledgments Chapter 1 Introductory observations 11 1.2 13 1.4 15 16 Geophysics and the earth’s environment Geophysical techniques for near-surface studies Environmental problems amenable to solution by geophysical means Engineering geophysical investigations: targets and techniques Units used in this book Geological time-scale References Chapter2 Gravity surveying 21 2.2 2.3 24 Introduction Characteristics of potential fields 2.2.1 Gravitational force, potential, and field 2.2.2 Laplace’s equation and Poisson’s theorem Rock densities Acquisition and correction of gravity data 2.4.1 Gravity measuring instruments NR BR Ow n sul 12 12 14 15 16 16Contents 2.4.2 2.4.3 24.4 2.4.5 Survey procedures Location and spacing of stations; positions and elevations of stations; gravity gradient survey Corrections to gravity data Free-air and Bouguer anomalies In-situ determination of density 2.5 Analysis and interpretation of gravity data 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.5.3 2.5.4 2.5.5, 2.5.6 General considerations Ambiguity in gravity interpretation Isolation of anomalies: regionals and residuals Enhancement of anomalies Digital filtering; wavelength filters; continuation filters; derivative filters Estimates of depth and anomalous mass Methodology of interpretation General approach; forward modeling; inverse modeling 2.6 Applications to environmental and engineering studies 2.6.1 2.6.2 2.6.3 2.6.4 2.6.5 2.6.6 2.6.7 Delineation of structural trends, contacts, and faults Mapping of salt structures Estimating shape and depth of plutons Mapping of alluvium/bedrock contact Gravity investigations of landfill Microgravity studies of rockbursts in mines Microgravity detection of subsurface voids and cavities References Chapter3 Magnetic surveying 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Physical basis of magnetic surveys 3.3 3.2.1 3.2.2 Magnetic quantities and units Magnetic potential and field; intensity of magnetization and moment Dipole field and the geomagnetic anomaly Magnetic properties of rocks and soils 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 Induced magnetization and susceptibility Remanent magnetization Total magnetization and effective susceptibility Magnetic effects of soils and iron objects 21 22 25, 26 28 28 28 29 31 36 39 43 43 45 47 48 52 56 61 65 65 65 65 68 71 val 73 74 75Contents xi 3.4 35 3.6 3.7 3.8 Acquisition of magnetic data 3.4.1 Magnetic survey instruments 3.4.2 Survey procedures and data correction Data enhancement techniques 3.5.1 Derivatives and continuation filters 3.5.2 Reduction-to-pole and pseudogravity transformation 3.5.3. Analytic signal of magnetic anomaly field Approximate methods of interpretation 3.6.1 .Estimation of depth 3.6.2 Estimates of direction of magnetization and source boundaries Quantitative interpretation of magnetic data 3.7.1 Forward modeling 3.7.2 Inversion of magnetic data Environmental and engineering applications 3.8.1 Mapping of structural trends and basement features 3.8.2 Magnetic investigations over landfills 3.8.3 Detection of buried metal drums and casings 3.8.4 Mapping of cavities and voids 3.8.5 Mapping of dikes blocking groundwater flow 3.8.6 Detection of archaeological objects References Chapter 4 Seismic surveys 41 4.2 43 44 Introduction Elastic waves and propagation parameters 4.2.1 Body and surface waves 4.2.2 Pulse frequency, and attenuation characteristics 4.2.3 Reflection, refraction, and diffraction of waves Seismic velocities in rocks 4.3.1 Factors affecting velocity 4.3.2 Velocity-density and velocity-porosity relationships 4.3.3 Velocity data Reflection surveying 44.1 Introduction 75 75 79 83 83 84 86 86 86 89 100 101 105 105 108 112 112 113 113 116 117 19 120 120 122 123 123xii Contents 44,2 Data acquisition in shallow seismics 124 Seismic sources; geophones and arrays; seismographs and filters; field parameters 44.3 Reflection geometry and the concept of NNO 130 Horizontal reflectors; dipping reflector 444 Common-depth point (CDP) technique 134 44.5 Static and dynamic corrections 135 Static corrections; dynamic or NMO corrections 44.6 Determination of average velocities 137 T’-x? method; velocity-spectrum method; well-shooting and CVL methods 44.7 Synthesis of reflection traces 139 44.8 Processing of reflection data 140 44.9 Migration of reflection points 142 4.4.10 Shallow reflection profiling: CDP and COF techniques 143 Optimum offset technique 44.11 Resolution limits in reflection mapping 148 4.4.12 Applications to environmental and engineering problems 149 Mapping of fracture zones; reflection profiling in groundwater studies; delineation of bedrock valleys; detection of shallow faults and cavities 45 Refraction surveying 158 45.1 Introduction 158 4.5.2 Mapping of horizontal interfaces: intercept time method 158 4.5.3 Horizontal versus vertical velocity changes 161 4.5.4 Mapping of faults and steep contacts 162 4.5.5 Mapping of dipping interfaces 164 4.5.6 Mapping irregular (non-planar) interfaces 166 4.5.7 Interpretation by generalized reciprocal method 170 4.5.8 Refraction survey data acquisition 173 4.5.9 Applicability and limitations of the refraction method 173 4.5.10 Environmental and engineering applications 175 Velocity as a guide to rock strength; detection of potential collapse features; mapping of buried ancient ditch; mapping of gravel and sand deposits; dam site investigations References 186 Chapter 5 Self-potential surveying 190 5.1 Introduction 190Contents xiii 5.2 Origin of self-potentials 190 Electrofiltration; thermoelectric; electrochemical; mineralization 5.3 Data acquisition and noise suppression 193 5.3.1 Field procedure 193 5.3.2 Noise suppression and data enhancement 194 5.4 Interpretation of SP data 196 5.5 Applications to environmental and engineering problems 199 5.5.1 Seepage flow in a landslide body 199 5.5.2 Seepage flow in dams and reservoir floors 201 5.5.3. Delineation of groundwater flow 201 5.5.4 Studies of geothermal fluid flow 203 References 205 Chapter 6 Resistivity and induced polarization surveys 207 6.1 Introduction 207 6.2 Electrical resistivity of earth materials 208 6.3. Theory of current flow in the ground 209 6.3.1 Potential distribution in homogeneous ground 209 6.3.2 Apparent resistivity and electrode configurations 212 6.3.3 Potential and current distribution across a boundary 214 6.3.4 Computation of apparent resistivity by linear filters 218 6.4 Field procedures and selection of electrode array 220 6.4.1 Electric sounding and profiling procedures 220 Vertical electric sounding; electric profiling 6.4.2 Selecting an array for a particular application 224 6.5 Resistivity instruments and electrode layouts 226 6.6 Interpretation of resistivity data 228 6.6.1 General 228 6.6.2 Interpretation by master curves and auxiliary graphs 229 6.6.3 Forward and inverse modeling techniques 231 6.6.4 Ambiguity in interpretation of sounding curves 232 6.6.5 Interpretation of lateral resistivity contrasts 233 6.6.6 Interpretation of combined electric profiling and sounding 235 6.7 Applications of resistivity surveys 237xiv Contents 6.7.1. Groundwater exploration and water quality 237 Delineation of aquifer boundaries in sedimentary layers; groundwater in fissured rocks; mapping boundaries of saline groundwater 6.7.2 Examples of environmental and engineering applications 242 Mapping of chemical pollution plumes; delineation of water-saturated zones in landslide bodies; location of permafrost zones; location of archaeological objects; location of cavities and voids 6.7.3 Resistivity characteristics of geothermal fluids 249 6.8 Induced polarization method 252 6.8.1 Principles 252 6.8.2 Timedomain and frequency-domain measurements 254 6.8.3 Data acquisition 254 Equipment; field procedures 6.8.4 Interpretation of IP data 256 6.8.5 Examples of applications to environmental studies 257 Evaluation of aquifer potential; investigation of domestic waste dump; mapping of industrial contamination 258 References 261 Chapter 7 Electromagnetic surveys 265 71 Introduction 265 7.2 Theory of propagation of EM fields 266 7.2.1 Fundamental quantities and field equations 266 7.2.2. Attenuation of EM fields, and depth penetration 268 7.2.3 Phase relations and elliptic polarization of EM fields 270 7.3 Classification of EM methods 272 74 Continuous wave field methods (frequency-domain EM) 273 74.1 VLF and VLF-R methods 273 Conventional VLF; VLF-resistivity method 273 74.2 Horizontal loop (Slingram) method 277 74.3 Ground conductivity meters 280 74.4 Examples of applications to environmental problems 282 Delineation of contamination plume from waste dumps; mapping industrial groundwater contamination; mapping soil salinity in farmland 75 Transient-field methods (time-domain EM) 286 7.5.1 Principles and operational designs 286Contents xv 7.5.2 Interpretation of TDEM data 288 75.3 Examples of environmental studies 288 Mapping of contamination plume at a landfill site; mapping of brine pockets at a waste repository site 75.4 Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) method 292 76 Interpretation of EM data 293 76.1 Use of interpretational aids 293 76.2 Ambiguity in EM interpretation 296 7.7 Magnetotelluric methods 296 7.7.1 Principles of MT sounding 297 7.7.2. AMT and CSAMT methods 298 7.7.3. Inversion of AMT data 298 7.74 Examples of AMT surveys 300 Mapping of permafrost zones; AMT investigations in geothermal areas 300 78 Radio imaging method (RIM) 302 78.1 Principles and practices 302 7.8.2 Example of imaging a fault zone 304 References 306 Chapter 8 Ground-probing radar 309 8.1 Introduction 309 8.2 Basic principles 310 8.2.1 Radar propagation parameters 310 8.2.2 Range and resolution 311 8.3 Data acquisition and