GEOS268

Geophysicalinvestigationof MacquarieUniversityand NorthEpping

DarrenKyi,40738019 June2008

Geophysicalsurveyofuniversitygroundsusingseismic,magneticandresistivitytechniques,aninvestigation ofM2tunnellocationusinggravity.

Contents
Introductionandscopeofworks ........................................................................................................................1 . GeologicalandEnvironmentalHistory................................................................................................................2 SeismicMethod...................................................................................................................................................3 ResistivityMethod...............................................................................................................................................4 GravityMethod...................................................................................................................................................5 MagneticsMethod..............................................................................................................................................6 SeismicInterpretation.........................................................................................................................................7 ResistivityInterpretation.....................................................................................................................................8 GravityInterpretation.......................................................................................................................................11 MagneticsInterpretation..................................................................................................................................12 Discussion..........................................................................................................................................................15 Conclusion.........................................................................................................................................................15 References.........................................................................................................................................................16 Appendices........................................................................................................................................................17

Introductionandscopeofworks
On the 10th and 11th of May 2008, a series of geophysical survey techniques were applied to an area of MacquarieUniversityaswellasthesecondarysiteatNorthEpping(seeappendixAandB).Thecontourmap ofthemagneticdataandhasbeenpartiallyoverlayedontoanaerialphotographofthearea(appendixC1) andcanalsobereferredtoforcoordinatereferences. Resistivityandseismicsurveyswereundertakentodelineatesoilandweatheringprofilesandtodiscoverthe depthtobasementinthegrassedareaaroundthelake.Magnetictechniqueswerechosenasthesewouldbe able locate any buried ferrous objects. A gravity survey was completed at North Epping to locate the M2 tunnelwhichwasknowntorunsomewherebeneaththesurveyarea. Thesubsequentweekswerespentreducing,correctingandanalysingthecollecteddataandpresentingitin auseableandpracticalformat.Datafromothergroupsisalsoconsideredwhenprovidinginterpretationsas eachgroupcoveredadifferentsectionofthesurveyareaswithaparticulargeophysicaltechnique. The combination of techniques should give a clear understanding of the geological and environmental compositionofthearea.Thisreportaimstopresentandsynthesisethefindingsofeachtechnique.

[1]

GeologicalandEnvironmentalHistory
The Sydney Basin in which the University is built on is a sedimentary basin which spans several thousand kilometres.Itisbelievedtobeupto5000mthickbutminordeformationduringthePermianandTriassichas affectedpartsofthebasin(Aus.Mus.,2004). The basin itself is made up of three main groups. The Narrabeen Group is the deepest member and is characterisedbysandstone,siltstoneandconglomeratelayers.TheHawkesburyGroupwhichoverlaysthis can be seen in outcrops around the university and surrounding area. This group contains quartzrich sandstoneandinterbeddedshale(Aus.Mus.,2004).AbovethislayersitstheWianamattaGroupwhichisa groupoffinelayeredshales(Ashfield,MinchinburyandBringelly)thatcovermuchofWesternSydney(SOP, 2008). TheWallumedegalAboriginalsaretheearliestknowninhabitantsoftheareaandtheyareunlikelytohave madeanysignificantchangestothesurroundingenvironment.In1792whitesettlersbegantoclaimlandin theRydeareaandutiliseitforfarming.Themainfarmsintheareawerewheat,barleyandmaize.Bythe 1840snumerousgrantshadbeenallocatedandsuburbswerebeginningtoform,thisgaverisetothedistrict ofRydewhichwasstillverymuchanagriculturaldistrictwithorchardsandmarketgardensthrivingonthe soilsoftheAshfieldShale(CityofRyde,2007). The area remained largely rural until after World War II when there was industrial and suburban developmentintheareawhichmeantthatmanyofthefarminglotsweresubdivided.Intheearly1960sthe universityandsurroundingindustrialareawereconstructed(CityofRyde,2007). Inthespaceof200yearstheareahadgonethroughvastchanges.Whatbeganasforesthasbeenusedas farmlandandlaterhadresidentialandlightindustrialdevelopmentsbuilduponit.Itshouldalsobenoted that further excavations and landscaping during and after the construction of the university such as the installation of a geothermal heat pump for the administration building (AAPPA, 1999) will also complicate thehistoryofthearea.

