Laboratory evaluation of ERT for seepage localization in earthen dams: Positional accuracy for dam health monitoring

Earthen dams subjected to variable hydrologic conditions are vulnerable to seepage and internal erosion, which can compromise structural integrity. Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) is widely used to image moisture-driven resistivity anomalies associated with seepage, but field applications rarely allow quantitative evaluation of localization accuracy because seepage geometry is generally unknown. Here, we present a controlled laboratory benchmark that compares the seepage-path localization performance of two widely used ERT arrays—Schlumberger and Dipole–Dipole—using a homogeneous, laboratory-scale 3D earthen dam model with a prescribed seepage pathway of known geometry. ERT data were acquired along six 2D profiles spanning the crest and downstream slope and inverted consistently. Localization accuracy was quantified by comparing detected and ground-truth anomaly positions at three reference points: the anomaly-top depth (T) and the left and right lateral boundaries (L and R). Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) were computed across profiles to assess both typical error and sensitivity to larger deviations. The Schlumberger array consistently produced lower and more uniform localization errors than the Dipole–Dipole array. At point T, Schlumberger achieved MAE/RMSE of 0.67/0.71 cm, compared with 0.75/1.46 cm for Dipole–Dipole. For lateral boundaries, Schlumberger yielded MAE/RMSE of 1.50/1.68 cm at L and 0.50/0.65 cm at R, whereas Dipole–Dipole yielded 2.42/3.46 cm (L) and 1.67/2.06 cm (R). These results indicate that, under controlled conditions with known ground truth, the Schlumberger configuration provides more accurate and more consistent delineation of seepage-path depth and lateral extent than the Dipole–Dipole array. The study demonstrates the value of laboratory-scale physical modeling as a repeatable framework for array evaluation and offers quantitative guidance for designing seepage-focused ERT monitoring strategies for earthen dams.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Structural Health Monitoring
Published
2026-04-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/14759217261422380
Primary Topic
Geophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Laboratory evaluation of ERT for seepage localization in earthen dams: Positional accuracy for dam health monitoring

Reza Ghiassi, Nima Babazadeh Abrbekouh
Structural Health Monitoring
Geophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
article

Laboratory evaluation of ERT for seepage localization in earthen dams: Positional accuracy for dam health monitoring

Reza Ghiassi, Nima Babazadeh Abrbekouh
article en

Abstract

Earthen dams subjected to variable hydrologic conditions are vulnerable to seepage and internal erosion, which can compromise structural integrity. Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) is widely used to image moisture-driven resistivity anomalies associated with seepage, but field applications rarely allow quantitative evaluation of localization accuracy because seepage geometry is generally unknown. Here, we present a controlled laboratory benchmark that compares the seepage-path localization performance of two widely used ERT arrays—Schlumberger and Dipole–Dipole—using a homogeneous, laboratory-scale 3D earthen dam model with a prescribed seepage pathway of known geometry. ERT data were acquired along six 2D profiles spanning the crest and downstream slope and inverted consistently. Localization accuracy was quantified by comparing detected and ground-truth anomaly positions at three reference points: the anomaly-top depth (T) and the left and right lateral boundaries (L and R). Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) were computed across profiles to assess both typical error and sensitivity to larger deviations. The Schlumberger array consistently produced lower and more uniform localization errors than the Dipole–Dipole array. At point T, Schlumberger achieved MAE/RMSE of 0.67/0.71 cm, compared with 0.75/1.46 cm for Dipole–Dipole. For lateral boundaries, Schlumberger yielded MAE/RMSE of 1.50/1.68 cm at L and 0.50/0.65 cm at R, whereas Dipole–Dipole yielded 2.42/3.46 cm (L) and 1.67/2.06 cm (R). These results indicate that, under controlled conditions with known ground truth, the Schlumberger configuration provides more accurate and more consistent delineation of seepage-path depth and lateral extent than the Dipole–Dipole array. The study demonstrates the value of laboratory-scale physical modeling as a repeatable framework for array evaluation and offers quantitative guidance for designing seepage-focused ERT monitoring strategies for earthen dams.

Structural Health Monitoring
University of Tehran (IR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Geophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.