Non-destructive Method for Evaluating Grouted Ratio of Soil Nail Using Electromagnetic Wave

  • Jong-Sub Lee
  • Jung-Doung YuEmail author


Although soil nails have been widely used for stabilizing slopes, they are often only partially grouted. Thus, grouted ratio of soil nails should be evaluated to prevent landslides. The purpose of this study was to investigate the suitability of a non-destructive method using electromagnetic waves for evaluating grouted ratio of soil nails. Experimental studies were performed with steel bars, partially grouted steel bars, and fully grouted steel bars in air. Partially and fully grouted steel bars were also installed in soils to simulate soil nails installed on slopes. Electromagnetic waves were generated and received using a time domain reflectometer by configuring a two-conductor transmission line formed by two parallel steel bars or two parallel grouted steel bars. Results of experiments showed that the respective round-trip travel time of electromagnetic waves increased with increasing length of the steel bar, grouted steel bar in air, and grouted steel bar in soils. The velocity of electromagnetic waves was the greatest in steel bars but the lowest in grouted steel bars in soils. In addition, the velocity of the electromagnetic waves decreased with increasing grouted ratio. This study suggests that electromagnetic waves might be useful for evaluating grouted ratios of soil nails to stabilize slopes.


Grouted ratio Electromagnetic wave Non-destructive method Soil nail 



This research was supported by a grant (NRF-2018R1D1A1A02042478) of the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education.


  1. 1.
    Singla, S., 1999. Demonstration project 103: Design and construction monitoring of soil nail walls. Project summary report, FHWA-IF-99-026, Federal Highway AdministrationGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chan, R.K.S.: Geoguide 7, Guide to soil nail design and construction. Geotechnical Engineering Office, Hong Kong (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jayawickrama, P.W., Turner, J. B., 2013. Influence of grout rheology and placement technique on integrity of soil nails. Geo-Congress 2013, San Diego, California, 1774–1783Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lazarte, C.A., Elias, V., Espinoza, R.D., Sabatini, P.J., 2003. Soil nail walls. Technical report, FHWA-IF-03-017, Federal Highway AdministrationGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lazarte, C.A., Robinson, H., Gómez, J.E., Baxter, A., Cadden, A., Berg, R., 2015. Soil nail walls—reference manual. Technical report, FHWA-NHI-14-007, Federal Highway AdministrationGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yu, J.D., Bae, M.H., Lee, I.M., Lee, J.S.: Nongrouted ratio evaluation of rock bolts by reflection of guided ultrasonic waves. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. ASCE 139(2), 298–307 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yu, J.D., Hong, Y.H., Byun, Y.H., Lee, J.S.: Non-destructive evaluation of the grouted ratio of a pipe roof support system in tunneling. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 56, 1–11 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pernica, G., Law, T., Glazer, R., Lee, C.F., Tham, G., Yue, Q.: 2002. Development of a non-destructive procedure to determine the length of in situ soil nails. In: Proceedings of the 55th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada, 1–8Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Salloum, T., 2003. Using the impulse response technique to estimate the length of in situ soil nails. M.S. Thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gong, J., Jayawickrama, P.W., Tinkey, Y.: Nondestructive evaluation of installed soil nails. Transp. Res. Rec. 1976, 104–113 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liao, S.T., Huang, C.K., Wang, C.Y.: Sonic echo and impulse response tests for length evaluation of soil nails in various bonding mediums. Can. Geotech. J. 45(7), 1025–1035 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cheung, R.W.M., Lo, D.O.K.: Use of time-domain reflectometry for quality control of soil-nailing works. J Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. ASCE 137(12), 1222–1235 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chung, C.C., Lin, C.P., Wang, K., Lin, C.S., Ngui, Y.J.: Improved TDR Method for Quality Control of Soil-Nailing Works. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 142(1), 06015011 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chung, C.C., Lin, C.P., Ngui, Y.J., Wang, K., Lin, C.H.: Laboratory Evaluation of Soil-nailing Quality Inspection by an Improved TDR Method. J. Geoeng. 11(3), 143–149 (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yu, J.D., Kim, K.H., Lee, J.S.: Nondestructive health monitoring of soil nails using electromagnetic waves. Can. Geotech. J. 55(1), 79–89 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bogatin, E.: Signal and power integrity-Simplified. Pearson Education, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cheng, D.K.: Field and Wave Electromagnetic. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (1989)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brown, R.G., Sharpe, R.A., Hughes, W.L., Post, R.E.: Lines, Waves, and Antennas. Wiley, New York (1973)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Maxwell, J.C.: A treatise on electricity and magnetism. Clarendon press, Oxford (1873)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Klemunes, J., 1998. Determining soil volumetric moisture content using time domain reflectometry. Technical report, FHWA-RD-97-139, Federal Highway AdministrationGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jiang Y.J., Tayabji, S.D., 1999. Analysis of time domain reflectometry data from LTPP seasonal monitoring program test section—Final report. Technical report, FHWA-RD-99-115, Federal Highway AdministrationGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fujiyasu, Y., Pierce, C.E., Fan, L., Wong, C.P.: High dielectric insulation coating for time domain reflectometry soil moisture sensor. Water Resour. Res. 40(4), W04602 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Daniels, D.J.: Surface-penetrating radar. Electron. Commun. Eng. J. 8(4), 165–182 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Solak, I.C., 2011. Determination of the dielectric constants of hydrated cement paste and cement mortar using a contact coaxial probe. M.S. Thesis, University of Massachusetts Lowell, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Knight, J.H.: Sensitivity of time domain reflectometry measurements to lateral variations in soil water content. Water Resour. Res. 28(9), 2345–2352 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Noborio, K.: Measurement of soil water content and electrical conductivity by time domain reflectometry: a review. Comput. Electron. Agric. 31(3), 213–237 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ghazanfari, E., Pamukcu, S., Yoon, S.U., Suleiman, M.T., Cheng, L.: Geotechnical sensing using electromagnetic attenuation between radio transceivers. Smart Mater. Struct. 21, 1–12 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lee, J.S., Song, J.U., Hong, W.T., Yu, J.D.: Application of time domain reflectometer for detecting necking defects in bored piles. NDT E Int. 100, 132–141 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural EngineeringKorea UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations