ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY METHODS IN

GROUNDWATER EXPLORATION

(A CASE STUDY OF MUKUTANI, BARINGO SOUTH,

KENYA)

PRESENTED BY

MITEI KIMOSOP MARK

INDEX NUMBER: 5221052959

PRESENTED TO: KENYA NATIONAL EXAMINATION

COUNCIL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE AWARD OF
DIPLOMA IN PETROLEUM GEOSCIENCES

NOVEMBER 2022
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this thesis is my original work and it is derived from my
own study and research.

NAME: MITEI KIMOSOP MARK

INDEX NUMBER: 5221052959

SIGNATURE: …………………………

DATE: ……………………………………

The project has been submitted to the Kenya National and Examinations
Council with my permission as the supervisor

NAME: FAITH SAMOEI

SIGNATURE: …………………..

DATE: ……………………………

i
DEDICATION
I dedicate this project to my lovely parents and siblings for the love, care and
support they have shown me ever since.

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am sincerely indebted to my supervisor, Madam Faith for his encouragement, guidance and
for always finding time to guide me despite his busy schedule throughout the research
process. I am very grateful and genuinely thankful to my parents, my brother and my sisters
for their much support during the research. I also acknowledge all my classmates in Rift
Valley Institute Of science and technology, friends and colleagues for their advice and
support. To all other individuals that I have not specifically mentioned by name, please
accept my profound gratitude for without your support, this is project would have come to
reality.

Thank you all

iii
Contents
DECLARATION.........................................................................................................................................i

ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................................................vi

CHAPTER ONE........................................................................................................................................1

1.0: INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................1

1.1: BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY.....................................................................................................1

1.2: STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM...................................................................................................1

1.3: OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY.........................................................................................................2

1.3.1: GENERAL OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY..................................................................................2

1.3.2: SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY.....................................................................................3

1.4: RESEARCH QUESTIONS...............................................................................................................3

1.5: SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY.....................................................................................................3

1.6: SCOPE OF THE STUDY.................................................................................................................4

1.7: DEFINITION OF TERMS................................................................................................................4

CHAPTER TWO.......................................................................................................................................6

LITERATURE REVIEW..........................................................................................................................6

2.1: EARTH’S MATERIALS RESISTIVITY...............................................................................................6

2.2: ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY METHOD..............................................................................................7

2.3: GROUNDWATER EXPLORATION IN KENYA..................................................................................8

2.4: PREVIOUS GEOPHYSICAL WORKS IN AREAS NEARING MARIGAT REGION..................................9

CHAPTER THREE..................................................................................................................................10

METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................................................10

3.1: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................10

3.2: SUBSURFACE CURRENT FLOW..................................................................................................10

3.2.1: SCHLUMBERGER CONFIGURATION....................................................................................11

3.2.2: WENNER CONFIGURATION................................................................................................12

3.3: FIELD INSTRUMENTS.................................................................................................................13

iv
 3.3.1: ABEM TERRAMETER...........................................................................................................13

3.3.2: GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS)................................................................................14

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS AND DATA ANALYSIS................................................................................15

4.1: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................15

4.1.1: SURVEY CONDUCTED.........................................................................................................15

4.1.2: FIELD MEASUREMENTS......................................................................................................15

4.2: RESISTIVITY DATA PROCESSING............................................................................................15

4.2.1: RESULTS.............................................................................................................................16

4.3: INTERPRETATION OF RESISTIVITY DATA...................................................................................16

4.3.1: INTERPRETATION OF HORIZONTAL ELECTRICAL PROFILES................................................16

4.4: INTERPRETATION OF APPARENT RESISTIVITY CURVES.............................................................17

4.5: INTERPRETATION OF CUMULATIVE RESISTIVITY CURVES.........................................................18

4.6: INTERPRETATION OF VERTICAL ELECTRICAL SOUNDING (VES) ALONG PROFILES.....................18

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS.......................................................................25

