International Journal Of Latest Technology In Engineering & Management (IJLTEM)

Volume 9 - Issue 6 {November-December 2024} {Page: 02-12}

DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE

SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION METHOD TECHNIQUE FOR
ENGINEERING SITE CHARACTERIZATION IN FUPRE AND ITS
ENVIRONS
1
Ighere S.G., 1Olaseni V.B., 1 Onifade Y.S., 2Egbai J.C., 3Utah S.
1
Department of Physics, Federal University of Petroleum Resources Effurun, Nigeria
2
Department of Physics, Delta State University, Abraka, Nigeria
3
Department of Earth Science, Federal University of Petroleum Resources Effurun, Nigeria

ABSTRACT: The study was carried out at the Federal University of Petroleum Resources to determine the mechanical
properties of the soil to know the subsurface strength. Seismic refraction survey was conducted for data acquisition. Fifteen
traverses were used for the data acquisition. The data was acquired using a 24-channel geophone (PASI-GEA 24) and was
processed using the GEO-STRU software. A total of three geologic layers were identified along the fifteen traverse each
having density of 1800kg/m³, and poisson’s ratio of 0.35 for all the layers. Having a velocity range of approximately
220.5m/s – 371.7m/s for the first layer, the second layer has a velocity range of approximately 381.7m/s – 440.8m/s, and
the last layer has a velocity range of approximately 902.1m/s – 1196.2m/s. The shear modulus for layer one and two range
from 20mpa - 57mpa and 62mpa - 91mpa, respectively, which indicate that they are composed of silty sand. Layer three's
shear modulus indicates that it is formed of dense sand with a shear modulus range of 338mpa – 594.38mpa. The first layer
young's modulus ranges from around 54.53mpa – 154.98mpa for all the traverses which suggests loose sand, the second
layer young's modulus also range from163.40mpa – 246.56mpa suggest sandy clay as the main material, and the third layer
young's modulus ranges from about 912mpa – 1604.81mpa suggests dense sand.

INTRODUCTION
Due to the failure to conduct the required investigations before the construction of structures, developing countries have
endured repeated collapse of engineering structures throughout the years. Recently, the statistics of building and
engineering structure failures in these countries have risen exponentially (Alabi, 2020). The number of structural
breakdowns in Nigeria in recent years is horrifying (Akintorinwa and Adeusi 2009). The geotechnical design necessary for
projects requiring deep and shallow foundations, basements, slopes, tunnels, highways, embankments, mining tailings,
seismic hazard assessments, site cleanup, and ground improvement must include site characterization as a crucial
component (Lehane et al., 2018). It is crucial to assess the subsurface integrity before construction because when an
engineering structure's foundation is built on a less capable earth layer, it poses a major threat to the structure and may even
cause it to collapse (Ayodele et al, 2019).
Geophysical methods are often used in site investigation to determine the overburden thickness and to map subsurface
conditions prior to excavation and construction. Geophysical data is an important parameter in contributing to the design
and construction of Civil Engineering structures such as buildings, roads and dams. Electrical resistivity and seismic
refraction methods are the most common geophysical techniques used for this purpose (Kurtenacker, 1934; Drake, 1962;
Burton, 1976; Nunn, 1979; Keary and Brooks, 1984). However, in resistivity method, the depth of investigation and
subsurface sections captured is limited to the array techniques employed during data acquisition that is resistivity sounding
or resistivity imaging.
Seismic method is the geophysical method that gives the most detailed picture of subsurface geology because it gives us the
opportunity to view the subsurface layers in two-dimensions (2D) or three-dimensions (3D) and to greater depths than that
captured in resistivity method. Therefore, geologic sections computed from seismic method is a more reliable model of the
subsurface since the earth is heterogeneous and 3D in geometry. That is why seismic method is often used to determine the
characteristics of subsurface soils and rocks, (Ayolabi 2004) and structural setting of an area. The technique (seismic
refraction) finds application in the determination of rock competence for engineering application, depth to bedrock,
groundwater exploration, crustal structure and tectonics. To fully understand a region's near-surface geology, it is important
to examine the soil (Adewoyin et al., 2021). The most common methods for characterizing soil are drilling, excavation,
and geophysical studies. However, it may be difficult to extrapolate the same result in the expansion of a much wider space
of the region studied because the results from these methods are site-specific and are only applicable to the tested spot, in

