Proceedings ISC-2 on Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, Viana da Fonseca & Mayne (eds.

)
2004 Millpress, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5966 009 9

Monitoring water saturation gradient in a silty sand site using

geophysical techniques
Enayat Kalantarian
Environmental Science and Engineering program, University of Texas at El Paso, TX, USA

Diane Doser
Department of Geophysical Science, University of Texas at El Paso, TX, USA

Keywords: seismic techniques, experimental modeling, partial saturation, water table, instrumentation
ABSTRACT: We present the results of experimental investigations of the changes in water saturation of two
silty sand sites in the vicinity of the Rio Grande near El Paso, Texas, using a combination of four geophysical
techniques: seismic refraction, spectral analysis of surface waves (SASW), down-hole seismic and directcurrent (DC) resistivity. These techniques were used to examine the periodic changes of the depth to the saturated zone (in Feb 2002, June 2002 & March 2003) in two study areas adjacent to two monitoring boreholes
(~200 meters apart) within the Rio Bosque Wetland Park. Direct measurements of the water table level were
taken during each field visit in two monitoring boreholes to verify the levels obtained by seismic surveys in
the field. All the geophysical surveys used in this study independently indicated a three-layer model where
layer thicknesses varied seasonally. Three techniques (SASW, DC resistivity and down-hole seismic) gave results for depth to saturation zones that were consistent with borehole observations. The refraction technique
however, grossly overestimated (by a factor of 3 or more) the water table depth.
1

INTRODUCTION

The seasonal fluctuation of the water table depth in

the vicinity of the Rio Grande Valley near El Paso is
a function of the amount of rain, irrigation practices
and river levels. The variation in soil moisture, salinity and grain size of the sediments within the Rio
Grande valley near El Paso, Texas often makes it
difficult to determine the saturation changes associated with the water table position using electrical resistivity or conductivity methods. Thus it is important to determine if other geophysical surveys could
be used.
We conducted a series of geophysical surveys including seismic refraction, spectral analysis of surface waves (SASW), seismic down hole, and DC resistivity to determine how changes in the depth to
the water table affected these surveys, which were
conducted in February 2002, June 2002, and March
2003.
The surveys were conducted at two sites near
boreholes located ~200 meters apart within the
Bosque Wetland Park (Fig. 1). One borehole (RB1A) is located about 20 meters from the Riverside
Canal, which receives irrigation water from the Rio
Grande from March to September. Another borehole
(RB-3) is located near a diversion channel in the

Bosque Wetland Park that receives peak discharge

from November to February.
Our first set of seismic measurements was taken
before the irrigation period in February 2002, when
the average water table depth was about 2.8 meters
in the RB-1A and 2.6 meters in the RB-3 borehole.
A second set of seismic measurements was taken
during the irrigation season in June 2002 when the
average water table depth was about 2.35 meters in
the RB-1A and 1.95 meters in the RB-3 borehole.

~ 200 m

Figure 1. The monitoring boreholes the Rio Bosque Park

491

FIELD TECHNIQUES

Horizontal Distance (25 m)

In this section we describe our field measurements

and discuss results and sensitivity of each geophysical technique.

