Soil resistivity influence due to the different utilization of electrical resistivity array

Soil

Resistivity Influence

due to the

Different

Utilization

of

Ekctrical

Resistivity

Array

ABSTRACT

EieetrieaJ. tesis+vily metl~od @RM] wks ~ ~ c t e a ~ ~ g l y adoptad as aft aIteImtiive t o ~ i ifi sbdfoxv &&.&a= exploration by ihe geotei3micd ergineers. This study presents the influence of soil electrical ~esistiviiy valae @RV) &te to the diffeenl Qpes of dm-Irioa1 resistiv7ity m a y ased in practice. l%e dissirnilarky of

ERL7 has always become a popular agnment by engineers to the geophysicist clue ta its less kindittuental htxrIei;lge of eicc~cai re&&ivity motbod. F r a ~ psst wpaimed, the h & ~ n c f ~ t d of- tms h s s being

eqosed by the mgineer thits creating several black boxes of the BRA4 basic theory which importantly

required during khe r b aequisiioil a& pro~ei!sing stages. Hence, & mdt y~Gduced fim &e E p a xvas difficult to ddivcr I'. a soutid of defh3itive ways due to lack of knowledgo md experienced of most asghws. Ela~ce, &is study presents kfirxzme of soil ERV due $0 the cfi1fem.t typs of asray used with particular reference to Weewer, SchTumbergor, Spole-dipoh and Pole-dipole. A Zinc of dectried re&stivity inragixig was M hsmafl m & m b e n t of lzdwxitic so2 in haw wcuftditicm with bifEa& types r-lf , m y using ABEM $AS (4.000) equdprnat set. Thrm in the of soil scunyles w e tested for moisttne

WJXW& <.w) tm i a m d a t e l y the el&4 resi&ivay data w-pisitbu was mpway 3 m e a w 4

Moreover, partide size ciistribntion test using dry and wet sieve was also bsing perfooned ordm k-npport

to tbo ERY Fllzdings. 1 was f o x i ti-& tho ERY was differ~nt fbr &I q p ~ s of anay used msn it was

perfanned on the same p h u l a r locattion of the survey line. HOIN~YB~, it was found that there is a eo~iiskat rehtIi)ml$p &?wen M Y a& mois&re co~tent fesdis which e'm be r w s e a t by ERV cn l/w.

Hence, it w found that ER'J can be h l f b e ~ d by types of asray used during the k l d miziswernent despite of the physical and chemical influences. Each types of m a y xvere applicable irl subsdace profile investigation whkh nonually subjected to the several considaztiom such as object target and the

w~irnw depth ef Ir?ter~$t kvestigated.

KE\f#foRDS:

Soit electtical resistivity; array; Werner; scl12mberger, dipole-dipole; pole-

INTRODUCTION

Gmle&~hl p i imesti-@n @$) is a p~elimimry stage which ixqwxtant trr &a r t ~ i g n a d

c~i~sfructkm of civil engineering smxctrrre. Accordiag to Clayton d d., (i995), site investigatioi~

is the prwss ia %d~$ch -peo4qLa17 gmtecirtrical

and.

&her rdevaat k ~ m a t i m 'ct.hi& nri@

affect the c~lisWcticn or perfarnlance of a civi1 engineering or building project arz acquired-

kfiltady, SI wa& was p&m& wi~g c~ftven~iofia£ MfIing teck~iqae or other &te~i&vc

technique such as geophysical met4rod. Eased 011 Clayton et dl., (1995), the foremost classical

geatech~icd site investigation astl15d

i'sr

subswfiace pr~file

expioration

is

the

applicatian of

bo~+ag @igh percussim~ driliiug, power a~get-ing

and was41

bori~g), drilliitg

(rataq

drilling and

coring), probig fJ&c&tmB probe, dynamic probing) and examinah11 in-situ (hid pitting, large