5.1: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................25

5.2: CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................................................................25

5.3: RECCOMENDATIONS................................................................................................................26

REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................26

v
vi
ABSTRACT
Groundwater explorations were carried out at mukutani, baringo south, Kenya.
Groundwater in the region is not majorly exploited due to the nature of fault
lines and presence of underground geysers. The study was carried out with the
aim of investigating the groundwater potential and identify water bearing
formations in the area using electrical resistivity method. Vertical Electrode
Sounding was applied using schlumberger electrode configuration to determine
the vertical variation of resistivity with depth hence identifying probable
aquifers that can be developed into productive boreholes. Twenty eight VES
points were drawn along five Horizontal Electrical Profiles within an area of
about 25km2 using an ABEM terrameter. The collected data were analysed
using IP2WIN, IX1D andRES2D softwares which revealed the presence of 3-6
geoelectric layers which were categorized into three inhomogeneous formations
corresponding with the existing borehole data within the region. The first
formation is an unsaturated alluvial deposits with resistivity ranging from
2.49Ωm to 250Ωm with thickness ranging from 0.284m to 42.1m. The second
formation which is slightly weathered and fractured rock has resistivity varying
from 0.77Ωm to 71.5Ωm and thickness ranging from 4.3m to 63.2m. The third
formation is characterized by fresh and weathered basement with basaltic rock
with resistivity values ranging from 0.77Ωm to 71.5Ωm with depth values
ranging from 4.22m to 52.1m. The study results show that groundwater
potentials along the sedimentary basin is good for development along shallow
depths ranging between 35 to 50m. Based on the geological setting of the area,
it is highly recommended chemical analysis of the groundwater should be
carried out for quality and safety measures.

vii
CHAPTER ONE
1.0: INTRODUCTION
1.1: BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Groundwater is one of the most vital natural source which is located beneath the
earth surface. It is stored in porous rock formations called aquifers. Several
geophysical methods can be used to investigate groundwater sources and
success of each method is dependent on the geological system of the subsurface.
There is a variety of geophysical methods used in groundwater exploration
techniques which varies from deep to shallow groundwater exploration. The
most common geophysical technique is electrical resistivity methods which
analyses the relationship between electrical conductivity and the
hydrogeological properties of the subsurface. The electrical resistivity method
was first developed in the early 1920`s (Robert Fox, England) for exploration of
base metal deposits but later gained popularity in groundwater exploration due
to its effectiveness. According to Goldman and Naubeur (1994), the electrical
resistivity technique is the most popular geophysical method used in shallow
groundwater exploration due to close relationship between electrical
conductivity and the hydrogeological properties of the subsurface.

This study was therefore undertaken to investigate depth, thickness and

distribution of water bearing formations using electrical resistivity methods in
order to characterize ground water potential for exploration and exploitation in
the region studied

1.2: STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Surface water being the major source of water, it is often inadequate due to
unpredictable weather patterns and global climate change. Groundwater is
essential substitute to surface water whoever the resource is scarce between the

1
occurrence and its distribution depending on the geologic and hydrogeological
setting.

Ground water in mukutani region is unexploited and the efforts of many

organizations and individuals to drill boreholes within the region have not be
very successful due to challenges of unexplored nature of fault lines, presence
of underground geysers and lack of detailed hydrogeological information of the
area. Several geophysical measurements have been undertaken around the
region for geothermal investigations however the instruments penetrate deep to
tens of kilometres distorting the shallow groundwater aquifers.

This study was therefore necessary to be undertaken in this area using electrical
resistivity methods in order to investigate and characterise the shallow
groundwater potentials which will help to locate the potential drill sites hence
reducing the risk of drilling dry and less productive boreholes. Hence the
immediate benefit of groundwater will greatly improve the socio economic
activities in the area.

