Skip to content 
Engineering geophysics is needed where safety depends on understanding the structure and condition of the geologic environment, timing and cost of solutions: engineering surveys, design, construction control, geo-risk assessment, and operations support. Its strength is in translating assumptions into measurable parameters, and then into a conclusion that can be verified and defended in a report.
If the sequence breaks down, one of two things almost always happens: either a convincing but incorrect interpretation is obtained, or a data set is collected that does not lead to an engineering solution. On this page you will find an easy-to-understand framework of the discipline, a map of the main geophysical methods and practical pointers: what the method really shows, where it is often wrong, and how to organize the verification of conclusions.
The materials are collected in the logic of the MGRI-MGGRU school: how the directions were formed, how the methods were fixed in the curriculum, how they were practiced and why the culture of result verification became a key quality standard. There are separate pages about the origins of the school, the field test site, documents and radiometric methods.
Brief overview
In the 1920s, geophysical methods in the country developed particularly rapidly. One of the key testing grounds was the Kursk Magnetic Anomaly: it was there that the methods were applied in large volumes and proved effective in real geology. P.P. Lazarev participated in these works, G.A. Gamburtsev, A.I. Zaborovsky, L.V. Sorokin. Later, V.I. Baranov and L.V. Sorokin also joined the formation of the geophysical specialty at MGRI. V.I. Baranov and V.F. Bonchkovsky.
From the very beginning it became clear: a geophysicist cannot be only a physicist or only a geologist. A geologic problem statement and a physically based solution work only together.
What quality looks like in engineering geophysics
In engineering geophysics, it is not the fact of measurement itself that matters, but the quality of the output and the transparency of the verification. These are the practical minimums that distinguishes a working result from a random interpretation.
- Measurement. Observations are properly staged and field control eliminates blind errors (profile geometry, repeatability, interference).
- Processing. Transformations are explainable and reproducible, not «fitted to expectation».
- Interpretation. The conclusion is consistent with the geology and physics of the environment: what exactly is changing in the section and why.
- Verification. The result is confirmed by independent sources: another method, a section, a borehole, primary facts and documented data.
Key Sections
A map of geophysical methods in applied logic. There is no superfluous theory here: what is measured, what is actually given, where most mistakes are made and how to organize the verification of conclusions.
Electrical exploration and logging
- What's being measured. Electrical properties of the medium and electromagnetic response.
- What they give. Contrasts of the section, zones of altered properties, well tie-in and refinement of engineering heterogeneities.
- Where mistakes are made. Mixing rock effect and saturation effect without controlling the model.
- How to check. Compare with section, borehole data and independent method.
Seismic survey
- What's being measured. Parameters of elastic wave propagation.
- What they give. Layer geometry, disturbance, zones of weakening and boundary refinement.
- Where mistakes are made. Do not calibrate speeds and get erroneous object geometry.
- How to check. Calibrate against boreholes, coordinate with geology and complex with other data.
Gravity and magnetic exploration
- What's being measured. Potential fields related to density and magnetization.
- What they give. Framework of the structure and anomaly zones at the area scale, a support for further detailing.
- Where mistakes are made. Trying to extract fine detail where the method physically gives a structural framework.
- How to check. Work pair gravito and magneto, correlate with geology and data from other methods.
Radiometry and nuclear radiometric techniques
- What's being measured. Radioactivity and nuclear-physical parameters.
- What they give. Section attributes, rock typing, and radiogeochemical signatures; in the borehole, support for interpretation by logging.
- Where mistakes are made. Ignore the physics of registration and measurement conditions, obtaining incorrect conclusions.
- How to check. Inspection on samples, comparison with borehole data and verification by geology.
Probabilistic and statistical processing
- What it's for. Highlight weak signal and honestly count errors.
- What they give. Filtering, recognizing, classifying, and working with multivariate observations.
- Where mistakes are made. Substitute the interference model with cosmetic filtering.
- How to check. Error control and testing on independent data and plots.
Method combination
- Why it's necessary. Reduce the risk of interpretation error and save the work budget.
