electrical resistivity surveys for … · resistivity (schlumberger) surveys in the upper...
TRANSCRIPT
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
130 www.jiarm.com
ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY SURVEYS FOR DELINEATION OF GROUNDWATER POTENTIAL ZONES IN AND AROUND KADIRI, ANANTAPUR
DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, INDIA
G. SUDARSANA RAJU*
*Assistant Professor, Dept. of Geology, Yogivemana University, Kadapa, A.P, India
ABSTRACT The occurrence, movement and control of groundwater, particularly in hard rock
areas, are governed by different factors such as topography, lithology, structures (fractures,
faults & joints) and nature of weathering. Integrated geological, hydrological and geophysical
(electrical resistivity) surveys have been utilized to delineate groundwater potential zones in
and around Kadiri schist belt, Anantapur district, southern part of India. The main lithological
units comprises mainly acid volcanic (rhyolites, rhyodacite and quartz-sericite schist) and
some minor amounts of basic volcanic (amphibolites) and is enveloped on all sides by
granitoids of Peninsular gneissic complex. Sixty four vertical electrical soundings were
carried out by using Schlumberger configuration covering an area of about 332 Km2 and the
field data was interpreted with the help of three layer master curves and auxiliary point
charts. Vertical electrical sounding curves suggest a few three layer geoelectrical sections A,
H and K type and a number of four layer sections of HK, HA and KH types. Iso-resistivity
contour maps were prepared and interpreted in terms of resistivity and thickness of various
subsurface layers using software SURFER programme and also isocontour diagrams
depicting the depth to bedrock were prepared. The interpreted VES results are also correlated
with the drilled borewell lithologs, showing good agreement with them. In general, the
weathered rock with 12 m thickness and resistivity values between 20 to 80 ohm-m are
considered to be good groundwater potential zones. Out of three layers identified, weathered
zone(second layer)holds good groundwater potentialities with yields ranging from 10,000 to
20,000 lph. Finally, based on depth to bedrock and thickness of saturated layer, groundwater
potential zones were delineated. The study indicates that the groundwater resources are
mainly confined to the weathered and fractured zones in granitoids.
KEYWORDS: Electrical Resistivity, Groundwater Resources, Kadiri Schist Belt, Geological
Cross Sections, Vertical Electrical Soundings, Groundwater Potential Zones
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
131 www.jiarm.com
INTRODUCTION
There are several difficulties for development of groundwater resources in hard rock areas as
wide and erratic variation of vital parameters (i.e. fractures, joints, porosity etc). In hard
rocks, groundwater occurs in secondary porosity developed due to weathering, fracturing,
faulting etc., which is highly variable and varies sharply within very short distances,
contributing to near surface inhomogeneity (Raju and Reddy, 1998). In such situations
topographic, hydrogeological and geomorphological feature provide useful clues for the
selection of suitable sites for groundwater exploration. Spatial variation of fractures and
joints is attributed, among other causes, to tectonic set-up and degree of weathering of near
surface rocks (Barker et al 2001). Different geological formations are characterized by
individual resistivities which in turn depend on many factors such as mineral composition,
structure, texture, degree of saturation, water quality and temperature (Todd 1980).