1.3: OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1.3.1: GENERAL OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The specific objectives are;

 To conduct ground resistivity survey of the region using Vertical Electrical

Sounding (VES).
 To estimate depth and thickness of aquifers present in the area.
 To generate 1D and 2D cross sections along the profiles of identified aquifer
zones.
 To determine uncontaminated ground water potential zones hence safety for
consumption.
2
 To familiarise with the operation of an ABEM terrameter as a tool for
conducting electrical resistivity survey.
 To familiarise with VES software data analysis and interpretation with the
use of IX1D and RES2D software.

1.3.2: SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

The main objective of this study is to investigate the groundwater potentials
and its characterization at mukutani region and its environment, baringo
south using electrical resistivity method.

1.4: RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The study’s research questions aimed to be tackled are as follows;

 How can 1D and 2D cross sections along survey profiles be achieved.

 What are the causes of groundwater pollution?
 How can ABEM terrameter be used to obtain data along VES points along
Horizontal Electrical Profiles.
 Which software is more effective in analysis and interpretation of profiles
between RES2D and IX1D software’s?
 Are there potential aquifer zones within the area of study?

1.5: SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Water scarcity being a major problem to the residents of mukutani region,
groundwater exploration and exploitation will benefit them socially and
economically. This will help them get access to enough water for domestic
use and economic as well which will enable them do irrigation activities
which will reduce food shortage and also enable them avoid walking for long

3
 distances in search of water for their livestock which are their main source of
income.
The groundwater investigation and characterization will also play a vital role
in understanding hydrogeological setting of the region hence easier
identification of potential aquifer zones by future hydrogeologists and
drilling engineers. This will also benefit researchers in the future who are
willing to undertake geological hydro-geophysical activities in the region.

1.6: SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The geophysical study carried out aimed at investigating groundwater
potential and to characterise water bearing formation in mukutani area using
resistivity method. An ABEM SAS terrameter 1000/4000 was used to
acquire VES points along Horizontal Electrical Profiles (HEP) within an area
of about 19.2km square.
This method was applied using schlumberger electrode configuration to
determine the vertical variation of resistivity with depth and to delineate
probable aquifers that can be developed to productive boreholes. RES2D and
Ix1D software was used in analysis.

1.7: DEFINITION OF TERMS

 Induced polarization (IP): Geophysical imaging technique used to
identify the electrical chargeability of subsurface formation.
 Horizontal Electrical Profiling: Procedure of moving an array along a
line of traverse.
 Vertical Eectrical Sounding (VES): Geophysical method of
investigating a geological medium.
 Global Positioning System (GPS): Space based radio navigation
system consisting of a constellation of satellite navigation signals and

4
 a network of ground and control stations used for monitoring of earth
and space activities.
 ABEM terrameter: An instrument used to measure self-potential,
resistivity and induced polarization of the subsurface formations.

5
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1: EARTH’S MATERIALS RESISTIVITY
The most useful parameters used in describing the earth’s properties and
formations are the electrical properties. This is because the variations in water
saturation, fluid conductivity, porosity and permeability. Depending on site, the
variations may be used to locate the depth of water table and aquifer
identification, buried structures, contaminant plumes, saline intrusion
stratigraphic units and any other structures whose electrical properties contrast
with the surrounding materials. The figure 2.1 below shows a representative
chart illustrating how the resistivities of important rock groups vary from each
other.

Figure 1.1: Electrical

resistivity and
conductivity ranges of varied rock groups (EOAS 2019)

Fine grained rocks have lower resistivities than coarse grained rocks while
unweathered and unfractured hard rocks such as lithified sedimentary rocks,
volcanic rocks, plutonic rocks and some metamorphic rocks +generally have
high resistivity values. The occurrence of groundwater greatly lowers the
resistivity of all rocks and sedimentary materials through electrolytic

6
conduction. Because of this, groundwater may be efficiently and effectively
explored using electrical resistivity method.