bored sldis, Qmel md drifts). The results fio~n

the

comnrelrliona: md~ca$s were produced exactly

in a direct ot1tprrt due its destructive m c & d (drilling) &us prodwing

a

goad pswametcr for

design md w & ' t t c t k ~

pwposes, Howeyer,

tie poblems isr

mst;

uaditiond

brbg

sad drilling

n~ethod emotmter when ttle area of the investigation m7as hrge which wilt increase I?= umber of

bore11aIe &w

&reasks

maey

d

time of pro&f. F u w n s ~ , &e id"&n ob&d

was

a

single -point

data

gad the i~~terplation be~qreen a b g e boreboles sprrcing can lead to

increase &e degree sf uncertaitgies of &e &st&crce pr&he insre&g&d @bittin et id., 2013;

G d i o eta]-, 20UG and Mauritsch et d., 2000).

Hence, dkmative t ~ c h ~ ~ i q u e such as geoph3~slcal method was required ia ordm to sstpport mil

coft3pLcment

tSte

existi~ig convention@ w h d

wblcb

able $0

r&~w

cog and of SI works.

Geopbysicd n'te'thod wsists of several tzchnitpes such its rcsi&ivi@, seismic, mar;neiic. gmt;ity,

ground p m ~

d a x ,

~ qetc, n The

kiwis

pf $ 4 ~ gwphyt3iai IIIG&Q~ i s qw&%iv~ smyiag

af

me&

tfsb~g physicr23 properties such

as

t~lecfrical resistance, velocify, magnetic sk~sceptibiiiky, dazsity,

eb. t&aeraHy, ge.o@yicaf tecfilliq~es oa-Sribt&es seserat advantages for ~xa~apk, it c m be

i1h~p1e~~ented m m quickly md less expensively md has the ability to cover greater meas Itzore

&ciroughdy (Ehatri at ai., 251 I; Liu a d Evett, 22008; G d i o ct al., 20% and Cosenm cr al., 20%).

Furthern~ore, it provi&s a large-scale characterization of tile physical propetties under

mdismber2 cm&;Jbns [Gd&o et d, 2fXXj. Accordhg

to

Ciayrm ei:

al,

(1995), site

damageability remains miaitnid and can be neghgible although the resistivity method req4res

ground contact during the data acq~~isitiotl. The process of geophysical tec!~:,iqw starts from data

acquisitiou (field meamemeat fir raw data cdection), data pr~cessitrg (rrsw data ai~alysis usirrg

utility

aub

f d p , rewlt h~terpretahon (moruaiy outcome). 3tr the past, the ekc;rical

resisti~ilqr ~ne&acI

was

reco@&ed ;ss a p ~ p a l z tech&&e &at waS applied ifi enghring,

envIr0nn1enta.l and w~haeolog suc11 as suttsurfw

prom

mapping

in

order to locate b&m$

f S d d ai., 21)I I), b d & r

andl

~sviiy

(Jurnl~,

2010), $rmdw&er sesmces <A&& e6 4.. 2012;

Saad

et al., 2012;

H m &

et al,, 2007 and H m z a h et

d.,

2006). groundwater ~onmi~latiofi

('£&&a%& et at,, 201 1

md

Smst~din

et

d,,

2#8), I e a c k &patian

(m

et

d.,

2&36j),

m*zg (Saad et

d.,

2012) and mcien$ crater (Saad et d., 301 I). G e a e d y , the majority afthose

stadies trwe wkly f w d the bask of mappiag perspective with particala refer- $G

cletectioa purposes

thr-u

resistivitj. afioaaly c o m s t results. Most of the geophysical techniyes

w a e applied in cngheexiag, e n v i ~ m e d a l

md

~ c h ~ e o ~ o g i c a l stndies.

