Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No.

1;Jan 2013

Geoelectric and laboratory measurements to estimate the effects

of bulk and surface electrical conductivities on the volumetric
water content of unsaturated groundwater protective layer in
selected locations of Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria
George, N.Jimmy (Corresponding Author)
Department of Physics, Akwa Ibom State University,Nigeria
P.M.B. 1167, Mkpat Enin L.G.A. Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria
Tel. +2348024087839 Email: nyaknojimmyg@yahoo.com

Akpabio, I. Okon
Department of Physics, University of Uyo, Uyo Nigeria
Tel. +2348023230794 Email: idara_akpabio@yahoo.com

Emah J. Bassey
Department of Physics, Akwa Ibom State University, Nigeria
Tel. +2348167435809 Email: joemah73@gmail.com
Abstract

Knowledge of volumetric water content which varies directly with travel time of water through the
protective layer and the surface and bulk conductivities are essential for management and monitoring of
contaminants which percolate into the saturated aquifer through the overlain unsaturated protective
layer. Numerically generated empirical relations between volumetric water content and electrical
properties or conductivities have been established in this work. These relations are relevant in
predicting the degree of contamination of the underlain saturated aquifer through the prediction of
volumetric water content from field and laboratory measurements in the study area and other areas
which have similar material types as their protecting materials. With the determination of groundwater
recharge rate, time of travel which determines the efficiency of protection can be empirically predicted.

Keywords: Surface electrical conductivity, Bulk electrical conductivity, volumetric water content,
VES and unsaturated protective layer

1. Introduction 1

Recently, the evolving environmental regulations have increased the need for defining protective
properties of naturally occurring geologic layers (Anderson and Berkebile, 1976).Within the protective
layer, the volumetric water content (Ω) and clay fraction (CF) are generally affected by the bulk and
surface electrical conductivities of unsaturated unit. The volumetric water content expressed in fraction
or percentage is equivalent to porosity in saturated layer and less than porosity in unsaturated layer.
For a deep unsaturated zone, volumetric water content, Ω can be assumed to be equivalent to the
specific retention throughout the thickness of the protective layer ( DeSmedt and Wierenga , 1978 and
Bear ,1979). Since aquifer protection mechanism depends on rate of volumetric water content (Ω),
covering layer thickness, rate of recharge and time of travel through the protective layer, the need to
estimate, volumetric water content variation with electrical conductivities within the covering layer is
absolutely necessary as this could assist in management or monitoring of aquifers (Enfield et al., 1982;
Archie, 1942 and Soupios et al., 2007).

1.1 Hydraulic properties of unsaturated protective layer 2

The partial differential equation that describes transient non-dispersive and non-reactive solute
movement in the vertical or z- direction through an unsaturated porous medium is:
( Ω) ( )
= 1

544 ISSN 1661-464X

Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No. 1;Jan 2013

Where is the dimensionless solute concentration, is the groundwater recharge

rate in units of length / time, and Ω is the dimensionless volumetric water content
(Russo and Bresler, 1981). Equation (1) can be expressed with the continuity
Ω
equation for unsaturated materials =− to obtain:

Ω( , ) = − ( , ) 2
The propagation rate for a given solute concentration is obtained from eq. (2) as
( , )
=− )
3
Ω( ,
For steady-state infiltration, is the constant solute tracer velocity, . If and Ω are relatively
constant through the protective layer and independent of time and position, eq. (3) can be restated as
= −Ω 4
Equation (4) can be used to generate the expression for the vertical advective time of travel through an
unsaturated protective layer of thickness as shown in eq. (5):
Ω
= 5
Equation (4) and (5) are approximate for predicting transport through thick unsaturated layers because
at greater depth, Ω remains relatively constant, even if precipitation or irrigation may vary (DeSmedt
and Wierenga, 1978 and Enfield et al., 1982). For flow through an anisotropic layered medium, eq. (5)
can be written as
n
1
=
qi
h 
1
i i 6

where is the number of layers which are denoted by the subscript, .