processing 313 8.4 Determination of radar velocities 314 8.5 Examples of environmental and engineering applications 316 8.5.1 Detection of fracture zones 316 8.5.2 Delineation of subsurface oil contamination 318 8.5.3 Mapping of geological contacts in frozen ground 320 8.5.4 Location of sinkholes and cavities 321 8.5.5 Detection of anomalous seepage 322 8.5.6 Mapping of archaeological remnants 323 8.5.7 Non-destructive testing of rock quality and structural integrity 325 References 328xvi Contents Chapter 9 Radioactivity surveys 91 9.2 9.3 94 95 9.6 9.7 98 9.9 Introduction Fundamentals of radioactive disintegration Units of radiation and dosage Radioactive decay series and equilibrium Radioactivity of rocks Instruments for measuring radioactivity 9.6.1 Geiger counter and scintillometer 9.6.2 Gamma-ray spectrometer 9.6.3 Radon emanometers Field procedure and operational considerations Environmental concerns about radon 9.8.1 Generation of radon 9.8.2. Radon transport mechanisms 9.8.3 Radon-risk index Examples of environmental radioactivity surveys 9.9.1 Assessment of indoor radon risk and groundwater contamination 9.9.2 Radiation from industrial and domestic waste pumps 9.9.3 Chernobyl radioactive fallout 9.9.4 Detection of faults and fracture zones 9.9.5 Radon-monitoring applied to earthquake prediction 9.9.6 Investigations of landslide development 9.9.7. Monitoring of radioactive contamination migration in subsurface References Chapter 10 Geothermal surveying 10.1 10.2 10.3 Introduction Thermal properties of rocks Propagation of thermal effects in the underground region 10.3.1 Depth penetration of surface temperature variations 10.3.2 Temperature distribution in the frozen ground 330 330 331 332 333, 334 335, 335 336 337 337 338 338 339 340 340 341 343 345 347 347 348 349 350 352 352 353 353, 353 356Contents xvii 10.4 Conductive heat flow and thermal gradient 357 10.4.1 Heat-flow measurements 357 10.4.2 Factors affecting thermal gradient 358 10.5 Heat production in crustal rocks 360 10.6 Temperature rise due to radioactive disposal in subsurface 361 10.7 Shallow thermal investigation methods 365 10.7.1 Shallow temperature surveys 365 10.7.2 Snow-melt photography and infrared imagery 366 10.8 Examples of shallow thermal surveys 366 10.8.1 Mapping of fissures and cracks 366 10.8.2 Location of leakage in pipelines 367 10.8.3 Thermal anomalies over salt and granite bodies 368 10.8.4 Temperature anomalies over waste dumps 370 10.8.5 Thermal detection of zones of weakness and leakage in dams 370 References 372 Chapter 11 Geophysical borehole logging 375 11.1 Introduction 375 11.2 General aspects of logging systems 376 11.3. Conventional borehole logging techniques in environmental investigations 376 11.3.1 Caliper logs 377 11.3.2 Electrical logs 377 11.3.3 Radiometric logs 380 11.3.4 Acoustic logs 384 11.3.5 Temperature logs 386 11.4 Specialized techniques for micrologging and fluid flow detection 388 11.4.1 The Ellog auger method 388 11.4.2. Microresistivity logging 389 11.4.3 Borehole televiewer log 391 11.4.4 Full waveform acoustic logging (FWAL) 392 11.4.5 Chemical/Radioactive tracer logs 393 11.5 Cross-borehole tomography for fracture and fluid flow detection 395 References 398xviii Contents Chapter 12 Inversion theory and tomography 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7 12.8 Introduction The inverse problem and its formulation Linear inverse problems and methods of solution 12.3.1 The Fourier method of linear inversion 12.3.2 The matrix method applied to linear problems Inverse calculations of density or magnetization; residual statics estimation Non-linear problems and methods of solution 12.4.1 Linearization of the non-linear problem 12.4.2 Unconstrained and constrained iterative solutions Sample applications to non-linear problems 12.5.1 Inversion of gravity and magnetic data 2-D interpretation; 3-D interpretation 12.5.2 Inversion of vertical electric sounding data 1-D, using partial derivatives; 1-D, using Zohdy’s technique; 2-D interpretation 12.5.3 Inversion of electromagnetic data 1-D methods; 2-D methods Introduction to tomography 12.6.1 The basic concept of tomography 12.6.2 Tomography in exploration geophysics 12.6.3 Radon transform Discretization methods in tomography 12.7.1 Generalized matrix method 12.7.2. Algebraic reconstruction technique (ART) 12.7.3 Simultaneous iterative reconstruction technique (SIRT) Transform methods of image reconstruction 12.8.1 Fourier projection method 12.8.2 Filtered back-projection (FBP) method 12.8.3 Wave diffraction method 12.8.4 EM diffraction tomography Electrical resistance tomography (ERT) References 400 400 400 402 402 404 407 407 408 409 409 415 419Contents xix Appendix A Analytical continuation of potential fields 452 Appendix B_ Gravity and magnetic attraction of finite vertical or horizontal cylinder 455 Appendix C Magnetic anomaly of a right rectangular prism with an arbitrary direction of magnetization vector 458 Appendix D Fourier series, transforms, and convolution 462 Appendix E Poynting vector resistivity and the Bostick inversion 466 Index 468Preface Over several years of engagement in geophysics teaching and research at the University of Copenhagen, I often felt a need for a comprehensive text on applica- tions of geophysical methods to a wide variety of environmental and engineering problems that range from protection of soil and groundwater from contamination, safe disposal of chemical and nuclear wastes, to geotechnical site testing for under- ground vaults, subways, dams, reservoirs, and power plants. Hitherto available literature on this subject is almost exclusively in the form of case histories published in the proceedings of various symposia (such as SAGEEP proceedings published by the Environmental and Engineering Geophysical Society) or special issues of some geophysical journals, and a few special volumes published by the Society of Exploration Geophysicists. To my knowledge, there is not yet any textbook that adequately covers the area of geophysical imaging of the shallow sub- surface from the standpoint of environmental and geotechnical problems. The present work is an attempt to fill in this gap. The structure of the book is summarized in the following. An introductory chapter outlines the basic principles of geophysical methods and their main areas of application in environmental and engineering contexts. The succeeding ten chapters describe all of the principal methods of geophysical surveying, each chapter containing the necessary basic theory, field procedures, interpretation techniques, and examples drawn from case histories. A final chapter is devoted to inversion theory and tomography to help understand the basis of geophysical imaging. In the discussion of various geophysical methods, particular emphasis is laid on techniques of data acquisition and anomaly enhancement that are imperative for accurate location and characterization of targets at shallow depths. Considering the virtual super-abundance of available books on signal analysis, digital filtering, and geophysical data processing, I have chosen to restrict the treatment of these topics to essential ideas only. The fuller treatment given to some other topics such as xxixxii Preface microgravimetry, shallow seismics, self-potential detection of fluid flow, environ- mental radioactivity, ground-probing radar, geothermal surveying, micrologging, borehole tomography, and inversion theory is justified by their omission from many standard geophysics texts. This book is designed primarily to be a textbook for senior undergraduate and postgraduate courses in environmental and applied geophysics, and a supplemen- tary course-book for students of geology, engineering geophysics, civil and mining engineering. It is hoped that the book will also be useful to professional earth scien- tists, archaeologists, engineers, and town planners who would like to have a broad view of the possibilities, advantages, and limitations of geophysical imaging tech- niques. The subject matter is so arranged that each of the chapters can be read inde- pendently without appreciable loss of continuity. Pertinent literature is referenced at the end of each chapter to assist those who wish to follow up specific topics in greater detail. In view of the non-uniform mathematical background of a wide possible reader- ship, the mathematical treatment has been kept to a minimum. While all the rele- vant mathematical concepts and formulas are carefully stated, they are mostly left unproved in the main text, to ensure an easy flow of the presentation. Readers seeking further details of the interpretation theory and modeling may turn to Chapter 12 and the Appendices at the end of the book. SI units are used throughout the text except in a few figures reproduced from older literature. A conversion table of geophysical units is included in Chapter 1. Many people have helped me in numerous ways during the preparation of the text and figures. Special gratitude is expressed to R. D. Barker, of the University of Birmingham, England; D. K. Butler, of the U.S.Army Engineer Waterways Experimental Station, Vicksburg; N. B. Christensen and Kurt Sorensen, of the University of Aarhus, Denmark; A. R. Dodds, of the Geological Survey of South Australia; O. Kappelmeyer, of GTC Kappelmeyer GmbH, Forsthart, Germany; L. B. Pedersen, of the University of Uppsala, Sweden; and S. E. Pullan and J. A. Hunter, of the Geological Survey of Canada; all of them have given me valuable information or material relating to their respective areas of expertise. lexpress explicitly my appreciation to my wife, Snehlata; without her affection- ate support completion of this book would not have been possible. Prem V. Sharma Nuuk, GreenlandAcknowledgments lam grateful to the authors and the following publishers for kind permission to use their copyright material as detailed below. Credit to the authors is also given in the figure captions and table headings. