Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42
DOI 10.1007/s00254-007-0790-y
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Combined analysis of electrical resistivity and geotechnical
SPT blow counts for the safety assessment of fill dam
Seokhoon Oh Æ Chang-Guk Sun
Received: 22 November 2006 / Accepted: 30 April 2007 / Published online: 23 May 2007

Springer-Verlag 2007
Abstract Electrical resistivity survey and the geotechnical
SPT blow counts (N value) method were simultaneously
analyzed to investigate the stability of a center-core type
earth-fill dam against the seepage phenomenon. The cou-
pling of these heterogeneous field methods provided a
chance to understand the status of underground material by
comparing the geophysical and geotechnical view. The
analysis shows that the zones with low resistivity value
generally have low N value, which means low stiffness.
However, some zones with a high resistivity pattern are not
accompanied by an increase of its N value, and are even
showing a lower N value. These results imply that one
should be careful to directly correlate resistivity value with
the real status of the core material of a fill dam. And a
highly resistive zone may be in poor status due to the effect
of increase of resistivity value as a result of the piping
condition. Additional laboratory tests show that there is a
deficiency of fine soil particles believed as the clay at the
troubled region, which means an increase in resistivity
value. Therefore, multiple explorations should be planned
to reduce the uncertainty in application of geophysical
methods to dam safety evaluation in order to compensate
the resistivity information of core material.
S. Oh (&)
Department of Geosystem Engineering,
Kangwon National University, Hyoja 2-dong,
Chuncheon, Kangwon 200-701, South Korea
e-mail: gimul@kangwon.ac.kr
C.-G. Sun
Earthquake Research Center,
Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources,
30, Gajeong-dong, Yuseong-gu,
Daejeon 305-350, South Korea
e-mail: pungsun@kigam.re.kr
Keywords Fill dam
Electrical resistivity
SPT