2.2: ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY METHOD

The main geophysical method used in groundwater exploration include
electrical resistivity method, electromagnetic methods, magnetic method,
seismic method and gravity method. Of all surface exploration methods,
electrical resistivity technique is the preferred method in identification and
characterisation of groundwater, bedrock, fresh and salt water zones (Burger,
1992).

VES has been used to determine zones with high yield potential in hermeland
province, south Afghanistan (2011). It was found that prominent low resistivity
points indicated weaker zones which represents a prospective zone for
groundwater development while high resistivity anomalies represented poorly
weathered fractured rocks. Das (2011) carried out hydrogeological
characterisation and estimation of electrical properties from VES sounding data
in sagar region, India. He observed that VES delineates the top soil, the saline
water zone and brackish ground water zones, impermeable clay layer and fresh
water aquifer in subsurface geological formation. This is mainly because
resistivity method is dependent on parameters such as temperature, porosity and
fluid salinity.

Direct current resistivity methods is the common tool for groundwater

exploration in arid areas. Neja el at (2011) carried out resistivity survey
technique to explore in an arid region in curin basin of southern Iran and the
quantitative interpretation of VES curves led to determination of aquifer
boundaries. Resistivity method can be used alongside other geophysical
methods in areas of complex geology and hydrogeology to evaluate

7
groundwater conditions and find potential aquifer zones. Ekstrum (1996) used
DC resistivity imaging and ground penetrating radar (GPR) to investigate the
extend and different zones within an aquifer at river alluvium in SW Zimbabwe.
Tshiboa (2002) carried out resistivity and time domain electromagnetic methods
in Delamere farm, Lake Naivasha, Kenya. The two methods were used in order
to complement one another and to enhance the interpretation of the subsurface
information in terms of conductivity for aquifer mapping.

2.3: GROUNDWATER EXPLORATION IN KENYA

Groundwater exploration in Kenya has been done by several government
organizations and private parties which includes Water Resource Management
Authority (WRMA), Radar Technologies International (RTI), Groundwater and
Technical services Limited, Ministry of Water, Japan International Agency
(JIA) among others. Groundwater exploration was done in turkana in the year
2013 by Radar Technologies International on behalf of UN. The aquifers were
detected by WATEX system, space based exploration technology that prospects
and explores subsurface water, soils and by processing multi-frequency and
multi-polarization radar imagery in shallow aquifers and integrating WATEX
base imagery with geophysical data interpretation such as magnetic, resistivity,
gravity and seismic data for deep aquifers (Landsat 2014). The two aquifers;
lokipiti basin and lodwar basin were identified using advanced satellite
exploration technology. Their existence was then confirmed by drilling
conducted by UNESCO and Rift Valley Water Service Board. It was found that
turkana which is characterized by large unexplored hydrogeological basins has a
capacity of over 250 billion cubic metres despite located in arid and semi-arid
region. Jorgen and Ingemar (2005) in a study carried out a GIS mapping of
groundwater in nakuru and baringo districts and observed that the bedrock in

8
the two regions consists of fluoride bearing minerals which contaminate the
water and high levels are present in deeply drilled wells.

2.4: PREVIOUS GEOPHYSICAL WORKS IN AREAS NEARING MARIGAT

REGION
Groundwater exploration in marigat was first done in late 1970s. Pencol (1978)
carried out some geophysical works in marigat area and indicated that there may
be groundwater at shallow depth in old sand and gravel filled channel to the
south of Katirion River and to the west of nginyang road. A seismic survey
(swain, 1998) covered the area between Lake Baringo and kerio valley and
between Lake Baringo and Lake Turkana to the north. The purpose of this
survey was to study the geological structures beneath the crust of the rift valley.
The seismic data collected near marigat indicated that the recent sediments near
the lake are very thick. It is estimated that the thickness would exceed one
kilometre to the south of the lake.