1.2 Electrical properties of unsaturated porous media 3

Several models have been developed which can and have been used to describe the electrical properties
of unsaturated materials as a function of hydraulic properties. Archie’s law (Archie, 1942) describes
the relationship of bulk porous medium resistivity, to pore water resistivity and hydraulic
parameters as
= 7
Equation 7 can be rewritten as
= 8
Where , are material constants, is porosity, is the degree of saturation and is the
formation factor. Archie’s law is most applicable for clay-free sediments because it does not account
for the electrical conductivity of the solid material matrix (Soupios et al.,2007). For clay containing
materials, however, the conductivity of the matrix or the apparent surface conductivity can be
significant. The variations between the bulk conductivity and the surface conductivity significantly
affect the volumetric water content. The use of apparent conductivity is grossly due to the material
grains and the electron double layer which forms at the surface of the grains (De Lima and Sharma,
1990).
Models that account for apparent surface conductivity are described by (Rhoades et al., 1977 and
Froehlich and Parke 1989).These models assume that soil-water system can be treated as parallel
resistors with a relationship of the form in eq. (9)
= , 9
where is the apparent surface resistivity. In terms of conductivity, eq. (9) can be related as
= ( , ) 10
Where refer to the electrical conductivity of the bulk material and pore water respectively
and is the apparent surface conductivity. The model for an unsaturated medium described by
Rhoades et al., 1976, assumes that depends linearly upon water conductivity, and only a fraction
of the total cross-sectional area conducts current. This assumption leads to the model relationship
= Ω + Ω+ 11
where are material constants. Equation (11) can be re-arranged and solved to yield an
expression for Ω as a function of electrical conductivities.
545 ISSN 1661-464X
Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No. 1;Jan 2013

( )/
Ω= 12
Applying Binomial expansion,
( ) ( )( )
(1 + ) = 1 + + + +⋯ 13
! ! !
and taking the first three terms of the expansion of eq. (12) while ignoring the higher powers, gives
equation 14 on simplifying.
( )
Ω = ( − 1) − 2 ( − ) 1 − 14
For various geomaterials in the unsaturated protective layers, Ω depends on the ( − ). For
geomaterials with fairly constant , , Ω increases when ( − ) < 0 and decreases
when( − ) > 0. The model described by [13] for the electrical property of unsaturated materials is
given as:
= + 15a
Equation (12) can be written in terms of water content Ω as
Ω
= + 15b
Where Ω = and is a new material constant.
For large values of , eq. (15) becomes the inverse of Archie’s law (eq. 7). Equation (15) can also be
written as
= Ω + or − = Ω 16
where = . Equation (11) and (16) show the relationship between the electrical resistivity of
sediments as a function of Ω, . Examination of these equations shows that for large values of
Ω and / or , the contribution of the apparent surface conductivity, becomes less significant. In a
similar manner, when is small relative to , as is the case for clay-free material, is influenced
more significantly by Ω and / or .
By applying geoelectric and laboratory measurements, Mualem and Friedman (1991) established a
relationship between Ω and electrical properties of the unsaturated protective layer for some materials
in term of porosity as shown below in equation (17)
Ω .
= + 17
This equation reasonably approximates the electrical properties for varieties of material types.
Geologically, the study area has Pliocene Benin Formation which is made up of sandy formation
intercalated with clay at the considered unsaturated layer though; the deeper layers are characterized
with Miocene Akata Formation (shales, intercalated sands and siltstone) and Miocene- Pliocene
Agbada Formation (sands and sandstones, intercalated with shales) (Edet and Okereke, 2002).The
study location lies between longitudes 7.30’ and 8.20’E and latitudes 4.30’ to 5.30’N in Nigeria (Fig.
1A, 1B and 1C). The rainfall in the area is over 200mm per annum. The mean evaporation is
4.6mm/day and the relative humidity is in the range of 60 to 90% (Edet, 1993 and George et al., 2011).

2. Field application methods 1

Geophysically, Dc-resistivity method with Schlumberger electrode configuration was used to obtain
VES at the field using ABEM Terrameter (SAS) 4000 and its accessories. This method involves
passing direct current (dc) through the earth’s materials between a pair of electrodes and measuring the
potential of voltage drop between another pair of electrodes located between the current pair. The
apparent bulk resistivity ( ) of the earth material is then estimated using equation (18) which accounts
for the geometry and electrode spacing being used (Obianwu et al, 2011, Akpan et al, 2006 and Mc
Neill, 2003).

= ∙ 18

Where, are current and potential electrode separations respectively and is the resistance
of the earth measured by the instruments. The measured data were analyzed electrically using Resist
software which processed the data into field curves that generated the resistivity, depth and thickness of
layers. The results were constrained by borehole data and the resistivity were converted to electrical
conductivity by finding the reciprocals of each of the six profiles. All the curves were HK-types.