N value
Piping
Introduction
A number of researches have shown that it is very
important to understand the seepage condition and homo-
geneity of the core material, which plays a significant role
in shielding the leakage of reservoir water, in order to
determine the safety of a fill dam. Geophysical survey
methods have been widely adopted as a key element to
investigate the condition of core material (Titov et al. 2002;
Panthulu et al. 2001), especially electrical resistivity
method has been chiefly applied because of the contrast
between the electrical properties of water and soil (Panth-
ulu et al. 2001). The application of electrical survey as-
sumed that the water content in core material has a close
positive correlation with the electrical conductivity. Based
on this assumption, to find weak zones meant to find a zone
of low resistivity. However, this assumption might be
wrong in some cases of earth fill dams (Bergstrom 1998;
Sjodahl et al. 2002).
When considering the structure and function of the
dam, the core zone naturally shows low resistivity values.
That is, the role of the core material of a fill dam is to
retain water in order to prevent fine-grained materials from
being swept away by slowing down the flow of seepage.
Hence, it is natural that the core material shows proper low
values of resistivity according to the reservoir level.
Instead, a highly resistive zone may imply the separation
of the fine soil particles such as clay which have low
resistivity value, within the core zone, leading to an in-
crease in resistivity, and finally a piping condition, which
is fatal to a fill dam.
123
32
We try to make an interpretation by combining resis-
tivity and geotechnical standard penetration test (SPT)
blow counts, named the N value, for the safety assessment
of a fill dam. The SPT is known as an effective and direct
method to analyze the soil stiffness. If the resistivity has
positive correlation with the soil stiffness, then it should
also show the same relation tendency with the N value.
In this study, we compare the N value from SPT and the
resistivity information to interpret how the resistivity pat-
tern is related with the subsurface soil condition. In addi-
tion, we also present the grain size distribution along each
borehole.
Electrical resistivity survey and borehole drilling
investigation for fill dam
By applying the electrical resistivity survey to investigate
the condition of the core material, one can expect to get
information on the variation of the electrical anomaly
pattern due to the saturation of the soil. Generally, resis-
tivity value decreases as the material is saturated with
water. This phenomenon may make some confused inter-
pretation in safety evaluation of earth fill dam. That is, it
may be possible to think that damaged region of core
material in fill dam tends to show low resistivity value.
However, the clay contents as well as degree of water
content are also proportional to the electrical conductivity.
Therefore, here we propose another contrary possibility
to interpret the troubled zone of earth fill dam. For exam-
ple, when the fine clay particles that shield the leakage are
thrown away, the resistivity values may increase in spite of
the condition of other factors. Especially, if the core
material above the elevation of reservoir level shows high
resistivity values, it may indicate serious condition of
material. This inference is based on the following
assumption. That is, the proper core material tends to have
very low permeability to retain water in soil for a long
time. However, poor or damaged material would be highly
permeable and have some porous zones so that it cannot
retain water in the soil. Even when the core material is
located below the water level, the resistivity values may
increase when the poor material cannot hold the fine par-
ticles (Bergstrom 1998; Sjodahl et al. 2002). The core
resistivity of Swedish case in Table 1 was estimated from
existing monitoring data from two Swedish dams (Jo-
hansson and Dahlin 2000) together with laboratory resis-
tivity measurements of similar materials (Bergstrom 1998).
And for comparison, we also include the resistivity values
obtained at this dam. The resistivity value for each zone for
this dam in Table 1 are estimated results, because the
resistivity value was obtained by inversion of dipole–di-
pole resistivity data.
123
Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42
Table 1 Electrical material properties in Swedish (After Sjodahl
et al. 2002) and studied target dam
Material Resistivity (Ohm-m)
Swedish dam Target dam
Core 300 100–200
Filter 2,000 ?
Upstream fill 4,000 ?
Downstream fill 20,000 700–1,000
Reservoir water 550 70–80
Damaged core 1500 >400 (?)
The resistivity value of material of target dam is inferred from the
inversion result except reservoir water. No data were available at the
filter and upstream fill region. The value for reservoir water is esti-
mated from the average of fresh water in Korea
Electrical resistivity survey
The target dam was reported to have experienced sliding in
the right downstream slope, and the seepage water
including much of clay is infiltrated out through the spill-
way wall. The objective of survey was to delineate the
weak zone of the embankment and estimate the status of
core zone. Electrical resistivity survey was selected to infer
the internal status of the embankment, and the locations of
boreholes were decided based on the survey result.
The target dam is an earth fill type covered with soil all
over the embankment, so the ground connection of elec-
trode for all profiles was very good. The location of the
survey profile is indicated in Fig. 1. The plane view and
cross section of the dam is shown in Figs. 1, 2, respec-
tively. Figure 1 also displays the location of the borehole
sites. In total, six resistivity profiles were explored as
shown in Fig. 1; two profiles at the crest, three profiles at
the downstream slope, and one profile at the boundary of
the embankment next to the spillway. The configurations
for each resistivity profiles are given in Table 2. For two
profiles on the crest, we thought that the resistivity infor-
mation on the crest is the most important for interpretation
of the status of core, so we made two lines of survey on the
crest for double check of data quality and confidence of
interpretation. But the number of level (n) is different (DC-
1 has 12 levels, and DC-2 has 10 levels) to show different
interpretation depth. The adjacent two lines apart by 8 m
show very similar resistivity values. Figure 3 shows the
result of electrical resistivity survey performed at the
center-core type earth dam. Measured data were inverted to
resistivity image by a 2.5-dimensional inversion algorithm
based on finite element modeling and active constraint
balancing (ACB) algorithm (Yi et al. 2003). The inversion
model blocks are also shown in Fig. 3. RMS error for each
profile is also displayed in Table 2. The RMS error of DC-
1, DC-2 DC-6 is relatively larger than that of the rest of the
Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42
Fig. 1 Plane view of target
dam. Locations of borehole sites
and resistivity profiles are also
displayed
Fig. 2 Cross section of target dam from the design drawing. The depth of each borehole is also displayed. Earth fill material is composed of sand
and gravel, and the center core is clay
profile due to the complex structure below the lines. A
drainage pipe that goes through the center–bottom of the
embankment is delineated with low resistive zone in the
inversion section. The pipe was made by resistive concrete,
but it seems that soil separation phenomenon around the
pipe boundary makes the material saturated with water and
clay, and it results in low resistivity pattern. Except this
pipe, any other artificial noise source is absent.
Here, we should mention that all of the resultant infor-
mation about resistivity value for target dam was from the
33
2.5-dimensional inversion algorithm. That is, we only have
indirect electrical information for the dam material and
logging data. However, this limited condition for surveying
is seldom the case, and will not kept off to find correlation
between resistivity and SPT N value. And ideally, we
should adopt the full three-dimensional inversion technique
to completely reflect the dam geometry. But practical
condition was to use 2.5-dimensional approach, and this
three- dimensional effect seems to increase the resistivity
value by 20–30% (Sjodahl et al. 2002).
123
34 Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42