Groundwater potential also varies significantly from place to place sometimes within few
meters and even within the same geological formations. Although the geophysical methods
are being routinely used for exploration of groundwater, at times it becomes a challenge
because of various factors such as geometry and depth of the aquifer and the yield of
groundwater. Further, in the absence of surface manifestations of structures favourable for
groundwater occurrence, geophysical strategy plays an indispensable role not only in
mapping and understanding the nature of aquifers but also ensures a better success rate of
groundwater exploration. Geophysics, predominantly geoelectrical resistivity techniques, has
been extensively used for a wide variety of geotechnical and groundwater exploration
problems in different terrains in order to understand the subsurface hydrological conditions
such as the variation in resistivity with depth, subsurface geology, thickness of weathered and
fractured zones and the position of bedrock (Zohdy, 1975; Barker, 1980; Ballukraya et al.,
1981; Verma 1983; Kshirasagar and Nagamalleswara Rao, 1989; Zhody 1989; Yadav and
Lal, 1989; Bernard and Valla, 1991; Raju et al., 1996; Murali and Patangay, 1998; Raju and
Reddy, 1998; Mack et al., 1998; Nowroozi et al., 1999; Mousa, 2003, Krishnamurthy et al.,
2003; Ibrahim, et al., 2004; Youssef et al., 2004; Al-Abaseiry et al., 2005; Hosny et al., 2005;
Alotaibi and Al-Amri, 2007; Das et al., 2007; Nigm, et al., 2008; Mohamaden et al., 2009;
Ariyo and Adeyemi, 2009; Oseji, 2010). This is due to the fact that, the electrical resistivity
survey is one of the simplest and less costly geophysical surveys employed in groundwater
exploration. Moreover, it can be used either in the form of vertical electrical soundings
(VES's) or horizontal profiling to search for groundwater in both porous and fissured media
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
132 www.jiarm.com
(Van Overmeeren, 1989; Raju and Reddy, 1998; Abd El-Rahman, A. and Khaled, M.A.,
2005; and Abd Alla et al., 2005). Electrical resistivity methods give indirect evidence to the
presence of water, indicating different probable productive zones at different depths
(Schwartz and McClymant, 1977). The electrical resistivity technique has particular
advantages in hydrogeology because it responds to variations in conductivity of the
groundwater. Raju et al. (1996) have delineated groundwater potential zones using electrical
resistivity (schlumberger) surveys in the upper Gunjanaeru catchment, Cuddapah district in
southern part of India and found that groundwater resources are mainly confined to the
boulder, weathered and fractured zones. In groundwater exploration the resistivity method
alone is not the sole deciding factor as incompetent formations give erroneous result but plays
a major role in the integrated approach (Raju and Reddy 1998).
Study area and geological setting
The study area, is a part of Kadiri schist belt, having a total catchment area of 332 Km2 and
lies between north latitude 14º00’-14º10’ and east longitudes 78º05’-78º15’ (Fig. 1) in the
survey of India toposheet no. 57 J/4. The area situated in subtropical zone and experiences
extreme climatic conditions with maximum and minimum temperatures are 45ºC during
summer and 14ºC during winter season, respectively. Lying off the coast, the area does not
get the full benefits either from southwest monsoon or northeast monsoon. Thus the area is
deprived of both the monsoons and subjected to recurrent droughts. The annual rainfall of the
area is 666 mm. On an average Kadiri region has 40 rainy days (days having more than 2.5
mm of rainfall) in a year.
The study area is comprised of Kadiri schist belt which consists of mainly acid
volcanics with minor amount of basic volcanics. Kadiri schist belt is a linear green stone belt
situated in the eastern part of the Dharwar craton and south western part of the Cuddapah
basin. Acid volcanics represents rhyolite, rhyodacite, quartz porphyry, quartz feldspar
porphyry, muscovite sericite schist and quartz sericite schist. The basic volcanics consists of
meta-basalt and amphibolites. The schist belt is having on either side by sin to post tectonic
granitoids which constitute mostly granodiorite-tonalite suite in the east and granite suite in
the west. At places, pink granite in the granodiorite-tonalite suite on the eastern margin shows
a clear cut intrusive contact with the schist belt units. The central portion of the area
constitutes the schist belt, which runs roughly in the NNW-SSE direction (Fig. 2).
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
133 www.jiarm.com
Geophysical Data Acquisition Geoelectric resistivity field survey was carried out by applying the vertical electrical
sounding (VES) technique which measures the electrical resistivity variation of formations
with depth. The electric resistivity of a rock formation varies according to the rock nature of
material (density, porosity, pore size and shape), water content and its quality and
temperature. Hence, there are no sharp limits for electric resistivity of porous formations. The
resistivity is more controlled by the water content and its quality within the matrix of the
formation than by the solid granular resistivity value itself. Therefore, the geological unit
may be subdivided into different geoelectrical units according to different percentage of
humidity within it (Parasnis, 1997).