Gwpi~yslcd D Z ~ & O ~

(GI@

u7m i d y c b p b ^ ~ t d by people &o~n $~ysic~t sciezces

(geophysicist) and is now gaining increased pqulariiy wi& g e o t e c h i ~ d and stntctara1 engfi1e::l.s. In rbe pasg &e i ~ p d i ~ s b

~f

gwp51yslal ter:kwqws str& as residivity mW was ir~~r-easkgly

used by cnglncers itl Sl works especially when dealing In a diiEcult site and due to its high

e=~iency of #st and uperati& tiwe. Hmve.irer, &e zeei& p r d u d were ah-ays mcan17h1ced

eripjared By Gxe

civil

esgkeers

dur=

to &eir lack of e x p t t i s &.td ex@&s

i s

this m a . As

w p ~ m d by CZayton et ai., (1995), soma of the reasons are due 10 poor planning of geophysical

a m q by e q h s w'an &I& e+-Fie~w ia the t&c&qz~, a& aver np&iski~ .ir;-ophy&ists

leading to inappropriak application of

thc

available te&ques. ~udaemorc, several

gmphysick%s &v{a?s i q r kide their e q e &

kr

hhss~ s a $ o ~ (Ab&a

a

d.,

2013). Severid

black boxes were rraiscd hthg - 1 3 ~ stage of data acquisltio~~ processitlg and hktrprttatio~t Those

pobiems have created a ~ ~ g a t i v e impact wbicB rekk %a

tkc

geophpsicd re&%

shce

it was veiy

dflicnit to be frrstiGed

ia

deMdve sounds dne to its weak md m~biguify output.

Hence, &is preseflts a field eiectricd resistivity and 3-q moistwe co~telrt data

with &@ereat wmy in O & G ~

to

& ~ G Q W &t: inflaen~it

of

~ i e c 2 r k d ze$sli%rity

mzy

to

&e

mil resistivity electrical value. This s@& aims to reduce some black box axd ambiguities via

r&io&p

of

diff%r&may sf EHV E~EGE geotechhd paper* rv& pw&u.lar refexme

to irnoist~~~z cantent ztd supported w<fi soil grain size

c?xmcteristics.

Fnficmore, ahis

fw~dilllrcl~EiI s@$ tv3I &Ie &creased &c r;a&denee kvel of esgiseers whir.l dc&g w&

dectricd resistivity metbod in ST works.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study consists

of

thee phase: viz fieldwmk, data processing using utrliQ s~fmare a d

labomaty experimentaJ. FieEdwork was begin witkt the eons$u&

af

srrrislI1 soil errrbmxkrnerzt t ~ i & size of 3.0 Qeugtb, in) x 1.0 (wide, m) x 0.3048 (height,

m)

all ddes of the m d d edge

shaped

iim a gei~tle SIT <: 45". The emba~krttlent was C D ~ S ~ L C ~ # withoat m y compaction

e&rt

&re

m

h

loose d & m of hte$ti~ 8 ~ 4 study ptzrposc~. ?ken, a line a£

2D

resistivi.ty

inaging WES perfbmred a I n g AIBEM SAS 4 0 0 equipine~~t set.

TW b d

resistivity cables wI:re

cam- 19 B$ mali setr eia- (6 i ~ d x

of

Iexfgth with 2

mm

af&m&er) w& SO ntkn eqrrd

spacing via 42 jamper cables

f

a

total spread line of 2

m

length (Wcnner. Sdt3t1mberger and

I)ipole&pak may se#&g w&Ie rem&e cable (50

m

iea@ whid~ setup pergtt'~&& wk% &e

resistivity b e ) connected with remote ebctPode using jumper cable was req~ired ody for Pob-

i3ip0.k %my sttit1g).