In 1987, a team from ministry of water, Nakuru office conducted a resistivity

survey at eldume, salabani and ngambo. The objective was to locate sites for
borehole. The study revealed very low resistivity measurements of below 5
Ohms which indicated presence of clay layers and saline water. However no
drilling was done hence lithological correlations were not measured and
analysed.

The ministry of Energy on reconnaissance study for geothermal potential in the

area carried out schlumberger resistivity measurements in Lake Baringo area,
the northern parts of the lake. The analysis of the sounding carried out in the
area indicated a discrete anomaly less than 20 Ohms at depth of 1km lodged
northwest of Lake Baringo. The field data obtained was later built by KenGen
in an attempt to describe Lake Baringo geothermal prospect. It was also
observed that geophysical surveys particularly seismic, electrical resistivity and
gravity has been carried out in the region. The study by Water Resource

9
Management Authority investigated groundwater potentials and characterisation
of the shallow subsurface formation using Vertical Electrical Sounding
techniques in order to identify potential aquifers.

10
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1: INTRODUCTION
The electrical resistivity is one of the most useful techniques. This is because
rock resistivity is sensitive to its water content and also sensitive to ionic
content. This implies that resistivity is able to map different stratigraphic units
in a geological section as long as the units have resistivity contrast. Porosity
also is a major control of resistivity in rocks. This is because the pore spaces
between the rock particles determines the rate at which groundwater flow within
the aquifer as described by Archie’s equation (3.1) below;

[ ( )]
1
w −m Rw
s = a∅ ❑ N
Rt

Where Sw is water saturation, ∅ is the porosity, Rw is the formation water

resitivity. Rt is the observed bulk density, a , m∧N are the empirical constants.
Other factors which influence the resistivity of rocks are the size of particles
and the mobility of ions in water which decreases with temperature when water
is frozen (Scollar, 1990).

Electrical resistivity is based on the principle that the distribution of potentials

in the ground and the current carrying electrode depends on the electrical
resistivity and distribution of the distribution of the surrounding rocks and soil
(ABEM instruction manual 2010). In this method, electrical direct current is
being applied between two methods implanted on the ground and measuring the
potential difference between the two potential electrodes.

3.2: SUBSURFACE CURRENT FLOW

Electrical currents are carried by moved charged particles. Current flow through
the sediments is entirely created by ions when salt crystals in the ground

11
dissociate with presence of soil water (Campana and Piro, 2009). The resistance
in a single electrode of hemispherical shell of radius r which is found between a
perfect insulator and a semi-infinite isotropic, homogenous conductor of a
resistivity p is given by the equation (3.2);

pdx
R=
2 π r2

Where 2 πr 2 is the surface area of the hemispherical shell. The current flow
radially away from the electrode so that the distribution is uniform over the
hemispherical shells centred on the source. The figure 3.1 below shows a
generalized form of electrical configuration;

3.2.1: SCHLUMBERGER CONFIGURATION

Schlumberger configuration is used in VES. The potential electrodes M, N and
N are installed at the centre of the electrode array with a small separation (a),
typically less than one fifth of the spacing between the current electrodes A and
B as shown in figure 3.2 below.

12
Figure 3.2; Electrical configuration of schlumberger array

The electrodes A and B are increased to a greater separation L during the survey
while M and N remain in the same position until the observed voltage becomes
too small to measure.

When the subsurface inhomogenities exist, resistivity the relative portion of

electrodes. Therefore, the computed apparent resistivity will be given by the
equation 3.3 below;

3.2.2: WENNER CONFIGURATION

This method is used to determine lateral variation in resistivity. The current and
potential electrodes are maintained in fixed position and are progressively moved
along a profile. It is normally employed when a rapid survey of an area is required.
The wenner array consist of four collinear equally spaced electrodes with electrode
spacing a. The outer electrodes A and B are typically the current (source) electrodes
as shown in figure 3.2.2 below and the inner electrodes M and N are the potential
(receiver) electrodes. The array spacing expands about the array midpoint while
maintaining the equivalent spacing between each electrode.