- What they give. Consistent site model and manageable research staging.
- Where mistakes are made. Mix up scales and stages, losing either the facility or the money.
- How to check. Internal harmonization of methods and external reconciliation with geology, drilling and primary facts.
Quick route
If you're starting from scratch
Go through the brief overview, then the key sections. After that, be sure to open the documents and the training ground. In this way you will see at a glance the bundle of method, source, practice and understand how the school has shaped the quality discipline.
If you care about the school's line of development
Start with the Moscow Mining Academy and the origins of the school, then go back to the methods map and document the picture. This gives context: why the directions developed the way they did and how the methodological decisions were fixed.
If you're working with radiometry
Go to the radiometry page, and then come back here to the complexing and the rules for verifying the output. This helps to build the direction into the overall engineering geophysics system and not lose the quality of the interpretation.
What's inside
The key lines of development of training methods and culture are collected below. Blocks are revealed as needed so that you read without being overwhelmed.
How the school was designed in the 1930s
- In June 1930, the Geophysical Department was established at MGRI, with A.I. Zaborovsky as its head.
- in 1930, training in four specialties was started: magnetometry, electrical surveying, gravio-seismometry, radiometry
- in August 1930, special departments were formed in the following areas
- In 1932 method departments were united into the Department of General Geophysical Methods
Electrical exploration and logging
The faculty has been active in electrical methods and logging for decades. This direction is largely due to A.I. Zaborovsky and L.M. Alpin, as well as their students and subsequent research groups. For practice, it is important that electrical methods give strong results when the problem is properly formulated and when the model is honestly controlled.
Key milestones and works
- in 1933 L.M. Alpin came to MGRI and started research on oil topics
- In 1935, his work on the theory of electrical prospecting was published, which became a fundamental
- in 1938 published a paper on the theory of borehole logging and developed section models for electrical logging
- A.I. Zaborovsky's textbook on electrical prospecting was published in 1943, which became a desk book for a long time.
- in 1947, Alpin published a paper on field sources and DC methods
- In 1950, a paper on the theory of dipole probing, important for structural electrical exploration, was published
- in 1954, work began on radio-wave scanning.
- In 1956-1960, research was developed on shaft variants of illumination and on low-frequency inductive methods.
- in 1960, the transient method was proposed
Seismic survey
When the Faculty was established, the Department of Seismic Exploration was organized and headed by V.F. Bonchkovsky. G.A. Gamburtsev, who later became an academician and a recognized founder of the Russian seismic school, worked at MGRI at that time. For engineering tasks, seismic is especially valuable because it helps to refine the geometry of the section and identify disturbances, but it requires strict velocity calibration.
Key facts and the development of teaching
- In 1932 the method departments were united into the Department of General Geophysical Methods under the leadership of A.I. Zaborovsky.
- in 1937-1938 G.A. Gamburtsev published the first textbook on the discipline
- I.I. Gurvich, the author of official textbooks on seismic exploration for technical schools and universities, was in charge of teaching since 1945.
- until 1978, seismic exploration was taught at the Department of General Geophysical Methods
- after 1978 the chair of seismic and borehole methods was separated from the chair of seismic and borehole methods
- In the 1990s, a method of shallow-depth high-resolution seismic survey was developed and tested for upper section problems
High-resolution seismic survey in Moscow (1990s)
In the 90s of the XX century at the Department of Seismic and Borehole Methods[13] of MGRI-RGGRU (then MGGA) under the guidance of G.N. Boganik (1935-2007) and V.P. Nomokonov (1921-2001) the method of high-resolution seismic exploration[14] was tested to study karst-suffosion and neotectonic processes on the territory of Moscow. Laptops and global positioning tools are coming to engineering geophysics.
This is an important marker of the transition from «classical» exploration seismic to urban and engineering tasks in the upper part of the section, This is an important marker of the transition from classical exploration seismic to urban and engineering tasks in the upper part of the section.