546 ISSN 1661-464X

Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No. 1;Jan 2013

The laboratory analysis commenced by obtaining the core samples of the six different soil types which
were carefully chosen within the indicated depths of the study area. The pore water resistivities were
measured using four-probe resistivity cells (Rhoades et al., 1990). Samples in resistivity cells were
soaked in solutions of varying electrical conductivity and their water contents were adjusted with a
pressure membrane extraction apparatus with tensions ranging from 0.3 to 4 bar. At each tension, the
resistivity cells were weighed and resistance was measured. The average measured resistance for each
cell was then converted to a value of resistivity ρw using predetermined cell constants. Pressure
membrane extracted water was collected for each resistivity cell and the electrical conductivities of
accumulated extracted water were measured. With the empirical formulation given in eq. (19), the
surface electrical conductivities for each of the materials were determined using (Rhoades et al., 1990).
( / ) = 2.3 − 0.021 19
Where, is the clay fraction estimated by (Rhoades et al 1990) for similar material types.The average
values of that were valid for all the material type according to Rhoades et al., 1990 were 1.15
and -0.18 for respectively. The measured values of which were fairly constant were
averaged as and used in eq. (14) to numerically estimate the volumetric water content Ω. To cross-
validate the estimated , the constant and the variables in equation (11) were substituted and the values
of were obtained for the six different material types with root-mean square of 0.0051mS/cm using
the expression
2
N
 o   0em 
= 
i 1 N
20

Where = bulk conductivity obtained from geoelectric measurement and is the bulk
conductivity obtained from empirical calculation and is the number of samples.The variations of
surface and bulk conductivities ( − ), grossly reflect variation of volumetric water content of
protective layer.

3. Results and discussion1

The foregoing geoelectrical and laboratory analysis were performed to estimate the volumetric content
of water and to determine numerically the empirical relationship between the variation in surface and
bulk conductivities of unsaturated protective layer and the volumetric water content. The results of the
analysis are presented in tables and graphs. The result of geoelectric survey is presented in table 1. The
table shows the bulk resistivity ρo, thickness H, bulk conductivity σo , longitudinal conductivity S and
the material type of the unsaturated protective layer.
The values of the Dar Zarrouk parameter, S show varying degrees of protection. Precisely, the order of
protection efficiency is clay>clay-loam>sandy-clay>loam>silt-loam>sandy-loam (Braga et al.,
2006).The order of increase in S also signifies a corresponding increase in travel time, t in Eqs. 5 and 6
for water through the unsaturated layer of protection as they are linearly related (Kalinsky et al., 1993)
Table 2 presents the resistivity of pore water ( ) for the protective layer and its inverse, pore water
conductivity( ). According to Rhoades et al., 1977, the clay fraction for the material surface
electrical conductivity( ), formation factor (F) and the normalized electrical resistivity are also
presented in table 2.
From the tables, ( − ) were evaluated and with average values of = 1.15, = −0.18 =
1.2 / , the values of Ω were generated numerically using eq. (14). From this equation, cases for
( − ) > 0 and ( − ) < 0 were considered and the graphs were plotted as shown in Fig. 2. The
graph indicates a direct proportionality of Ω with ( − ) for ( − ) < 0 and inverse
proportionality of Ω with ( − ) for ( − ) > 0. Precisely, when σs<σo ,Ω increases and for
σs>σo,Ω ,decreases. The prediction of the volumetric water content in the protective layer in this way is
useful as the parameter is widely used with rate of recharge, q (usually determined using water balance)
and thickness, H in eq. 5 to predict the time of travel water through the protective layer. In this case, Ω
is linearly related with t.
Fig. 3 is a typical representation of apparent resistivity curves for VES 1 and VES 5 in the study area.
The two curves are HK-curve types and the unsaturated protective layer falls within the second layer of
the site geomaterials. The bulk conductivities obtained from the bulk resistivity in the area was cross-
checked by tieing the empirically evaluated values of bulk conductivity obtained using eq. (11) in order
to see the degree of variation. The cross plot of bulk conductivity from geoelectrical measurement