After

i&at,

both resistivity land

cables

were

cemected

to

the ekctrode

selector m d Terrm~at-er SAS 4000 data logger. Finally, 12 volt battery was connected to the data

bgger

to

supply diretit curreat (DC) &&g the data

acqslisitim.

staxcly used TxIemte~,

Sc1llmzberger, Dipole-dipole

a ~ d

Pole-&ple m y

due

to

the

s ~ t d s d may that was applied

in

most d the resisti~ty ssltrrey di around

1-he

~wmld related t~ the engheering, envkoment

md ~ ~ h e o l ~ g y mdiesL

X?I

arda ta

rebgce

bowrzdary effect wty

reduce

tke

ERV ~ G W C J J caased by r&acted

and

selected carre&, the electrical. resistivity line was placed at the canter of

the saij

~ d e l

.wi& &set (g.5

m)

~ P Q @ ewfr

e&

of Ils It?~@k. B a d on Telf~rd et al.,

(i990), eiectricat cwwefit may propagate

ia

geo~i~aterials via

tke

process of electrolysis where the

is W e d

by

ims

at a

c o m p d w i y SLOW r*, HFQCT, S Q ~ mndds

were

~ D W O w* aratef before

&e

olectxicd resistiyity test s?'+'Fs ~011dt1cIert. @hezPlise, ~ mwill ~be t o l e d t to

pr~pagaIe tk-of~gh &e m ~ k 1 &e b &e

&

sod wm&tia W & G ~ tt.i$l m s e some error In &e

ebctrica! resistivity ueadii~lgs. The ~nclbel mder 2 9 EEectried resistivity data acquisition was

s h w n Itll Figme 1. MI

raw

data obtained f m fieid eteas~uement tws trafisfemd to t"kd computer

ushig SAS4.000 utiliiies s o f m ~ . Thea, ihose data was pr~cessed md iuidyzed using R E S 2 D W

sohare

~ f ( L o k e ct B., 2Cj3)

re

provide &a fnkcrse mbclei that approximate file act& !&$ida~e

structure. Finally afier the redsti~ity test fished, three soil sa~npIes were immediately taken st

di.fFeiwt poifit which kxa~ed

in

line with &e resiaivity lhe performed md tested for soil

moistice cmtent usiag oven drjjiq m e d ~ d

and

particle size disSriblttictn test using dry aad wet

the

g r m d ~&ace (soil was e-sayate at 1 iuch b e f ~ e &e wnp:es was &?~en dse $a redwed

a u f k e :eesistiviQ b h k da$a which d l dem~ed during the dm processing stage). Schematic & a m rep.resmiisg the

miif

satnphg

and

eb@icrah ~edstivi$$

b

a t i o m ~ r t w s given

in

Figure 2.

F w e

4: 2D elec~cdrslsisti~7ity test in propess 31) rn

t- ' P

91

4

_I

*

2.0 rn

Resistivity line

RESULTS

AND

DISCUSSIONS

Eicctriea! resistivity resdts at point A, E

md

C wcrz extracted ffim 2D ~sisiivity

toimgrap11~7 section produced from the RES2DINV software prmsshg. If was fomd

that

all

electrical resistivity vaiucs (ERv at

poiat

C

l w e rhe lowest ERV

foHoviizd

by ?!EV at points A

and

B. It w t ~ f f o t ~ i that

Werner

army

has

prodwed $he highest ERV followed by S~cldw~~berger,

Dipoie-dipoli: md Pokdipcrle mays. Tbe resdt

E ~ K

2r) resistivjty lomogxaph-qr

section

and

bc&ed £53 (extracted from 2D resistivity ttomogmpl~y

seccis3n) at

paint A, R and C

are

giverl

ia Figures 3

-

6 and Table 1.

~ p p t ~ pbxawrdtiw% 7 715. error = 9 - R t

P.M8 .D.BRE 1-20 1 - 6 0 m.

, , . . . . . . , ' . ' . ' , . " . . ' . " . L . " . . . , +

Inverse Wdgl RQ&d&&iky S n t i o n

~

9BG 558

~

188E

m

7 88ft

~

~

~

~

7

~

~

F

~

~

~

a

~

~

6

~

~

e-

kk!