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, Fig. 11.13, p. 234 from Kearey and Brooks, 1991, An Introduction to Geophysical Exploration, 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Fig. 8.11, p. 530 from Telford et al., 1990, Applied Geophysics, 2nd edition. Elsevier Science - NL, Amsterdam Geoexploration, 25, Fig. 5, p.351 from Abdoh and Pilkington, 1989; 27, Fig. 4, p. 88 from Bernard and Valla; and Fig. 16, p. 343 from Thanassoulas, 1991; 28, Figs. 9 and 10, pp. 263 and 264 from Tweeton et al., 1991; J. Appl. Geophys., 29, Figs. 3, 13, and 14, pp. 213, 222, and 223 from Griffiths and Barker, 1993; 30, Fig. 12, p. 306 from Mwenifumbo, 1993; 31, Fig. 1, p. 67 from Miller and Steeples; Fig. 4, p. 110 from Kobr and Linhart; and Figs. 3 and 7, pp. 158 and 161 from Medici and Rybach, 1994; 32, Fig. 2, p. 157 from Senos Matias et al., 1994; 33, Figs. 8, 9, and 11, pp. 21, 22, and 24 from Kong and By; Fig. 6, p. 131 from Stevens et al.; Fig. 5, p. 148 from Carlsen et al.; Fig. 6, p. 162 from Mellet; and Figs. 3 and 16, pp. 181 and 191 from Benson, 1995. European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers, The Hague Geophys. Prosp., 17, Fig. 9, p. 58 from Ogilvy et al., 1969; 23, Fig. 2, p. 412 from Arzi, 1975; 25, Figs. 1, 2, and 3, pp. 202 and 210 from Pedersen, 1977; 29, Fig. 10, p. 946 from Palacky et al., 1981; 31, Fig. 3, p. 753 from Fajklewicz, 1983; 37, Fig. 8, p.540 from Davis and Annan, 1989; First Break, 2, Figs. 3, 6, and 7, pp. 22 and 24 from Worthington, 1984; 5, Fig. 1, p. 296 from Palacky, 1987; 10, Figs. 3 and 6, pp. 56 and 57 from Barker, 1992. Gebriider Borntraeger, Stuttgart, Figs. 4.21 and 4.33, pp. 157 and 166 from Kappelmeyer and Haenel, 1974, Geothermics with Special Reference to Applications. xxiiixxiv. Acknowledgments Royal Astronomical Society, London Geophys. J. Roy. Astr. Soc., 3, Fig. 1, p. 66 from Bott, 1960; 74, Fig. 7, p. 610 from McMechan, 1983. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma, Fig. 1, p. 3 from Nettleton, 1971, Elementary Gravity and Magnetics. Geophysics, 41, Figs. 6, 8, and 9, pp. 1025, 1026, and 1027 from Fajklewicz, 1976; 43, Fig. 18, p. 1466 from Tripp et al., 1978; 44, Figs. 3 and 11, pp. 230 and 241 from Corwin and Hoover, 1979; 49, Fig. 14, p. 1090 from Butler, 1984; 51, Figs. 4 and 5, Pp. 262 and 264 from Hatherly and Neville; and Fig. 1, p. 562 from Pattantyts-A, 1986; 54, Figs. 2 and 6, pp. 32 and 36 from Geissler; Figs. 2 and 4, pp. 39 and 44 from Van Overmeeren; Figs. 1 and 4, p. 237 from Ash and Morrison; and Fig. 4, p. 248 from Zohdy, 1989; 58, Fig. 3, p. 655 from Roest and Pilkington; Fig. 5, p. 745 from Gendzwill and Brehm; and Fig. 1, p. 1590 from Marson and Klingele, 1993. Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics, Vol. 1, 1990, Fig. 10, p. 56 from Lankston; Figs. 1, 5, and 7, pp. 136, 138, and 142 from Corwin; Fig. 11, p. 202 from McNeill; Fig. 9, p. 273 from Daniels and Keys; and Fig. 7, p. 316 from Soonawala et al. Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics, Vol. 2, 1990, Fig. 8, p. 9 from Hoekstra and Blohm; Figs. 1b and 4, pp. 31 and 34 from Buselli et al.; Fig. 6, p. 151 from Ross et al.; Figs. 3 and 4, pp. 191 and 192 from Street and Engel; Fig. 1, p. 198 from Cahyna et al.; Fig. 12, p. 209 from Barker; Fig. 7, p. 286 from Wolfe and Richard; Fig. 6, p. 307 from Dodds and Ivic; and Fig. 3, p. 315 from Sandberg and Hall. Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics, Vol. 3, 1990, Figs. 2 and 4, pp. 25 and 27 from Kilty and Lange; Figs. 1, 6, and 8, pp. 76, 81, and 83 from Pullan and Hunter; Figs. 3 and 4, p. 158 from Arzate et al.; Fig. 4, p. 184 from Wu and Zhang; Figs. 3, 4, and 5, pp. 214 and 215 from Sternberg et al.; and Figs. 2 and 8, pp. 283 and 286 from Schwarz. Springer-Verlag GmbH, Berlin, Figs. 3.22, 3.27, and 3.62, pp. 78, 82, and 111, respec- tively, from Vogelsang, 1995, Environmental Geophysics - A Practical Guide. The University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the Environmental and Engineering Geophysical Society, Englewood, Colorado J. Env. and Engg. Geophys., 1, Fig. 2, p. 191, and Fig. 5, p. 193, both from Ramirez etal., 1996.Chapter 1 Introductory observations 1.4 Geophysics and the earth’s environment Geophysics is the study of the planet earth using methods of physics. However, the term is often used in a restricted sense to denote the physics applied to the study of the ‘solid earth’ (excluding the hydrosphere and atmosphere). Solid earth geophys- ics is traditionally divided into two main fields of study: (1) global geophysics, and (2) exploration geophysics. The first involves studies of large-scale problems relating to the earth’s gross structure and dynamic behavior, whereas the second deals specifically with applications of geophysical techniques to problems of oil/gas, water, and mineral exploration. Geophysical exploration has rapidly expanded over the past 50 years and has helped to cope with increasing needs for raw materials and energy resources required by modern civilization. However, in its wake this has created new geophys- ical tasks relating to environmental protection. The current environmental prob- lems include, among others, location of buried hazardous waste material, protection of soil and groundwater from contamination, and planning of new, safe and secure disposal sites for dumping of nuclear, industrial, and domestic waste. In addition, as mining, oil and gas production, nuclear power installations, earthworks and heavy constructions continue to expand, various engineering/geo- technical problems are also demanding increasing attention from geoscientists and engineers. Integrity and safety of critical man-made structures such as nuclear waste repositories, dams, subways, etc., are of great importance both from engineer- ing and environmental considerations. Apart from the man-made problems, there are environmental hazards of natural origin, e.g., earthquakes, landslides, and volcanic outbursts that occasionally cause massive destruction. While their recurrence is apparently beyond man’s control, geophysical studies of these phenomena can be helpful in making evaluation of such hazards and mitigation of damages. The problem of air pollution, also an attribute of our high-tech civilization, is2 Introductory observations already of great concern and warrants the increasing attention of environmental scientists and town planners alike. However, this subject is outside the scope of this book. 1.2 Geophysical techniques for near-surface studies There is no need to develop new geophysical techniques for conducting environ- mental and engineering investigations, as the existing methods and techniques of exploration geophysics can be adapted with some modifications. Most targets of environmental and engineering interest are at shallow depths. Very often, the near- surface sources that are treated as ‘noise’ in conventional exploration surveys, now become main targets of investigation and for their accurate location and character- ization it is usually necessary to lay out a closely spaced grid of observation points. In principle, all the geophysical techniques that have been devised for subsurface investigations essentially detect a discontinuity, that is, where one underground region differs sufficiently from another in some physical property such as density, magnetic susceptibility, elasticity, spontaneous polarization, electric resistivity and conductivity, dielectric permittivity, radioactivity, and thermal conductivity. In this book these techniques are classified and described under ten major headings: | gravity surveying magnetic surveying seismic surveys self-potential surveying resistivity and induced polarization surveys electromagnetic surveys ground-probing radar @ radioactivity surveys m geothermal surveying = geophysical borehole logging The suitability of a particular geophysical technique or a combination of tech- niques depends very much on the physical property contrasts involved between the target structure and the surroundings, depth extent of the target, and the nature and thickness of the overburden. Speaking generally, investigations of as many properties as possible by various geophysical methods enable a countercheck of results and enhance the reliability of interpretation. The cost factor is also an important criterion in choosing which geophysical method to use for a given problem. The cost estimate of a selected technique in a survey area depends on the local terrain conditions, size of the area, grid spacing and number of survey points, instruments to be employed, required precision, depth penetration, and details of interpretation. There are, as yet, few published reports of geophysical expenditures actually incurred in environmental and engi- neering projects.Environmental problems amenable to solution by geophysical means 3 Vogelsang (1995) reports a cost analysis for an actual environmental investiga- tion of a landfill project conducted in 1993 in north Germany. According to this analysis various geophysical methods used could be placed in a scale of increasing cost (expressed in U.S. $ per line meter for each type of ground survey) as follows: self-potential (0.8); resistivity trenching (1.4); magnetic (1.5); electromagnetic (1.5); resistivity sounding (1.7); induced polarization (2.1); georadar (3.4); seismic refrac- tion (5.0); and seismic reflection (12.0). By way of comparison, core drilling in the survey locality was offered at U.S. $ 150 per meter and percussion probing at U.S. $ 20 per meter. As a rule, geophysical survey costs are much lower than the drilling costs. Geophysics is able to provide a broad, composite picture of the subsurface over large areas with speed and economy not attainable by other means. However, because of inherent ambiguities in interpretation (discussed in Chapters 2-12), the geophys- ical results should not be considered to be definitive, and selective drilling is often necessary to confirm the validity of interpretations made. Geophysical surveying can, if properly applied, optimize an exploration program by maximizing the rate of ground coverage and minimizing the drilling requirements. 