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 2 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

light of the aforementioned, it is suggested that additional methods, especially geophysical studies, be employed in addition
to geotechnical ones to accurately assess the condition of the subsurface (Adewoyin et al., 2021).
Olaseni and Onifade (2024) did shallow investigation using seismic refraction method using FUPRE stadium and its
Environs as a case study, from his study of the subsurface lithology in study area, it was revealed that the first two layers
have poor bearing capacity as a result of low shear strength values (i.e 33.61 MPa and 72.99 MPa for first and second layer
respectively), however the third layer which 243.44Mpa has high compressibility to withstand any load attached to it.
Ayodele et al. (2019) state that because of their non-intrusive approach to civil engineering sites, geophysical approaches
have been shown to be extremely useful in the development of engineering projects. Seismic method is one of the main
geophysical techniques for examining underlying layers and/or local anomalies. This technique is widely used in a variety
of disciplines, including engineering, environmental science, groundwater research, hydrocarbon extraction, and the
discovery of industrial minerals (Khalil and Hanafy, 2018). Seismic waves are produced by a controlled source and travel
through the earth's crust during seismic surveys. After refraction or reflection at geological boundaries within the
subsurface, certain waves will surface again (Kearey et al, 2022).
Seismic methods, especially the refraction seismic method, have been used to solve many problems related to civil
engineering, and environmental geology works. Seismic methods are divided into two types: invasive and non-invasive.
The invasive type requires borehole like (Cross-hole, Down hole, P-S suspension and logging). As for the second type
which is the non-invasive, it is carried out on the surface like (Seismic Refraction and Reflection, Spectral Analysis of
Surface Waves (SASW), Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW)) which enables us to calculate the velocities of
the shear seismic waves (VS), it in turn serves the engineering evaluation process for different sites. By utilizing processes
that are quick and inexpensive, the seismic refraction surveying techniques provide pertinent information regarding soil
behavior at very low strain levels for wide areas of soil that are evaluated in an undisturbed state (Foti et al, 2023).

METHODOLOGY
2.1 Location of The Study Area
The study area is located on the campus of Nigeria's Federal University of Petroleum Resources Effurun (FUPRE). The
school's athletic complex is the designated study area. The research area is located within the blue rectangle on the map
below (Figure 1.1).

Figure 2. 1: Map of FUPRE campus showing the study areas in blue rectangle. (Source: Alaminiokuma 2020).

2.2 Geophysical Equipment

Measuring tape: This is used to get a straight profile and determine the offset between each geophone along the traverse.
Seismic cables: Also known as sensor cables, are cables designed to carry the signals generated by the geophones when
they detect seismic waves, and transmit them to the seismograph for recording and analysis.
Geophones: These are instruments that detect seismic waves generated by explosions, and other sources of ground motion.
They send detected vibrations through the seismic cable to the seismograph for recording.
GPS: This is used to get the coordinates (latitude and longitude) of the survey area. It’s also used to get the elevation of the
area in meters above sea level.

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 3 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

Ranging Pole: Ranging poles are survey instruments that are used for spotting and marking the position of survey stations.
They can also be used to range straight lines.
Seismograph: This instrument is used to measure and record ground vibrations, including seismic waves generated by
earthquakes and other sources of ground motion. It consists of a sensor (often a geophone) that detects ground motion and
converts it into an electrical signal, and a recording device that records and displays the signal.
Hammer and Metal plate: A hammer and metal plate is used as a simple seismic energy source to generate seismic waves
for the seismic surveys. The process involves striking a metal plate with a heavy hammer to create a sudden and localized
disturbance, which generates a series of seismic waves that propagate through the surrounding subsurface.
2.2 Data Acquisition from the Study Area
In this research, a 24 channel PASI GEA-24 seismograph was used in the data acquisition and the data was acquired from
15 traverses. The geophone spacing of 4m was used during the acquisition and both forward and reverse shooting was done
for each traverse at positions 0m, 50m and 100m respectively.
A metal plate and sledge hammer was used for the generation of the seismic wave, the hammer was released on the metal
plate to create a disturbance that produces wave which is capable of penetrating the Earth, which travels through the Earth
penetrating different layers and reflected back to the surface, the waves are detected by the geophones which are
strategically placed on the Earth surface which is then transmitted to the laptop.
The data was recorded on a laptop which was connected to the seismograph using a seismic cable, the data was processed
using the GEO-STRU software and seismic waves for each traverse were generated. First breaks were picked for each
traverse using the software and time-distance graphs plotted for each traverse using the GEO-STRU software. The time
distance graphs were analyzed to obtain information about the velocity of the waves as they propagate through the
subsurface and also the intercept time of the waves. The thickness of the subsurface layers for each traverse was calculated
using the G.R.M method, and with the knowledge of these the mechanical properties of the subsurface which includes:
Seismic velocity, Density (ρ), Poisson's ratio (σ), Young’s modulus, shear modulus and bulk modulus. The morphology of
the subsurface reflectors was generated using the software for each traverse and also the velocity map for each traverse was
also generated.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Traverse 1 tables and graphs
Table 3.1 below is the offset values taken during acquisition of data while table 3.2 to table 3.4 are the time distance values.
Figures 3.1 to 3.3 are the images of graph generated after each shot.