Vo!. 1 8

[2013],

Bun-sf. X

0--=

5647

Figwe ?r:

232 ekx%Gcd

r~sisti~7ity zoi~tegraphy section

ad

Itrcaiize sekcted go& (,4,

B

and C ) of

ERV nsing Wefmer array

nepth t t & ~ K i o n f ribs. errar = i2.r t

n a W-LBn I .ZU

1ewersp m&l Pesistiuity Soctim

BIId 1 S B

R e s ~ t i u i t y ilia nhnd U p i t e k t r n d ~ spaciny R . B S l 13,

Figre 4z 22D electrical resistivity tonlograplly section

and

b t W selected point (A, B

Fi@w

5;

ZD

electrkaJ resistivity t~tomograpiy mtim and localiz~ select~d point (A,

B

and C )

of

ERV using Dip&-dipole

l n w s e Nodal Rosisl3uity S e c t i o n

349 5 5 8 lsOg %ZSO M Q O TUgP

R P s i s t l u i t g in ohn-n onit elettrsae spacing B.R58 m.

Figwre

6:

2D eieetricd resistivity tomogra&y secliofi

and

~ac&k.c selected poiat (A,

B

and C) of

ERV using

!?ob-dipcie amy

a

Vol.

18

120131,

Bund. X

... - . .

---

5649

G;!J

21Fp

4?Sp 9.35 6.3 ,:47

Efiisieveaperture size, mm I I , I I

.

I I

Rguw 7:

PSD cumc

for

latexitic sail

moztd

at go& C

Accordiug to res& reSisEiviry value, all amys (Wem~er, &Wutlbe~"ger, Dipole-dipole & P d e 4 i e ) has fad to

be

dksi~xigar which indicate

tke

a p @ k a t b of ektkcd

resisti'~ity technique has

m

i:~fluenct; due ta

the

array sewused dmhg the fidd meamremat. The ERV

f

a

A

mafr' nsed szs %mb tct be BBere~t even

the

~ s r e r m d a t :vas p e r f ~ d an the saae survey k c . 3-wically, this factor occurred due to the different g e a c t q factor,

K

&rived &om the differ& types of msy used. The v d a e 4 q p a t ERV (pa) was gzedy

the dec.trde cotxf;rgm&oa us& in data acquiiiitloz. Apparent re$qtivity @a) is ERV e a h & ~ d

based 011 half-pace geomew asswnptiun which refers t~ field ERY. According to TeKard d aL, ( 1 9 0 j , npgweai trerl&&y will bc eqwi to the ttur;r ~Sisti37iQ pob-ided r$e-

cmm

&

configtifation was applied o v a ths hon~oge.@ncous isotropic grou~d. Ha~vcvsr, &e anomaly trend

(ci~tricd resisfiviiy image) at a & i a a m depth of the bfnogrzql~y s& has S ~ PSOaIe S ~

s W t y for mosi of &t may 11sed.

'This

L-cnd has proved that ERV was ahvays s~%jective to

some ranges r;f propeak

as

@vm in the past referm~ce

c B m

atd

tables of ERY p r q r t i e s

interpretation. Eleld ERV was detenliaed nsing Welmer, Schlumberger, Dipole-dip& md Pole-

apde

atray

with a

geo$%etry

actor

as gitwea

in

Equalions 1 - 4 w!ki~fT are deriifsd

from

basic

Equations 5 and 6 . 4 1

the

geometry factors, K used hi this study w a ~ derived frorn Equation 6

b r i d or1 bask f u r electrode syste~n of measurement The scl~einzltic diagram of field electx-ical

resistivity configmation was giveil in Figure 8

-

11 while the schematic diagram for the basic

fomclectmdc system is given in Figure LO,

*=

2 m " R

where

X

is a resistazee term given by R-AVII

where

R

is a resistaace term given by R=AVfi

where R

Is

a resistance ierm given by R=AV/S, K is geomstty factor based on pole-dipole

electrode co~ffr~o~vation

k&

Vol.