1.3. Environmental problems amenable to solution by geophysical means Groundwater is an important part of the earth’s environment. Many of the environ- mental problems are directly or indirectly related to the location of groundwater and its protection from contamination sources of various kinds. Physical properties of many rocks are significantly altered by the presence of water in pores and fissures, the degree of alteration varying with the nature and content of contami- nants present; this makes it possible to locate water-bearing structures and to inves- tigate the quality of water by using appropriate geophysical techniques. In relation to the problems of hazardous waste contamination and safe disposal of nuclear and chemical wastes, important geophysical tasks are the following: 1 Location of geological structures (faults, fissures, shear zones, steep litho- logic contacts, etc.) under and around existing landfills and waste dump sites. 2 Location of aquifers and hydraulically active structures for tracing the move- ment of contaminated plumes and seepages in the ground. 3 Detection and location of buried waste dumps; in particular, delineation of their margins and physical characterization of major wastes. 4 Exploration for new disposal sites in tectonically/seismically stable localities with structures (geological barriers) protecting rock and groundwater from contamination. The depth of a potential disposal site may vary from some hundreds of meters or more for deep deposition of high-level radioactive waste to as small as a few meters for domestic garbage.4 Introductory observations In addition, there are environmental problems concerning radioactive emana- tions, earthquake risk evaluation, landslides and ground subsidence, archaeolog- ical site delineation, and many others that are amenable to solution by geophysical means. Table 1.1 gives an overview of important targets of environmental geophysics and the appropriate techniques to be used. In addition to the techniques listed in the table, there are borehole logging techniques comprising several geophysical logging tools (described in Chapter 11) that are routinely used in any available borehole. Methods and techniques relating to evaluation of earthquake hazards and mitiga- tion of damages to heavy structures are not included in the table because these problems are not discussed in this book. 1.4 Engineering geophysical investigations: targets and techniques Over the past several decades there has been a steady increase in the application of geophysical techniques to many types of civil engineering problems. The important ones may be divided into three classes: (1) foundation testing, (2) water location, and (3) detection of abandoned mine shafts, unlogged pipes, and discarded metallic objects. The problems of foundation testing include determination of (1) the depth to and constitution of bedrock, and (2) the physical properties of rock encountered in dam, canal, tunnel, shaft, high-level waste disposal vault, railway, highway, subway, and other construction projects. In regions of high latitude (near or within the polar circle), delineation of permafrost zones and of thawing layers is of major geo- technical significance. The location of water and determination of its salinity play an important part in municipal engineering in connection with water supply, sewage disposal, irriga- tion and drainage problems. In transportation engineering, determination of water levels and water-bearing fissures is essential for subway and tunnel construc- tion. Location of many of the older underground excavations (mine shafts and tunnels) becomes occasionally necessary because their records are no longer avail- able. For the same reason, geophysical techniques may have to be used to locate pipes. Detection and location of buried ammunition and other metal machinery are also of importance for obvious reasons. Table 1.2 lists some of the important engineering problems and the appropriate geophysical techniques that may be used. 1.5 Units used in this book Despite the wide adoption of SI (Systeme Internationale) units by many inter- national scientific and technical agencies, it is a fact that many geoscientistsTable 1.1 Important targets of environmental investigations by geophysical techniques. Area of application Geological structures} Hydraulically Landfills/ Contamination Landslides/ Pre-excavation Survey technique barriers active structures Waste dumps plumes Ground sinking —_ archaeology Gravity + 5° - ° ° Magnetic* + = + 7 - + Self-potential ° + O° O° + - Resistivity +1P° + + + + + + Electromagnetic ° + + + - ° Ground radar ° O° + Oo O° + Radioactivity? ° O° oO fe} Oo - Seismic refraction + ° ° - ° ° Seismic reflection + oO - - - = Geothermy* ° + ° - ° - Notes: + applicable; O limited applicability; — not applicable. *Technique applicable to both ground and airborne surveying. > Induced polarization.Table 1.2 Engineering/geotechnical applications of geophysical techniques. Area of application Depth to and constitution of Rippability/ Fracture/Flow Location of Permafrost/Thaw zones PipesjMetal Technique bedrock Rock strength seepage detection cavities/voids delineation detection Gravity + - - + - - Magnetic + - - + - + Self-potential - - + - - ° Resistivity +IP* + = + + + °° Electromagnetic ° - + O° + + Ground radar + O° + + + oO Radioactivity - - ° - - - Seismic refraction + + ° O° + - Seismic reflection + + Oo O° } im Notes: +applicable; O limited applicability; —not applicable. “Iduced polarization.Geological time-scale 7 (particularly from the United States) are still not accustomed to thinking in terms of newtons, teslas, or even joules. A brief description of the basic concepts and conven- tions used in the SI system of units is given in the following. The SI system is an extension of the rationalized MKSA (meter-kilo- gram-second-ampere) system, with standard prefixes corresponding to powers of ten increasing usually by multiples of three; for example, nano (n)=10~°, micro (w)=10-, milli (m)= 107°, kilo (k)=10°, mega (M)= 10°, giga (G)= 10°. Electrical quantities are derived from current, defined through the ampere (A), while all magnetic fields (the earth’s field or laboratory fields) whether in vacuum, air, or within a magnetizable permeable body, are described fundamentally by the flux density (B-field), expressed in teslas (T). The H-field, which denotes the field of magnetizing force produced by an electric current, is designated as the magnetizing field strength, expressed in A/m. The intensity of magnetization, J, caused by the magnetizing field, H, has the same unit (A/m) as that for H; therefore the susceptibility constant, x, given by the relation J=«H, becomes dimensionless in the SI system. The permeability constant, y,, has a numerical value of 417x107’ in SI units. Throughout the book, the SI units are used. The only exceptions are a few dia- grams that are reproduced from the older literature giving data in e.m.u/cg.s. units; in these diagrams a note of conversion to SI units has been added in the figure caption. However, to avoid ambiguities and to facilitate conversions, Table 1.3 should serve a useful purpose. 1.6 Geological time-scale In many geological and geophysical investigations, it is important to know the rela- tive and (if possible) absolute age of a rock formation. Rocks can be dated from their fossil content, i.e., from the fossilized remains of different organisms, plants, and animals whose sequence of evolution is known from the methods of paleontology. This enables relative dating of rocks which are fossiliferous. Stratigraphical ages so determined are divided into ‘eras’ such as Cenozoic (recent life) and Paleozoic (ancient life), which in turn are subdivided into ‘periods’ such as the Carboniferous (coal-bearing) and the Cretaceous (chalk- like). Absolute dating is based on radioactive decay of certain elements in rocks (Section 9.2). In geophysical investigations of environmental and engineering problems, a knowledge of the stratigraphical ages of the rocks under study is often adequate; absolute ages are very rarely required. Table 1.4 shows the geological time-scale with ages in millions of years (Ma) before the present (B.P.).8 Introductory observations Table 1.3 Conversion of SI units to c.g.s. or electromagnetic c.g.s. units. Corresponding equivalent in c.g.s. SI units or electromagnetic Quantity Name Symbol c.g.s. units Mass kilogram kg 10° g Length meter m 10?cm Time second s s Acceleration meter/second? m/s? 10? Gal=10? cm/s* Subunit for gravity gravity unit g-u.=pm|s? 10-! milligal (mGal) Density kilogram/meter? kg/m? 107 g/cm? Force newton N 10° dynes Pressure pascal Pa=N/m? 10 dynes/cm?