Table 3.1: Offset Geophones' geometry

Position X Position Z
[m] [m]
1 4.0 0.0
2 8.0 0.0
3 12.0 0.0
4 16.0 0.0
5 20.0 0.0
6 24.0 0.0
7 28.0 0.0
8 32.0 0.0
9 36.0 0.0
10 40.0 0.0
11 44.0 0.0
12 48.0 0.0
13 52.0 0.0
14 56.0 0.0
15 60.0 0.0
16 64.0 0.0
17 68.0 0.0
18 72.0 0.0
19 76.0 0.0
20 80.0 0.0

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 4 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

21 84.0 0.0
22 88.0 0.0
23 92.0 0.0
24 96.0 0.0
Shots data
Shot 1
Location: Back of College of Science
Source position X 0 [m]
Source position Z 0 [m]
Co-ordinates: Latitude: 5° 34' 12.9'' N, Longitude: 005° 50' 30.2'' E, Elevation: 3 m

Figure 3. 1: Traverse 1 shot 1

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 5 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

Table 3. 2: Traverse 1- Shot1 travel times

Geophone position Arrival Time
[m] [ms]
4.0 10.1551
8.0 23.2116
12.0 33.3667
16.0 43.5217
20.0 56.5783
24.0 71.0855
28.0 81.2406
32.0 92.8464
36.0 105.9029
40.0 114.6073
44.0 123.3116
48.0 132.0159
52.0 140.7203
56.0 149.4246
60.0 158.1290
64.0 165.3826
68.0 174.0870
72.0 180.7651
76.0 184.9447
80.0 187.0345
84.0 191.2140
88.0 195.3935
92.0 199.5731
96.0 201.6628
Shot 2
Location: Back of College of Science
Source position X 50 [m]
Source position Z 0 [m]
Co-ordinates: Latitude: 5° 34' 12.0'' N, Longitude: 005° 50' 31.6'' E, Elevation: 3 m

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 6 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

Figure 3. 2: Traverse 1 shot 2

Table 3. 3: Traverse 1- Shot2 travel times

Geophone position Time
[m] [ms]
4.0 79.7596
8.0 76.6249
12.0 73.8386
16.0 68.9624
20.0 63.7380
24.0 55.3789
28.0 48.0647
32.0 42.8403
36.0 34.4812
40.0 21.9426
44.0 9.4040
48.0 1.0449
52.0 1.0449

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 7 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

56.0 9.7523
60.0 20.8977
64.0 34.4812
68.0 42.8403
72.0 54.3340
76.0 60.6033
80.0 66.8727
84.0 70.0073
88.0 72.0971
92.0 76.2766
96.0 79.4113
Shot 3
Location: Back of College of Science
Source position X 100 [m]
Source position Z 0 [m]
Co-ordinates: Latitude: 5° 34' 11.0'' N, Longitude: 005° 50' 32.9'' E, Elevation: 3 m

Figure 3. 3: Traverse 1 shot 3

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 8 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