The geoelectrical resistivity measurements were performed applying resistivity meter of the
type DDR1 (IGIS, Hyderabad) allowing to filter the potential of the earth and measure the
potential difference (ΔV) due to the fed current (I) and the current itself simultaneously.
About 20% of the total measurements were recorded twice by changing the supply voltage.
Sixty four vertical electrical soundings were taken at different locations spreading entire area,
excluding the hilly area (Fig.1). In present work, Schlumberger configuration is applied with
half current electrode spacing (AB/2) starting from 1 m to a maximum of 100 m from place
to place depending upon the accessibility to determine the lithology, weathered, fractured
pattern, depth to basement and resistivity variations. This spacing is sufficient to reach
adequate depths covering the weathered and fractured aquifer. In this schlumberger method,
the two outer current electrodes and the two inner potential electrodes are aligned in a single
line. The distance between these potential and current electrodes is kept always equal or less
than one fifth of that of the current electrodes at any stage during the probe. The apparent
resistivity is measured at the centre of the electrode array. The apparent resistivity values
were plotted against half the current electrode spacing on a log-log graph. The curves of best
fit were then traced and the data obtained from the smooth curve (Smoothed values) were
noted. Qualitative and quantitative interpretations of the field curves were carried out to
obtain the type of curves and by partial curve matching, respectively. The resistivity and
thickness obtained from the partial curve matching. All field curves were interpreted with the
help of auxiliary point charts (Bhattacharya and Patra, 1968) and three layer master curves
(Orellana and Mooney, 1966). Interpretation of data were done quantitatively and
qualitatively and bringing in to bare the knowledge of the local geology of the area. The
result of the geoelectric survey was processed and quantitatively interpreted using available
geological information and presented as geoelectrical sections along the various profiles
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
134 www.jiarm.com
which run from east to west (A-A’ and M-M’) and SW to NE (X-X’) direction. Type of
curves, resistivity of the sediments and lithologic logs from nearby boreholes were used in
conjunction with the knowledge of the local geology as guides in the interpretation and
analysis of the geologic section in terms of probable and sustainable water supply.
Results and Discussion
Sixty four vertical electrical soundings (Fig.1) are carried out and the resistivity data obtained
is analysed qualitatively and quantitatively to delineate high and low resistivity zones and
results are presented in Table 1.
Qualitative interpretation
The aerial variations in apparent resistivity often can be related qualitatively to the geological
formations (Schwartz and McClymant, 1977). The iso-resistivity contour maps help to
delineate high and low resistivity zones to know the aerial extent of low resistivity zones and
nature of the basement rock. Horizontal geoelectrical cross sections are prepared to
understand areal distribution of different zones that may help to infer the possible locations of
exploitable groundwater (Raju et al., 1996).
Horizontal apparent resistivity cross sections
The iso-resistivity contour maps at 1.5 m, 10 m, 50 m and 100 m depth and their respective
three-dimensional maps are prepared using SURFER software to understand the horizontal
geoelectrical cross sections and the hydrogeological characteristics. Horizontal cross section
and three dimensional view at 1.5 m depth reveals the changes in the resistivity
characteristics at the near surface zone (Fig. 3). The apparent resistivity values range from 13
ohm-m to 310 ohm-m with contour interval of 10 ohm-m. The contours are dense at the
northern and southern portions of the study area. The apparent resistivity values decrease
from this dense central portion to all directions of the map. The highest resistivity values of
310 ohm-m, 260 and 200 ohm-m are found at Muritipalle in the north and at Cheritivaripalle
and Bommireddipalle in the south, respectively which corroborate with the three dimensional
view of the apparent resistivity values shown for 1.5 m iso-resistivity contour map. The high
resistivity values correspond to the relatively high resistivity formations such as
pegmatite/quartz veins (Karanth et al., 1992). The horizontal cross section prepared based on
the resistivity values at 10 m spacing and the three dimensional view is shown in the Fig. 3.