Table 2 Configuration for each resistivity profiles material shows resistivity values in the range of 100–
Type of resistivity array Dipole–dipole
200 Ohm-m (Song et al. 2005), and most of the blocks in
Fig. 3 display values within this range. The highly resistive
Used equipment Sting R1-IP, stainless electrode zone observed at the shallow depth seems to reflect the
Profile No. of No. of Dipole Profile RMS trace of the past repairs by cement grouting, and it is also
name station level (n) spacing length error observed in the borehole test. The profile DC-5 shows the
DC-1 31 12 7m 210 m 0.192 resistivity value of downstream fill material. And the pro-
DC-2 31 10 7m 210 m 0.290
file DC-6, along the spillway, displays more or less high
DC-3 31 10 5m 150 m 0.069
resistivity value about 1,500 Ohm-m, thought as influence
DC-4 21 10 5m 100 m 0.039
by void space of adjacent spillway.
DC-5 21 10 3m 60 m 0.080
Borehole drilling investigation
DC-6 21 10 4m 80 m 0.210
The location for each profile name is displayed in Fig. 2 As part of the safety evaluation of the existing dam, five
borehole-drilling investigations, in which water or drilling
As shown in Fig. 3, the basement rock appeared con- fluids were not used to avoid hydraulic fracturing in the
tinuously as highly resistive zone at both sides of the dam core, were also performed together with the electrical
abutments, and this tendency coincides well with the resistivity surveys at the earth dam. For determining the
borehole test in Fig. 4. And other profiles, DC-3 and DC-4, conditions and characteristics of dam materials, a SPT at
extended normal to the dam axis, are also showing con- 1.5-m depth intervals was also conducted during the
tinuous resistivity pattern with that of the crest result, DC- borehole drilling, and disturbed and undisturbed soil sam-
1. It means that 2.5-dimensional interpretation has a good ples were continuously obtained using the single tube core
reason. The low resistivity values observed at the center– barrel together with the split-spoon sampler of SPT and the
bottom of the section are believed to be due to a conduit thin-wall open-tube (Shelby tube) sampler, respectively.
that appeared in the plan, and it was confirmed by the The representative section of the earth dam is presented
borehole test. Generally, it is known that proper core in Fig. 2, and the borehole drillings contain three holes on

Fig. 3 Result of resistivity survey performed on an earth fill dam. The borehole sites and location of the DC survey profiles are also displayed as
in Fig. 1. Exact depth of each borehole is appeared in Fig. 2