Vav

2.1 Geophysical Measurements

The seismic refraction method utilizes P-waves,
which travel at different velocities through different
materials and are refracted at layer interfaces when
the velocity of the lower layer is greater than that of
the upper layer. The velocity of P-waves depends on
the physical properties (i.e. rigidity, density, saturation) and degree of homogeneity of the medium. We
used a 24-channel seismograph with 24 vertical
component geophones and a sledge hammer/metal
plate as an energy source. Two approximately 24
meter long (~ 79 feet) seismic lines with roughly 1meter geophone spacing were recorded at the site.
To verify this correlation between the geophone
spacing and the corresponding wavelength, the
SASW method was followed using the inequality of:
X/2< Lph< 3X, (Nazarian 1984) where X and Lph are
geophone spacing and wavelength, respectively.
Five shots (located at geophones 1, 7, 12, 18 and 24
m) were obtained for each line. Three to four hammer blows were performed at each source location to
enhance signal quality by stacking the records to
improve the signal-to noise ratio.
Since P-waves travel at the fastest speeds in a
medium, the first seismic signal received by a geophone represents the P-wave arrival. Knowing the
arrival times and distances from the source to each
geophone, layer velocity can be obtained using a
number of different analysis software. In this study,
we used a computer program called RefractSolve
by Burger (1992) to determine layer thickness and
corresponding velocities. The resulting three-layer
velocity models, with average P- velocities ranging
from about 171 to 1330 m/s for both sites, are shown
in figure 2. The 1330 m/s layer is considered to be
saturated soil. However the depth to this layer (~ 7
m) is inconsistent with the depth to the saturated
zone as measured by the other geophysical techniques and in the boreholes.
There are at least two reasons why the depth to
the water table appears to be overestimated. First,
there appears to be a low velocity zone (Nazarian
and Desai, 1993) at 1-m depth that may contribute to
an overestimation of the depth to the water table lying below it. (e.g. Dobrin, 1976). Second, if the upper portion of the saturated zone is a thin layer overlying a thicker, slightly higher velocity layer (such
as a thick clay), the refracted arrivals from the thin
layer will not be discernable because they always
reach the surface layer than arrivals from the unsaturated zone or the deeper layer.

492

RB3
Feb 2002

Vav

RB1
Feb 2002

RB1
June2002

Vav

RB3
June2002

Figure 2. P- velocities models of the refraction data

This thin layer is termed blind zone., and it is difficult to recognize from seismic data alone (e.g.
Soske, 1950).
We used the same 24-channel seismograph and
geophones to record SASW data during the same
field visits. A weight of about 50 lb (~ 24 kg) was
dropped from a height of ~ 1.5 m to produce the
seismic signal. We carried out three to five weight

2004 Millpress, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5966 009 9

drops at each shot location along the line (at geophones 1, 7, 12, 18 and 24). During the recording
process we selected those geophone channels that
provided shot/detector distances, of 1, 2, 4, and 8
meters.
The wavelength/phase velocity relationships from
all records were combined and used to generate dispersion curves. Nazarian and Stokoe (1984) have
discussed this process in detail. The experimental
dispersion curves were in our study constructed using a common receiver mid-point (CRMP) testing
array (Nazarian and Stokoe 1986). In the CRMP array technique (Fig 3), an imaginary centerline for the
receiver array was selected. Twenty-four receivers
were then placed on the ground surface, and surface
waves of various frequencies were generated in the
medium. By selecting records from various geophones for various shot positions from the entire 24channel data set, we were able to obtain the same
mid-point detector/shot positions mentioned above
without having to move our geophones during the
data collection process. The records were monitored,
captured, and saved for future reduction. After testing on one side of the array was complete, the receivers were kept in their original positions, but the
source was moved to the opposite side of the imaginary centerline and testing was repeated.
1

8m

11 13 15 17 19 21 23

4m
2m
1m
1m
2m
4m
8m

CL
Figure 3. Common Receiver Mid Point (CRMP) array

The signals produced by the receivers were digitized and recorded in the time domain by the 24
channel seismograph. In order to gain more information from the extracted data, the recorded signals
were transformed from the time domain o=into the
frequency domain using Fast Fourier Transform algorithms.
The quality for signals for each test for all the frequency ranges (bandwidth) was verified using coherence function and the genuine signals were proc-

essed. In this selected range of coherence, phase information of the cross power spectrum was used to
calculate phase velocities associated wavelengths for
each frequency.
The iterative inversion software developed by
Nazarian and Desai (1993) was used to determine
the variation of the shear wave velocity profile at the
sites. In this process the thickness of each layer was
assigned by applying trial and error estimates to the
program, and only the shear velocity of each layer
was determined. The procedure was verified by
comparison of the theoretical dispersion curve and
the experimental dispersion curve obtained in the
field. The experimental dispersion curve was constructed based on the data collected in the field in
the form of phase information. The phase information was then analyzed using an unfolding process
Nazarian (1984) to determine phase velocities and
wavelengths for each frequency in order to build the
theoretical dispersion curve. The RMS of experimental and theoretical dispersion curves was calculated to determine the best fit for the curves.
For layers with constant elastic properties, Raleigh wave (R-wave) velocity (VR) and shear velocity (Vs) are related by Poissons ratio (v).
VR/VS = [(1-v)/(0.5-v)]

