We have acquired a [Formula: see text] seismoelectric section over an unconfined aquifer to demonstrate the effectiveness of interfacial signals at imaging interfaces in shallow sedimentary environments. The seismoelectric data were acquired by using a [Formula: see text] accelerated weight-drop source and a 24-channel seismoelectric recording system composed of grounded dipoles, preamplifiers, and seismographs. In the shot records, interfacial signals were remarkably clear; they arrived simultaneously at offsets as far as [Formula: see text] from the seismic source. The most prominent signal was generated at the water table at a depth of approximately [Formula: see text] and had peak amplitudes on the order of [Formula: see text]. A weaker response was generated at a shallower interface that is interpreted to be a water-retentive layer. The validity of these two laterally continuous events, and of other discontinuous events indicative of vadose-zone heterogeneity, is corroborated by the presence of reflections exhibiting similar characteristics in a ground-penetrating radar profile acquired along the same line.

Field experiments carried out at a site near Vancouver, Canada have shown that a shallow lithologic boundary can be mapped on the basis of its seismoelectric response. As seismic waves cross the boundary between organic-rich fill and impermeable glacial till, they induce electric fields that can be measured at the surface with grounded dipole receivers. Sledgehammer and blasting cap seismic sources, positioned up to 7 m away from the interface, have produced clear seismoelectric conversions. Two types of seismoelectric signals are observed. The primary response is distinguished by near simultaneous arrivals at widely separated receivers. Its arrival time is equal to the time required for a seismic P-wave to travel from the shotpoint to the fill/till boundary. On the surface, its maximum amplitude (about 1 mV/m) is measured by dipoles located within a few meters of the shotpoint. At greater distances, the amplitude of the primary arrival decays rapidly with offset, and secondary seismoelectric arrivals become dominant. They differ from the primary response in that their arrival times increase with dipole offset, and they appear to be generated in the immediate vicinity of each dipole sensor. Our studies show that the responses cannot be attributed to piezoelectricity or to resistivity modulation in the presence of a uniform telluric current. We infer that seismically induced electrokinetic effects or streaming potentials are responsible for the seismoelectric conversion, and a simple electrostatic model is proposed to account for the two types of arrivals. Although our experiments were small in scale, the results are significant in that they suggest that the seismoelectric method may be used to map the boundaries of permeable formations.

[1] Conversions of compressional seismic waves to electric fields have been measured in two boreholes drilled in an unconfined sandy aquifer on the Gnangara Mound near Perth, Australia. The seismoelectric conversions at both field sites occurred in the vicinity of the water table at 13-m depth and yielded maximum amplitudes of 1 mV/m using a sledgehammer source on surface. Partially cemented layers, inferred from geological and geophysical logs, straddle the water table and may play a role in generating the conversion and influencing its amplitude distribution. The dense vertical sampling used in these borehole experiments reveals spatial and temporal polarity reversals of the interfacial signal which provide new evidence in support of the conceptual model for seismoelectric conversions at interfaces. We demonstrate that the growth rate of the source zone and its maximum vertical extent below the water table are encoded in the polarity of the interfacial signal. These experiments confirm that vertical seismoelectric profiling can be used to gain further insight into seismoelectric conversions and characteristics of interfaces that makes them amenable to detection.

A field trial of seismoelectric surveying was carried out at a site underlain by 20 m of water-saturated clayey Champlain Sea sediments, renowned for their amenability to high resolution imaging by seismic reflection surveys. Seismically induced electrokinetic effects were recorded using an array of 26 grounded dipole electric field antennas, and two different seismic sources including an eight-gauge shotgun, and a moderate power (10 000 lb Minivib) vibrator. Despite the high electrical conductivity of the sediments, shot records show evidence of possible interfacial seismoelectric conversions caused by the arrival of P-waves at the base of the clay/top of bedrock and at the top of a layer of elevated porosity and conductivity within the clay at 7 m depth. However, the data are more remarkable for the fact that P-wave, S-wave, and PS/SP converted wave reflections evident in the seismic records all give rise to electrical arrivals exhibiting very similar moveout patterns in the seismoelectric records. Superficially, these electrical responses could be misinterpreted as simple coseismic seismoelectric effects associated with the arrival of reflected seismic waves at each dipole antenna on surface. However, their broader bandwidth, superior coherency and earlier arrival times compared to their corresponding seismic arrivals indicate that the electrical effects are generated by the arrival of seismic reflections below each dipole at the shallow intraclay interface 7 m below surface. Such quasi-coseismic arrivals have recently been predicted by full-waveform seismoelectric modelling and characterized as evanescent electromagnetic (EM) waves. In retrospect, they were also observed in earlier seismoelectric field trials, but not measured as clearly nor recognized as a distinct seismoelectric mode intermediate between interfacial and coseismic effects. We propose that the observed quasi-coseismic effect can be understood physically as a fringing field emanating from the travelling charge separation associated with a P-wave (direct or modeconverted) crossing a subsurface interface at an oblique angle. Such effects may be nearly indistinguishable from coseismic effects if the interface depth is small compared to the seismic wavelength, but recognition of the phenomenon contributes to an improved understanding of the seismoelectric wavefield, and will lead to improved interpretations. From a practical standpoint, the results of this field trial suggest that using electric field receivers to supplement geophones on surface could yield significantly higher resolution seismic reflection images in those areas where suitable near-surface layers exist for the generation of quasi-coseismic effects. The results also reinforce the importance of using multichannel recording to allow interfacial seismoelectric conversions originating at depth to be distinguished from stronger coseismic and quasi-coseismic arrivals originating in the near-surface by measurement of their arrival time versus offset (moveout) and amplitude versus offset b...

[1] Seismoelectric signals have been measured as a function of depth in a borehole penetrating glaciofluvial sands, silts, and glacial till using a broadband surface seismic source, and a downhole electrode array. Transient electric field pulses, with amplitudes of 1 to 4 mV/m accompanied the arrival of seismic P-waves at the electrodes but no simultaneous interfacial signals were observed above the noise floor of approximately 0.2 mV/m. The co-seismic effect was strongest in a sand and gravel layer where its amplitude is consistent with the predictions of a simplified theoretical model. Normalization of the amplitude logs by measurements of seismic particle velocity and electrical conductivity enhanced their sensitivity to changes in lithology and porosity. The results of this experiment suggest that co-seismic seismoelectric effects show potential as a porosity/permeability logging tool in the borehole environment.