[2]

SeismicMethod
Seismicrefractionlineswerecompletedusingidenticalsetupsonthefollowinglineswithinthearea: 1000N,1010N,1025N,1038N,1070N,1100N On 1000N and 1010N the seismic line was centred on 1050E, other lines were conducted at each groups discretionandcanbeseeninappendixE. TheseismicrecordswerecapturedusingaGeometricsStrataViewExplorationSeismographconnectedto24 channelswhichrecordedfor256mswithasamplingrateof250s.The14Hzgeophoneswerespacedat2m andshotsweretakenat1,5and10mfromeachendandatthecentre.Shotswerestackedupto6timesto reducenoiseandincreasesignalamplitude.Theseismicwavewasgeneratedbyasledgehammerandsteel plateastheshotgunwasunavailableonthisoccasion. FieldsheetswerekeptforeachrecordandcanbefoundatappendixD.Qualityofdatawasverifiedinsituby inspectingthedataontheseismographaftereachshot,poorlyresolvedshotsweredeletedandretakenand acceptablefilesweresaved. DatawaslateranalysedinthelabusingSeisImager.ThisprocessinvolvedusingPickwintopick/removefirst arrivals.AnalysisandmodellingofthepickeddatawascompletedusingPlotrefawhichcangenerateamodel includingthicknessesandvelocityoflayers(appendixE).

StrataViewSeismograph

[3]

ResistivityMethod
AnAbemTerrameterSAS300Cwasusedtocollectresistivitysoundingsandprofilesacrossthesurveyarea. SoundingsweretakenusingaSchlumbergerarraysetup(seefig.1)atlocations: 1000E1150N,1000E1100N,1025E1085N,1000E1050Nand1025E1100N Spacingvalues(mandy)canbefoundonattachedfieldsheet(appendixF1).Datafromthesoundingswas taken back to the lab where the resistance figures were converted to resistivity values. The corrected resistivityvalueswerethenmodelledinrinvertwhichgivesamodelofvariouslayerswiththicknessesand resistivity. ProfileswerecollectedusingaDipoledipolearraysetup(seefig.2)onlines: 950Eand1000E Thepotentialelectrodesweremovedawayfromthecurrentelectrodesinmultiplesof5m(a)upto7times (n). The current electrodes are then moved up 5m and the potential electrodes are moved back and the process is continued. Profile data was converted from resistance to resistivity with respect to the geometricalfactor.ThedatawasconsolidatedinaspreadsheetandwasmodelledusingbothRes2dInvand DCIP2D.
2m C1 P1 P2 C2

2y
Figure1:Schlumbergerarraysetup

a P1 P2 C2 a C2

n.a
Figure2:DipoleDipolearraysetup

AbemTerrameter300C

[4]

GravityMethod
AgravitysurveyusingaScintrexCG3gravitymeterwasconductedtolocatethepositionoftheM2tunnelat North Epping. A 175 metre stretch of Norfolk Road adjacent to the park was chosen such that the tunnel wouldpassunderitatsomepointalongthetraverseline.Thegravityreadingsweretakenevery5malong thelinewhilebasestationreadingsweretakenatroughlyhourlyintervalsinordertotrackdriftduringthe day(appendixG1).Themeterwaspositionedonthelineandlevelledtowithin10degreesoneitheraxisto provideaccuratereadings. Dumpylevelreadingswerealsotakenevery5m,elevationsweregivenrelativetothebasestationwhichhad aknownelevationof80mabovesealevel(appendixG2). Atthelab,thegravitydatawascorrectedfordrift,heightabovebasestationandlatitudeandreducedto showaBougueranomaly.

GravitysurveyonNorfolkRd

Datumofsurvey

[5]

MagneticsMethod
Twomagnetometerswereusedtoconductmagneticsurveysacrosstheuniversitygrassedarea.Mostofthe areawascoveredbyaGeometricsG858Magmapper(CaesiumVapour)whileonelinewasrunon1000E usingaGeometricsG856MemoryMag(Protonprecession). TheG858wascarriedbytheoperatorwiththesensorabout1.2minfront;amarkerswitchwashitat25m andthenattheendoftheline,lineswerespacedat2m.Thesemarks,combinedwithinformationaboutthe geometryoftheareaenteredpriortothestartofthesurveysegmentenabledtheunittotrackwhichlines hadbeencompletedandthereadingsalongeachline.LineswererunNSalthoughinsomeareaslineswere alsorunEW. OnlyonelinewascompletedusingtheG856on1000Efrom1000Nto1300N.TheG856isheldverticallyand thesensorisorientedtofacemagneticnorth.Readingsofthemagneticfieldweretakeneverymetrealong theline. Astationarymagnetometerwasalsosetonatripodinaquietareainordertorecorddiurnalchangesinthe magneticfieldaswellaslevelsofmagneticnoise(appendixC5).