13
 Figure 3.2; Electrode configuration in wenner array.

Substituting the values of electrode spacing of schlumberger array in equation 3.3

results to equation 3.4

Where pa is the apparent resistivity, 2 πa is the geometric factor K, ∆ v is the potential

difference and I is the electric current.

3.3: FIELD INSTRUMENTS

This refers to the necessary tools required to conduct electrical resistivity survey
effectively.

3.3.1: ABEM TERRAMETER

The most commonly used device for resistivity survey is the ABEM terrameter shown
in figure 3.3 below. The ABEM SAS 1000/4000 terrameter is an affordable and
effective instrument used in geological and geophysical surveys. It is a versatility and
flexibility allows effectiveness in broad range of applications ranging from
groundwater, mineral explorations to infrastructure site investigations. It has a built in
PC compatible microcomputers which can save up to 1,000,000 data points on internal
flash disk. It has capability of a fast and precise data acquisition and analysis and high
accuracy (ABEM instruction manual, 2009)

The ABEM SAS operates in three models;

1. Induced polarization (IP) mode: It measures the transient voltage decay in a

number of intervals. It is measured in terms of chargeability.
14
 2. Resistivity survey mode: It comprise of a battery-powered deep penetrating
resistivity metre with output sufficient for a current electrode spacing of 2Km
under good surveying conditions and apparent resistivity ranging from 0.5
milliohms to 1999 kilo Ohms.
3. Voltage measuring mode; It comprises of a self-potential instrument that
measures natural DC potentials. The results are displayed in volts.

One advantage of ABEM is its capability to measure four channels simultaneously.

The electrical isolated transmitter sends out well defined and regulated signal currents
with strength up to 1000mA and voltage up to 400 V limited by the output power of
100W. The receiver discriminates noise and measure voltages correlated with
transmitted signal currents (resistivity survey mode and IP mode) and also measure
uncorrelated DC potentials with the same discrimination and noise rejection (voltage
measuring mode). The microprocessor monitors and controls operations and
calculated results. Another advantage of SAS is its ability to distinguish between
geological formations with identical resistivity e.g. clay soil and water. This is
applicable in induced polarization mode since SAS permits natural or induced or
induced signals to be measured at extremely low levels with excellent penetration and
low power consumption.

3.3.2: GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS)

GPS is a satellite-based navigation system which provides information on location and
time of anywhere on or near the earth surface. GPS satellites synchronize operations
so that the repeating signals are transmitted at the same instants. The signals, moving
at the speed of light arrive at GPS satellite at slightly different times because some
satellites are further away from the receiver than others. The receiver estimates the
distance of at least four GPS satellites and calculates location’s position in terms of
longitude, latitude and altitude.

15
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS AND DATA ANALYSIS
4.1: INTRODUCTION
4.1.1: SURVEY CONDUCTED
Resistivity survey was conducted in mukutani region and its surrounding regions in
baringo bogoria basin in April 2014 and February 2021. The survey was conducted in
an area approximately 20km2 and consisted of 5 profiles and 28 VES points.
Schlumberger array was conducted for vertical electrical sounding survey while
wenner array was conducted in each profile. Electrical resistivity technique with an
application of horizontal profiling and vertical electrical sounding were applied to
investigate the shallow basement structures which include faults and fracture zones
that are likely to be groundwater potential aquifers.

4.1.2: FIELD MEASUREMENTS

The survey was first conducted in the area then the sounding points were chosen based
on the accessibility and applicability of the method in the study area. Horizontal
Electrical Profiling (HEP) was conducted at chosen sites in order to locate fault zones
which have high probability to be potential aquifers, then followed by VES at each
point in order to obtain geological profiles. Wenner array was used in HEP to
determine the horizontal variation of resistivity. Five resistivity profiles of length
1300m, 250m, 460m, 750m and 1240m were measured. The profiles in the study area
had different lengths due inaccessibility of some parts due to rough terrain and growth
of cactus and thorn trees.