=10-5 bar Viscosity pascal sec Pas 10 poise Energy joule J 107 ergs~0.24 cal Power watt W=Jis 10” ergs/s Heat flow watt/meter? Wim? 23.9 caljcm? s Conductivity (thermal) watt/meter°C Wim°C 2.39x10°? calfem s °C Heat production watt/meter? Wim? 2.391077 calfem? s Current ampere A 10-1 e.m.u. (or ‘absolute amp’) Potential difference volt Vv 10° e.m.u. Electric field volt/meter 10° e.m.u. Electric charge coulomb 10° emu. Capacitance farad 10~? emu. Resistance ohm 10° e.m.u. Resistivity ohm meter 10" e.m.u. Conductivity siemen/meter 10" emu. Dielectric permittivity’ farad/meter 1 (for vacuum) Magnetic flux weber 10® maxwell Magnetic flux density tesla 10* gauss (G) (Bfield) Subunit for the B-field nanotesla nT 1y=10" gauss (G) Magnetizing field ampere/meter Am 4X10? oersted (Oe) (H-field) Inductance henry H=Wb/A 10° em.u. Permeability’ henry/meter M)=40X10-7 H]m 1 (for vacuum) Susceptibility dimensionless K 4nem.u. Magnetic pole strength ampere meter Am 10emu. Magnetic moment ampere meter? Am? 10? e.m.u. Magnetization ampere/meter Alm 10 e.m.u. Notes: *Permittivity for vacuum. » Permeability for vacuum. Tables of physical constants, in SI units, are given by Markowitz (1973).Geological time-scale Table 1.4 Geological time-scale with absolute ages in millions of years before present (B.P,). Geological era and period Age* (Ma) Cenozoic (mammals) Quaternary Holocene 01 Pleistocene 2.0 Tertiary Pliocene 5a Miocene 24.6 Oligocene 38.0 Eocene 54.9 Paleocene 65 Mesozoic (reptiles) 2 Cretaceous Upper 98 g Lower 144 3 Jurassic Upper 163 2 Middle 188 a Lower 213 é Triassic Upper 231 Middle 243 Lower 248 Paleozoic (invertebrates) Permian Upper 258 Lower 286 Carboniferous Upper 320? Lower 360 Devonian 408 Silurian 438 Ordovician. 505 Proterozoic eon Archean eon Priscoan eon Oldest dated rock Age of the earth Precambrian tim« ~590-2500 ~2500-4000 ~4000-5000 3750 4600 Source: Harland et al. (1982). * Ages correspond to the lower boundaries of geological periods and divisions.10 Introductory observations References Harland, W. B., Cox, A., Llewellyn, P.G., Pickton, C. A. G., Smith, A. G. and Walters, R. 1982. A Geological Time Scale. Academic Press, London. Markowitz, W. 1973. SI, the international system of units. Geophys. Survey 1 217-41. Vogelsang, D. 1995. Environmental Geophysics - A Practical Guide. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Chapter 2 Gravity surveying 2.1 Introduction Since the discovery of the law of gravitation (Isaac Newton, 1685), the mutual attrac- tion between all masses has been recognized as a universal phenomenon. The phe- nomenon accounts for the familiar fact that a body when released near the earth will fall with increasing velocity. The rate of increase of velocity is called the gravita- tional acceleration, or simply gravity, g, which would have a single constant value on the earth’s surface if the earth were a perfect sphere of uniform concentric shell structure. In fact, our earth is non-uniform, non-spherical, and rotating, and all these facts contribute to variations in gravity over its surface. The measurements and analyses of the variation in gravity over the earth’s surface have become powerful techniques in the investigation of subsurface struc- tures at various depths. Of prime interest in environmental and engineering studies are the variations in gravity which reflect lateral density contrasts associated with targets at shallow depths. In many cases the density contrasts occur at boundaries between different geological formations, although man-made boundaries such as tunnels and mines also represent contrasts. Gravity variations caused by density inhomogeneities are relatively small (often <10~ of the earth’s gravity), and their accurate measurement is possible only with the aid of extremely sensitive instru- ments. As a geophysical technique, the gravity-surveying method has a great deal in common with the magnetic method. Both gravity and magnetic fields are potential fields, and both require fundamentally similar interpretation techniques. The use- fulness and applications of the two methods, however, vary considerably depending on the relative prominence of the physical property (density or magnetization) con- trast involved in various geological situations. In this chapter we shall first study the characteristics of potential fields which are basic to a proper understanding of the gravity measurements and their interpreta- tion in terms of subsurface density distribution. This will be followed by methods of u12 Gravity surveying data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation with special emphasis on the resolu- tion of shallow targets. Several examples of environmental and engineering studies are included to illustrate the use of gravity surveys. 2.2 Characteristics of potential fields 2.2.1 Gravitational force, potential, and field The force of attraction, F, between two point masses m and m’, separated by a dis- tance, r, is given by Newton’s law: F=G ("r ) r (2.1) where r, is a unit vector directed from m towards m' (when Fis acting on m), and Gis the gravitational constant which has a measured value of 6.672 X10-" N m2/kg? in SI units (6.672 x 10-* dynes cm?/g? in the c.g.s system of units). The SI unit of force is the newton (1 N= 10° dynes). The force exerted on a body at the earth’s surface is due to the attraction of the earth. When the effects of rotation and non-uniformity of the shape and density of the earth are neglected (as if it were a sphere of uniform concentric shell struc- ture), the force exerted by the earth on a body of mass m can be obtained from Eq.(2.1) as F=G(M,m/R2)r, (2.2) where M, is the earth’s mass, R, is the earth’s radius, and r, is a unit vector directed from m towards the earth’s center. The gravitational force is also given by Newton's second law of motion, i.e., F=mg, where g is the acceleration that would be caused by the gravitational pull of the earth if the body were allowed to fall freely. Thus, the gravitational acceleration g (henceforth referred to only as gravity) may be considered as the force exerted by the earth on a unit mass, and it can be expressed as g=F/m=G(M,/R})r, (2.3) where r, is a unit vector directed towards the center of the earth. The SI unit for gravity, g, is m/s. In the c.g.s. system the unit for g is cm/s”; in geophysics this unit is referred to as the Gal (in honour of Galileo). One-tenth of a milligal is called a gravity unit (g.u.), which is used more commonly in exploration work. The practical unit g.u. is the same as the subunit m/s? of gravity acceleration in SI. Thus, 1 m/s?=1 g.u.=0.1 mGal. The gravitational potential, U, due to a point mass m at a given point P, at a distance r from m, is defined as the work done by the gravitational force in moving a unit mass from an infinite distance to the final position at P. In geodesy andCharacteristics of potential fields 123 Fig. 2.1 Gravitational attraction g and its vertical component g, at a point P due toa generalized mass M; it is calculated by integrating the gravity effect of an element dM over the whole mass (see text). geophysics, the sign convention is to take U to be a positive quantity; its magnitude is given by U=Gmlr (2.4) The potential function, U, plays an important part in the theory of attraction; the neg- ative derivative of U gives the gravity attraction in the corresponding direction. Thus aU_Gm pose 2.5) er a @5) The gravity attraction due to a generalized mass distribution (Fig. 2.1) is the vec- torial sum of attractions produced by all point masses, because they do not gener- ally act in the same direction. It is the vertical component of gravity attraction, g, (henceforth written simply as g), that is usually of interest. This is calculated at a point P by the integral equation dM IV so/ mr cospag [PON (2.6) M v where dM is the mass of a volume element dV of density pat a distance r from P. Considering the point P located at a,8,0 and the mass element at x,y,z, we can write dM=pdxdydz. In this coordinate system, Eq.(2.6) can be written as sof mea 2.7) where r=[(x—a)?+(y—B)+27?", If the mass distribution is two-dimensional (2-D), which occurs when a body com- posed of elements, each of constant cross-section dS, is striking infinitely in a hori- zontal direction (say from + to —* in the y-direction, perpendicular to the plane of Fig. 2.1), the above equation reduces to dxdz Sonj=2G | | ee (2.8) where r=[(x—a)?+27]'2.14 Gravity surveying These are the basic equations for calculating the gravity effects of bodies of uniform density. Use of Eqs.(2.7) and (2.8) makes it possible to obtain closed analyt- ical expressions for the gravity effects of bodies of regular shape such as sphere, cylinder, horizontal slab, etc., (see Section 2.5.5, Table 2.2). Of these, the most widely used is the gravity formula for an infinitely extending horizontal slab, given by g=2nGph (2.9) where pis the density and h the thickness of the slab. 2.2.2 Laplace’s equation and Poisson's theorem Some knowledge of the potential field theory is essential to appreciate the methods of analyzing and interpreting the potential field data such as gravity, magnetic, and electric. For a detailed treatment of the subject, the reader may refer to Baranov (1975) and Blakely (1995), but it is convenient to mention here one important prop- erty of potential fields, that at all points in free space (external to the region con- taining the attracting mass or magnetic/electric polarized material) they satisfy Laplace’s equation van, 2A, OA (2.10) ax? ay? az? where A refers to potential and is a function of the position of the point (x,y,z). For 2-D bodies, there is no field variation along the direction of strike (say y) and therefore Laplace’s equation simplifies to yar 2A_9 (2.11) The generality of Laplace’s equation leads to the ambiguity that quite different mass (or magnetic/electric) distributions can provide identical potential fields through regions of space. This point is further discussed in Section 2.5.2. Gravity and magnetic potentials are related through Poisson's theorem which states that _ jw W=c bp os (2.12) where W and U are, respectively, the magnetic and gravitational potentials of the same source of volume V, density p, and magnetization J, oriented in a direction s. The constant c has a numerical value of 107’ in SI units. For the case when the direction of magnetization is vertical (s=z), as it is in high- latitude areas, the magnetic potential W can be calculated directly from the gravity, g (=0U/dz), using Eq.