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
135 www.jiarm.com
The apparent resistivity varies from 10 ohm-m to 300 ohm-m with a contour interval of 10
ohm-m. The higher resistivity values are recorded in gneissic terrain and the highest values is
recorded at Cheritivaripalle and Kottapalle having a value of 300 ohm-m and 250 ohm-m,
respectively. The apparent resistivity values at 50 m depth (Fig. 4) range from 45 ohm-m to
900 ohm-m with a contour interval of 50 ohm-m. There are four cluster portions in the two
dimensional as well as in three dimensional maps are observed with highest values of 900
ohm-m recorded in the Muritipalle which is situated in the border zone between schist and
gneissic formations. Other peaks observed in the three dimensional map is Rangannagaripalle
(800 ohm-m) and Kutagulla (490 ohm-m) which are situated in gneissic terrain whereas
Kottapalle (740 ohm-m) is present in granite formations. The two and three dimensional
views of the horizontal cross sections are prepared for apparent resistivity at 100 m depth
(Fig. 4). The apparent resistivity values vary from 150 ohm-m to 1600 ohm-m with a contour
interval of 100 ohm-m. The highest resistivity values are recorded at Barigareddipalle (1600
ohm-m) in schistose formation. Next higher values are observed at Muritipalle (1500 ohm-m)
and Rangannagaripalle (1450 ohm-m) in gneissic formations, whereas Chigurumani Tanda
(1000 ohm-m) situated in the granite formations.
Depth to basement
Using the interpreted results of the electrical soundings, two and three dimensional
maps have been prepared showing the depth to basement (Fig. 5). The depth to basement is
not uniform in the study area and it is very shallow at Muddimadugu at about 8 m, while it is
the deepest at Goddivelagala at about 33 m depth. On the basis of sounding data alone it has
been found that the depth to bedrock is found to be greater along south-eastern region and
also at a few locations along central and western directions. Hence, these areas are more
suitable for groundwater development.
Quantitative interpretation
Field curves have been quantitatively interpreted with the help of master curves (Orellana and
Mooney 1966). The sounding curves suggest a few three layer geoelectrical sections H
(ρ1>ρ2<ρ3), A (ρ1<ρ2<ρ3) and K (ρ1<ρ2>ρ3) type and a number of four layer sections of
HA, HK and KH, types. Results of resistivity data reveal that out of 64 soundings, 44 are
three layer types and the rest are four layer type curves. The characteristic resistivity layers
obtained for various formations are presented in the Table 2.
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
136 www.jiarm.com
Three layer data reveals that out of 44 soundings, 36, 6 and 2 are of A-type, H-type and K-
type, respectively. From the field curves and field studies, it is identified that the initially K
and A curves (ρ increasing with depth) indicate the presence of low resistivity soil cover that
overlies the weathered zone and hard basement rock at shallow depths. The areas covered by
these soundings may not be suitable for large scale groundwater development but limited
development with low yield perhaps may be possible. The areas covered by H-type curves
contain as a highly resistive dry soil cover when compared to low resistive weathered and
fractured rock layers at deeper depths and holds promise for good groundwater development.
The thickness of the top soil cover varies from 1 to 5 m with a resistivity variation from 13 to
150 ohm-m. The thickness of the second layer (weathered rock) is in between 2.5 to 18 m
with resistivity values varying from 17 to 100 ohm.m (Table2). The semi-weathered/
fractured layer having a thickness of 5 to 22 m with a resistivity values varies from 80 to 320
ohm-m, followed by hard basement rock with high resistivity values more than 320 ohm-m.
Out of these three layers, second layer (i.e weathered zone) holds good groundwater
potentialities with yields ranging from 10,000 to 20,000 lph. The third layer (semi-
weathered/fractured rock) show moderate chances for groundwater development with yields
ranging from 5,000 to 15,000 lph. Based on these studies it is observed that the weathered
rock is proved to be a good aquifer under water table and semi-artesian conditions in the
study area. In general, the weathered rock with 12 m thickness and resistivity values between
20 to 80 ohm-m are considered to be good groundwater potential zones.
