ELECTRICAL RESISITIVITY METHOD FOR

SUBSURFACE COMPETENCY AT SIMAWA,

REDEEM CAMP

BY

Olapade T.S, 2Mathew S, Osunmakinde A.O, 3Kamil M.A, 4Ogun C.

1
 Aim of the study

To determine the competency of the study area for

structural foundation
 Objectives of the method
 Geophysics plays a major role for characterizing the hard rock for foundation competence
 It helps in:

• Mapping the subsoil condition

• Mapping the fractured basement, weathered layer and unconsolidated
nature of the overburden
• Mapping the subsurface geologic structures
• Determine the electrical properties of the rock
• Mapping the depth and the thickness of the clay content
• To determine if the study area is prone to future cavity or sinkhole
 Electrical resistivity techniques
 Several geophysical methods are available for groundwater exploration
 Electrical resistivity method is the most commonly applied method among all the geophysical methods for
groundwater exploration because:
- of the large variation of resistivity for different formations and the changes that occur
due to the saturated conditions
 Resistivity is defined as the resistance offered by a unit cube of material for the flow of current through
its normal surface
 Electrical resistivity method measures how subsurface materials oppose to the flow of electric current
 If L is the length of the conductor, and A is the cross-sectional area, then the Resistance is define as:

R =  (L/A)
 Where  is constant of proportionality and is called as resistivity. The unit of resistivity is ohm-meters (m).
 Ohm’s Law

V
I =
R

Electric current = Voltage / Resistance

 Resistance vs Resistivity

Resistance is relevant only to a particular measurement

circuit. Units: ohms or 

Resistivity is an intrinsic property of all physical materials. .

Units: ohm-meters or -m

Apparent Resistivity is a resistivity estimate based on a

assuming a half-space geometry. Units: ohm-meters or -m
 Electrical Resistivity vs Electrical Conductivity

Resistance =  (ohm-meter)

Conductivity =  = 1/  (mho/meters)
Factors Influencing Electrical Conductivity in
Rocks

 Porosity (connected/effective – fractures or pores)

 Pore saturation (% air or gas)
 Hydrocarbon fluid saturation
 Water salinity
 Clay content
 Metallic Sulfide Mineral content
 Fluid temperature
 Rock matrix intrinsic resistivity
 Foundation Studies
Surface geophysical method
Electrical Resistivity Method
 Electrical resistivity is the resistance of a volume of materials to the flow
of electric current
 Current is introduced into the ground through a pair of current electrodes
 Resulting potential different is measured between another pair of
potential electrodes
 Apparent resistivity is then calculated as:

a = 2a V
I
V is the measured potential difference (in volts) and
I is the current introduced (in Ampere)
 Measurement of Resistivity

 Generally for measuring the resistivities of surface formations, four electrode are
required.

 A current of I is introduced between one pair of electrode, called as current

electrodes, named as A and B.

 The potential difference produced as a result of current flow is measured with another
pair of electrodes, called potential electrodes, named as M and N.

 There are different electrode arrangements for measuring the potential difference,
which are unequally used as different purposes in exploration techniques
Four-electrode resistivity arrays
 Electrode Configuration
The most commonly used array are:
- Wenner and
 Schlumberger.

Wenner Array:
 Wenner configuration consists a system of earth measurement with a four collinear
equally spaced point on the ground surface

 The two current electrodes A and B and the potential electrodes M and N are placed
at the surface at equal distance ‘a’ as shown in the next page

 Current I is passed into the ground through A and B and the potential is measured
through M and N
Wenner Configuration

A M N B

a a a

The geometric factor (K) for this array is 2a and the apparent resistivity is given by:

a = 2a V
I
Schlumberger Configuration

A M N B

2l
2L
The geometric factor (K) for this array is given by:

a = (L -l ) V 2 2

2l I
Where A and B are the current electrodes, M and N are the potential electrodes,
L is the half spacing of current electrodes, l is the half spacing of potential electrodes
Common Rock types and their Resistivity ranges
COMMON ROCKS  m
Topsoil 50 – 100
Loose sand 500 – 5000
Gravel 100 – 600
Clay 1 – 100
Weathered bedrock 100 – 1000
Sandstone 200 – 8000
Limestone 500 – 10 000
Greenstone 500 – 200 000
Gabbro 100 – 500 000
Granite 200 – 100 000
Basalt 200 – 100 000
Graphitic schist 10 – 500
Slates 500 – 500 000
Quartzite 500 – 800 000
Basemap of the Study Area
 Profile interpretation
 When the apparent resistivity observations for all stations on a traverse and for
all such traverses spread over the entire area of the survey area made, the
resistivity values are plotted at their respective positions over a map.

 After this, contour of equal resistivity values for the particular electrode
spacing are drawn and are called as equi-resistivity or contour maps.

 Thus, the representation is in the form of linear maps for several electrode
spacing or contour maps for a particular assumed depth section.

 The resistivity highs/lows are marked to give an idea about the epicentral
location of the target (resistive or conductive zone) and the lateral extent.
 VES Interpretation
 The apparent resistivity is plotted against half current electrode spacing on a double logarithm
paper and the curve so obtained is called sounding curves.

 To get the layer parameters (resistivity and thickness) of the subsurface, these sounding curves
are to be interpreted.

 There are mainly two types of interpretational techniques: Indirect methods and direct
methods.

 In the direct methods, the field curve is compared with a set of theoretical curves, also called
as master curves, for different known layered parameters prepared in advance.

 Several albums of master curves are available which include among others Compagne generale
de Geophysique (1963), Flathe (1963), Orellana and Mooney (1966).
 Conclusion

The application of Electrical resistivity method using PASI Earth resistivity meter has been employed in
delineating the various litho units at a proposed site in Simawa, Redeem Camp, Southwestern Nigeria.
Based on the fourty-five VES measurements taken, five major layers were delineated from the study area
which comprise topsoil, clayey sand/sandy clay and sand. The depth of the topsoil range from 0.4m at the
Southeastern part of the study area to 3.4 m towards the Western part of the area. The depth of the partially
competent bed ranged from 3.4 – 13.0 m. The first and second layers are highly saturated, and it is rated
incompetent. This has been attributed to the waterlogged nature of the site.