0.5

(1)

Although the ratio of the R-wave to S-wave velocities increases as Poissons ratio increases, the
change in this ratio is not significant for shallow
seismic studies. The effect of varying densities in
the dispersion curve calculations is on the order of
the effect of varying Poissons ratios. Changing the
values of the densities of the different layers does
not significantly (< 1%) affect the shape of the dispersion curve Nazarian (1984). Thus, during the inversion process Poissons ratios of 0.45, 0.40 and
0.35 (bottom to top layer of model) and a total unit
density of 1800 kg/m3 were assumed for our threelayer models.
The results obtained from the SASW studies also
suggest a three- layer velocity model at the sites
(Figure 4). Furthermore, the results indicate that the
third layer has a lower shear velocity than the second layer for both sites. We interpret this low velocity layer as the fully saturated zone (water table).
SASW analysis indicates that the average shear velocity of the saturated zones is about 140 m/s close
to the borehole RB-1A, and 138 m/s near borehole
RB-3.
Our third seismic technique used down-hole
seismic methods to determine changes in compressional and shear wave velocity versus depth. In this
technique, a seismic source is placed on the surface
near a borehole (1 to 2 m away), and two geophones
(14 Hz) are placed at selected depths (< 5 m) in the
borehole. The source for P-waves is a hammer on a
plate, for S-waves a railroad tie is hit by a hammer.

Proceedings ISC2 on Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, Viana da Fonseca & Mayne (eds.)

493

The railroad tie is held in place by the weight of a

car. Multiple blows were made at both ends of the
plank to generate SH-type waves with reversible
first motions, as discussed by Crice (2001). Surface
sources for P and S waves propagated elastic waves
downward to an in-hole receiver, which was moved
within the hole, thus providing a record section of
waveforms for a series of depths. We used a Geometric R24 Seismograph for recording the data.
The raw data obtained from the down-hole surveys provided the travel times for compressional and
shear waves from the source to the geophones. Note
that data quality depends on borehole conditions.
Brown et al., (2002) has indicated that the best results are obtained for an uncased borehole. However
our down-hole logging method requires cased holes
in order to clamp the receiver at various depths.
DC resistivity measurements were taken using the
Wenner array (e.g. Sharma, 1997) with electrode
spacings of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 15, and 20 m. An
electrical current (I) was applied to the ground surface through two of the electrodes, while an additional electrodes measured variations in the potential
of the electrical field V (voltage) that is set up within
the earth by the current electrodes. The apparent resistivity is calculated from the current, voltage, and
electrode geometry. The resistivity technique is sensitive to grain size and water salinity/water saturation.
In this work the apparent resistivity profiles show
a drop in resistivity at a spacing of 4m (for RB1A
February2002), 3m (for RB-3 June 2002) and 2 m
(for RB1 July 2000) suggesting transition from unsaturated to saturated sediments. Observed apparent
resistivity was modeled using the one-dimensional
technique of Keller and Freschkencht (166). These
results suggest water saturation at ~ 3 meter which is
consistent with the SASW and down-hole survey results.
3

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY RESULTS

We have summarized the measurements of all the

geophysical surveys for both borehole sites in Figures 4a, 4b, 4c and 4d.
Our observations indicate that the average shear
velocities measured by SASW (139 m/s) are about
the same as the values determined from down-hole
(133 m/s) measurements. The measured depths to
the water table obtained from the two boreholes vary
at both sites (Figures 4a through 4d). Part of this
variation is due to the different layer interfaces obtained by the SASW and down-hole methods. Layer
intervals for the down-hole profile were selected
based on observed travel times and the down-hole
lithology log. Lateral variability between surface array positions and down-hole measurements may also
contribute to differences in shear wave velocities