4.2: RESISTIVITY DATA PROCESSING

HEP data were used to select points where Vertical Electrical Sounding was
conducted. Regions where low resistivity values were observed was selected as VES
points as shown in figure 5.2 since they are attributed to be weak points which are
likely to be faults hence groundwater potential zones. The VES data was input to the
laptop and curves were plotted using IP, 2WIN SOFTWARE. The field resistivity data
were determined based on the electrical’s configuration type and provided information

16
on resistivity, number of layers, depth and thickness of geological formation at each
sounding point.

4.2.1: RESULTS
The resistivity survey was taken along five profiles as shown in figure 4.1 below;

Figure 4.1; HEP and VES points of the study area.

4.3: INTERPRETATION OF RESISTIVITY DATA

4.3.1: INTERPRETATION OF HORIZONTAL ELECTRICAL PROFILES
The graphs in figure 4.2 below shows lateral variation of resistivity across HEP 1 and
HEP 2.

Figure 4.2: Graph showing horizontal electrical profiles of HEP 1 and HEP 2.

17
Five points with low resistivity values were selected for VES in HEP 1 while four
points were selected on HEP 2 based on accessibility and applicability of VES in the
study. HEP 4 and 5 had generally low resistivity values ranging from 10.34 ohms to
26.38 ohms. From the two profiles, three VES points were selected from each profile
for probing which are VES 19, 20, 22, 24, 25 and 26 respectively. The low resistivity
seen in the anomalies is interpreted as shallow bedrock formations, fractured zones
and faults that are likely to be potential aquifer layers

4.4: INTERPRETATION OF APPARENT RESISTIVITY CURVES

Three layers were found to be of higher resistance while low resistivity values were
observed at depth below 100m in the most sounding points.

Figure 4.3: A graph of apparent resistivity versus electrode spacing of HEP 1

18
Figure 4.4: A graph showing apparent resistivity and electrode spacing of HEP 2

4.5: INTERPRETATION OF CUMULATIVE RESISTIVITY CURVES

The apparent changes in cumulative resistivity curve reveals presence of three
geoelectric layers with varying resisivities and thickness. The first layer consisting of
unsaturated soil, the second layer consisting of weathered formation while the third
layer consisting of fractured layers which has low resistivity values.

Figure 4.5; A graph of electrode spacing versus cummulative resistivity.

4.6: INTERPRETATION OF VERTICAL ELECTRICAL SOUNDING (VES)

ALONG PROFILES
The VES profiles have varying parameters; Number of layers (N), resistivity (p),
thickness (h), depth (d) and altitude (alt). The red and black curve shows the
relationship between AB/2 and apparent resistivity value. The blue curve gives
information about the resistivity value variation while the open dots are the apparent
resistivity values. In VES 1, the first layer has a thickness of 0.68m corresponding to

19
superficial deposits of alluvium followed by dry volcanic soils of resistivity 164
ohms.

Figure 4.6a: VES 1 along profile 1

VES 2 which is moist volcanic soil of resistivity 19.9 Ωm consists of superficial

deposits of sand and gravel with depth ranging from 43.2m to 84m. The fourth and
fifth layers consists of heavily weathered basalts with depth range of 10.8m to 80m
where shallow and deep aquifers are expected.