Table 3. 4: Traverse 1- Shot3 travel times

Geophone position Time
[m] [ms]
4.0 205.8424
8.0 203.7526
12.0 198.5282
16.0 194.3487
20.0 191.2140
24.0 187.0345
28.0 182.8549
32.0 175.5407
36.0 168.2265
40.0 159.8674
44.0 152.5532
48.0 144.1942
52.0 134.7902
56.0 122.2516
60.0 111.8027
64.0 101.3539
68.0 88.8152
72.0 78.3664
76.0 67.9175
80.0 57.4687
84.0 44.9301
88.0 35.5261
92.0 24.0324
96.0 8.7043

Figure 3. 4: Traverse1 travel time curve for the 3 shots showing the 3 subsurface layers

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 9 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

Table 3. 5: Other geotechnical parameters

Layer n. 1 Layer n. 2 Layer n. 3
Poisson's ratio 0.35 0.35 0.35
Density [kg/m³] 1800.00 1800.00 1800.00
Vp [m/s] 371.73 468.87 1068.82
Vs [m/s] 178.58 225.24 513.44
G0 [MPa] 57.40 91.32 474.53
Ed [Mpa] 248.74 395.71 2056.28
M0 [MPa] 191.33 304.39 1581.75
Ey [Mpa] 154.98 246.56 1281.22
G0: Shear modulus;
Ed: Oedometric modulus;
M0: Bulk modulus;
Ey: Young's modulus;

Figure 3. 5: Morphology of the subsurface reflectors (Traverse 1)

Figure 3. 6: Velocity map of the subsurface (Traverse 1)

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 10 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

DISCUSSION
The seismic refraction method has been used to characterized the subsurface in FUPRE, Okuokoko environment. Using a 3
shot point’s survey configuration along the traverses, three layers were delineated across the fifteen (15) traverses of the
study areas with a velocity range of approximately 220.5 m/s – 371.7 m/s for the first layer, the second layer has a velocity
range of approximately 381.7 m/s – 440.8 m/s, and the last layer has a velocity range of approximately 902.1 m/s – 1196.2
m/s. The lithology of the layers is inferred from the velocity of the three levels to be loose and unconsolidated sand for the
top layer, a mixture of clay and sand for the second layer, and wet coarse sand for the third layer. The presence of silt in the
geologic layers is also indicated by the poisson's ratio of the three layers, which is around 0.35 for the 15 traverses. The first
layer young's modulus ranges from around 54.53 mpa – 154.98 mpa for all the traverses also suggests loose sand, the
second layer young's modulus also range from about 163.40mpa – 246.56 mpa suggest sandy clay as the main material, and
the third layer young's modulus ranges from about 912.00 mpa – 1604.81 mpa suggests dense sand. The shear moduli of
layers one and two indicate that they are composed of silty sand, with shear moduli range of around 20 mpa – 57 mpa and
62 mpa – 91 mpa, respectively. Layer three's shear modulus indicates that it is formed of dense sand with a shear modulus
range of 338.00 mpa – 594.38 mpa.

CONCLUSION
Based on the acquired data from the seismic profiles, it appears that the subsurface geology is quite strong, as indicated by
the high values of the Young's modulus (Ey), Shear modulus (G0), and Bulk modulus (M0) for all three layers from the
traverses.
Young's modulus is a measure of a material's stiffness, and the high values for each layer indicate that the subsurface
geology is very resistant to deformation. Similarly, the Shear modulus is a measure of a material's resistance to shear
deformation, and the Bulk modulus is a measure of a material's resistance to volume change under pressure. The high
values for these parameters indicate that the subsurface geology is strong and resistant to deformation under stress.
Additionally, the Poisson's ratio for all three layers is 0.35, which indicates that the subsurface geology is relatively
incompressible and resistant to volume changes.
The density of the subsurface geology is 1800 kg/m³ for all three layers, which is a relatively low density, indicating that
the subsurface geology is composed of sedimentary rocks rather than denser igneous or metamorphic rocks.
The seismic wave velocities for each layer are also high, with Vp and Vs values increasing with depth. This suggests that
the subsurface geology becomes increasingly compact and homogeneous with depth, potentially indicating the presence of
solid rock at greater depths.
Overall, based on the seismic profile data acquired, it appears that the subsurface geology is strong, dense, and resistant to
deformation under stress, likely composed of sedimentary rocks, and potentially contains solid rock at greater depths. For
construction purposes layer three is best to erect any structure.

