There is an increasing need for effective tools to assess the structural condition and damage evolution of tailings dams, given their high risk of catastrophic failure and associated secondary disasters. In this study, we present a novel cross-spectral-density-based horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio (CSD-HVSR) method that enables monitoring of the resonant frequency of tailings dams. Taking advantage of the full cross-terms of three-component passive ambient seismic recordings, this method offers improved stability and reliability over conventional HVSR techniques. We apply the method to examine seismic data collected over 1 year at the XiaoDongGou tailings dam in Chengde, China. The resulting daily fundamental resonant frequency exhibits clear, reversible fluctuations in response to external weather conditions, revealing dynamic changes in water and stress states within the tailings dam. We attribute these fluctuations primarily to variations in the seismic velocity of the top tailings layers and/or perturbations in the phreatic surface, which links resonant frequency behaviors to key metrics of tailings dam stability. These results highlight the strong potential of the CSD-HVSR method for future structural health monitoring.
DobryRAlvarezL.Seismic failures of Chilean tailings dams. J Soil Mech Found Div1967; 93(6): 237–260.
2.
LyuZChaiJXuZ, et al. A comprehensive review on reasons for tailings dam failures based on case history. Adv Civ Eng2019; 2019(1): 4159306.
3.
RottaLHSAlcantaraEParkE, et al. The 2019 Brumadinho tailings dam collapse: possible cause and impacts of the worst human and environmental disaster in Brazil. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf2020; 90: 102119.
4.
PiciulloLStorrøstenEBLiuZ, et al. A new look at the statistics of tailings dam failures. Eng Geol2022; 303: 106657.
5.
WeiZYinGWangJG, et al. Design, construction and management of tailings storage facilities for surface disposal in China: case studies of failures. Waste Manag Res2013; 31(1): 106–112.
6.
KossoffDDubbinWEAlfredssonM, et al. Mine tailings dams: characteristics, failure, environmental impacts, and remediation. Appl Geochem2014; 51: 229–245.
7.
Hudson-EdwardsKAKempDTorres-CruzLA, et al. Tailings storage facilities, failures and disaster risk. Nat Rev Earth Environ2024; 5(9): 612–630.
8.
OuelletSMDettmerJOlivierG, et al. Advanced monitoring of tailings dam performance using seismic noise and stress models. Commun Earth Environ2022; 3(1): 301.
9.
HussainYHamzaOHuangX, et al. Seismic signature of mudflow tremor resulted from Brumadinho (Brazil) tailings dam failure. REM Int Eng J2020; 73(3): 421–424.
10.
LumbrosoDMcElroyCGoffC, et al. The potential to reduce the risks posed by tailings dams using satellite-based information. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct2019; 38: 101209.
11.
ClarksonLWilliamsD.Critical review of tailings dam monitoring best practice. Int J Min Reclam Environ2020; 34(2): 119–148.
12.
GuerovaGJonesJDoušaJ, et al. Review of the state of the art and future prospects of the ground-based GNSS meteorology in Europe. Atmos Meas Tech2016; 9(11): 5385–5406.
13.
CampilloMPaulA.Long-range correlations in the diffuse seismic coda. Science2008; 299(5606): 547–549.
14.
SniederRLaroseE.Extracting earth’s elastic wave response from noise measurements. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci2013; 41(1): 183–206.
15.
NakataNGualtieriLFichtnerA.Seismic ambient noise. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2019.
16.
WangQYBrenguierFCampilloM, et al. Seasonal crustal seismic velocity changes throughout Japan. J Geophys Res Solid Earth2017; 122(10): 7987–8002.
17.
XieFLaroseEWangQ, et al. In-situ monitoring of rock slope destabilization with ambient seismic noise interferometry in southwest China. Eng Geol2023; 312: 106922.
18.
BottelinPBailletL.Original insights into rock slope damage processes until collapse from passive seismic monitoring. Geophys Res Lett2024; 51(13): e2024GL109139.
19.
NakamuraY.A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Railway Tech Res Inst Q Rep1989; 30(1): 25–33.
20.