(2.12). Further, the magnetic field component in the verticalRock densities 15 Gravity 1 =P 2 Pa Py 3 P4—P, Pa=P3 P3—Po 4 Fig. 2.2 Schematic section showing lateral density contrasts resulting from a structural uplift. p,, p,, p,, and p, are the densities of four flat-lying layers. Horizontal variation in gravity is caused by lateral variations in density. (After Nettleton, 1971.) direction, B, (=4W/@2), can be obtained from the vertical derivative of the gravity by Poisson’s relationship Jag 2 "Gp dz (2.13) These equations enable calculation of gravity and magnetic fields from each other by assuming a common source. They also show in a simple way that the magnetic field varies one power faster with respect to distance than does the gravity; i.e. the magnetic field is proportional to the rate of spatial change of gravity. Thus, the magnetic field due to a source will be more sensitive to depth and will better define the location of the source than the gravity field from the same source. 2.3. Rock densities Density relates volume to mass and the variations in density cause differences in mass and gravity acceleration. Any geological condition that results in a horizontal variation in density will cause a horizontal variation in gravity or a gravity ‘anomaly’. This is illustrated in Fig. 2.2 where the flat-lying layers are disturbed by a structural uplift. In addition to density variations caused by deformation of strata, there may be inherent density variations, for example, those caused by changes in facies in sedimentary rocks and differentiation in plutonic bodies. For quantitative interpretation of gravity anomalies, it is necessary to estimate the differences in densities (density contrasts) between the subsurface rocks before one can postulate their structure. The bulk density of most igneous rocks is primarily controlled by the mineral grain density, p,,. In contrast the densities of clastic sediments and sedimentary rocks are controlled largely by the pore space and the fluid in the pore. A distinction is usually made between dry and wet bulk density. Dry bulk density, p,, refers to specimens in a completely moisture-free state, whereas wet bulk density, p,, implies that the specimen is saturated with water. The interrelationship between p,,, p,,and p,, is given by the following formulas:16 Gravity surveying Pa= Pm (1—P) (2.14) Py =pa+Pa (2.15) where Pis the fraction of volume occupied by the pores, and a is the fraction of pore volume filled with water. In the case of highly porous materials, the difference between p, and p,, may be as much as 30%. For most rocks below the groundwater table it is safe to use wet bulk density values. As a rule porosity tends to decrease with increasing consolidation and lithification of sediments. Sedimentary densities thus increase from low values (<1800 kg/m’) in the case of younger unconsolidated deposits, to values approaching mineral grain densities (>2800 kg/m*) in older formations. Table 2.1 shows the density values encountered in typical rocks and rock-forming minerals. There are, as yet, few data on density values of domestic garbage and industrial waste components. Laboratory measurements on rock specimens utilize various methods of deter- mining pore space, specimen volume, and mass to determine densities. However, it is not always easy to make representative density determinations because of the difficulty of obtaining fresh, unweathered rock samples. Wherever possible the lab- oratory determinations should be supplemented by in-situ determinations of density (Section 2.4.5). When no other information about densities of subsurface rocks is available, the Nafe-Drake or Gardner relationsip between the seismic P- wave velocity and density may be used to estimate densities from the knowledge of P-wave velocities (Section 4.3.2). 2.4 Acquisition and correction of gravity data 2.4.1 Gravity measuring instruments The determination of g at some point on the earth’s surface with a precision of better than one part in 10 million requires the greatest care. Almost all the earlier absolute and relative determinations used some form of swinging pendulum whose period is related to g. Since the development of other instruments, which are quicker and more accurate for making relative measurements (i.e., differences in gravity between two points), pendulums have assumed a secondary role of pro- viding the absolute values at primary base stations and calibration standards for other gravity measuring instruments. Today all gravity measurements for geophysical exploration are made by relative measuring devices, gravimeters. In principle a gravimeter is an extremely sensitive weighing device whose responsive element is essentially a spring carrying a fixed mass. A small change in gravity, Ag, will cause a displacement of the mass and alsoa change in spring length L (Fig. 2.3) by a small amount, AL. To measure Ag to a preci- sion of 0.1 g.u. (which corresponds to Ag/g=10-), the fractional change in spring length, AL/L, must be measured to a precision of 1 part in 10.Acquisition and correction of gravity data 17 Table 2.1 Densities of rocks and minerals. Density (wet) Rock type or mineral (X10? kg/m?) Remarks Sand 16-2 Data taken mostly from a Moraine 15-2 compilation made by Sandstones (Mesozoic) 2.15-2.4 Parasnis (1971) Sandstones (Paleozoic and older) 2.35-2.65 Quartzite 2.60-2.70 Limestone (compact) 2.5-2.75 Shales (younger) 2.1-2.6 (2.4)* Shales (older) 2.65-2.75 (2.7) Gneiss 2.6-2.9 (2.7) Basalt 2.7-3.3 (2.98) Diabase 2.8-3.1 (2.96) Serpentinite 2.5-2.7 (2.6) Gypsum 2.3 Anhydrite 29 Rocksalt 2.1-2.4 (2.2) Zincblende 4.0 Chromite 45-48 Pyrite 49-5.2 Hematite 5.1 Magnetite 4.9-5.2 (5.1) Galena 74-76 Granite 2.52-2.81 (2.67) These data are taken from Granodiorite 2.67-2.79 (2.72) tables by Clark (1966) Syenite 2.63-2.90 (2.76) Quartzdiorite 2.68-2.96 (2.81) Gabbro 2.85-3.12 (2.98) Peridotite 3.15-3.28 (3.23) Dunite 3.20-3.31 (3.28) Eclogite 3.34-3.45 (3.39) Note: “Figures in parentheses are taken to be average values. Two basic types of systems are used to measure extremely small changes in spring length produced by small changes in gravity: (1) a stable or static system that employs high optical, mechanical, or electronic amplification to provide the required sensitivity; (2) an unstable or astatic system, which employs an additional negative restoring force operating against the restoring spring force (i.e., in the same sense as gravity) and consequently amplifies the displacement. Most gravimeters currently in use employ a ‘zero-length’ spring which is pre- tensioned during manufacture so that the restoring force is proportional to the18 Gravity surveying FRAME PROOF MASS. Fig. 2.3 Principle of operation of a stable gravimeter. To measure gravity changes to 0.1 g.u. (i.e., to about 1 part in 10° of the earth’s normal gravity) would require the fractional change in length AIL to be measured to a precision of the same order. physical length of the spring rather than its extension. In the LaCoste-Romberg design (which is typical of unstable gravimeters in general), the zero-length spring (Fig. 2.4) is attached rigidly to the frame and balances the mass M at the end of a beam. Any change in the force of gravity acting on the mass causes a motion which changes the angle @ between the beam and the spring and hence the moment of the spring’s pull on the beam. By suitable choice of the spring constant and beam geo- metry, the net torque on the mass can be reduced to a minimum and the equilib- rium made unstable. The system is then very sensitive to variations in g. The gravity change from place to place is measured in terms of the restoring force necessary to return the beam to the horizontal position by altering the vertical location of the spring attachment with a micrometer screw. To minimize the effects of temperature fluctuations on the sensing element, gravimeters require a constant temperature environment; this is usually achieved by a battery-powered thermostat system. In some designs (e.g., Worden gravimeter), temperature effects are reduced by a built-in self-compensating device and, in addi- tion, the entire system is kept in a sealed vacuum flask. Standard gravimeters frequently used in geophysical exploration surveys have a sensitivity of 0.1 g.u. (0.01 mGal), and a dial range without reset from a few thousand g.u. to several tens of thousand g.u. The availability of a true ‘microgal’ gravimeter (LaCoste & Romberg Model-D with a sensitivity of 0.01 g.u.) in the early 1970s and a better appreciation of the exacting requirements for high-resolution surveys gave impetus to the use of microgravimetry for environ-Acquisition and correction of gravity data 19 Cl Adjusting screw to restore the beam to its null position Light-beam Weight = Mg 1 Ie Weight = Mg’ Fig. 2.4 Constructional design and basic components of the LaCoste-Romberg gravimeter. mental and geotechnical applications. Under field conditions