CHAPTER FOUR: RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 VES curves

The results of the geo-electric soundings are presented as sounding curves, chart, tables and

maps.

The geo-electric layers delineated across the study area have a range of three to four layers. The

first layer resistivity value ranges from 43 to 257 ohm-m and thickness ranges from 0.3 to 4.1 m.

the second layer has a resistivity values varies from 24 – 1287 ohm-m with a thickness ranges

between 0.5 to 12.2 m. The third layer resistivity value varying from 40 to 83,843 ohm-m with

thickness ranges between 2.3 to 11.0 m. The fourth layer which is the deepest layer has a

resistivity value ranges from 1109 to 6612 ohm-m with depth ranging from 2.4 to 15.3 m.

The resistivity sounding curve type obtained from the study area varied between A, HA, H and

KH curve types. The three layers curves comprises of A and H curve types while the four layers

comprises of HA and KH. The H type curve is the predominant curve type in the area,

accounting for 40%, A and KH type curve accounts for 25% each and HA curve type accounts

for 10% curve type in the study area. The KH curve type indicates a fractured or weathered layer

between the second layer and basement rock which is often associated with groundwater

possibilities and a confined aquifer type. The H curve has a weathered layer as the middle layer

which is usually regarded as the aquifer in the basement complex and the aquifer varies

depending on the material that overlain it. The A curve has a weathered layer more resistive than

the top soil layer. The frequency of this curve type is presented in a chart shown below in figure

4.1. The typical depth sounding curves obtained from the study area are presented in Appendix

1.0.
Table 4.1: Summary of the vertical electrical sounding interpreted results.

VES NO LAYER RESISTIVITY LAYER THICKNESS CURVE

TYPE
ρ1, ρ2, ρ3……. ρn-1 (Ωm) h1, h2, h3,………….hn-1 (m)

1 199, 450, 4810 1.8, 8.6 A

2 257, 99, 406, 1109 0.6, 1.4, 6.8 HA

3 234, 1287, 418, 6612 1.1, 3.9, 2.3 KH

4 43, 24, 1122 2.1, 5.2 H

5 26, 122, 40, 2000 1.9, 2.2, 8.1 KH

6 56, 28, 1952 2.6, 3.9 H

7 127, 750, 127, 1280 0.5, 0.5. 11 KH

8 118, 255, 87, 2314 0.8, 5.2, 7.6 KH

9 41, 134, 2152 0.6, 3.4 A

10 200, 34, 1630 0.5, 5.8 H

11 65, 24, 154, 3200 0.6, 0.7, 14 HA

12 52, 16, 3881 1.6, 2.4 H

13 247, 117, 11877 1.9, 2.7 H

14 49, 287, 83843 1.8, 12.2 A

15 130, 56, 11736 0.8, 1.6 H

16 66, 211, 5335 0.3, 5.8 A

17 102, 300, 5571 4.1, 4.2 A

18 188, 846, 37, 4596 1.3, 1.1, 2.8 KH

19 115, 33, 1513 0.4, 5.8 H

20 129, 49, 482 0.3, 4.8 H

Figure 4.1: A chart showing the frequency of curve types within the study area.
4.2 Analytical hierarchy process

The resulting priority vector, table 4.2 below, indicates that in terms of criterion “GODT”

alternative G (groundwater confinement) is prioritized, with alternatives T (topography) ranking

second and O (overlying strata formation) and D (depth to aquifer) ranking third and fourth

respectively. The assigned weight for the GODT parameters from the AHP process are 0.51,

0.15, 0.08 and 0.27 respectively. The result has a consistency ratio of 6.97 % which shows that

the result is accepted and the decision is valid. The result was used to assign weight to the geo-

electric parameters.

4.3 GODT modelling approach

The modelling approach for this study is AHP-GODT based modelling approach. The

parameters used for the GODT were (G- groundwater confinement, O- overlying strata

resistivity, D- depth to aquifer, T- topography) and they were derived from geo-electric

parameters (layer thickness and resistivity).

4.3.1 Topography map

The quantitative data were derived from GPS elevation reading of the VES points. The value in

the study area ranges from 290 – 350 m. The obtained values are shown in Table 4.3 and used

for the generation of map as shown in Figure 4.2. The study area is divided into five zones based

on equal class interval.

The extreme Southwestern part and some points on the Central part shows region of lower

elevation where infiltration is expected to be high and the region is more vulnerable to liquid

contaminant as a result of high infiltration.

Table 4.2: A matrix of pair-wise comparisons of GODT parameters for the AHP process.

More important Less important

Strongly
ImportantHighly importantImportantSlightly
ImportantEqually
important
Slightly
ImportantImportantHighly
ImportantStrongly important975311/31/51/71/9
GODTWEIGHTG13530.51O1/3131/50.15D1/51/311/30.08T1/33310.27COLUMN
SUM1.877.33124.531
Consistency ratio = 6.97 %
From the Northeastern part to the central part is region of high to moderate elevation where run-

off is expected to be high. Liquid contaminant has little or no chance of percolating into the

subsurface. This region is less vulnerable to liquid contaminant.