123
Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42
the crest and two holes on the berm. Figure 1 shows the
plane view of the dam and the locations of five boreholes.
The results of borehole-drilling investigations for the earth
dam indicated that the core and filter were composed of
silty clay and sand, respectively, and the earth fill was
comprised mainly of gravel and boulder near the surface
and silty sand in the deeper zone. In addition, the sub base
between the crest and core consisted of silty sand with
gravel. The core materials were not saturated but usually
moist or wet. Ground water levels and corresponding
seepage lines were examined in the boreholes using the
water level sensor, and any seepage or leakage was not
observed at the end of drilling, with the exception of the
bottoms of several boreholes. Based on the monitoring of
ground water levels in the boreholes, the dam has a gen-
erally satisfactory performance for seepage cutoff. How-
ever, some questionable soft materials were observed
locally in the upper zone of the core, although the stiffness
of core materials usually increased with depth.
According to the analysis of all investigated borehole
logs in the target dam, the current dam geometry and the
Fig. 4 Front view of stratifications of boreholes and basement of target dam. The basement line and material properties were inferred from
borehole test and samples
35
corresponding bedrock distribution were consistent with
the prior design condition. The geologic stratifications, for
which the dam crest is assumed as the ground surface, and
the bedrock geometry are illustrated in Fig. 4. The drillings
of BH-3 at left side on crest and BH-4 at right side on berm
were advanced to a depth lower than the bedrock (hard
rock) level. On the other hand, for both BH-1and BH-2,
and for BH-5, the drillings were finished in the dam core
and the earth fill, respectively. The core is originally dis-
tributed to a depth of about 1.0 m on the center of crest, but
in this study, the core materials were investigated from a
depth of about 7.5 m because the borehole drillings on the
crest were carried out on the edges adjacent to the down
slope.
Standard penetration test
Among various site investigation techniques for estimating
the geologic and geotechnical conditions and characteris-
tics, the classic borehole drilling investigation has been
123
36
known as the most direct and unbiased technique. Vertical
drillings from the ground surface are general for obtaining
geologic stratifications, whereas the inclined or horizontal
drillings are sometimes executed specially in tunnels and
slopes. In general, while the vertical drilling is used for
investigation of the design and performance evaluation of
the earth structures and structural foundations, the SPT was
additionally executed to determine the soil conditions and
obtain the soil samples. Here, we would like to present the
geotechnical SPT method and regulation for geophysical
application and interpretation.
The SPT, which was developed around 1925, is a well-
established and unsophisticated method and currently one
of the most popular techniques for evaluating the geo-
technical characteristics of soils to weather rock all over
the world (Bowles 1996). More exactly, the SPT is a type
of in situ testing method and is conducted between upper
and lower vertical drillings or advances in a borehole
according to ASTM D 1586 (ASTM 2002).
For the SPT, a split-spoon sampler (5.1 cm, outside
diameter and 3.5 cm, inside diameter) is driven a total dis-
tance of 45 cm from the bottom of a pre-bored hole into the
soil by means of a 63.5 kg hammer falling free from a height
of 76 cm above the ground surface. The number of blows
needed to drive the sampler 15 cm increments into the soil (a
third of total penetration distance) is recorded and the sum of
the number of blows required for the second and third 15 cm
of penetration is termed the ‘N value’ (SPT blow counts, or
standard penetration resistance), from which soil conditions
concerning the degree of compactness or the stiffness can be
easily determined in field. The first 15-cm penetration, which
tends to reflect disturbed material remaining in the hole from
the removal of the drilling and insertion of the sampler, is
considered to be the seating drive, and the last 30 cm pen-
etration is regarded as the drive into the undisturbed ground.
Also, soil samples were recovered using the sampler and
subsurface conditions were examined from the obtained
samples, which were taken to the laboratory for soil analysis
and testing. Besides roughly determining soil conditions and
obtaining soil samples in the field, the SPT provides several
useful correlations of soil properties. For example, the rel-
ative density and friction angle of sandy soils, the consis-
tency and shear strength of clayey soils, and the deformation
moduli of soils can often be estimated from the existing
correlations between N value and soil properties (Kulhawy
and Mayne 1990). The SPT is commonly performed at 1.5-m
depth intervals or at the changed soil stratification. The blow
count for penetrating 30 cm from the SPT is generally
recorded as ‘N’ (or ‘N/30’). When the sampler is driven
less than full test penetration of 45 cm, for instance, in case
of stiff soils and weathered rock, the 50 blow counts
(common in Korea) resulted in a penetration of specified
thickness (T; in cm units) is recorded as a ratio of ‘50/T’.
123
Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42
Correction of N value from SPT
The SPT is subject to a large number of variables or factors
that affect the test results represented as an N value. Some
of these factors include the rod length and cross section, the
type of anvil (lowner guide for drop hammer), the blow
rate, the technique of the operator, the alignment of the
hammer, the use of liners (installed inside the sampler to
contain sample) or borehole fluid, the borehole diameter,
and the type of hammer. Aggour and Radding (2001)
indicated that the hammer type among all of the docu-
mented variables is the most influential factor in the N
value, due to the variability in energy delivered to the drill
rods. Besides the influence of these variables that are re-
lated to field-testing procedures, the SPT N value is sig-
nificantly affected by the effective overburden pressure
(Liao and Whitman 1986). Consequently, the measured N
value must be corrected considering these field-testing
circumstances, and then the corrected N value can be used
for evaluating soil characteristics.
The correction of the N value has been studied over
several decades by a number of researchers (Aggour and
Radding 2001; Kulhawy and Mayne 1990). In particular,
Skempton (1986) reviewed SPT calibration data from the
US, the UK, Japan, and China, and suggested correction
factors based on standard practices in these countries. From
the several recent studies, it has been suggested that the
SPT be standardized to some energy ratio, which depends
mainly on the hammer type in situ. Although the standard
energy ratio has been suggested as 50–70% (Bowles 1996),
in this study, the standard energy ratio of 60%, which is the
average of 50 and 70%, was adopted for the correction of
energy efficiency in accordance with that presented by
Skempton (1986). On the basis of the correction factors
(Skempton 1986) given in Table 3, the N value corrected
for field procedures can be computed by
N60 ¼ CER CB CS CR N ð1Þ
where N60 and N are the N values corrected for field pro-
cedures to the standard energy ratio of 60% and the N value
measured from the SPT in field, respectively; and CER, CB,
CS, and CR are correction factors for energy ratio, borehole
diameter, sampling method, and rod length (Table 4).
As stated above, the SPT N value also varies with stress
level, which is roughly proportional to the testing depth. In
the ground condition with a constant density, the N value
measured at a deeper depth will be greater than that at a
shallower depth, and this trend is especially prominent in
sandy soils rather than clayey soils. Thus, overburden stress
correction factors are used to provide a consistent point of
reference, and the N value corrected for overburden stress
together with field procedures can be obtained by
Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42 37