18 [2013],

Bund. X

-

5651

Figure 9: Schlutnberger electrode array arrangement

X B M N

Figure 10: Dipole-dipole electrode a r r g aarangen1ent

C1 Pl P2 C2

Figure 11: Pole-dipole electrode array amlgeineilt

Figare 12: Four electrodes arrangement On the surface of homogeneous isotropic proufid

of resistivity

However, all array has denlonstrate that the ERV was lon7est at highest moisture content (w)

value (point C) and vice versa (point B). This finding has codmned the previous theory that

rek&&p w& ERI7 m ?/w, Ac~ozbing to @u md Eves, 2008), a soil's clec&i~d resistivi@

vrtfne gemr&y varies inversely p~oprtiond to the water content and &ss&ed ion concentration

as ckyey ~ $ 3 exhibit l@b & . s ~ a i ~ 7 & 1m mnr:ent&m, n7~t chyey solfs h x 7 e Iowesa ~ s i s r i ~ i t y af

all soil mzttcrials ~vlrife coase,

dry

s d and gravci deposits aid msrssive bedded a ~ d hard

&&&s

haye &e h@%es$ ERY.

As

repmt.ed

try

Jmg et d., fZf?OO), adaxease of' ERV svi+s

redis

i h m

a11 &?creased

of

metal i ~

or

nbrmgafic eiements ~

in

geon1ater;ials. Apart from the i:rP,ucwe

darr;sy,

water

eoi~lefit

ad

prticle-s fkz~ftons, &is cor-l~o~led rnkiafo~e mdet Study also

reueaied

that the soil electtical resistivity valse was highly Mnenced by the presence of air void content wltj~%

cm

dso

represear

s ~ f pofgssity. The ERV i v a ~ fo~md ie be very high &c

ta ~e

inconsistent of low moistme cmtez~t a n d high .t.olume of void or sclil porosity derived fro111 &is

study which focused oil lofoose

&id

e m b h e a inode1. Due to file loose cwiition of soil modd it enables

a

higher ah filed

void

which able to iucreased

die

ERV

over

the range oaf the previous

rcfmencs &arts and tables. k~carding to Jusoh (2010), air fiUed void posses a higher rc~istiv* ~-4% coapred wth &$ w~ filled void. As reported by K I & ~ et d,, (2007), ERV fix sand

ar~d

p v e l was varied from 50 Bm (wet)

-

10,000

8 m

(dry). Hence, carefsl masiderriti~~~$ sikch as

s w y , p a ~

o&efs need la

be

considered irr

m&r

to i - i e ' i a rdiahk result from

loose soil co~dition. Othernrise, it can be ~vrongly htqreted

as hard

rack mat~fials.

This study has demofistrated that &e elecBicaI resistivity m i i y pioves to have a% hf'lw~ced

in producing the e k ~ c a l resistivity vahe tagsther with the ildlume of geamateriali features

suc11 as ;tke conce~th:&on of lime or came gained fiacfim

and

water cmtleat. Esch anay has a specifis stre,'1& a d wmbzc\ss

and

the O@II of cJmmkg ike best m y dugkg eie(;trkal

resistivily data acqwisitioa was always relative to tire target interest, For example, W e ~ m e ~ array

lw a good itpph&u.

for

h i 7 d

strxme

svfrik Pole-&pk was &e &st may

for

deeper

imaging. As reported by ksob @020), h e best selection of army

w7as

based on signal skength,

sens&ix7&y af resi&vity v&e &e &e chmgUrg of vertic~nf h~ck?.anM stn;tc&xe, depth af investigation, type of structure tv%ich needs to

be

mapped aid itoiw level. Finally,

&c

co~fidence

lev03 w d rc3i3bifity of cleetricd resistitrity anomaly isfieqmtrttion aid eoaelusicx~ eaa be