G858Computerunit

[6]

SeismicInterpretation
ModelledseismicprofilesarefoundatappendixE.Allprofilesshowsimilargeologywithonelowervelocity layer over a higher velocity layer. The velocities of the top layer range from 300600 m/s while the lower layer had velocities of 23003100 m/s. The contact between the two layers is close to horizontal for all profiles. Theupperlayerisinterpretedtobethesoillayerwhilethelowerlayersincreasedvelocityandknowledgeof thegeologyoftheareasuggestthatitconsistsofHawkesburysandstone. While in the field it appeared that there may have been a third layer below the sandstone. This layer appeared to have a lower velocity than the sandstone and thus was difficult to model as seismic surveys assume that deeper layers have a higher velocity. The reason for the apparent lower layer may be that previousconstructionworkhasdisturbedthesandstoneinthearealeavingsmallairspaces. Theseismic profilesgiveadepthtobasementof1.54m.Thedepthtobasementwasshallowestnearthe basepointofthearea(1000E1000N)andwasdeeperfortheseismiclinesconductedfurthernorth.Lines 1000N, 1010N and 1025N (appendix E13) had depths ranging from 1.52.5m. Lines further north, 1038N, 1070Nand1100N(appendixE46)haddepthtobasementintherangeof2.54m. Thetrendofincreasedsoildepthmaybeaproductofthelandscapingofthelakeareaoftheuniversity.If thereisanyslopeinthebedrockmoresoilmayhavebeenusedontoptocontroltheslopeofthegrassed areaincertainareas,presumablyforaestheticanddrainagepurposes.

[7]

ResistivityInterpretation
The resistivity soundings all modelled three or four layers. The equivalence analysis for each sounding is given below, the sounding report for 1025E 1100N is attached as appendix F2. A sounding was originally conductedat1000E1050Nbutthisdatawasunusablebecauseitwastooclosetotheculvert,thesteelfrom theculvertinterferedwiththeelectricalpaththusthissoundingwasnotprocessedinthelab.
1:1000E1150N

2:1025E1085N

3:1000E1100N

4:1025E1100N

[8]

Inthefourlayercase(4:1025E1100N)thethirdandfourthlayershadsimilarresistivity(roughly100m)so this is likely the same layer with slightly varying levels of resistivity from shallow to deep. The other four layer case (1: 1000E 1150N) has a third thin layer which is only 0.56m thick, this may be related to an isolated anomaly as no other surrounding soundings captured this layer. There is also a high percentage error(>10%)associatedwiththispointinthesoundingmodelthusthislayerwillnotbeconsidered. Allsoundingsexcept3:1000E1100Ngiveanupperlayerofsoilwiththicknessofabout13mandresistivity of150300m.Sounding3:1000E1100Nhadanupperlayerofabout2.5mthicknessbutwithresistivityof around500m,thismaysimplybeamoreresistiveandsandysoil. The resistivity of the second layers are all between 6001000m which is acceptable for sandstone. The Thicknessesofthelayersrangesfromabout10to30m. At1:1000E1150Nthelowerlayerismodelledwitharesistivityofabout1500m,thisisunliketheother soundingsintheareawhichmodelthelowestlayerwithresistivityof100200m.Thefiguresof100200m arestillwithintherangeofsandstonebutthevalueof1500misalittlehighbutcanstillbeattributedto thesandstonebasinthattheuniversitysitson. The equivalence analyses for each sounding show that all models within the same error tolerance will be roughly similar to the modelled data. The exception is the third layer of 1000E 1150N which has severe equivalenceissues(videsupra). Thedepthtobasementgivenbytheresistivitysoundingagreeswiththeresultsoftheseismicsurveywith valuesofaround3mtothesandstone.Thesoiloverlayingthesandstonerangesfromsandytoamoreclay richsoilwhichhaslowerresistivity. TheprofiledataisrepresentedasaverticalcontourplotavailableasappendixF34. Thelineon950Ehasafewpointsofinterest,at1035N,1055N,and1080Nasindicated.

950E,resistivityprofile

These are all locations of higher relative resistivity. These correspond to magnetic highs on the magnetic map (appendix C2). The anomaly at 1035N is a low which corresponds to the path of the culvert on the magneticmap;thelowisduetothereinforcementoftheconcreteactingasaconductor.Thelowat1060N isrelatedtothedraincomingoutfromtheamphitheatrearea.Thehighat1080Nmaybeapointwherethe subsurfacesandstoneisclosertothesurface.