Table 3 The SPT correction factors for field procedures For the earth dam in this study, the dam materials were
Category Correction Field variables Correction value
mostly composed of silty soils shown in Fig. 5, thus Eq. (3)
term for fine sands was used to compute the correction factor,
CN, for the effective overburden stress.
Energy ratio CER Safety hammer 0.90
Donut hammer 0.75 N value in fill dam
Borehole CB 65–115 mm 1.00
diameter 150 mm 1.05 The SPT was carried out from 1.5 m below the surface
200 mm 1.15 down to the bottom of boreholes in BH-1, BH-2 and BH-
Sampling CS Sampler with liner 1.00 5, and to the weathered rock in BH-3 and BH-4. The N
method Sampler without 1.20 value obtained from the SPT at five borehole sites on the
liner
target dam is summarized in Table 5. As depicted in
Rod length CR >10 m 1.00 Fig. 4, because of the concrete cover of the water pipe,
6–10 m 0.95 the borehole drilling at BH-2 was terminated at 22.5 m,
4–6 m 0.85 and the last SPT in the borehole was performed at
3–4 m 0.75 19.5 m. For BH-4, which shows weathered rock distrib-
uted from 3.2 to 3.8 m in depth, the SPT was conducted
merely at two testing depths of 1.5 and 3.0 m. In BH-1,
Table 4 Consistency of saturated cohesive soil according to the BH-3, BH-4, and BH-5 the N values over 50 blow counts
corrected N value (after Bowles 1996)
were obtained at one or two testing depths. The N value
Consistency (N1)60 (N1)70 greater than 50 at a 3.0 m depth in BH-1 is caused by
Very soft 0–2 0–2
gravel in the sub base, and the N values over 50 at 21.0
and 27.0 m depths in BH-3 indicate that the lower core
Soft 3–6 3–5
materials are very stiff for this target dam. The large N
Medium 7–10 6–9
value at 3.0 m depth in BH-4 results from a stiff soil
Stiff 11–19 10–16
layer between the earth fill and weathered rock, and the
Very stiff 20–35 17–30
large N value at 18.0 m depth in BH-5 indicates that silty
Hard >35 >30
sands in the lower earth fill are dense.
To evaluate the soil material conditions and character-
ðN1 Þ60 ¼ CN N60 ð2Þ istics of the target earth dam using the N value from SPT,
first the N value measured in the field should be corrected
where (N1)60 is N60 value corrected to a reference to N60 with the consideration of field procedures using Eq.
overburden stress of one atmosphere, and CN is (1). Then, to correct for effective overburden stress, the
correction factor for overburden stress. Three expressions correction factor, CN, at a given test depth should be
to obtain the overburden stress correction factors, CN, for determined by the relevance of Eqs. (3), (4) or (5), taking
different sand conditions, were proposed by Skempton into account soil conditions such as fine, coarse and over
(1986). The CN for fine sands can be calculated as consolidated sands. In this paper Eq. (3) was used for fine
sands. With the determined CN, the corrected N value,
2 (N1)60, can be computed by Eq. (2) for the evaluation of
CN ¼ ð3Þ
1 þ r0v =pa subsurface soil characteristics. For the SPT performed in
the target dam, a donut hammer was adopted for pene-
where r¢v and pa are the effective overburden stress at test trating a split-spoon sampler without liners at each test
depth and the reference overburden stress (100 kPa or depth in all 5 NX-sized (76 mm in diameter) boreholes.
1.0 kg/cm2), respectively. The CN for coarse sands can be The anvil, which the drop hammer strikes downward, was
also computed by installed 1.5 m above the ground surface, and the rod
length at each test depth was obtained as the sum of the test
3 depth and the height of anvil. Based on these testing con-
CN ¼ ð4Þ
2 þ r0v =pa ditional procedures in this study, the correction factors
were determined from Table 3 as 0.75 for CER, 1.00 for CB,
And the CN for over consolidated sands can be obtained by
1.20 for CS, and 0.75–1.00 according to test depth for CR.
Moreover, the CN for effective overburden stress was cal-
1:7
CN ¼ ð5Þ culated using the unit weight of undisturbed soil samples
0:7 þ r0v =pa obtained in the boreholes, and ranged about from 1.59 near

123
38 Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42

the surface to 0.34 at a lower depth. The corrected N values Table 5 N value measured from SPT
of N60 and (N1)60 in all five boreholes were computed using Depth (m) N value measured in field (Blow countsa)
the determined correction factors, and were plotted versus
the depth in Fig. 5. The measured N values were also BH-1 BH-2 BH-3 BH-4 BH-5
plotted in Fig. 5 for the purpose of comparisons. The N 1.5 20 14 9 7 4
values for BH-4, which have only two test depths, were 3.0 50/28 12 10 50/2 6
inserted in the graph for BH-5. The measured N value of 4.5 25 12 20 – 6
‘50/28’ at 3.0 m depth in BH-1 (Fig. 5a) was converted 6.0 23 21 20 – 9
linearly into the N value of ‘58’ for penetrating 30 cm. The 7.5 22 31 28 – 13
other N values of over 50 blow counts in BH-3, BH-4 and 9.0 10 20 25 – 11
BH-5 were not converted because their thin penetrations 10.5 13 11 24 – 12
may induce significant errors in the process of conversion, 12.0 13 19 19 – 23
and those values were not corrected for the effective 13.5 5 24 27 – 14
overburden stress as well as the SPT procedures.
15.0 12 27 29 – 29
16.5 22 27 23 – 17
18.0 34 29 18 – 50/8
19.5 – 19 26 – 12
(a) N Value (Blow Counts) (b) N Value (Blow Counts)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 21.0 – – 50/20 – –
0.0 0.0
22.5 – – 32 – –
3.0 3.0 24.0 – – 25 – –
25.5 – – 27 – –
6.0 6.0
27.0 – – 50/9 – –
Depth from Ground Surface (m)
Depth from Ground Surface (m)

9.0 9.0 a
Marked italic N values represent a ratio of 50 blow counts per
12.0 12.0 penetration thickness (T) expressed as 50/T