4.3.2 Groundwater confinement map

The values obtained for each VES points are shown in Table 4.3. The spatial variation of the

groundwater confinement is shown in Figure 4.3. The study area is divided into five zones based

on the class interval discussed in chapter three (Table 3.2). The areas with resistivity values

below 100 Ωm and above 1000 Ωm are inferred as impermeable layer and good aquifer

confinement layer (Mogaji and Omobude, 2017). These areas have low vulnerability to

contamination. These areas occupied by these include some portion of the central part of the

map, extreme southwestern part, eastern part and a point on the eastern part.

The areas with resistivity greater than 100 Ωm and lesser than 600 Ωm are inferred to as

unconfined aquifer and poor aquifer confinement layer (Mogaji and Omobude, 2017). These

areas offer little or no resistance to pollution or contaminant due to their pervious or permeable

nature. The areas include the extreme part of the Northeastern part of the map, southern part to

central part to eastern part and the extreme part of the southern part.

4.3.3 Overlying strata formation map

This was generated from the results of interpreted VES curves obtained in the study area using

equation (4.1) below;

4.1

Where
ρi = layer resistivity
n = number of layers

The estimated values are shown in Table 4.3 below. Figure 4.4 shows the spatial variation of the

overlying strata resistivity map in the study area, dividing the study area into five zones based on

manual class intervals. From the map, it can be inferred that aquifers in some part of the central

part, western part, south-western part and some part of northeastern part of the study area are

overlain by strata of resistivity value less than 100 Ωm and greater than 600 Ωm. This is

indicating the aquifers in those part are overlain by strata with good aquifer protective capacity.

Hence, the aquifers are less vulnerable to contaminant.

Aquifers in the central part extending to southern part and western part and extreme northeastern

part of the study area are overlain by strata of resistivity value of (100-600 Ωm), indicating that

the aquifer protective capacity of the overlying strata is poor. Hence, the aquifers are more

vulnerable to contaminant.

4.3.4 Depth to aquifer map

The depth to aquifer was obtained quantitatively from the interpreted VES curves for each VES

point. The obtained values are shown in Table 4.3 and used for the generation of map as shown

in Figure 4.4. The depth to aquifer in the study area ranges from 0.3 to 6m. This is indicative of

shallow depth to aquifer. This show the area has a greater risk to contamination with the

assumption that the shallower the depth, the higher the rate of contamination.
Figure 4.2: Topography map of the study area.
Figure 4.3: Groundwater confinement map of the study area.
Figure 4.4: Depth to aquifer layer map of the study area.
Figure 4.5: Overlying strata formation map of the study area.
Table 4.3: Summary of the interpreted geo-electrical parameters

EASTHINGS NORTHINGS ELEVATION VES G O D T

NO
729735 809686 345 1 199 199 1.8 345
729675 809580 343 2 99 178 2 343
729566 809355 328 3 1287 761 5 328
729410 809151 306 4 43 43 2.1 306
729254 809149 306 5 122 75 4.1 306
729326 809167 309 6 56 56 2.6 309
729325 809341 312 7 750 439 1 312
729202 809077 309 8 255 187 6 309
729304 808994 298 9 41 41 0.6 298
729308 808746 305 10 200 200 0.5 305
729129 808667 290 11 24 45 1.3 290
729360 808680 297 12 52 52 1.6 297
729442 808483 301 13 247 247 1.9 301
729489 808630 303 14 49 49 1.8 303
729495 808739 307 15 130 130 0.8 307
729510 808872 312 16 66 66 0.3 312
729524 808924 312 17 102 102 4.1 312
729595 808912 320 18 846 517 2.5 320
729399 809003 301 19 115 115 0.4 301
729364 808931 305 20 129 129 0.3 305

G- Groundwater confinement (Ωm)

O- Overlying strata resistivity (Ωm)

D- Depth to aquifer (m)

T- Topography (m)

4.3.5 AHP-GODT index and overlay approach

This involve the approach used to overlay the GODT and AHP. In order to achieve this, a rating

table was generated based on literature review and the autonomous researcher knowledge of the

groundwater occurrence in the study area and the AHP approach was used to assign weight to the

GODT parameters. Table 4.4 shows the ratings for classes of the GODT parameters and Table

4.5 above shows the result of the assigned weight from the AHP approach. The scored rating

values were multiplied by the weight values in computing the final AHP-GODT index using the

formulas below in equation (4.2 & 4.3);

AHP-GODT Index = GI + OI + DI + TI 4.2

Where; GI , OI = , DI = , TI = 4.3

Where subscripts W and R are the weights and ratings for each parameters respectively.

Table 4.6 shows the computed results evaluated for each VES point. According to the table, the

estimated AHP-GODT index values for the area varies approximately between 0.28 and 0.88.

4.3.6 Aquifer vulnerability index model map

The result of the computed AHP-GODT index values in Table 4.6 were processed with GIS

application through application of geo-statistical interpolations tool to produce aquifer

vulnerability index map of the study area (Figure 4.6). The computed AHP-GODT index values

were modelled into five classes (Table 4.7).