involving frequent transports and ambient noise (due to wind, traffic, etc.,) the accuracy of the LaCoste & Romberg Model-D gravimeter for a single relative measurement of gravity is between 0.03 and 0.06 g.u. More recently, microprocessor-controlled automatic-reading gravimeters have become available which are particularly suitable for high-resolution surveying (e.g., for locating voids and fissures in karst areas, old mining areas, abandoned tunnels and underground vaults, and archaeological remnants). They provide the facility of continuous sampling for real-time signal enhancement together with the advan- tage of a wide operating temperature range of —40°C to + 45°C. One of such instru- ments is the Scintrex CG-3M Autograv (Fig. 2.5) which is a stable-type gravimeter. Here the position of the proof mass attached to the spring is sensed by a capacitative transducer. An automatic feedback circuit applies a d.c. voltage to the capacitor plates, producing an electrostatic force on the mass, which brings it back to a null position. The feedback voltage, which is a measure of the relative value of gravity at the reading system, is converted to a digital signal and recorded. Automatic read- ings which are continuously sampled for real-time signal enhancement and analy- sis reduce operational errors. The instrument does not need resetting and has a measurement accuracy of better than 0.05 g.u. With this advancement in measure- ment precision, present-day limitations in gravity data are in the reduction, pro- cessing, and interpretation rather than in the measurements. The reading of a gravimeter at any observation point changes with time. This20 Gravity surveying Fig. 2.5 Scintrex CG-3M Autograv gravity meter for land surveys. The instrument has a measurement range of over 70,000 g.u. (7000 mGal) and a reading resolution of 0.01 g-u. (1 pGal). continual variation of the gravity readings with time is known as ‘drift’ and is caused by (1) ambient environment changes of temperature and air pressure, and (2) slow creep of the gravimeter springs. The drift of the gravimeter readings with time also includes, in part, the tidal changes, i.e., the cyclic changes in gravity on the earth’s surface, which are caused by the attractions of the sun and moon. The maximum rate of tidal variations is 0.5 g.u./h. Under normal operating condi- tions the effect of inherent instrumental drift is less than the tidal variation, but drift rates >1 g.u./h have been observed under extreme ambient environment changes. The usual method of correcting for the drift is to repeat the measurements at a base station at intervals of about one hour during which the drift is assumed to be linear. From such a drift curve the base reading corresponding to the time a particu- lar station was measured can be obtained. This base reading is subtracted from theAcquisition and correction of gravity data 21 reading at the station to obtain the gravity difference. For microgravity surveys the interval for repeat base readings may have to be kept <30 min depending on the required precision and the drift characteristics of the gravimeter. The value of the calibration constant for the scale division on every gravimeter is supplied by the makers, but as it can change with time due to elastic fatigue in the springs, intermittent checks on it are usually necessary. For checking the calibra- tion a convenient method is to read the instrument at the top and bottom ofa tower, or of a tall building. The measured gravity difference, Ag, will be 3.086h g.u. (Eq.(2.18)), where h is the elevation difference (in meters) between the two points of observation. 2.4.2 Survey procedures Location and spacing of stations One of the most important considerations in a gravity survey is the location and spacing of stations. Wherever possible the gravimeter stations are planned at the corners of a square grid, the grid length, s, depending primarily on the depth, h, of the geological feature to be located. An easily remembered rule is that s should be (“1 fleyy2,) (2.21a) ijk #12 where the function fis given by $e,¥,2,)=Go[x Infy V2 FZ ]+yln|(x+r)/ VF +2]+2tan“xyjzr)} (2.21) with r=(x?+y?2+z2)!?_ The above formula is in a form that is convenient for computer programing. Amajor problem in microgravity surveys is the application of terrain corrections which demand very precise determinations of elevations (with a relative accuracy of +4 mm) nearby the stations. The correction for terrain effects within 50 m of a station can be significant and must be carefully considered. The effects due to more distant terrain features (some hundreds of meters or more away), while possibly quite large in magnitude (caused by large mountains or valleys), will influence each survey station value to an equal extent. Hence the relative gravity effects caused by these distant terrain features need not be considered. Butler (1980) describes the procedures for accomplishing the terrain corrections. 2.4.4 Free-air and Bouguer anomalies It is customary to speak of gravity anomaly as the difference between the observed value of g at some point and a theoretical value predicted by the GRS-1967 formula26 Gravity surveying (Eq.(2.16)) for the same point. The observed gravity value is determined by relative gravity measurements (made by gravimeters) with reference to certain primary base stations where absolute measurements have been made previously. If g,,, is the observed value on the land surface at height h, it must be corrected to sea-level before it can be compared to g,, the theoretical value for the same latitude. If only the free-air correction, C,, has been applied, we define the ‘free-air’ anomaly, Ag,, as Age Bors +Ce-By (2.22) Occasionally, the gravity data are presented as a ‘free-air’ anomaly map without taking into consideration the topography above sea-level. This usually occurs when maps of oceans and continental shelves are drawn. Any free-air anomaly map from land observations will show a strong correlation with local topography, because the gravity effects of topographic masses are not considered in calculation of Ag,. In small-scale gravity studies, such as those made for mapping local structures related to environmental, geotechnical, or mineral prospecting problems, the reduction of data is usually made with reference to any convenient base point to which an arbitrary gravity value is given. To the observed gravity differences, Ag,,, (measured values at the survey points minus the value at the base point), the neces- sary corrections (described in the previous section) are then applied. The relative Bouguer anomaly, Ag,, with reference to the base station is then expressed as Ag,=Ag,,,+C,+C,—C,+C, (2.23) The correction terms in the above equation correspond to a station south of the reference latitude of the base station (in the northern hemisphere) and above the datum level. Note that the signs of C, and C, change when the station is below the datum level. The following example will illustrate the computation of the relative Bouguer anomaly. Let us assume: (1) the survey locality is at a latitude of 22°S; (2) Ag,,, ata station (relative to base) is 10.5 g.u.; (3) the station is located 120 m south of the base and its elevation is 2.40 m over the base level; (4) the density of rock material above datum (base level) is 2000 kg/m3; (5) the terrain correction at station is computed to be 0.4 g.u. Then, using Eq.(2.23) with appropriate signs of the corrections, Ag=15.6 gu. 2.4.5 In-situ determination of density Application of both the Bouguer correction and the terrain correction requires a prior estimate of the density of the rock material within the range of elevation differences in the area surveyed. Direct sampling of surface rocks over a large area is a formidable task, and the density estimate so made may not be representative of the rock material lying at moderate depths.Acquisition and correction of gravity data 27 Ag (mgal) : ee gate eee eee ravity profiles , for various OL densities wo 9 S 7 L 460 = Sy Topography a — a ¢ r € . : ’ a Ny ( ’ & eel” L450 4 eee EES HSS UE eae 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Distance (m) Fig. 2.8 A gravimetric method for measuring the surface density. The criterion for the actual density is that which gives a reduced gravity profile with no visible correlation with the topography. The indicated density of 1.9 g/cm? (1900 kg/m’) is an average value for the topographic feature sampled. (Modified from Nettleton, 1971.) Various field methods have been devised for the determination of density in situ. One of the methods is to run a ‘density profile’ with a gravimeter. This method con- sists of measuring a line of closely spaced stations over a topographic feature repre- senting a comparatively large mass of surface material. The observed gravity values are then reduced with different density values to a base level. The criterion for the actual density (Fig. 2.8) is that which gives the smoothest reduced curve for the Bouguer anomaly and shows no visible (direct or inverse) correlation with the topography. As an alternative to the graphical approach, the criterion for minimum correlation can be formulated mathematically to obtain density by least-squares adjustment (Parasnis, 1951). A tool often employed for direct measurement of formation densities in bore- holes is the ‘density logger’, which utilizes the principle of gamma-ray scattering. The use of this tool is described in Section 11.3.3. Only a borehole gravimeter could give density information from a greater volume of rock than is possible with a density logger. However, because of high operational costs the use of