Electrical Methods

http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
Electrical methods
Methods
Applied source
resistivity: our concentration
IP; induced polarization: measure decay of voltage following cessation of current pulse (time-domain) or
low-frequency variations of impedance
electromagnetic methods: apply EM field with xmit coil; currents are produced which generate secondary EM
field, picked up by receiving coil
Natural source
SP; spontaneous potential: natural potential difference between 2 points
tellurics: time-varying magnetic field in ionosphere produces currents in crust
magnetotellurics: measures magnetic field produced by those currents
Archaeology and Electrical Methods
Some Equipment A Geophysical Contractor
Basic electricity
Ohm's law:
V = voltage, or electromotive force (EMF);
volts; like water pressure
I = current, or charge per unit time; amp =
coulomb/second; like discharge or flow
R = resistance; ohms; like restriction in pipe
(waterwheel)
In circuit diagrams, lump resistance, capacitance,
inductance, etc. into discrete components; in Earth,
these properties are distributed, although not
necessarily uniformly, throughout Earth.
current is replaced by current density
[amps m
-2
]
resistance (extensive) is replaced by resistivity (intensive), a
rock property
or [ohm m or Wm]
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
conductivity: (ohms
-1
meters
-1
)
(ohm
-1
= mho = siemen)
current flow perpendicular to equipotential surfaces
ohm's law becomes:
or, as vector,
Current flow: homogeneous, isotropic Earth
current flux, j, at distance r:
by ohm's law:
or:
Integrating this expression, gives
This gives the potential around a single current electrode. For 2 current electrodes (positive and negative) , just
add the potentials due to the individual current electrodes:
We know the current we are putting into the ground (i), so we could theoretically measure V at some point (r1 and r2, our
distance from the 2 current electrodes would be known), so we could solve for r. our ultimate goal.
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
However, we really must measure a potential difference, so we use two potential electrodes. At the second
potential electrode,
The potential difference between electrodes C and D is V
c
- V
d
. Solving for r gives the fundamental equation of
the resistivity method:
Since this holds only for homogeneous half-space, this equation gives the apparent resistivity for the "real" Earth.
Sometimes the quantity V/I above is replaced by "R".
Wenner array
Probably the most common arrangement of electrodes is the Wenner array:
To calculate the apparent resistivity for this array:
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
, so
The other configuration is the Schlumberger array. I'll let you look that up...
Field Methods
General
depth of penetration of resistivity sounding depends on spacing of current electrodes. Studies show that
depth of current penetration is nearly equivalent to distance between adjoining electrodes, for depths above
100 feet.
like all potential field methods, averaging occurs
"Resistivity methods are relied upon to provide most of the information on subsurface conditions, but are
supported with control data gained from a few boreholes. The strength of the resistivity method --
approximate depth information over a wide area -- combines with the strength of boring -- exact depth
information at one point -- to provide greater information than can be acquired using either method by itself.
This type of program also costs less because fewer borings are required and it takes less time than does a
comprehensive drilling and sampling program."
Typical Resistivities
Material Resistivity W-m
Wet to moist clayey soil and wet clay 1s to 10s
Wet to moist silty soil and silty clay Low 10s
Wet to moist silty and sandy soils 10s to 100s
Sand and gravel with layers of silt Low 1000s
Coarse dry sand and gravel deposits High 1000s
Well-fractured to slightly fractured rock with moist-soil-filled
cracks
100s
Slightly fractured rock with dry, soil-filled cracks Low 1000s
Massively bedded rock High 1000s
Material Electric Resistivities
(room temperature)
Material Resistivity W-m
Silver
1.6x10
-8
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
Copper
1.7x10
-8
Aluminum
2.7x10
-8
Carbon (graphite)
1.4x10
-5
Germanium*
4.7x10
-1
Silicon*
2x10
3
Carbon (diamond)
5x10
12
Polyethylene
1x10
17
Fused quartz
>1x10
19
*Values very sensitive to purity.