e l m c e d due

to

beiter undcmaiidhg of basic fimdmner~tal of rcsistivily w y used during

each of fieid m e a m e n t -

I O N

The e l e c ~ ~ c a l resistivity value

of

we11 graded Silty SAND was successfull$ behg determined

mder miniawe model af soil trial embaiskmeN

under

lwse wndili~fl. The id4uence an soil

resistivity value due to di@ereat types uf m a y was saccesM$ md metfiodlcalb studies and

pfewted. The ERV was brgely k&~e~&d by

vpes

of

ar~ay used

dt~e

ta the drffere~lt geometqj

ftsctor (K) &rived

Roa e a ~ h

W ' t : ~ n t types of may used. This skdy

has

also provzd .dmt the

ERY was ia-fbmd b y physical chara~&ri@i~ of sod sach as

h

qmmtity a€ maishr~ content

aid geomstcriais faction, This shtdy

has

r~duced few of

the

black boxes (~tlmcc&&-ifies) &rough

some aftfie bask e 2 e c ~ c d ~resisti~ity ikorjl p r e s e d wit& pa&~~dt=ii reference to amy s e h g .

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

we &e $0 di s~pexviscrs and research menlhrs for their trcm~doas plcawe, wmk

and coopention. Mmy thanks go to Uxsit.erslli T~ul Husselu Onn Malaysia aid Uaitlersiti Sains

REFERENCES

2. Clayton, C- R. I., Matthew% M. C., and Simons N. 1995. Site Jm7esfigariun, 2nd ed.

Blackwell Scieilce Ltd, UK.

2. Atridin,

M.

H. Z., Ahmad, F., Wijeyesekera, D. C., Saad, R, and Bal~amddin, M.F.T.

(2013). Soil Resistivity Measurenlents to Predict Moisture Content and Density in Loose

and Dense Soil. Applied Mechanics ~tadhfate~'inIs, Vol. 353-356, pp. 91 1-9 17.

3. Godio, A., Strobbia, C., and De Bacco, G. (2006). Gopl~ysicd Cl~aracterisation of a

Rockslide in an Alpine Region, Engineering Geuiogv, Vol. 83, pp. 273-286.

4. Mauritsch, H.J., Seiberl, W., Arndt, R., Romer, A., Schneiderbaum, K., and Sendlhofer

G.P. (2000). Geophysicai Investigations of Large Landslides in

the

Camic Region of

Souti~ern Austria, Engineering Geology, Vol. 56. pp. 373-388.

5 . Khatri, R., Shrivasta~a, V. K., aid Chudak, R. (2011). Correlation between Vertical

Electric Sounding aid Conventional Methods of Geatecluucal Site Tjlvestigation.

Jntemationpl Jotrnal ofAdvcmced Engineering Sciences und Technologies, Vol. 4, pp.

042-05 1.

6. Liu, C., and Evett, J. B., 2008. Soils and Fuund~~fion, Peason International, Singapore.

7. Cosenza, P., Marniet, E., Rejiba, F., Jwi Cui, Y., Tabbagh, A., and Cl~arlery, Y. (2006).

Correlzitioiis between geoteclmical and electrical data: A case study at I t c h y in Fraice. Journal of Applied Geoplrysics, Vol. 60, pp. 165-178.

8. Saad, R., M u z m , N. M., and Mol~amad. E. T. (2011). Tile 2D Electrical Resistivity

Tomography (ERT) Study for Civil and Geoteclulical Engineering Pumoses. Electronic

Journal of Geotechnic

J

En-keering, Vol. 16, pp. 1537- 1545.

9. Jusoh, Z., 2010. Application of 2-D Resistivity Imaging and Seismic Refraction

Technique in Subsurface Investigation for Civil Fngineering, h4.S. thesis, Scb Physics,

Science Ui~iv., Pena~g, Malaysia.

10. Adiat, K. A. N., Nawawi, M. N., and Abdullah, K (2012). Assessing the Accuracy of

GIs-based Elementary Multi Criteria Decision Analysis as a Spatial Predictioi~ Tool - A

case of Predicting Pote~~tial Zones of Sustainable Groundwater Resources. Journal of

H~'droiog~r, Vol. 440-441, pp. 75-89.