REFERENCES
[1] Abam, T.K.S., 2016. Engineering geology of the Niger Delta. Journal of Earth Sciences and Geotechnical Engineering, 6(3),
pp.65-89.
[2] Adewoyin, O.O., Joshua, E.O., Akinyemi, M.L., Omeje, M. and Adagunodo, T.A., 2021. Evaluation of geotechnical parameters
of reclaimed land from near-surface seismic refraction method. Heliyon, 7(4), p.e06765.
[3] Agha, S.O., 2016. Assessment of the strength of foundation materials in some parts of Afikpo, Nigeria, using seismic refraction.
Nigerian Journal of Physics, 18(1), pp.33-38.
[4] Aka, M.U., Okeke, F.N., Ibuot, J.C. and Obiora, D.N., 2018. Geotechnical investigation of near-surface structures using seismic
refraction techniques in parts of Akwa Ibom State, Southern Nigeria. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, 4(2), pp.451-
459.
[5] Akintorinwa, O.J. and Adeusi, F.A., 2009. Integration of geophysical and geotechnical investigations for a proposed lecture
room complex at the Federal University of Technology, Akure SW, Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences, 2(3), pp.241-254.
[6] Alabi, A.A., 2020. Site characterization for engineering purposes using geophysical and geotechnical techniques. Materials
and Geoenvironment, 67(4), pp.197-207.
[7] Alaminiokuma, G.I. and Chaanda, M.S., 2020. Geophysical Investigation of Structural Failures Using Electrical Resistivity
Tomography: A Case Study of Buildings in FUPRE, Nigeria. J Earth Sci Geotech Eng, 10(5), pp.15-33.
[8] Alaminiokuma, G.I . and Omigie, J.I., 2020. HYDROGEOPHYSICAL DELINEATION OF PROLIFIC GROUNDWATER
AQUIFER AROUND STUDENTS HOSTELS IN FUPRE CAMPUS, NIGERIA. Geological Behavior (GBR), 4(2), pp.68-72.
[9] Al-Heety A.J. (2019) Seismic Refraction Survey for Teaching Hospital Project site of the Mosul University, [Link]. thesis, Dept.
of Earth Science, College of Science University of Mosul, Iraq.
[10] Al-Khafaji, Ammar Damhem Jassim (2022) Using seismic methods to investigate places Weakness and geotechnical evaluation
of the soil foundations of the Hussein Water Project in Karbala, Master’s thesis, College.

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 11 |

 DETERMINATION OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USING SEISMIC REFRACTION.....