Correlation of sounding results with geological sections
In order to know the accuracy of interpretations of vertical electrical soundings, resistivity
values are compared with the geological formations of the existing wells. The results of six
resistivity soundings taken close to dug wells have been correlated with the geological
sections obtained from well sections (Fig. 6), by and large they match with each other. The
thickness of the soil layer (having a range of 1 to 5 m) obtained from the interpretation of
sounding curves is in good agreement with the geological sections. The second layer
weathered rock whose resistivity varies from 17 to 100 ohm-m also agrees with the
geological sections. In the case of S-15, the boundary between the second layer (weathered
rock) and the third layer (hard rock) of the geological section is not so well brought out by the
resistivity soundings. Although the geological sections indicate the presence of various layers
such as the soil, the weathered, the semi-weathered/fractured and the hard rock, the
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
137 www.jiarm.com
interpretation of the soundings in many cases showed only three layers. This indicates that
the weathered layer thickness as interpreted from soundings partly corresponds to the semi-
weathered/fractured layer as well. Therefore, the four layers are electrically equivalent to
three layers, which may not have sufficient resistivity contrast to bring out the difference
between them. The depth to basement data derived from sounding interpretations are in good
agreement with the actual depth data collected during the field work from the dugwells, dug-
cum-borewells. This shows that electrical resistivity data, if properly obtained, would help in
a big way to understand the subsurface layering, degree of saturation and basement
configuration.
Geological cross sections
Hydrogeological cross sections, A-A’, M-M’ and X-X’ (Fig. 7) are distributed across the
maximum study area, in which A-A’ and M-M’ runs from east-west direction and X-X’ runs
from northeast-southwest direction. The results obtained from various soundings have
combined along each profile to produce geoelectric sections to understand the variations in
thickness of different layers i.e soil, weathered and semi-weathered/fractured rock in
subsurface.
Ekkulacheruvu to Middeverepalle cross section (A-A’) is based on the resistivity results
of four soundings (S3, S23, S32 and S59) taken along a profile in east-west direction (Fig. 7).
This section presents quite a simple picture of the subsurface geology. In this section, the
resistivities of soil cover vary from 13 to 90 ohm-m having slight variation in thicknesses.
The thickness of weathered rock zone varies from place to place and maximum thickness of 7
m is observed at S-59 with a resistivity ranges from 45 to 80 ohm-m. The minimum
weathered rock thickness observed in the central part (S-32) and its thickness increases in
east and west direction. Maximum thickness (9 m) of semi-weathered/fractured rock is found
in the central part of the section (S-32) and thickness is decreased in other two directions.
Along this section, deep dugwells or dug-cum-borewells are recommended as the resistivity
values indicated the presence of saturated weathered/fractured zone (Reddy and Saleem
1986). Diguvapalle to Pulikuntapalle cross section (M-M’) is based on the resistivity results
of four soundings (S11, S14, S49 and S50) taken along a profile in east-west direction (Fig.
7). In this section, the thickness of soil cover increases from west to east direction and
maximum thickness (4 m) of soil cover is observed at S-49 and S-11 having a resistivity
variation of 20 to 120 ohm-m. The thickness of weathered zone is increasing from east to
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
138 www.jiarm.com
west direction and maximum thickness (15 m) is observed at S50 location. Maximum
thickness of semi-weathered/fractured rock is found at S49 (16 m) and S11 (12 m) having a
resistivity values ranging from 148 ohm-m to 320 ohm-m. Along this profile dugwell is
recommended at S11 and S50, where the weathered zone thickness is around 10 m and 15 m,
respectively. A bore well may be recommended at S49 location as the thickness of the semi-
weathered/fractured rock zone is around 16 m having a resistivity values of 148 ohm-m.