[9]


1000E,resistivityprofile

The1000Eprofilealsohasanumberofinterestingfeaturesatpositions1040N,1060N,1070Nand1085N. Againtheseareascorrespondtoareasofinterestonthemagneticmap.1040Niswheretheculvertcrosses the1000Elineunderground,at1060Ntheremaybesomepipeordrainlinkedtotheculvert;bothofthese producelowerresistivityduetothemetalliccontent.Thehigherreadingsat1070Nto1085Nmaybedueto sandysoilandsandstoneclosetothesurface.

[10]

GravityInterpretation
ThegravitydatawasreducedtoshowaBougueranomalywhichcanbeusedtolocatetheM2tunnelspath underNorfolkRoad.Theactualsizeoftheanomalyis0.15mgalatitsgreatest;theregionaltrendofthedata isincreasingvaluesfurthernorth.Theregionaltrendisprobablycausedbyincreasedsandstoneonthenorth sidegivingtheareaahigherdensityvalue(seefig.3). Themodelleddata(appendixG3)hashadcorrectchainagesaddedpostmodellingandshowstwotunnels. Both tunnels are approximately 6m high and 15m wide with 3m between them. The depth to the top of eithertunnelis15m.Thisisslightlycontrarytosomesourceswhichstatethedimensionsofeachtunnelas 12m wide x 8m high (ATS, 2008) but it is still an acceptable model. More accurate dimensions can be obtainedbutmayrequireRTAauthorisationandroadclosureforupto1hourineachdirection. Theextentsofthetunnelareboundedbychainages5mand40m.Thereisalsoasolidareabetweenthe tunnels which is approximately 5m wide. The tunnels are cut into sandstone which has a density of 2400kg/m3whilethetunnelsthemselvesareairfilledwhichhasadensityof0kg/m3,thiscontrastiseasily seenoncethegravitydataiscorrectedandreduced. Anothergroupmodelledthetunnelsaseachbeing5mwidex9mhighat10mdepth.Thisappearstofittheir datasetanddemonstratesthenonuniquenessassociatedwithgravitymodels. North

Notesandstoneslope

Figure3:M2Tunnelwestbound,taken19508,16:14

[11]

MagneticsInterpretation
ThemagneticcontourmapascollectedbytheG858isavailableatappendixC2,amapwiththeuniversity aerialphotooverlaidisavailableatappendixC1andmoredetailedmagneticsurveyareasasappendixC34. Theweekendof10th,11thMaywasplaguedbylargeamountsofmagneticnoise(appendixC5),fortunately the data from the weekend is still usable. There are a number of features that run parallel to the survey directioncausedbychangesinoperatorandoperatorshavingtovarytheheightofthesensortonavigateup hills,mostimportantfeaturesareeasilyvisible. Pointsofinterestwillbemarkedonthemapbelow. 1:Thisisamagneticanomalywhichdoesnotappeartohaveanydiscernableshapeandnoaboveground features.Thisislikelytosimplybesomeleftoverwasteconstructionmaterialthathasbeenburied. 2:Thisisthepathofthe culvert; itis pickedupeasilyasthesteelreinforcementofthe concreteishighly magnetic.Notethatthereisalsoanotherdrainwhichextendsfromtheamphitheatreintotheculvert. 3,4:ThesearepipesordrainswhichappeartoberelatedtotheareaaroundW11A. 5:Thisanomalymaybecausedbythemetallicsculpturewhichisabovegroundinthearea. 6:Thisanomalyhereappearstobeapipewhichrunstowardtheadministrationbuilding.Thismaybethe geothermal heat pump system. The actual loops are probably too deep (100m) for the magnetometer to detect.Theareacanbeseeningreaterdetailatappendix C3.

Overlayofestimatedpositionofgeothermalsystem(AAPPA)

[12]

[13]

TheEWlinesrunshowlittlemorethantheoveralldatasetbutareincludedasappendixC4.Theeffectsof theculvert,pipeandthesculpturearevisibleinthedataset. Overalltheareatothenorthappearstohavehighermagneticreadings.Thereisnoobviousreasonforthis other than the soil used to landscape that area is more magnetic than the soil further down. The effect appearstobeuniformthoughtheareaandstopsatthe1100Nline. The proton magnetometer data confirms the caesium data. Magnetic anomalies are present at 1040N, 1085N, 1120N and 1150N. These correspond to the culvert, sculpture and the pipes that cross the 1000E line.

