Advantages and Limitations of Seismic Refraction Method Using Hammer Sources

Author(s):  
Awuha Washima ◽  
George A. M ◽  
Kur Anti ◽  
Joseph Luper Tsenum

The seismic refraction surveying method uses seismic energy that returns to the surface after traveling through the ground along refracted ray paths. The first arrival of seismic energy at a detector offset from a seismic source always represents either a direct ray or a refracted ray. This fact allows simple refraction surveys to be performed in which attention is concentrated solely on the first arrival (or onset) of seismic energy, and timedistance plots of these first arrivals are interpreted to derive information on the depth to refracting interfaces. this simple approach does not always yield a full or accurate picture of the subsurface. In such circumstances more complex interpretations may be applied. The method is normally used to locate refracting interfaces (refractors) separating layers of different seismic velocity, but the method is also applicable in cases where velocity varies smoothly as a function of depth or laterally.Despite the numerous limitation of hammer seismic refraction survey, the technique is still very much in use due to the various aspects in which it is found advantageous. The most pronounce advantage of the refraction method is that it gives directly the velocities of the refracting beds. Which are needed in the depth interpretation. This this work reveals that even though there are several problem of this technique, there are also a lot of advantages, one of which is that it is the most readily available seismic energy source we can lay hands on.Hammer source is a low energy source whose use is restricted to shallow survey. Due to weak energy generated,only the first few layers of the ground subsurface can be detected. It provides only the picture of the bedrock configuration. When there arises problems such as noise, irregularities in the shallow bedrock surface or eroded and weathered rock surface, anisotropic surface, existence of blind zone, velocity reversal with depth, and when the boundary between the interfaces are non-parallel, then correction measures are necessary to improve on the results obtained. Ambiguities do occur in this technique hence it requires thought, care, a high degree of skill and a good sense of judgment.These shortcomings are not enough to dismiss the use of the hammer source in seismic refraction method as its results has been shown to be useful in solving civil engineering and hydrogeological problems. The method is economical in cost, time and area of coverage. It poses no danger to the environment to which the work is done, or neither personnel nor damage to instruments used. This work has not only enumerated the limitations and advantages of seismic refraction method using hammer source but has also made suggestions to aid in the basic problem of the method, like dipping layers, blind zone, velocity inversion occurrence and noise control.

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (2D) ◽  
pp. 53-63
Author(s):  
Mundher Alsamarraie

Preliminary site properties need geophysical methods to determine it, the same as the large use of the seismic refraction method to detect the layers of soil and the depth reaching the bedrock. This study was conducted to find out the subsurface profile characteristics of a backyard field in UTM, Skudai following the principles of this method. The analysis of seismic data processed using ZondST2D software by determining the first arrival time until we get a block model of 2D shape based on the primary propagation of seismic velocity wave’s in soil layers. It was found that the investigated subsurface profile consists of four layers showing the level of weathering grade ranges from 600–4000 m/s based on the classification of rock mass in Malaysia. It was found that weathering rates decreased at higher depth, with the increase of density for the material and dampness reduction of seismic velocity. It was concluded that the survey of seismic refraction in development can be used only for shallow subsurface profiles and far from noise and disturbance.


1971 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 107
Author(s):  
M. J. Laws

Among the advances in geophysical techniques during the past ten years, particularly those related to multiple coverage using the seismic reflection method, the seismic refraction method has become somewhat neglected. The neglect has often been necessary since the seismologist is increasingly required to detail more complex structures and locate hydrocarbon bearing features that have been formed by subtle variations in stratigraphy or lithology, refinements that cannot be produced by the refraction method.However, the refraction method has been used with success in areas where the primary drilling target is an interface at which there is a large increase in seismic velocity, such as in Iran where the Asmari limestone provides a good refraction horizon. Similar conditions exist in Papua where the Miocene limestone was an early target and it was with expectation of similar success that the Australasian Petroleum Company, with the Anglo Iranian Oil Company (which later became BP) as a partner, embarked on a programme of refraction exploration in Papua. Early surveys, planned before the nature of the limestone structures was fully understood, failed to provide satisfactory structural information, but as the programme progressed and expanded a pattern of refractors became recognised.In the Eastern Delta, basement is recorded at depths of over 20,000 feet and an unreliable refractor from within the Miocene is evident. As we move towards the west, the top of the Miocene limestone becomes apparent as a refractor, increasing in intensity as we continue westwards until multiple limestone refractors become evident in the Western Delta area.


2001 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 1301
Author(s):  
Τ. Δ. ΠΑΠΑΔΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ ◽  
I. A. ΑΛΕΞΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ ◽  
Π. Ι. ΚΑΜΠΟΥΡΗΣ

In this paper is examined the potential and effectiveness of two conventional geophysical methods in geotechnical research. The seismic refraction method that has been successfully used in the past for subsurface bedrock delineation in foundation projects, failed to indicate clear distinction between flysch and limestone bedrock material in the area under investigation. This failure is due to the macro-anisotropy structure of the limestone that resulted from joints, tectonic processes or/and karstic phenomena and later fillings of the voids with argillaceous material. The geoelectrical method of vertical sounding, on the other hand, although provided a clear distinction for the bedrock characterization, failed to distinguish the overburden cover from the underlain flysch formation. Finally, in this paper it is shown that for a successful application of geophysical work in  geotechnical research, it is required effective design, utilization of modern analysis methods and handling more than geophysical methods.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document