FähDKindFGiardiniD.A theoretical investigation of average H/V ratios. Geophys J Int2001; 145(2): 535–549.
21.
NakamuraY.What is the Nakamura method?Seismol Res Lett2019; 90(4): 1437–1443.
22.
PasténCPeñaGComteD, et al. On the use of the H/V spectral ratio method to estimate the fundamental frequency of tailings dams. J Earthq Eng2023; 27(6): 1649–1664.
23.
MartoranaRCapizziPD’AlessandroA, et al. Contribution of HVSR measures for seismic microzonation studies. Ann Geophys2018; 61(2): SE225.
24.
La RoccaMChiappettaGDGervasiA, et al. Non-stability of the noise HVSR at sites near or on topographic heights. Geophys J Int2020; 222(3): 2162–2171.
25.
LuYPedersenHAStehlyL, et al. Mapping the seismic noise field in Europe: spatio-temporal variations in wavefield composition and noise source contributions. Geophys J Int2022; 228(1): 171–192.
26.
LunedeiEAlbarelloD.Theoretical HVSR curves from full wavefield modelling of ambient vibrations in a weakly dissipative layered Earth. Geophys J Int2010; 181(2): 1093–1108.
27.
Sánchez-SesmaFJRodríguezMIturrarán-ViverosU, et al. A theory for microtremor H/V spectral ratio: application for a layered medium. Geophys J Int2011; 186(1): 221–225.
28.
Piña-FloresJPertonMGarcía-JerezA, et al. The inversion of spectral ratio H/V in a layered system using the diffuse field assumption (DFA). Geophys J Int2017; 208: 577–588.
29.
LiHLiLZhangZ, et al. Alteration of the Damiao anorthosite complex in the northern North China Craton: implications for high-grade iron mineralization. Ore Geol Rev2014; 57: 574–588.
30.
CharlierBNamurOBolleO, et al. Fe–Ti–V–P ore deposits associated with proterozoic massif-type anorthosites and related rocks. Earth Sci Rev2015; 141: 56–81.
31.
WeiYNiuYGongH, et al. Geochemistry and iron isotope systematics of coexisting Fe-bearing minerals in magmatic FeTi deposits: a case study of the Damiao titanomagnetite ore deposit, North China Craton. Gondwana Res2020; 81: 240–251.
32.
SuCRanaNMEvansSG, et al. Tailings storage facilities in China: historical failure incidents, existing status, and database-driven quantitative risk assessment. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct2024; 114: 104973.
33.
Chávez-GarcíaFJSánchezLRHatzfeldD.Topographic site effects and HVSR: a comparison between observations and theory. Bull Seismol Soc Am1996; 86(5): 1559–1573.
34.
LermoJChávez-GarcíaFJ.Site effect evaluation using spectral ratios with only one station. Bull Seismol Soc Am1993, 83(5): 1574–1594.
35.
BonillaLFSteidlJHLindleyGT, et al. Site amplification in the San Fernando Valley, California: variability of site-effect estimation using the S-wave, coda, and H/V methods. Bull Seismol Soc Am1997, 87(3): 710–730.
36.
Ibs-von SehtMWohlenbergJ. Microtremor measurements used to map thickness of soft sediments. Bull Seismol Soc Am1999, 89(1): 250–259.
37.
RaptakisDChávez-GarcıaFJMakraK, et al. Site effects at Euroseistest—I. Determination of the valley structure and confrontation of observations with 1D analysis. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng2000; 19(1): 1–22.
38.
Sánchez-SesmaFJPérez-RuizJACampilloM, et al. Elastodynamic 2D Green function retrieval from cross-correlation: canonical inclusion problem. Geophys Res Lett2006; 33(13): 1–6.
39.
WeaverRLLobkisOI.Diffuse fields in open systems and the emergence of the Green’s function (L). J Acoust Soc Am2004; 116(5): 2731–2734.
40.
TchaweFNFromentBCampilloM, et al. On the use of the coda of seismic noise autocorrelations to compute H/V spectral ratios. Geophys J Int2020; 220(3): 1956–1964.
41.