Areas with negligible vulnerability of AHP-GODT index ranging from 0 to 0.2 are not found in

the study area. Area with low vulnerability of AHP-GODT index ranging from 0.2 to 0.4

indicated with purple color is found at a point in the extreme part of the Northeastern. This area

offer low protection for the aquifer layer in this part of the study area. The areas indicated with
green color are areas where the AHP-GODT index is between 0.2 and 0.4 which signifies a

moderate vulnerability to the underlying aquifers.

These areas occupy the northeastern and north central, portion of the central region, portion of

the southern region and the extreme part of the southwestern. The aquifers in this areas are

moderately protected from pollution. Areas with high vulnerability are indicated with yellow

color, these areas are highly vulnerable and offer low protection to the underlying aquifer unit.

These occupy the extreme of the northeastern part, north central part, western part and eastern

part of the map. The red color represent the very high vulnerability zone of the study area. These

occupy the extreme part of the south and are scattered through central part to the southeastern

and southwestern part of the study area. These areas are very high to pollution and they offer

little or no protection to the underlying aquifers.

Table 4.4: Ratings for classes of the GODT parameters

Vulnerability Classes Rating Vulnerability
parameters implication

Groundwater 0 – 100 (Ωm) 0.2 Very low

hydraulic confinement
100 – 300 (Ωm) 0.8 High

300 – 600 (Ωm) 1 Very high

600 – 1000 (Ωm) 0.6 Moderate

> 1000 (Ωm) 0.4 Low

Overlying strata 0 – 60 (Ωm) 0.2 Very low

formation
60 – 100 (Ωm) 0.4 Low

100 – 300 (Ωm) 0.8 High

300 – 600 (Ωm) 1 Very high

> 600 (Ωm) 0.6 Moderate

Depth to aquifer 0 – 2 (m) 1 Very high

2 – 5 (m) 0.8 High

5 – 10 (m) 0.6 Moderate

10 – 20 (m) 0.4 Low

> 20 (m) 0.2 Very low

Topography 350 – 338 (m) 0.2 Very low

338 – 326 (m) 0.4 Low

326 – 314 (m) 0.6 Moderate

314 – 302 (m) 0.8 High

302 – 290 (m) 1.0 Very high

Table 4.5: Weight assigned to the parameters using AHP process

GW OW DW TW

0.51 0.15 0.08 0.27

Where; GW: groundwater confinement weight, OW: overlying strata resistivity weight, DW: depth to
aquifer weight and TW: topography weight.

Table 4.6: The computed result of the AHP-GODT modelling

VES AHP-
NO GR OR DR TR GI OI DI TI GODTI
1 0.8 0.8 1 0.2 0.408 0.12 0.08 0.054 0.662
2 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.2 0.102 0.06 0.064 0.054 0.28
3 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.204 0.09 0.048 0.108 0.45
4 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.102 0.03 0.064 0.216 0.412
5 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.408 0.12 0.048 0.216 0.792
6 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.102 0.03 0.064 0.216 0.412
7 0.6 1 1 0.8 0.306 0.15 0.08 0.216 0.752
8 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.408 0.12 0.032 0.216 0.776
9 0.2 0.2 1 1 0.102 0.03 0.08 0.27 0.482
10 0.8 0.8 1 0.8 0.408 0.12 0.08 0.216 0.824
11 0.2 0.2 1 1 0.102 0.03 0.08 0.27 0.482
12 0.2 0.2 1 1 0.102 0.03 0.08 0.27 0.482
13 0.8 0.8 1 1 0.408 0.12 0.08 0.27 0.878
14 0.2 0.2 1 0.8 0.102 0.03 0.08 0.216 0.428
15 0.8 0.8 1 0.8 0.408 0.12 0.08 0.216 0.824
16 0.2 0.4 1 0.8 0.102 0.06 0.08 0.216 0.458
17 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.408 0.12 0.048 0.216 0.792
18 0.6 1 0.8 0.6 0.306 0.15 0.064 0.162 0.682
19 0.8 0.8 1 1 0.408 0.12 0.08 0.27 0.878
20 0.8 0.8 1 0.8 0.408 0.12 0.08 0.216 0.824

AHP-GODT Index = GI + OI + DI + TI 4.2

GI , OI = , DI = , TI = 4.3

Where; GR: Groundwater confinement rating, OR: Overlying strata resistivity rating, DR: depth to
aquifer rating and TR: topography rating.
GI: Groundwater confinement index, OI: Overlying strata resistivity rating, DI: depth to aquifer
index and TI: topography index.
AHP-GODTI : AHP-GODT index
Table 4.7: The aquifer vulnerability classification
AHP-GODT Index Vulnerability class

0 – 0.2 Negligible

0.2 – 0.4 Low

0.4 – 0.6 Moderate

0.6 – 0.8 High

0.8 – 1 Very high

Figure 4.6: Aquifer vulnerability prediction map of the study area based on AHP-GODT model
approach.