Geological Material Resistivities
material
resistivity (ohm-
centimetre)
Seawater (18
o
C)
21
Uncontaminated surface
water
2x10
4
Distilled water
0.2 - 1x10
6
Water (4
o
C) 9x10
6
Ice
3x10
8
Rocks (in situ)
Sedimentary
Clay, soft shale
100 - 5x10
3
Hard shale
7 - 50x10
3
Sand
5 - 40x10
3
Sandstone
10
4
- 10
5
Glacial moraine
1 - 500x10
3
Porous limestone
1 - 30x10
4
Dense limestone
>10
6
Rock salt
10
8
- 10
9
Igneous
5x10
4
- 10
8
Metamorphic
5x10
4
- 5x10
9
Rocks (laboratory)
Dry granite
10
12
Minerals
Copper (18
o
C) 1.7x10
-6
Graphite
5 - 500x10
-4
Pyrrhotite 0.1-0.6
Magnetite crystals 0.6 - 0.8
Pyrite ore
1 - 10
5
Magnetite ore
10
2
- 5x10
5
Chromite ore
>10
6
Quartz (18
o
C) 10
14
- 10
16
Electrical profiling
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
constant electrode spacing
for rapid survey of lateral variations across an area
single electrode interval or double
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
Barnes Method for 2 layers, 2 electrode spacings
A B C D E F G
Electrode
Interval, ft
R (W) (V/ I,
measured)
2pAR
(W-ft)
2pAR (W-
cm)
1/ R (1/ W)
Layer
(1/ W)
W-cm
k=957.5
Station 1
30 13.9 2618 79796 0.072
35 3.1 683 20816 0.322 0.250 3830
Station 2
30 13.9 2618 79796 0.072
35 13.5 2972 90580 0.074 0.002 478750
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]

Modified from "Earth Resistivity Manual," Soiltest, Inc., 1968, p. 8.
Explanation of table above
Electric Sounding
from single measurement, impossible to distinguish homogeneous half space from layered earth, so...
increase electrode spacing at single location
interpret changes in apparent resistivity with spacing as changes in resistivity with depth
compare with refraction of waves at boundary with velocity contrast
Flow lines for layer on half-space; different resistivity contrasts
Increasing the electrode spacing samples deeper:
For the two cases of higher resistivity layer at depth, and lower resistivity layer at depth, apparent resistivity varies
with electrode spacing like so:
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
Data collected for such a survey might look like this:
Spacing,
m
V I
Apparent
Resistivity, W-m
1.0 50.0
2.0 50.0
5.0 49.0
10.0 38.0
20.0 21.0
50.0 10.0
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
100.0 9.0
Notice that the spacing is basically logarithmic.
Burger's Table 5-4 allows you to calculate the variation of apparent resistivity with electrode spacing for a layer-
on-a-halfspace model. Notice that when the electrode spacing is a fraction of the depth to the interface, the
apparent resistivity is essentially that of the upper layer. When the electrode spacing is many times the depth to
the interface, the apparent resistivity approaches the resistivity of the lower layer.
Schlumberger array
widely used in Europe
M kept constant
restrict total line length so 3<L/M<30
Case Histories
Whately, MA: (Burger, p. 122-3, 302) Rural community in west-central MA. In 1983 and 1984, pesticide contamination found in many homeowners'
wells. Because water derived from shallow wells penetrating unconfined aquifer, contamination viewed with great alarm, resulting in state funding for
study and possible remediation. Soon obvious that alternate water source necessary. Well logs indicated sand and gravel layer sandwiched between thick
sequence of glacial-lake clays above and compacted glacial till and /or arkosic bedrock below. Clay layer forms impermeable between the deeper sands
and gravels and the contaminated surface sands. It was reasoned that deeper sands and gravels might constitute a confined aquifer if areas of sufficient
thickness could be discovered. Preliminary geophysical investigations suggested the presence of anomalously deep bedrock areas which might be a
prime location for the aquifer thicknesses required. Ultimately, seismic refraction and electrical resistivity supplemented by selected drilling sites
delineated a buried river valley filled with the sands and gravels to extent sufficient to develop as community water source.
Resistivity effectively mapped bedrock depths which tended to correlate with location of buried aquifer. Fig. 5-35(a) is a typical apparent resistivity
curve. Steep downward segment is due to thick clay layer (about 50 m), and last upward segment reveals the presence of bedrock. Analysis of curve
yields bedrock depth of 71 m, which is abnormally deep for local area, but agrees with 75 m depth to bedrock determined from a well less than 1 km
away. Gravel aquifer cannot be detected but is inferred from increased depth of bedrock (channel).
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]
Easthampton, MA: (Burger, p. 303) This town also depends on confined aquifer, a glacial sand and gravel deposit resting on Triassic sedimentary
rocks. It is overlain by glacial lake clays which vary in thickness, thinning to zero in recharge area, where the aquifer is exposed to the surface. The profile
below was part of a study to determine the thickness and extent of the aquifer. From this sounding, the clay layer thickness was estimated to be about 31
m.
Electrical Methods
http://geophysics.ou.edu/enviro/electric/[ :: //]