Cherlopalle to Godduvelagalla cross section (X-X’) is based on the resistivity results of six
soundings (S10, S8, S18, S56, S60 and S62) taken along a profile in NE-SW direction (Fig.
7). The increase trend of soil thickness is observed from the NE to SE direction i.e S10 to
S62, except at S18 where thickness is negligible. Large variation in the weathered rock
thickness has been observed throughout the cross section having a resistivity values vary
from 25 to 100 ohm-m. The maximum weathered zone thickness is around 17 m at S56 and
minimum is around 3 m at S18. The fractured layer thickness varies from 9 to 22 m with
resistivity values of 110 t0 240 ohm-m. Maximum thickness of fractured zone is found across
this section with an exception of S56 and S60. Since weathered and fractured zones extended
up to the depth of 30 m, these areas may be suitable for good chances of groundwater
development with yields ranging from 10,000 to 20,000 lph.
Groundwater potential zones
Assuming that wide variations are not present within a few kilometres, groundwater
potential zones have been delineated based on the subsurface lithology, simple yield test
(container method) in dug wells, data related to thickness of the aquifer and depth to
basement obtained from quantitative interpretations. From quantitative interpretation,
groundwater potential zones are identified by considering the 25 m depth and resistivity
values of less than 80 ohm-m and more than 8 m weathered zone thickness (Fig. 8). The
groundwater potential zones deciphered by qualitative interpretation (<200 ohm-m) are in
good agreement with those found by quantitative interpretation. The qualitative and
quantitative interpretations complement each other in giving locations for dug wells or
borewells for drinking and irrigation purposes.
Conclusions and Recommendations
In general, the hard rock formations do not have good groundwater potential, still
integrated studies would help to ascertain presence of hidden water bearing formations.
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
139 www.jiarm.com
Resistivity sounding proves to be an effective tool to locate the productive zones, when
interpreted in conjunction with hydrogeological data. The results of the resistivity data
indicate that out of 64 soundings 44 are three layered (majority are of A-type) and remaining
are four layer type curves. The groundwater development of the study area is at a depth
between 20 to 32 m within the second and third layers. These layers consists of highly
weathered and fractured rocks which are reasonably good formations to obtain an appreciable
quantity of water in hard rock for sustainable groundwater development. The research did
pave way for a clear picture of the subsurface hydro geological knowledge of Kadiri region in
order to create awareness on the productive and prolific aquifer for sustainable groundwater
supply. The present results of research act as guides to both the Government and individuals