15.0 15.0

18.0 18.0 According to another corrected N value, the (N1)70

21.0 21.0
which is equal to ‘(60/70) · (N1)60’, summarized by
Measured N Measured N Bowles (1996), the consistency of the saturated cohesive
24.0 24.0
N60 N60 soils containing the core material, which may indicate the
(N1)60 (N1)60
27.0 27.0 material integrity, can be empirically characterized into six
categories as presented in Table 4.
N Value (Blow Counts) N Value (Blow Counts)
(c) 30 40 50 60
(d) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0 10 20
0.0 0.0
Measured N
3.0 N60 3.0
(N1)60 Combined interpretation of the electrical resistivity
6.0 6.0 Non-corrected N
value measured and N value
into 50/2 (in BH-4)
Depth from Ground Surface (m)
Depth from Ground Surface (m)

9.0 9.0
The resistivity and N values from SPT for each borehole
12.0 12.0 Non-corrected N
value measured are compared in Fig. 6 to look into their relation. The
into 50/8 (in BH-5)
15.0 15.0 resistivity value for each depth is estimated from the pre-
Non-corrected N
value measured
vious inversion result. Although the inversion result pro-
18.0 18.0
into 50/20
vides true resistivity section, we are always careful to
21.0 21.0
Measured N (in BH-4)
N60 (in BH-4)
consider the limitation of the non-uniqueness and
Non-corrected N
(N1)60 (in BH-4) smoothing condition of inverted result. Because the drilling
Measured N (in BH-5)
24.0 value measured 24.0
into 50/9 N60 (in BH-5) was performed not at the central axis of the crest, but
(N1)60 (in BH-5)
27.0 27.0 eccentric to the downstream on the crest, the borehole
information for the core material did not appear at the early
Fig. 5 Measured and corrected N values with depth: a in BH-1, b in stage. Therefore, the zones that have no information for
BH-2, c in BH-3, d in BH-4 and BH-5. The corrected N values consist core material are not displayed in Fig. 6. For this reason,
of the N60 corrected for the test procedures and the (N1)60 corrected
for not only for the test procedures and but also for effective the depth of BH-1 starts from 7.5 m, BH-2 and BH-3 starts
overburden stress from 9.0 m.

123
Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42 39

The left column (three graphs) of Fig. 6 shows the (1986). The corrected N values in the right column are
in situ measured N values with the resistivity values and the corresponding more with the resistivity values than the
right column (three graphs) displays the corrected N values, in situ N values in the left column. Especially, the BH-1
(N1)60, which consider the SPT procedures in field as well and BH-3 show good correlations between the two
as the effective overburden stress in the case of fine sandy parameters, except at a depth of 9 m for the former and
soils among the three soil types proposed by Skempton 21 m for the latter. Generally, zones where resistivity

Measured N and Resistivity in BH-1 (N1) 60 and Resistivity in BH-1

40 350 16 350

35 14
Measured N value (Blow Counts)

300

CorrectedN value (Blow Counts)

300

Resistivity (Ohm-m)
Resistivity (Omh-m)
30 12
250 250
25 10
200 200
20 8
150 150
15 6
100 100
10 4
Measured N 50 Corrected N 50
5 2
Resistivity Resistivity
0 0 0 0
9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 16.5 18.0 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 16.5 18.0
Depth (m) Depth (m)

Measured N and Resistivity in BH-2 (N1) 60 and Resistivity in BH-2

35 600 25 450
Measured N value (Blow Counts)

400
CorrectedN value (Blow Counts)

30 500
20 350

Resistivity (Ohm-m)
Resistivity (Omh-m)

25
400 300
15
20 250
300
15 200
10
200 150
10
5 100
Measured N 100 Corrected N
5
Resistivity Resistivity
50

0 0 0 0
7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 16.5 18.0 19.5 7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 16.5 18.0 19.5
Depth (m) Depth (m)

Measured N and Resistivity in BH-3 (N1) 60 and Resistivity in BH-3

60 700 60 700
Measured N Corrected N
Measured N value (Blow Counts)

CorrectedN value (Blow Counts)

Resistivity 600 50 Resistivity 600

50
Resistivity (Ohm-m)
Resistivity (Omh-m)

500 500
40 40
400 400
30 30
300 300
20 20
200 200

10 10 100
100

0 0 0 0
7.5 9 10.5 12 13.5 15 16.5 18 19.5 21 22.5 24 25.5 27 7.5 9 10.5 12 13.5 15 16.5 18 19.5 21 22.5 24 25.5 27
Depth (m) Depth (m)

Fig. 6 SPT N Value versus Resistivity (Ohm-m) for each borehole. Left column displays the raw measured N value, while right column shows
the corrected N value (N1)60. The depth for comparison starts from that corresponding to the core part in each borehole