ProtonMagtraverseon1000E
57350 57300 57250 57200 nT 57150 57100 57050 57000 1000 1020 1040 1060 1080 1100 1120 1140 1160 1180 1200 1220 1240 1260 1280 1300 Northing

[14]

Discussion
Theseismicandresistivitydatacanbeusedtomodelthedepthtobasement.Bothofthetechniquesgave similar results (about 3m). The seismic technique could only provide a two layer model up to a depth of about 12m; the resistivity technique gave data up to 1000m deep although only the first hundred metres was needed. The seismic technique cannot differentiate between two layers of sandstone unless their acoustic velocities differ however the resistivity could delineate two layers of sandstone based on the resistivityoftherock.Theresistivitycanalsodifferentiate betweendifferent kindsofsoil(videlicet,sandy andclayrichsoil). Iftimewaslimitedtheseismicrefractionsurveywouldbeamoreappropriatemethodforfindingthedepth tobasement.Whilebothtechniquesweresuccessfultheseismicmethodwasfasterandrequiredlesslabour (couldbedonewithtwomen).Theresistivitycouldbedonewithjustonemanbutthiswouldprobablytake awholedayjusttocompleteonesounding. Theresistivityprofilesalsosharedanomalieswiththemagneticdata.Thesewererelatedtopipesordrains which cut the profile. The resistivity again showed some anomalies which were related to the soil or rock types. The magnetic data would be much better at locating subsurface metallic objects like drains as it is fastertorunandcanberepresentedmoreclearly. The magnetic survey with the caesium magnetometer was able to cover a large amount of area; this is because the magnetometer takes continuous readings. The data is also able to be presented in a contour map which is relatively easy to interpret. The proton magnetometer is a bit slower to operate than the caesiumbutgivessimilarresults.Allferrousobjectspresentinonearepresentintheotherbuttheproton magnetometerdataisnotpresentedinacontourmapbutrathera2dplot. ThegravitytechniquewaseffectiveinlocatingthepathoftheM2tunnel.Thesurveywastimeconsuming andtookawholedaybutitisaquietandrelativelypassivetechnique.

Conclusion
Each technique was successful at locating or investigating their target objectives. Seismic and resistivity couldlocatedepthtobasement;resistivitycouldalsodifferentiaterockorsoiltypes.Magneticsdetectedthe ferrousobjectsintheareaincludingthegeothermalheatpumpsystemandgravitylocatedtheM2tunnel. Thegeophysicaltechniquesareextremelyusefultounderstandthegeologyorenvironmentalaspectsofan areaandtheycanbecarriedoutwithoutdestroyinganyofthearea.Eveniflocationsofdrainsandpipesare given on survey plans these may not be truly accurate and accurately run geophysical techniques may be abletolocatethesefeaturesifnecessaryforconstructionwork. Thecaesiummagnetometerdatawasprobablythemostusefulfromacoveragepointofviewasitcovereda wideareaandshowedvariousmanmadeconstructsinthesubsurface.Theothertechniquesallhavetheir placeanddependingontheexactrequirementofthejobthereareamyriadoftechniqueswhichwouldbe suitable.

[15]

References
TheSydneyBasin,AustralianMuseum,2004 http://www.austmus.gov.au/geoscience/earth/sydbasin.htm<accessed6June2008> SydneyOlympicPark:GeologicalHistory,SydneyOlympicPark,2008 http://www.sydneyolympicpark.com.au/education_and_learning/history/geological<accessed6June2008> HistoryofRyde,CityofRyde,2007 http://www.ryde.nsw.gov.au/ryde/heritage/history_ryde.htm<accessed6June2008> AAPPANewsletter,AustralasianAssociationofHigherEducationFacilitiesOfficers.No.12,March1999. M2TunnelSydney,AustralasianTunnellingSociety,2008 http://www.ats.org.au/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=154<accessed6June2008>

[16]

Appendices
A: B: C1: C2: C3: C4: C5: D: Mapofinvestigationarea,MacquarieUniversity Mapofinvestigationarea,NorthEpping Magneticsmapoverlayedonaerialofuniversity Magneticsmapofinvestigationarea Magneticmapofareacompletedbygroup8 Magneticmapofareacompletedbygroup8(EWlines) Plotofmagneticdiurnaldriftandnoise Seismicfieldsheet(group8) Modelledseismicsections Resistivityfieldsheets(group8) Resistivitysoundingreport Resistivityprofiles Gravityfieldsheetanddumpylevelreadings Gravitymodelleddata

E16: F1: F2: F34:

G12: G3:

[17]

Appendix F3
Line 950E Group 6

Notes: top diagram is psudosection of the raw data, middle section is the psuedosection generated from the resistivity model. The third section is the resistivity model.

Appendix F4

Appendix G3