1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 4, Issue 6
  5. Article
Volume 4, Issue 6
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

A microgravity survey was undertaken to investigate the area surrounding the collapse of a riverbank retaining wall. Initial site investigation identified the presence of a void in the immediate area of the collapse. The objective of the geophysical survey was to assess the extent of the identified void and identify any similar features in the surrounding area. Several geophysical techniques were considered but due to the urban environment, the microgravity technique was chosen. Forward modelling using the data from the initial site investigation was undertaken to optimize the survey parameters. The gravity data was processed to the Bouguer anomaly and the terrain effects of the river‐channel morphology accounted for. Anomalies identified within the data set have been analysed using the Euler deconvolution method, which has provided estimates of the depth to the top of the anomalous areas. Inversion of the gravity data using the Cordell and Henderson method has provided an image of the 3D extent of the anomalous areas identified. Guided by this information, a secondary invasive site investigation was conducted which confirmed the interpretation of the geophysical results. The combination of a non‐invasive geophysical investigation together with selective invasive control has enabled the full subsurface characterization of this site.

© European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers © 2006 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2006011
2006-02-01
2024-04-26

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2006011
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ArziA.A.1975. Microgravimetry for engineering applications. Geophysical Prospecting23, 408–425.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. BellF.G.1988. Subsidence associated with the abstraction of fluids. In: Engineering Geology of Underground Movements (eds F.G.Bell , M.G.Culshaw , J.C.Cripps and M.A.Lovell ), pp 363–376. Geological Society Engineering Group, Special Publication No. 5. Geological Society, London.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BellF.G., StaceyT.R. and GenskeD.D.2000. Mining subsidence and its effect on the environment: some differing examples. Environmental Geology40.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BishopI., StylesP., EmsleyS.J. and FergusonN.S.1997. The detection of cavities using the microgravity technique: case histories from mining and karstic environments. In: Modern Geophysics in Engineering Geology, pp 155–168. Geological Society Engineering Group, Special Publication No. 12. Geological Society, London.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. BranstonM.W. and StylesP.2003. The application of time‐lapse microgravity for the investigation and monitoring of subsidence at Northwich, Cheshire. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology36, 231–244.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. ButlerD.K.1984. Microgravimetric and gravity gradient techniques for detection of subsurface cavities. Geophysics49, 1084–1096.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. CordellL.E. and HendersonR.G.1968. Iterative three‐dimensional solution of gravity anomaly data using a digital computer. Geophysics33, 596–601.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. DanielsJ.1988. Locating caves, tunnels and mines. The Leading Edge7, 32–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. GhatgeS.L.1993. Microgravity method for detection of abandoned mines in New Jersey. Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists30, 79–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. PattersonD.A., DaveyJ.C., CooperA.H. and FerrisJ.K.1995. The investigation of dissolution subsidence incorporating microgravity geophysics at Ripon, Yorkshire. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology28, 83–94.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. RavatD.1996. Analysis of the Euler method and its application in environmental magnetic investigations. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics1, 229–328.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. ReidA.B., AllsopJ.M., GranserH., MillettA.J. and SomertonI.W.1990. Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution. Geophysics55, 80–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. SheriffR.E.1984. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Exploration Geophysics, 2nd edition. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. ThompsonD.T.1982. EULDPH: A new technique for making computer‐assisted depth estimates from magnetic data. Geophysics47, 31–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. WilunZ. and StarzewskiK.1975. Soil Mechanics in Foundation Engineering.Surrey University Press in association with International Textbook Company Ltd.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. YuleD.E., SharpM.K. and ButlerD.K.1998. Microgravity investigations of foundation conditions. Geophysics63, 95–103.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2006011
Loading
Site characterization and assessment using the microgravity technique: a case history
Near Surface Geophysics 4, 377 (2006); https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2006011
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2006011
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2006011
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error