547 ISSN 1661-464X

Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No. 1;Jan 2013

against the bulk conductivity obtained empirically using the site geomaterials is shown in Fig. 4. The
result shows a good fit between the two set of data as the relation is 99.7% correlated. Fig. 5 shows the
plots of the evaluated volumetric water content for ( − ) > 0 and ( − ) < 0 against the bulk
resistivity. The variation shows the reverse of the variation of volumetric water content against
electrical conductivity. The graph shows that for ( − ) > 0, volumetric water content increases
with bulk resistivity, and decrease with bulk resistivity for ( − ) < 0. This relationship is quite
unique though the correlation for ( − ) > 0 and ( − ) < 0 are 46.9% and 43.4% respectively.
Fig. 6 is a plot of bulk electrical conductivity and surface electrical conductivity of the geomaterials
against the calculated formation factors. The plots show gradual exponential decay of bulk and surface
electrical conductivities. At higher formation factor and lower conductivity, the bulk and surface
electrical conductivities fit very well. However, at lower formation factor and higher conductivities
(low bulk and surface resistivity), a rough fit between the two conductivities is noticed. This shows
that linearity of the two conductivities is not achievable at lower formation factor and higher bulk and
surface electrical resistivities. This deviation is due to the unequal conductivity between the pore fluid
and the soil particles. Comparing the relations in Fig. 6 to that of Fig. 5, it can be concluded roughly
that at a higher surface conductivity, , and lower formation factor, the volumetric water content
decreases(low travel and non protection) and increases at lower surface conductivity ,and higher
formation(high time of travel and good protection) factor. Fig.7 shows another empirical relationship
  
between normalized resistivity ,  1   1   o w  and the volumetric fraction of clay determined
 w 
by (Rawls and Brakensiek, 1989) for the considered material types. Where  w is the average value of
the pore fluid resistivity. The relation between normalized resistivity and the volumetric fraction of
clay in Fig.7 is purely quadratic and this suggests nonlinearity between normalized resistivity and the
volumetric clay fraction of the considered material types. Since the relation is not linear, the value of
bulk resistivity,  o for the different material types is purely a function of the water resistivity which
influences the volumetric clay fraction heavily. The linking nonlinear equation in Fig.7 shows a good
fit based on the correlation coefficient of 0.989(98.9%). Generally, volumetric fraction of clay is
inversely related with resistivity of material .However, since the bulk resistivity of the unsaturated
materials considered depends on a variety of physical, chemical and biological factors, it is worthwhile
to conclude that the relation in Fig.7 is nonlinear. For specific material, the normalized resistivity can
be obtained by putting the specific volumetric clay fraction into the empirical relation shown in Fig.7.

4. Conclusion1
The geoelectric sounding results carried out at some selected locations with peculiar surface geoelectric
terrains in the southern part of Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria allowed a distinction to be made between the
topmost unsaturated protective layer and the immediate underlain weathered layers. The
complementary laboratory analysis of the unsaturated protective material samples have equally enabled
the electrical properties which paved the ways for electrical surface and bulk conductivities to be
deciphered. With standard material constants available in literatures for the similar unsaturated
geomaterial considered in this work, numerically generated empirical relations were established. The
relationship between the electrical properties and volumetric water content which is an important
parameter in ground water protective layer has been established. With the variation in volumetric water
contents with electrical conductivities, the time of travel of water through unsaturated protective layer
can be roughly estimated and this can serve as a guide to decide whether a protective layer is efficient
or not. The analogy of the numerically generated parameters from geoelectric and laboratory inputs is
well defined within the observed ranges in literatures.

References

Akpan F.S, Etim O.N & Akpan A.E. (2006),Geoelectrical investigation of groundwater potential in
parts of Etim Ekpo Local Government Area, Akwa Ibom State, Nigerian Journal Physics 18, 39-44

Anderson M.P. & Berkebile C.A. (1976), Evidence of salt water intrusion in southeastern long Island,
Groundwater 14, 315-319
548 ISSN 1661-464X
Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No. 1;Jan 2013

Archie G.E. (1942), The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir
characteristics, American Institute Mineral and Metallurgical Engineering. 146, 54-62.

Bear J. (1979), Hydraulics of Groundwater, Mc Graw-Hill, New York, 88pp.

Braga A.C de O, Filho W.M, & Dourado J.C. (2006), Resistivity (DC) method applied to aquifer
protection studies, Revista Brasileira de Geofisica, 24,573-581

De Lima O.A.L. & Sharma M.M. (1990), A grain conductivity approach to shaley sand,
Geophysics.50, 1347-1356
DeSmedt F. & Wierenga P.J, (1978), Approximate analytical solution for solute flow during
infiltration and redistribution, Soil Science, Society American Journal 42, 407-412

Edet A.E (1993), Groundwater quality assessment in parts of eastern Niger Delta, Environmental
Geology 22, 41- 46

Edet A.E and Okereke C.S (2002), Delineation of shallow groundwater aquifers in the coastal plain
sands of Calabar area (southern Nigeria) using surface resistivity and hydrogeological data,
Journal of African Earth Sciences. 35, 433-443

Enfield C.G, Carsel R.F, Cohen S.Z Phan T. & Walters D.M. (1982), Approximating pollutant
transport to Groundwater, 20, 711-722