borehole gravimetry is restricted to special problems of hydrocarbon production and reser- voir studies.28 Gravity surveying 2.5 Analysis and interpretation of gravity data 2.5.1 General considerations In common practice, gravity and other potential field data are acquired along a series of parallel profiles. Thus the data can be viewed and interpreted either as profiles or, in two directions, as a map of isoanomaly contours. For large data-sets, machine contouring is very common because gridding, a necessary step in machine contouring, provides data in a form that is suitable for further processing by various techniques to isolate and enhance anomalies of geological interest. Presentation and analysis of data in profile form has some specific advantages. Profile interpretation is theoretically valid if the anomaly sources strike per- pendicular to the profile and are two-dimensional (2-D). In practice, the 2-D approximation is considered reasonable when anomaly contours are elongated in one horizontal direction so that the anomaly length in this direction is at least two times the anomaly width. Profile interpretation is also used as an initial step to 3-D modeling of isoanomaly contours in map form. The objective of gravity interpretation is to deduce from the various character- istics (in particular the amplitude, shape, and sharpness) of the anomaly the loca- tion and form of the subsurface structure which produces the gravity disturbance. For this purpose, the data have to be analyzed by suitable interpretation techniques. It is important for all who use gravity data - and in particular for geologists and engineers - to realize that despite the best use of available techniques interpreta- tion is not a clear-cut process which can be relied upon for a unique answer. The problem of magnetic interpretation (Sections 3.6 and 3.7) is essentially the same and, therefore, the following discussion also applies to magnetic anomalies. 2.5.2 Ambiguity in gravity interpretation There are two characteristics of the gravity field which make a unique interpreta- tion almost impossible. The first is that the measured value of g, and, therefore, also the reduced anomaly, Ag,, at any station represents the superimposed effect of many mass distributions at various depths. A Bouguer gravity map is almost never a simple picture of a single isolated anomaly, but is practically always a combination of relatively ‘sharp’ and ‘broad’ anomalies whose ‘causative’ sources are at different depths. Interpretation can, therefore, only proceed after the contributions of the different sources are isolated by various techniques which will be described later. No matter what technique is employed, the anomaly separation process suffers from the axiomatic fact that a ‘sum’ cannot be resolved into ‘parts’ without the imposition of restricting conditions. The second, and more serious, difficulty in gravity interpretation is that of deter- mining the ‘source’ from the ‘effect’, which is the inverse problem of the potentialAnalysis and interpretation of gravity data 29 Ag Distance 4 3 Fig. 2.9 Ambiguity in gravity interpretation. The given gravity anomaly can be explained by a variety (theoretically an infinite number) of mass distributions at different depths. field theory. For a given mass distribution, it is fairly easy to determine its gravity effect, but the inverse problem has no unique solution. For a given distribution of gravity anomaly on (or above) the earth’s surface, an infinite number of mass distri- butions can be found which would produce the same anomaly. Figure 2.9 shows how a given gravity anomaly could be explained by any of the alternative mass distributions (cases 1-3) showing a fixed density contrast, Ap, with respect to the surrounding material. The figure also illustrates another type of ambiguity arising from lack of information about the density contrast. If we assume that the anomaly results from a body of spherical shape, various interpretations of the size {i.e., volume, V) of the sphere are possible, although the anomalous mass (product VAp) can be determined uniquely. This type of ambiguity cannot be resolved unless Ap is reliably known. The above considerations, at first sight, may present a rather pessimistic picture of the interpretation problem. However, in actual practice the situation is not nearly so hopeless. Geological intuition coupled with logic will often rule out solu- tions of many forms, and other information, such as the probable density or depth of the target feature, may further narrow down the range of likely possibilities. Furthermore, if any independent control, such as that obtained from drilling logs or seismic data, is available, the number of variables can be reduced to the point where the final solution may have practical validity. 2.5.3 Isolation of anomalies: regionals and residuals The gravity anomalies of relatively small geological features located at relatively shallow depths are usually of short wavelength and perceptible only over small dis- tances. In contrast, the effects of large-scale geological structures located at greater30 Gravity surveying a Distance Fig. 2.10 Graphical method of separation of the regional and local anomalies. The regional effect has been sketched by free-hand (dashed lines) and on subtracting it from the observed anomaly, either on the contour map (upper) or on the profile (lower), the local anomaly (the so-called residual) can be obtained. depths are perceptible over larger distances as anomalies of relatively large wave- length. The latter are called ‘regional’ anomalies, whereas the former are referred to as ‘local’ anomalies. The definition of ‘residual’ anomaly is not very precise, but perhaps can best be defined as the anomaly of geological interest in a particular study. The separation of the residual anomaly of a potential field distribution is a critical problem which controls the accuracy of the interpretation process. In a gravity map of a small area, the regional trend may appear as a uniform vari- ation represented by nearly parallel, evenly spaced contours. A local anomaly, which ordinarily would be indicated by closed contours, appears as a ‘nose’ on the regional anomaly field (Fig. 2.10). The anomaly separation procedure may consist of the removal of the regional effect by either of two methods: (1) graphical smoothing, either on the contour map or on profiles; (2) an analytical process applied to an array of values, usually on a regular grid. In the graphical approach, the value of the visually smoothed regional field on the profile can be subtracted from the original Bouguer anomaly at the point to give the ‘residual’ anomaly (Fig. 2.10 (lower). While the process is entirely empirical and subjective, it can, if skillfully applied, lead to a very effective isolation of anomalies. A degree of control can be imparted to this subjective process by establishing a network of intersecting profiles and requiring the smoothed regionals to be equal at the intersecting points.Analysis and interpretation of gravity data 31 The analytical approach is based on suitably averaging the anomaly data at equal distance around a station to obtain the regional (smoothed) value and subtracting this from the Bouguer value of the station to get the residual. The gravity data are usually interpolated onto a regular grid, and the values averaged are those on the circumference of a circle centered at the station. The circle may be thought of as a band-pass filter, which is reasonably effective at isolating anomalies whose width is of the same order as its diameter. In practice it is adequate to select four to eight values to be averaged. The residual gravity map can be prepared by repeating the above process at each point of the grid. Grid-residualizing techniques are especially adaptable to computer processing. Regionals are sometimes obtained by polynomial fitting. Here the observed data are used to compute, usually by least squares, the mathematical surface giving the closest fit to the gravity field. In practice the surface is expressed as a two- dimensional polynomial of low order. For example, a second-order polynomial may be used to express the regional field surface as Ag(x,y)=Ax?+By?+Cxy+Dx+Ey+F (2.24) The coefficients A,B,...,F are determined by a least-squares adjustment. The residu- als are then obtained by subtracting the polynomial values from the observed gravity values. The analytical techniques appear to be free from subjective bias, but the process is too mechanical, and known geological factors, which might affect the interpreta- tion, may not be taken into consideration. Whatever the technique, the funda- mental premise of the isolation process is that the residual anomaly retains significant character of the anomaly source of geological interest, and can be directly used for quantitative analysis and modeling. 2.5.4 Enhancement of anomalies The fundamental objective of various enhancement techniques is to accentuate par- ticular characteristics of anomalies to increase their perceptibility. The ‘enhanced’ potential field anomalies are primarily used in qualitative visual analysis to infer approximate shape outlines of anomaly sources of interest which may be localized features at relatively shallow depths, or large-scale structures at greater depths. Various enhancement techniques that are commonly used involve selective filtering of anomaly field data. Digital filtering When dealing with large data-sets, digital filtering is more efficiently accomplished in the wave number domain. The mathematical formulation of the filtering opera- tion can be summarized in the following.