11. Smd, R., Nawawi, M. N.

M.,

and Mohamad, E. T. (2012). G r ~ d w a t e r Detection in

AViun~ Usbig 2-D Electrical Resistivity TomograpIiy (ERT). E!ecmnic Jaraa! of

6koteclmicd Engbleering, VoI. 17, pp. 369-376.

12. Hamzah, U., Semsndin, A.

R,

and Malim, E. P. (2007). Gsoundxvater investigation ill

Kuah Selangor using vertical electrical sounding (VF!S) surveys. Envkoimental

Geology, Vol. 51, pp. 1349-1359.

13. Hamzah, U., Yaacup, R., Sanlsudin, A. R., and Ayub, M. S. (2006). Electrical imaging of

the Groutid~vater Aquifer at Baiting, Selangor, Malaysia. Enviromnental Geology, Vol.

43, pp. 1156-1162.

14. Baharuddin, M. F. T., Taib, S., Hashinl, R., Abidin, M. H. Z., and Ishak, M. F., (2011)

Time-lapse resistivity investigation of salinity changes at an ex-proinontory land: a case

n

a

Vol.

18 120131,

Bund.

X

5654

Vol. 180, pp. 345-369.

15, Sanisudin, A. R., Hagono, A., Hsmlzalk U., and Rafek, A. G. (2008). S a l i n i ~ mapping of

coastal groundwater aquifers using hydrogeocl~ernical and geophysical methods:

a

case

study from north Kelantan, Malaysia. Environmental Geolop, VcrL 55, pp. 1737-1743.

16. Samsudin, A. R., R a h h , B. E. A, Yaacob, W. Z. W., and Hamah, U. (2006). Mapping

of contamhation phmies at ln~lnicipal solid waste disposal sitcs using geoelectric

imaging teclmiqne: Case studies in Malaysia. Joun~al of Spatial Hy&olog~~, Vol. 6 no, 2.

17. Saad, R.. Adli, I., and Molmmad, A. S. (2012). The Study of lron Ore Prospect using 2-D

Resistivity and Induced Polarizatioil (IP) Method, Electronic Journal of Geotechnical

Engineering, Vol. 17, pp. 2981-2988.

18. Saad, R., Saidin, M. M., Muztaza, N. M., Ismail, N. A., and Ismail, N. E. H. (2011).

Subsurface Study Using 2-D Resistivity Inlagiug Method for Meteorite Impact at Bukit

Bm~uh, Perak. Electronic Journal af Geoteclmical Engineering, Vol. 16. pp. 1507-15 13.

19. Abidin,

I

N

H. Z., Wijeyesekera, D. C., Alm~ad, F., and Saad, R. (2013). Integral

Aualysis of Labomtory aad Field Electrical Resisli~rily Valuc for Soil Moisture Coiltenl

Prediction

-

Soft Soil Engineering Ii~ternational Conference. Sarawak, Malaysia.

20. Telford, W. M., Geldat, L. P., md Sl~eriff, R. E., 1990. Applied Geophysics, Cambridge

University Press.

21. Loke, M. H., Acword~,

I.,

and Dahlin, T. (2003). A cornpaiso11 of smooth and blochy

h~versioi~ methods 2-D electrical imaging surveys. Explor Geophys, VQ~. 34, No. 3, pp.

182-187.

22. British standard 1377: 1990. Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes.

23. Jmg, Y., Lee, Y., and Ha. H. (2000). Application of Electrical Resisd~~ity lrnagiug

Teclu~iques to Civil and Envirom~tental Problen~s. Use of Geophysical Methods it1 Canstructicm.

24. Kniidel, K., Lange, G., Voigt H. J., and Seidel, K., 2007. Direct Current Resistivity

Methods En?rironinental Geology, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

-.-

-ss$% c w

c h

Q