Figure 4.6b: VES 2 along profile 1

20
Figure 4.6c: VES 3 along profile 1

VES 4 and VES17 fourth layers consists of heavily weathered and fracture basalts
below 76.54m in VES 4 while in VES 17, it consists of heavily weathered and
fractured tuffs with depth below 36.3m

Figure 4.6d: VES 4 along profile 4

21
Figure 4.6f: VES 5

Figure 4.6g: VES 6

Figure 4.6g VES 6

22
FIGURE 4.6j: VES 9 along profile 2

Figure 4.6k: VES 10 along profile 2

Figure 4.6l: VES 11 along profile 2

23
Figure 4.6m: VES 12

Figure 4.6n: VES 13

Figure 4.6o: VES 14

24
Figur4.6p:VES15

Figure 4.6q: VES 16

The interpretation of the VESs carried out in the study area revealed the presence of
multi-layered inhomogeneous formations consisting of alternating layers of rocks with
varying resistivities and thickness. The layers fall into three groups, the first and
second layer forms the top soil, the third and fourth layer forms the weathered rocks
while the fifth and sixth layer forms the fractured and weathered bedrock as shown in
the figure below;

25
26
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS
5.1: INTRODUCTION
The interpretation of the resistivity data was successfully used to identify and
understand the relationship between the potential aquifers and the existing underlying
rocks. This is Important because the development of groundwater resources heavily
depend on the hydraulic parameters and the water quality. This study was therefore
carried out in order to identify potential sites which can be turned to productive
boreholes.

5.2: CONCLUSIONS
The results for electrical resistivity survey carried out in the area helped to aquiferous
units and has provide understanding of aquifer charactericts which are the thickness,
depth of bedrock and fractured zones which are required for locating points with high
potential for groundwater occurrence. The results clearly indicate the groundwater
potential along the sedimentary basin is good for development at shallow depths
ranging between 35m to 50m.

The interpretation of the VES conducted in the region indicated the presence of 3 to 6
geoelectric layers. The layers are divided into three groups. The first group is the
topsoil which consists of unsaturated top alluvial deposits, silt, gravel or soil beds. The
second is a weathered layer which can be sandy or tuffs while the third layer is the
fractured bedrock which comprises of basalts, tuffs and phonolites. It was observed
that the thickness and resistivity values of various aquiferous layers vary from one
rock to another. The resistivity of the top soil ranges between 2.49Ωm and 258Ωm
while thickness vary from 0.284m to 44.2m. The resistivity and thickness of
weathered layers ranges between 0.77Ωm and 71.5Ωm, and 7.5m to 63.2m
respectively. The bedrock has resistivity values which ranges between 0.0685Ωm and
6975Ωm while the depth rangers between 24.7m and 105m. The common aquifer
shallow bearing rocks were identified as a typical weathered layer which had

27
sediments interbedded between volcanic rocks located in VES 7, 13, 17, 18, 22, 24
and 26.

5.3: RECCOMENDATIONS
The electrical resistivity survey carried out in mukutani region is a notable success to
the locals in the region, county and national government as well as the local and
international humanitarian organizations in location of potential borehole sites which
will sustainable water supply to the region. Based on geological setting and the nature
of the resistivity data obtained, it is highly recommended to undertake chemical
analysis of the water before consumed.

REFERENCES
JICA report (2011). The preparatory survey on project for rural water supply in
Baringo County. (CTI Engineering Company Limited)

Jorgen N and Ingemar s. (2005). GIS mapping of fluoride contaminated

groundwater in nakuru and baringo districts, Kenya. MSc thesis, Lulea University of
Technology, Sweden.

ABEM instruction manual (2010). Terrameter SAS. Retrived from ABEM portal.

WRMA (2013). Baringo water borehole data. Ministry of Water and Irrigation,
kabarnet, Kenya.

Braja. MA (2010). Geotechnical engineering handbook.

Goldman M. and Neubauer F.M (1994). Groundwater exploration using integrated

geophysical techniques.

Geo2X (2012). Geology and geophysics. Retrived fromGeo2X website.

Swain c.s, Khan, Wilton, Maigure (1981). Seismic and gravity surveys in Lake
Baringo-tugen hills region, rift valley, Kenya.

MOWD (1987). Water resources assessment study in baringo district, Kenya.

28
Marita Nicholas (1989). Geophysical survey on schlumberger, north of Lake
Baringo, Kenya.

29