Advertisement

Full Waveform Inversion for Advance Exploration of Ground Properties in Mechanized Tunneling

  • Andre Lamert
  • Wolfgang Friederich
Research Paper

Abstract

We present a new approach for exploration of small- and large-scale geological structures in mechanized tunneling environments by analyzing actively excited seismic waves illuminating the soil in front of the tunnel-boring machine. Applying the concept of full waveform inversion, we exploit all information contained in the seismic recordings to image unknown disturbances of soil properties along the tunnel track. Owing to the lack of field data, we explore two-dimensional synthetic test models containing exemplary disturbances of the soil, where real recordings are replaced by synthetic ones obtained by solving the (an)elastic wave equation with a Nodal Discontinuous Galerkin method. An extension to three dimensions is straight forward but computationally expensive. Disturbances in these test models are reconstructed with an iterative procedure guided by minimization of the misfit between measured and predicted records. Our method is validated by means of a simple test case and different minimization procedures including a quasi-Newton method are compared. The presented method is able to reconstruct the spatial distribution of seismic wave velocities (P and S waves) and can detect large and small-scale objects ahead of the tunnel face characterized by wave velocities differing from that of the surrounding bedrock. The imaging process is stabilized by a multiscale approach, where the frequency content of the recordings is successively extended with the number of iterations. Incorporating viscoelastic attenuation of the surrounding bedrock does not compromise the capability of detecting large-scale objects as long as low-frequency waves are used.

Keywords

Full waveform inversion Tunnel exploration Seismic waves Adjoint method 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge funding by the German Research Foundation (DFG) within the Collaborative Research Center SFB 837 “Interaction modeling in mechanized tunneling”, subproject A2 “Development of effective concepts for tunnel reconnaissance using acoustic methods”.

References

  1. 1.
    Giese R, Klose C, Otto P, Selke C, Borm G (2001) Seismische Tomographiemessungen beim Tunnelbau unter Tage in den Schweizer Zentralalpen, Zweijahresbericht. GeoForschungsZentrum PotsdamGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brückl E, Chwatal W, Mertl S, Radinger A (2008) Exploration ahead of a tunnel face by TSWD-tunnel seismic while drilling. Geomech Tunn 1(5):460–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Petronio L, Poletto F, Schleifer A, Morino A (2003) Geology prediction ahead of the excavation front by Tunnel-Seismic-While-Drilling (TSWD) method. Society of Exploration GeophysicistsGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bohlen T, Lorang U, Rabbel W, Müller C, Giese R, Lüth S, Jetschny S (2007) Rayleigh-to-shear wave conversion at the tunnel face—from 3D-FD modeling to ahead-of-drill exploration. Geophysics 72(6):T67–T79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tarantola A (1984) Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation. Geophysics 49(8):1259–1266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bharadwaj P, Drijkoningen G, Mulder W, Thorbecke J, Neducza B, Jenneskens R (2017) A shear-wave seismic system using full-waveform inversion to look ahead of a tunnel-boring machine. Near Surf Geophys 15(3):210–224Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Musayev K, Hackl K, Baitsch M (2014) Identification of the velocity field of 2D and 3D tunnel models with frequency domain full waveform inversion. PAMM 14(1):781–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nguyen LT, Nestorović T (2016) Unscented hybrid simulated annealing for fast inversion of tunnel seismic waves. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 301:281–299MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fichtner A (2011) Full seismic waveform modelling and inversion. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 113–140Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tromp J, Tape C, Liu Q (2005) Seismic tomography, adjoint methods, time reversal and banana–doughnut kernels. Geophys J Int 160(1):195–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Käser M, Dumbser M (2006) An arbitrary high-order discontinuous Galerkin method for elastic waves on unstructured meshes—I. The two-dimensional isotropic case with external source terms. Geophys J Int 166(2):855–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Käser M, Dumbser M, De La Puente J, Igel H (2007) An arbitrary high-order discontinuous Galerkin method for elastic waves on unstructured meshes—III. Viscoelastic attenuation. Geophys J Int 168(1):224–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Warburton T (2006) An explicit construction of interpolation nodes on the simplex. J Eng Math 56(3):247–262MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lambrecht L et al (2015) A nodal discontinuous Galerkin approach to 3-D viscoelastic wave propagation in complex geological media. Geophys J Int 212(3):1570–1587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tromp J, Komatitsch D, Liu Q (2008) Spectral-element and adjoint methods in seismology. Commun Comput Phys 3(1):1–32zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nocedal J, Wright SJ (2006) Numerical optimization, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Virieux J, Operto S (2009) An overview of full-waveform inversion in exploration geophysics. Geophysics 74(6):WCC1–WCC26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brossier R (2011) Two-dimensional frequency-domain visco-elastic full waveform inversion: parallel algorithms, optimization and performance. Comput Geosci 37(4):444–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Monteiller V, Chevrot S, Komatitsch D, Wang Y (2015) Three-dimensional full waveform inversion of short-period teleseismic wavefields based upon the SEM–DSM hybrid method. Geophys J Int 202(2):811–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shewchuk JR et al (1994) An introduction to the conjugate gradient method without the agonizing pain. Carnegie-Mellon University, Department of Computer Science, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moczo P, Kristek J (2005) On the rheological models used for time-domain methods of seismic wave propagation. Geophys Res Lett 32(1):L01306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Forbriger T, Friederich W (2005) A proposal for a consistent parametrization of earth models. Geophys J Int 162(2):425–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Iran University of Science and Technology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Geology, Mineralogy and GeophysicsRuhr-University BochumBochumGermany

Personalised recommendations