494

and the depth to interfaces. The down-hole method

obtains velocities for a small volume close to the
borehole, whereas the SASW method averages
properties over horizontal distances related to the array length. Another possible explanation for the differences in shear velocities could be because of the
Poissons ratios (0.4, 0.35 and 0.30) assumed for initial analysis of the SASW technique.
Our results for the 4-meter SASW spacing suggest a sharp shear velocity decrease (spread out at
almost a 2.4-meter depth), which is consistent with
the direct measurements of water table depth in
monitoring wells (2.5 m) and DC resistivity methods, while the layer velocities for the down-hole decrease at a 2 meter depth (Figures 4a, 4b, 4c and 4d).
The seismic refraction measurements give average P-wave velocities ranging from 171 m/s to 1330
m/s (a velocity consistent with saturated sediment).
However layer thickness is not consistent with the
resistivity, seismic down-hole and SASW model
layer thicknesses or depths. This is similar to observation made along the banks of the Rio Grande
northwest of El Paso (Hincapie et al. 2001). Note
that depth to the 1330 m/s layer (saturated zone) is
about 8.5 m deep in February and 6.5 m deep in
June for both sites.
DC resistivity values obtained near the monitoring wells are consistent with our interpretation of
partially and fully saturation layers obtained from
the SASW and down-hole modeling (Figures 4a
through 4d). The resistivity value of the second layer
(~ 100 ohm-m) would correspond to a partially saturated layer, the second layer measured by the SASW
and down- hole techniques. The third layer has resistivities that vary between 2-16 ohm-m, values consistent with saturated sediments. Depths to the third
layer are consistent with depths to water table. The
following table compares the seasonal results obtained by seismic techniques (refraction, SASW and
down-hole) and DC resistivity.
Table1. Seasonal water table fluctuation in the Park

Borehole RB1A
Winter Summer
Technique
2002
2002
Depth (m)
Direct values
2.8
2.35
SASW
2.8
2.5
Down-hole
2
2
Refraction
9
8
Resistivity
3
3
Good results SASW SASW
Resistivity
x

Borehole RB-3
Winter Summer
2002
2002
Depth (m)
2.6
1.85
2.5
1.9
2
2
8.7
8.2
None
3
SASW
SASW
Downx
hole

2004 Millpress, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5966 009 9

SASW and Downhole for RB1 feb 02

Refraction RB1 Feb

2002

Depth (m0

Shear velocity (m/s)

100

10000

Water
Table
2.8 m

Depth (m)

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Depth (m)

12 18
0 60 0 0

Resistivity RB1 Feb

2002

P- Velocity (m/s)

1
100 10000
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Resistivity (ohm-m)

Figure 4a. Variations in geophysical parameters with depth at site in February 2002. SASW (thin line) and down-hole (thick line).

Refraction RB1 June

2002

SASW and Down

Hole RB1 June 02"

100 200 300

1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Shear Velocity (m/s)

100

10000

Water
Table
2.35 m

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

100

10000

Depth (m)

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Depth (m)

Depth (m)

Resistivity RB1
July 2000

P- Velocity (m/s)

Resistivity (ohm-m)

Figure 4b. Variations in geophysical parameters with depth in June 2002 and July 2000. SASW (thin line) and down-hole (thick line).

Refraction RB3
June 2002

100

200

Depth (m)

Depth (m)

0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Shear Velocity (m/s)

0
1
2
3
4
5
6

7
8
9
10

100

Resistivity RB3
June 2002

10000

Water
Tabl
1.85 m

P- Velocity (m/s)

Depth (m)

SASW and Down

Hole RB3 June 02

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

100

10000

Resistivity (ohm-m)

Figure 4c. Variations in geophysical parameters with depth at site in June 2002. SASW (thin line) and down-hole (thick line).

Proceedings ISC2 on Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization, Viana da Fonseca & Mayne (eds.)