especially those involved in groundwater development on formation type of the aquifer and
the depths of boreholes could be drilled for sustainable groundwater supply in the drought
prone Kadiri environs.
Table: 1 Apparent resistivity at different depths
s.no Location 1.5m 10m 50m 100m Longitudinal Conductance
1 Chigurumani Tanda 35 83 432 1002 0.12
2 Gollavari palle 75 114 332 521 0.104 3 Ekkalacheruvu palle 25 47 183 452 0.239 4 Mutyalacheruvu 57 16 282 505 0.138 5 Battalapalle 65 54 146 286 0.338 6 Bhagiratipalle 15 43 134 278 0.352 7 Eguvapalle 45 32 134 280 0.359 8 Brahamanapalle 53 103 304 514 0.143 9 Kareddypalle 34 80 252 502 0.194 10 Cherlopalle 74 165 390 685 0.116 11 Diguvapalle 21 29 46 102 1.069 12 Maddimadugu 63 76 146 221 0.298 13 Maddimadugu lands 131 101 336 562 0.107 14 Tirumaladevarapalle 103 92 192 344 0.185 15 Sivarampalle 112 83 535 284 0.197
16 Pantulacheruvu 122 92 322 541 0.098
17 Indukurupalle 64 83 244 441 0.815 18 Kavulepalle lands 160 223 340 485 0.08 19 Kattela Tanda 123 130 174 210 0.179 20 Battalapalle Tanda 86 84 190 365 0.224 21 Murutipalle lands 194 140 785 1650 0.066 22 Murutipalle 310 226 900 1557 0.041 23 Barigireddypalle 25 64 150 305 0.313 24 Gollavaripalle lands 53 65 134 210 0.327 25 Kutagulla lands 25 70 230 460 0.207
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
140 www.jiarm.com
26 Erradoddi palle lands 64 64 202 375 0.245 27 Erradoddi Tanda 45 83 303 480 0.128 28 Jukala lands 122 134 172 210 0.179 29 Jukala lands 95 72 230 470 0.165 30 Kutagulla lands 116 138 492 800 0.087 31 Kutagulla 138 142 180 224 0.128 32 Saidapuram 136 202 450 680 0.085 33 Kadiri 145 72 220 401 0.156 34 Baripalle 135 178 464 720 0.074 35 Kavulepalle 116 138 492 800 0.087 36 Metukupalle 133 115 351 620 0.062 37 Allugundla 132 100 190 270 0.109 38 Jaggannapeta 140 205 324 480 0.135 39 Bommireddi palle 202 162 190 320 0.168 40 Ranalapalle 174 110 243 500 0.193 41 Cheritivaripalle 260 312 395 602 0.138
table1 contd…
S.NO. Location 1.5m 10m 50m 100m Longitudinalconductance
42 Kuntlapalle 146 160 323 490 0.073 43 Rangannagari palle 211 155 802 1455 0.062 44 Devrintipalle 182 120 365 560 0.104 45 Enumala 26 66 223 430 0.217 46 Pattaravandla palle 34 56 146 300 0.288 47 Balepalle Tanda 44 46 134 360 0.186 48 Polivandla palle 38 96 260 540 0.178 49 Kottapalle 124 254 740 1420 0.065 50 Pulikunta palle 28 69 225 440 0.213 51 Nalasanipalle 24 49 140 295 0.307 52 Rajamvandla palle 70 122 310 530 0.128 53 Arakacheruvupalle 66 56 152 300 0.327 54 Kottapalle 25 44 88 150 0.514 55 Gangannagari palle 25 66 220 430 0.216 56 Muthannagari palle 82 110 310 560 0.173 57 Maddivarigundu 15 49 128 273 0.379 58 Gollapalle 22 44 200 440 0.239 59 Middivaripalle 15 30 120 250 0.324 60 Mustipalle 45 66 185 315 0.216 61 Mustipalle lands 41 93 240 460 0.16 62 Godduvelagala 63 95 220 400 0.247 63 Virannagattupalle 65 57 152 300 0.327 64 Jukala 31 48 205 430 0.237
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