Frohlich R.K &Parke C.D. (1989), The electrical resistivity of the vadose zone-field study,
Groundwater, 25, 525- 530

George N, Obianwu V. & and Udofia K. (2011),Estimation of aquifer hydraulic parameters via
complementing surficial geophysical measurement by laboratory measurements on the aquifer core
samples International Review of Physics.5, 88-97

Kalinsky R.J, Kelly W.E, Bogardi I. & Pesti G. (1993), Electrical resistivity measurement to estimate
travel times using unsaturated groundwater protective layers, Journal of Applied Geophysics. 30,161-
173

Mc Neill J.D (2003), Electrical conductivity of soil and rocks, Technical Note TN-5 Hydrological
Process, Korea, 17, 1197-1211

Mualem Y. & Friedman S.P. (1991), Theoretical prediction of electrical conductivity in saturated and
saturated soil, Water Resource Research, 27, 2771-2777

Obianwu V, George N, Udofia (2011), Estimation of aquifer hydraulic conductivity and effective
porosity distribution using laboratory measurement on core samples in the Niger Delta, Southern
Nigeria, International Review Physics. 5, 19-24
Rawls W.J & Brakensiek D.I. (1989), Estimation of soil water retention and hydraulic properties, In:
H.J .Morel- Seytoux (Editor), Unsaturated flow in Hydrolic Modelling, Theory and Practice, Kluwer,
Dordrecht, pp. 275-300

Rhoades J.D, Kaddah M.T, Halvorson A.D & Prather R.J (1977), Establishing soil electrical
conductivity-salinity calibrations using four electrode cells containing undisturbed soil cores, Soil
Science, 123, 137-141

Rhoades J.D, Raats P.A.C. & Prather R.J (1976), Effects of liquid-phase electrical conductivity, water
content, and surface conductivity on bulk soil electrical conductivity, Soil Science Society of
American Journal, 40, 651-655

549 ISSN 1661-464X

Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No. 1;Jan 2013

Rhoades J.D, Shouse P.J, Alves W.J, Manteghi N.A & Lesch S.M. (1990), Determining soil salinity
from soil electrical conductivity using different models and estimates, Soil Science Society of
American Journal, 54, 46-54

Russo D. & Bresler, E. (1981), Effect of field variability in soil hydraulic properties on solutions of
unsaturated water and salt flows. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 45, 675-681

Soupios P.M, Kouli M, Vallianatos F, Vatifidis A & Stvroulakis G. (2007), Hydraulic parameters from
surface geophysical methods: Keritis Basin in Chania-Crete Journal of Hydrology, 338, 1-8

Table 1: summary of geoelectrically deduced parameter of the unsaturated protective layer in

the study area.
VES No (Ω ) H(m) ( / ) Material type Longitudinal
conductance(S)
(Siemens)
1 28.5 6.2 0.35 Loam 0.218
2 12.9 5.8 0.77 Clay-loam 0.450
3 14.0 4.9 0.71 Sandy clay 0.350
4 42.0 8.4 0.24 Sandy loam 0.200
5 25.6 5.3 0.39 Silt loam 0.210
6 7.1 3.9 1.41 Clay 0.550

Table 2: Summary of laboratory results, and some empirical values for the condensed material
types
(Ω ) / CF ( / ) ′ (Ω ) F Material type
9.0 0.32 0.15 1.1 28.23 3.17 Loam
9.8 0.75 0.34 1.0 11.83 1.33 Clay loam
8.8 0.65 0.29 1.1 14.20 1.59 Sandy clay
12.0 0.23 0.10 0.8 31.22 3.50 Sandy loam
8.9 0.35 0.16 1.0 25.67 2.88 Silt loam
5.0 1.36 0.60 2.0 12.67 1.42 Clay

Figure 1: Map of Nigeria (B) showing Akwa Ibom State (C) and the location of the study area (A)
550 ISSN 1661-464X
Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No. 1;Jan 2013

Figure2: A plot of volumetric water content against variation between surface and bulk electrical
conductivity

Figure3: Typical VES curves and their layer resistivities in the study area

551 ISSN 1661-464X

Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No. 1;Jan 2013

Figure4: A cross-plot of bulk electrical conductivity obtained from geoelectric

measurement against the one obtained by empirical calculation

Figure5: A plot of volumetric water content against bulk resistivity

552 ISSN 1661-464X

Archives Des Sciences Vol 66, No. 1;Jan 2013

Figure6: A plot of electrical conductivity against formation factor

Figure7: A plot of normalized resistivity of the formation against volumetric fraction of clay

553 ISSN 1661-464X