495

Refraction RB3 Feb 2002

0 100 200 300

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Shear Velocity (m/s)

1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Depth (m)

Depth (m)

SASW and Down

Hole March 03 and
Feb 02

100

10000

DC
resistivity
data are not
available for
RB3 Feb 02

Water
Table
2.6 m

P- Velocity (m/s)

Figure 4d. Variations in geophysical parameters with depth at site in February 2002. SASW (thin line) and down-hole (thick line).

Our results suggest that the depth of the water table

obtained by the down-hole method slightly underestimates the true depth, and that seismic refraction
grossly overestimates the depth, but the refraction
method show a decrease in the depth in the summer. DC resistivity overestimates the depth to the
water table, mostly likely because we used water
table beds in the modeling process. As a result, the
SASW models both for the RB1-A and RB3 wells
gave the best results in winter and summer 2002
4

CONCLUSIONS

SASW, seismic down-hole and resistivity studies

at two sites in West Texas gave three-layer models
consistent with known borehole and geologic information, including estimates of depth to the water table. SASW is the best at determining water
table depth, while down-hole and resistivity gave
depths within 1 m of the true water table. Although
seismic refraction studies also gave three-layer
models, depths to the water table (7-9 m) greatly
overestimated the observed water table depth (2-3
m) similar to results from a previ-ous study by
Hincapie et at. (2001). These results suggest that
the seismic refraction technique may not be a suitable method for determining water table depth using at sites where the water table is expected to be
< 5 m in depth. Notice that the verification technique of geophone spacing by the SASW method
and the accuracy of the pervious investigators in
the area suggested the scale of 1-m geophone spacing for the seismic refraction technique in this
work.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

SASW tests, and Galen Kiap for his experimental

support with down-hole data interpretation.
REFERENCES
Brown, L, T. D., M. Boore, and K, H. Stokoe II, 2002. Comparison of Shear-Wave Slowness Profiles at 10 StrongMotion Sites from Noninvasive SASW Measurements and
Measurements made in Boreholes, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. Vol. 92. No. 8. pp. 31163133.
Burger, H. R, 1992, Exploration Geophysics of The Shallow
Subsurface. Prentice Hall-Inc, pp. 20-145
Crice, D. 2001. Borehole Shear-Wave Surveys for Engineering Site Investigations, The first draft of Geostufuf pp 213
Doser, D.I, S Nazarian, D Yuan, and M.R.Baker 1998. Monitoring Water infiltration under an earth-fill levee with
geophysical techniques, ISC 98 Proceed, First international Conf. on Site Characterization, PP 557 - 561
Hincapie, J, D. Doser, D. Yuan and M, Baker 2001. Detection of shallow water table fluctuation using the spectral
analysis of surface waves (SASW) technique, Proceedings
of the Symposium on the Applications of Geophysics to
Environmental and Engineering Problems (SAGEEP
2001-Denver), on CD-ROM, paper ASP-4.
Keller, G,V, & FC, Freschknecht 1966. Electrical methods in
geophysical prospecting. Pergamon Press.
Nazarian, S 1984. In Situ Determination of Elastic Moduli of
Soil Deposits And Pavement Systems By SpectralAnalysis-Of-Surface-Waves Method, PhD Thesis, The
University of Texas at Austin, Texas.
Nazarian, S., And M. Desai, 1993, Automated surface wave
method: Field testing: Geotechnical Engineering Journal,
Vol. 119. No. 7, pp. 1101-1111.
Stokoe, K. H, II, and S. Nazarian, (1985), use of Rayleigh
Waves in Liquefaction Studies, proceedings of a session
sponsored by the Geotechnical Engineering Division of
the American society of Civil engineering in conjunction
with the ASCE convention in Denver, Colorado, pp 1-17.
Sharma, P. V., 1997, Environmental Engineering Geophysics: Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 475 p.

Special thanks to Soheil Nazarian and Deren Yuan

for their modified inversion program to analyze the

496

2004 Millpress, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5966 009 9