PetersonJR.Observations and modeling of seismic background noise. Albuquerque, NM: US Geological Survey, 1993.
42.
KonnoKOhmachiT.Ground-motion characteristics estimated from spectral ratio between horizontal and vertical components of microtremor. Bull Seismol Soc Am1998; 88(1): 228–241.
43.
SESAME Project,. Guidelines for the implementation of the H/V spectral ratio technique on ambient vibrations. measurements, processing and interpretation. SESAME European Research Project WP12 - Deliverable D23-12, 2004.
44.
WatheletMChatelainJLCornouC, et al. Geopsy: a user-friendly open-source tool set for ambient vibration processing. Seismol Res Lett2020; 91(3): 1878–1889.
45.
BahavarMSpicaZJSánchez-SesmaFJ, et al. Horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio (HVSR) IRIS station toolbox. Seismol Res Lett2020; 91(6): 3539–3549.
46.
AfoninNKozlovskayaECanalesRM.Application of passive seismic interferometry for mapping mining waste storage facilities: a case study of Pyhäsalmi mine in Finland. Appl Geophys2022, 202: 104669.
47.
RongMHeCYangB, et al. Joint inversion of noise horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio and multimode dispersion curves: method and verification. Seismol Res Lett2025; 96(4): 2550–2565.
48.
AlbarelloDHerakMLunedeiE, et al. Simulating H/V spectral ratios (HVSR) of ambient vibrations: a comparison among numerical models. Geophys J Int2023; 234(2): 870–878.
49.
Piña-FloresJGarcía-JerezASánchez-SesmaFJ, et al. HV-Inv: a MATLAB-based graphical tool for the direct and inverse problems of the horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio under the diffuse field theory. Softw Impact2024; 22: 100706.
50.
TendürüsMvan WijngaardenGJKarsH. Long-term effect of seismic activities on archaeological remains: a test study from Zakynthos, Greece. In: SintubinMStewartISNiemiTM, et al. (eds) Ancient earthquakes, Geological Society of America Special Paper 471. Boulder, CO: The Geological Society of America, 2010, pp. 145–156.
51.
ColomberoCJongmansDFiolleauS, et al. Seismic noise parameters as indicators of reversible modifications in slope stability: a review. Surv Geophys2021; 42(2): 339–375.
52.
Le BretonMBontempsNGuillemotA, et al. Landslide monitoring using seismic ambient noise correlation: challenges and applications. Earth Sci Rev2021; 216: 103518.
53.
LaroseECarrièreSVoisinC, et al. Environmental seismology: what can we learn on earth surface processes with ambient noise?J Appl Geophys2015; 116: 62–74.
54.
WangQYCuiXFrankWB, et al. Untangling the environmental and tectonic drivers of the Noto earthquake swarm in Japan. Sci Adv2024; 10(19): eado1469.
55.
FokkerERuigrokETrampertJ.On the temperature sensitivity of near-surface seismic wave speeds: application to the Groningen region, the Netherlands. Geophys J Int2024; 237(2): 1129–1141.
56.
SioniFManzatoAFasanoG, et al. On atmospheric pressure and temperature correlation across various terrain types. Atmos Res2024; 311: 107689.
57.
KramerRLuYBokelmannG.Interaction of air pressure and groundwater as main cause of sub-daily relative seismic velocity changes. Geophys Res Lett2023; 50(7): e2022GL101298.
58.
LiGChenHNiuF, et al. Measurement of Rayleigh wave ellipticity and its application to the joint inversion of high-resolution S wave velocity structure beneath northeast China. J Geophys Res Solid Earth2016; 121(2): 864–880.
59.
HobigerMBardPYCornouC, et al. Single station determination of Rayleigh wave ellipticity by using the random decrement technique (RayDec). Geophys Res Lett2009; 36(14): L14303.
60.
SeivaneHSchimmelMMartíD, et al. Rayleigh wave ellipticity from ambient noise: a practical method for monitoring seismic velocity variations in the near-surface. Eng Geol2024; 343: 107768.
61.
LiRJLuYXieF, et al. CSD-HVSR computation method. Zenodo2025. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15911209.