123
40 Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42

Fig. 7 Grain size distributions Sample No. 1 (Sandy Lean Clay); Depth of 12.5 m in BH-2; CL in USCS
and index properties of soil
Sample No. 2 (Sandy Fat Clay); Depth of 21.0 m in BH-2; CH in USCS
samples at depths of 12.5 and
21.0 m for BH-2. In the legend, Sieving Test Hydrometer Test
CH, CL, and USCS represent
Standard Sieve Number
clay of high plasticity, clay of
4 10 40 200
low plasticity, and unified soil 100
classification system,
respectively. The soil classes 82.7
are described according to grain
80

Percent Finer by Weight (%)

size below the graph. The grain
size distribution curves were
obtained from combining both 2
results of the sieving and 60
hydrometer test. The index
53.8
properties containing water
content, specific gravity, liquid Sample No. 1 No. 2
limit, and plasticity index are 40 1
listed together with the fine soils Water Content (%) 27.2 27.9
contents in the subset within the Specific Gravity 2.75 2.72
graph. Particularly, the fine soils 20 Liquid Limit (%) 32.7 50.9
content of sample no. 1 at Plasticity Index 13.9 25.2
12.5 m is much smaller than
Fine Soils Content (%) 53.8 82.7
that of sample no. 2 at 21.0 m
0
10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size (mm)
19.05 mm
Gravel Sand
Silt or Clay (Fine Soils)
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine

values are low, also show low N values, which means a
good correlation exists between the two parameters in the
region of low resistivity values.
However, some regions are showing different patterns
between the two parameters at some zones of high resis-
tivity values. That is, at a depth of 9.0 m for BH-1, 9.0–
13.0 m for BH-2, 7.5–9.0 m for BH-3, the N values do not
show any specific increase considering the high resistivity
values. Especially, resistivity and N values are negatively
correlated at depths of 9.0–13.5 m for BH-2. The result of
the borehole exploration in Fig. 4 shows that the moisture
level of this zone is not serious, which supports the resis-
tivity values. This phenomenon implies, in spite of the high
resistivity values, that the core material may not be in
proper condition. As the result of the previous study by
Swedish experts, shown in Table 1, it is known that the
damaged core material may show five to ten times higher
resistivity values than the normal condition of the material.
It seems as if the same pattern is present in our study; so
the piping formation may have caused this situation.
Figure 7 shows the results of laboratory tests including
grain size distributions and index properties of two soil
samples in BH-2. Figure 7 shows that fine soil particles are
significantly diminished at a depth of 12.5 m, compared
with lower zones. Exactly, the fine soil content at 12.5 m is
53.8%, whereas that at 21.0 m is 82.7%. This result also
supports the previous interpretation that the decrease of
fine particles like clayey or silty soils may cause an in-
crease of resistivity value, and results in the weakening of
the core material, which appeared as low N values. And it
may lead to the failure of the embankment due to piping
and excessive leakage through the core.
Generally, we find in this study that the resistivity pat-
tern seems to be deeply related with the moisture in the
drilled material. However, it is dangerous to say that zones
where the resistivity pattern is high means that the zone is
safe from the possibility of dam failure, and it is natural
that the core material shows low resistivity values, con-
sidering its role in center core type fill dam where it shields
against the leakage of the reservoir.
We can also notice that the correction of the N values
increase the correlation with the resistivity values at the
right side of the dam near BH-3 (see Fig. 6c). That is, some
abnormally high N values (24–30) considering low resis-
tivity values (70–140 Ohm-m) was changed to reasonable
range (8–11) after the N value correction.
Figure 8 plots all of the corrected N values with their
resistivity values. Seeing the degree of correlation from
Fig. 8, two groups are different from the general correla-
tion pattern, although most of the values are posi-
tively related to each other. For instance, when all of the
resistivity and N values are included, the coefficient of