In engineering terms, «high resolution» is not a slogan, but a set of rigid requirements for field and desktop solutions: frequency range and sources, profile pitch and density of observations, quality of statics/velocities, tie discipline, transparency of control. It is these requirements that make the method suitable for diagnostics of karst-suffosion risks and manifestations of neotectonics in the city.
- Subject. The upper part of the section where decompaction zones, voids, fault/weakened zones and associated deformations are formed.
- Objective. Not a «nice cut» but an engineering verifiable model: where is the risk, what is the geometry, what is supported by independent facts.
- Key Discipline. Velocity and static control: without it, anomaly geometry easily becomes a processing artifact.
- Field control. Precise profile geometry and repeatability is where digitalization began to really change practice in the 1990s.
Probabilistic and statistical methods of processing
The development of statistical processing of geophysical data was based on the works of A.G. Tarkhov. In the late 1950s, he proposed a method of inverse probabilities to detect weak anomalies of a given shape. The direction was further developed through the research of his students and colleagues, through monographs and program implementations. In applied work, this means one thing: you do not just «process» but control the error and understand the limits of the result.
Chronology and applied results
- in 1969 published a monograph by O.A. Demidovich on the statistical separation of weak anomalies. Demidovich on the statistical separation of weak anomalies
- In the 1970s, under the leadership of A.G. Tarkhov and A.A. Nikitin, self-tuning filters, energy filtering, recognition and classification were developed
- a monograph on statistical methods of geophysical anomaly detection was published in 1979
- In the 1980s, work began on software for statistical processing techniques and for processing of nuclear-physical information
- in the 1990s, joint works provided development of processing and interpretation of multilevel observations
- COSCAD-3D technology and the development of wavelet transformations and neural networks in applied problems are noted among the achievements of the last decade.
Method combination
Complementation emerged as a direct response to the limitations of each individual method. Isolated application leads to interpretation errors, whereas an integrated approach increases reliability and affects the economics of the whole process. The school materials emphasize the role of the physico-geological model and the staging of work: one cannot «shoot at sparrows with a cannon», but also it is impossible to save money where the cost of error is higher than the measurement budget.
What is the basis of bundling
- each method gives a different slice of reality and separately inevitably leads to errors of interpretation
- integrated techniques helped overcome limitations and improved the quality of exploration
- The early integrated approach is exemplified by studies at KMA, where the combination of magnetic and gravity surveys has shown high efficiency
- The system-structural approach and physical-geological model as a basis for selecting a rational complex are emphasized in the methodology of complexing
- The bundling study line has separate courses and study guides prepared by faculty members in the department
Who benefits
The page is designed for different roles. Choose the one that is closest to your task and use it as a working reference.
- Engineers and geologists. To choose a method meaningfully, understand the limitations, and obtain a verifiable conclusion.
- Students and faculty. To see the nexus of department, methodology, practice and the culture of checking the result.
- Researchers. To draw on the school's texture, primary sources, and sequence of trends.
- Project Managers. To build the quality of interpretation, work program and bundling without excessive costs.
Terminology
- Engineering Geophysics. Applications of geophysics to problems where verifiable conclusions and manageable solutions are important.
- CMA. Kursk Magnetic Anomaly, an important historical context of mass application of exploration geophysics methods.
- Gamma logging. Downhole gamma ray recording method for section analysis and rock comparison.
- Physical and geologic model. A systems view of the site where geology, petrophysics, fields and disturbances are harmonized.
- Output verification. Confirmation of interpretation by independent sources and methods.
Frequent questions
Where to start in choosing a method
Start with the objective and verification criteria. Then select a minimally sufficient set of methods and plan ahead for independent verification. This saves time and reduces the risk of interpretation error.
Why one method is almost never enough
Because different methods are sensitive to different physical parameters, and interpretation almost always has alternatives. Complementation reduces the risk of error and increases the reproducibility of the result.
Where to find primary sources and exact wording
The MGRI documents page, which collects orders and fragments that capture the structure and methodological outline of the school. This is particularly useful if you are preparing a research, academic paper or report with increased substantiation requirements.