|
Back to Agenda
FHWA Unknown Foundations Summit
Detection Of Unknown Bridge Foundations For Bridge Scour Analysis Using Electrical Surface Geophysical Methods Wade Kress, hydrologist, US Geological Survey
Purpose Use commercially available software and equipment to solve unknown bridge foundations Done this over last 7 years Helped identify contaminants
Equipment & Software AGI, Iris, Zonge, Abem, others RES2DINV
Concept of electrical resistivity data
Resistivity and induced Polarization Induces polarity Turn it on, then off time to measure the decay of voltage over time Different properties of earth hold charges for different amounts of time
Wenner / Schlumbarger Arrays Tell computer which
Data Collection Deploy cables and electrodes Connect resistivity unit and batteries Data processed in field on site
Site map North Dakota Had 4 lines on 1 side of bridge pier, then additional 4 lines 8 2D lines Collect data on different lines
Line Location Map Shows bridge pier, only 2 lines on top of footing Looked at several different things. Inject current into ground Looked at feasible/economic method to image bridge footer—wanted to know how close Do you have to be to it. Processed as quasi-3D set
Resistivity Plotted in depth and feet, in ohm-meters. Red is more resistant, dark is less resistant Used 2.5 meter electrode spacing Have electrical signature
Induced polarization data [strong contrast of colors] Structure holds charge longer than surrounding geology Depending on need of project, could get a high-resolution image Could collect this data and process in couple of hours
3D data processing
Conclusions of pilot study Couple of days in field to collect data, couple of days in office to process Thought it was promising, but more work needs to be done
Where do we go from here? Collected data from 2 bridges Report coming next month Want to model and simulate different geological environments Have several resistivity tools, try different ones, evaluate different geologies Evaluate at different bridge structures Define best approaches—help DOTs use in their states, use as estimation tool Define optimal environmental approaches
Questions
Q: Had 30 ft depth. Did you know where water table was and what are WT effects?
Kress: Moisture does affect results. Water in river, so ground water elevation was probably couple feet below land surface. Able to image conductor inside of another conductor. Footer less resistive than geology was. Depends on construction of structure and environment. Modeling can help. Plug in values, give good estimation of end product.
Q: How do this in flowing water?
Kress: We can float electrodes behind a boat. These electrodes are waterproof; but in flowing water can be different. Successful in the past for geological mapping. Tools available for water-borne methods.
Q: Try use xxx?
Kress: Used simplest approach. Next, try different array types. Depth of investigation is limited to spacing of electrodes. Have to work within confines of collection area.
Back to Agenda
|