[11] Al-Mawla, Salman Zain Al-Abidin (2021): Using geophysical methods in evaluating properties Geotechnical engineering of the
Al-Azim Dam site. Doctoral thesis, College of Science - University of Baghdad.
[12] Al-Rubaie, Asaad Salman Qanbar (2019): Engineering use of the seismic refraction method in a site Electrical station.
Master's thesis, College of Science - University of Baghdad.
[13] Al-Shajiri, Sabah Jassim Dahboush (2018) A geophysical and geotechnical study of the soil for two sites. In the city of
Baghdad. Master’s thesis, College of Science, University of Mosul.
[14] Al-Sadi, H.N. (2022) Seismic Exploration. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel
[15] Al-Salhi, Muthanna Abdul Sattar Rasool (2021): Measuring some geotechnical properties using Longitudinal and transverse
refracted seismic waves for selected locations between the Baiji and Samarra regions.
[16] Ayodele, Y.G., Joshua, A.O. and Sunday, O.J., 2019. An Engineering Site Characterization using geophysical methods: a case
study from Akure, Southwestern Nigeria. J Earth Sci Geotech Eng, 5(4), pp.57-77.
[17] Ayolabi, E.A. (2004). Seismic refraction survey of University of Lagos, Nigeria and its implication. Journal of Applied
Sciences. Vol.7 No.3, pp4319-4327
[18] Bawuah, G. (2018). The Use of Seismic Refraction Survey in Geotecnical Investigation. International Journal of Engineering
Research and Science (IJOER) vol.4. ISSN: 2395_6992.
[19] Dobrin, M.B. and Savit, C.H. (2020). Introduction to Geophysical Prospecting. 4th Edition. McGraw-Hill Book Company.
[20] Drake, C. L. (1962). Geophysics and engineering Geophysics 27: 193-197.
[21] Essien, U.E., Akankpo, A.O., George, N.J. and Umoren, E.B. (2023). Determination Of Poisson’s Ratio Of Surface Soils And
Shallow Sediments Of Uyo And Environ From Seismic Compressional And Shear Wave Velocities.
[22] Foti, S., Sambuelli, L., Socco, V.L. and Strobbia, C., 2023. Experiments of joint acquisition of seismic refraction and surface
wave data. Near surface geophysics, 1(3), pp.119-129.
[23] Hole, J.A. (2016). Seismic Refraction Data Acquisition and Processing: A Beginner’s Guide. Journal of Environmental and
Engineering Geophysics, 21(1), 1-19.
[24] Kearey, P., Brooks, M. and Hill, I., 1984. An introduction to geophysical exploration (Vol. 4). John Wiley & Sons.
[25] Khalid N. D. (2020) “The effective fluid bulk-modulus within a hydrostatic transmission,” Journal of Dynamic Systems,
Measurement and Control, Transactions of the ASME, vol. 119, no. 3, pp. 462–466, Sep. 1997, doi: 10.1115/1.2801279.
[26] Khalil, M.H. and Hanafy, S.M., 2018. Engineering applications of seismic refraction method: A field example at Wadi Wardan,
Northeast Gulf of Suez, Sinai, Egypt. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 65(3-4), pp.132-141.
[27] Khurshid, P. (2019). Quantitative Analysis of Seismic Refraction Data to Delineate the Weathering Structures in Parts of Delta
State. SSRG International Journal of Applied Physics ( SSRG – IJAP ) - Volume 5 Issue 2.
[28] Kurtenacker, K. S. (1934). Some practical application of resistivity measurements to high problem. Transaction of American
Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers 110: 193-205.
[29] Lehane, B.M., Acosta-Martínez, H.E. and Kelly, R., 2018. Geotechnical and geophysical site characterisation 5.
[30] McGarry, S. (2023). Seismic Refraction for Site Investigation. Geotechnical News, 31(1), 25-27.
[31] Momoh, K.O., Raimi, J. and Lawal, K.M., 2021. Seismic refraction survey for foundation investigation at Ahmadu Bello
University Zaria Phase II, Kaduna State, Nigeria. FUDA Journal of Science, 3 (3), 161, 167.
[32] Mondol, N.H., 2020. Seismic exploration. Petroleum Geoscience, pp.375-402.
[33] Olaseni V.B and Onifade Y.S (2024) Shallow Site Investigation using Seismic Refraction Method: Case Study of FUPRE
Stadium and Its Environs 8(4) FUPRE Journal Of Scientific and Industrial Research, ISSN: 2578-1129 (Online)
[34] Oghenero, A.E., Akpokodje, E.G. and Tse, A.C., 2022. Geotechnical Properties of Subsurface Soils in Warri, Western Niger
Delta, Nigeria. Journal of Earth Sciences and Geotechnical Engineering, 4(1), pp.89-102.
[35] Schuck, A. and Lange, G., 2019. Seismic methods. In Environmental Geology (pp. 337-402). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
[36] Shakir (2022) Site investigations of the proposed site for establishing the metro in the city of Najaf. Master’s thesis, College of
Science, University of Mosul.
[37] Shebl, S., Gemail, K.S., Attwa, M., Soliman, S.A., Azab, A. and Farag, M.H., 2019. Utilizing shallow seismic refraction in
defining the geotechnical properties of the foundation materials: A case study at New Minia City, Nile Valley, Egypt. Egyptian
Journal of Petroleum, 28(2), pp.145-154.
[38] Sheriff, R. E., and Geldart, L. P. (2019). Exploration seismology (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Stokoe, K. H., and
Nazarian, S. (2019). Geophysical methods for geotechnical site characterization. In Proceedings of the 10th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering (Vol. 3, pp. 1273-1313).
[39] Telford, W.M., Geldart, L.P., and Sheriff, R.E. (2019). Applied Geophysics. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press.
[40] Ugwu, S.A. and Nwankwo, C.N., 2023. Determination of Elastic Constants and Seismic Velocity of Unconsolidated Layers
around the Greater Port Harcourt City, Rivers State, Nigeria. Pacific Journal of Science and Technology, 14(2), pp.551-564.

[Link] 10.56581/IJLTEM.9.6.02-12 |pAGE| 12 |