123
Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42
Fig. 8 Overall comparison
between resistivity and
corrected N values, (N1)60, from
SPT. Marked points show zones
where the correlation deviates
from the general pattern. When
Resistivity (Ohm-m)
we remove some deviated
points that are believed to be
connected to weak zone, the
correlation ratio is improved
determination, R, is only 0.3843 (R2 = 0.1477). But
excluding the two groups of dotted-circle, the coefficient is
improved to 0.6867 (R2 = 0.4756) showing relatively good
relation. The previous interpretation was given for these
groups, namely that the upper group of Fig. 8 is suspected
to be in the piping condition with high resistivity and low N
value while the lower group is presumed to show low
resistivity values due to the filter zone or rock fill material.
However, it should be considered that this result is based
only on the biased and non-unique inversion result. And
because of the limitation of resolution and imperfectness of
inversion, overwhelming interpretation for the correlation
should be avoided.
Conclusion
The results of resistivity survey and borehole test are
interpreted together to infer the condition of the core
material of an earth dam against the piping or leakage
condition, and to understand the relation between the two
properties. According to the interpretation, the resistivity
and SPT N values show some correlated pattern as ex-
pected. That is, zones showing low resistivity value gen-
erally have low N value and vise versa.
However, we can get some distinctive feature from the
combined interpretation. That is, it may be erroneous to say
that the low resistivity value always means the unstable or
troubled status of material to shield against seepage if the
core zone shows proper range of resistivity value consid-
ering the retained water in the fine particles. Instead, we
can find some regions where the resistivity value is
somewhat high, but the SPT N value is very low, which
appeared as an anomalous group in Fig. 8. We propose
following mechanism to explain above phenomenon: In the
region where fine particles are deficient due to the piping
41
700 Correlation: Resistivity = 18.509 (N 1) 60
Correlation between Resistivity and (N 1) 60 from SPT
600
Number of data points used= 23
Average X ( Corrected N)= 11.47
500
Average Y (Resistivity) = 210.0
400 Residual sum of squares = 203243.42
Coef. of determination (R 2) = 0.4756
300
Residual mean square = 9238.34
200
BH-1
100 BH-a
BH-3
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Corrected N value, (N1) 60 (Blow Counts)
condition or other causes, the resistivity value may increase
because the clay component, which is the factor for
decreasing the resistivity value, would flow out, accom-
panied by a decrease of the N value. This result is different
from the typical interpretation for the resistivity survey for
the center core type fill dams. This assumption coincides
with well results from previous experimental tests (Berg-
strom 1998) and our sieve analysis of the material.
Thus, we conclude that the core material in the normal
condition to shield the seepage should show a proper low
resistivity value. Some regions with high resistivity value
may be in a serious condition. However, it is very difficult
to distinguish it with only resistivity survey whether the
material has a normal or a troubled condition, because
highly resistive regions are not always meaning troubled
zones. Of course, it is still a good way to notice the zone
with irregularly low or high resistivity value comparing
with that of near regions. Therefore, it is recommended to
apply various geophysical methods like SP (spontaneous
potential) survey, long-term resistivity monitoring or other
approaches to reduce the ambiguity of interpretation for
seepage condition.
Acknowledgments Suggestions and comments from Dr. Enzo
Rizzo, an anonymous reviewer, and associate editor Dr. Mark Bult-
man helped us to improve the manuscript significantly. This work was
supported by the Korea Research Foundation Grant funded by the
Korean Government (MOEHRD, Basic Research Promotion Fund)
(KRF-2006-003-D00709) and the research project (NP2007-015) of
the Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM)
funded by the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy of Korea.
References
Aggour MS, Radding WR (2001) Standard penetration test (SPT)
correction. Report No. MD02-007B48, Maryland State Highway
Administration, Baltimore, 87 p
123
42
ASTM (2002) Standard test method for penetration test and split-
barrel sampling of soils (D 1586–1999). Annual book of ASTM
standards. Sect. 4, vol. 04.08, American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, pp 146–150
Bergstrom J (1998) Geophysical methods for investigating and
monitoring the integrity of sealing layer on mining waste
deposits. Licentiate Thesis, Lulea University of Technology,
Lulea, Sweden
Bowles JE (1996) Foundation analysis and design, 5th edn. McGraw-
Hill, Singapore, pp 135–166
Johansson S, Dahlin T (2000) Seepage monitoring by resistivity and
streaming potential measurements at Hallby embankment dam
1996–1999. Report 00:15, Elforsk, Stockholm
Kulhawy FH, Mayne PW (1990) Manual on estimating soil properties
for foundation design. Final report no. EL-6800, Electric Power
Research Institute, Palo Alto, 306 p
Liao SSC, Whitman RV (1986) Overburden correction factors for
SPT in sand. J Geotech Eng ASCE 112:1449–1459
Panthulu TV, Krishnaiah C, Shirke JM (2001) Detection of seepage
paths in earth dams using self-potential and electrical resistivity
methods. Eng Geol 59:281–295
123
Environ Geol (2008) 54:31–42
Sjodahl P, Dahlin T, Zhou B, Johansson S (2002) Monitoring of
leakage in embankment dams through resistivity measure-
ments—2.5D modeling study. In: 8th meeting of environmental
and engineering geophysics, Portugal
Skempton AW (1986) Standard penetration test procedures and the
effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle
size, aging and overconsolidation. Geotechnique 36:425–447
Song SH, Song Y, Kwon BD (2005) Application of hydrogeological
and geophysical methods to delineate leakage pathways in an
earth fill dam. Special issue published jointly by ASEG 36, SEGJ
58, KSEG, vol 8, pp 92–96
Titov K, Ilyin U, Konosavski P, Levitski A (2002) Electrokinetic
spontaneous polarization in porous media: petrophysics and
numerical modeling. J Hydrol 267:207–216
Yi MJ, Kim JH, Chung SH (2003) Enhancing the resolving power of
least-squares inversion with active constraint balancing. Geo-
physics 68:931–941