141 www.jiarm.com
Table:2 Results of Vertical Electrical Soundings S.NO e1Ohm-
m e2 Ohm-m
e3 Ohm-m
e4 Ohm-m
h1 Mts
h2 Mts h3 Mts Depth to basement
Type of curve
1 37 55 235 1.9 9.1 6.4 17.4 A 2 62 54 143 435 1.4 7.8 18.7 27.9 HA 3 31 67 251 1.5 11.5 13 26 A 4 63 22 120 626 2.9 10.7 5.7 19.3 HA 5 44 90 72 2.8 14 16.8 K 6 15 35 115 476 2.2 9 16.4 27.6 A 7 45 100 140 3 6 15 24 A 8 57 40 240 2 2 8 12 H 9 33.2 51.6 360 160 1.8 9 18 28.8 A 10 97 65.2 108.6 1.1 5.5 16.4 16.4 A 11 21 100 380 3.7 11 10 24.7 HA 12 62 140 430 1.2 12.8 8.6 22.6 A 13 187 78 689 0.53 8.13 8.66 A 14 35.8 17 383 627 1.38 7.28 4.42 13.08 H 15 42 68 314 1.93 11.9 13.92 HA 16 112 50.4 80.5 818 1.2 6.8 9.42 17.42 A 17 68.5 34.8 106 228 1.02 2.23 13.4 16.65 HA 18 132 203 422 2.96 17.66 20.62 H 19 118 111.2 140.6 357 1.11 2.1 18.64 21.63 A 20 85.7 47.2 129 485 2.25 3.08 16.39 21.72 HA 21 241.7 56.4 116.4 435 0.94 3.05 12.23 16.22 HA 22 22.7 46.6 201.8 1.43 8.26 9.69 HA 23 22 45 133 1.05 2.4 28.06 31.52 A 24 53 48 103.6 526 4.03 3.62 20.47 28.12 A 25 24.6 99.2 115 469 1.7 13.64 6.42 21.76 HA 26 64.6 34.6 183.1 447 1.65 2.25 23.75 27.66 AA 27 46.7 88.6 106.3 2.61 6.2 18.32 27.13 HA 28 57.2 97.4 290 1.2 12 6.2 19.4 A 29 58 85.5 285 1.2 12.6 7.1 20.9 A 30 57.6 32.8 120 1.4 14 6.8 22.2 A 31 57 84.4 360 1.5 12.5 2.8 16.8 H 32 92 100.2 120.6 465 2.6 13 9.4 25 A 33 95 110.6 140.2 2.8 8.4 11 20.1 A 34 61 140 430 1.2 12.8 8.6 22.6 A 35 16 25.5 110.2 1.5 15 6.6 23.2 A 36 101 65.6 202.4 1.1 5.5 16.4 23 H 37 19 27 98.6 2 20 3.2 25.2 A 38 44 110 164 381 3 8 16.2 27.2 AA 39 45 170 95.6 1.3 6.8 18.6 26.7 K 40 100 150 380 1.3 13 4.2 17.5 A 41 12.7 68.5 382.6 2.6 18 5.5 26.1 A
Table2 contd…S.NO e1Ohm-
m e2 Ohm-m
e3 Ohm-m
e4 Ohm-m
h1 Mts
h2 Mts h3 Mts Depth to basement
Type of curve
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
142 www.jiarm.com
42 123 162 302 2.4 14.6 3.2 20.2 A 43 142 74.8 250.6 605 5 10 16.2 31.2 HA 44 152 80.2 420 4.5 9 12 25.5 H 45 22.65 78.7 326.9 1.4 12.5 7.6 21.5 A 46 32 49.5 165 1.4 14 13.4 28.5 A 47 49.7 77.3 240 1.3 12.8 6.2 20.3 A48 35.3 113.5 361.4 1.2 15.9 3.2 20.3 A 49 122 68.2 148.2 565 3.7 8.6 18.5 30.8 HA 50 23.4 79.6 321.6 1.2 13.9 6.2 21.3 A 51 24.4 62.8 195 2.2 14.6 8.2 24.9 A 52 39 56.2 120.4 421 1.8 9.6 18.3 29.7 AA 53 75 34.6 156.7 562.8 1 12.5 9.2 22.8 HA 54 25 39 240 1.5 12.5 6.2 21.2 A 55 24 60 120.6 2.3 16.5 7.6 26.4 A 56 14 25 110 2.2 17.4 6.6 26.2 A 57 17 80 170 5 16 9.6 30.6 A 58 17.6 60.2 242.6 380 1.31 12.6 18.8 32.5 AA 59 13.7 68 110.3 520 1.5 12.6 18 31.1 AA 60 39.6 119.4 730 1.5 15.5 4.2 21.2 A 61 32 58.6 225 400 1.8 12 18 31.8 A 62 62.8 59.3 221.5 1.7 2.8 28.9 33.4 HA 63 75 44 156 1 11.5 6.8 18.8 HA 64 24.6 66 320 1.4 8.2 6.6 16.2 A Table.3 Analysis of vertical electrical soundings
A-Type
1,3,6,7,9,10, 12 , 13, 16, 19, 23, 24, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 51, 54, 55, 56, 57, 60, 61, 64
H-Type 8, 14, 18, 31, 36, 44. K-Type 5, 39. HA-Type 2, 4, 11, 15, 17, 20, 21, 22, 25, 27, 43, 49, 53, 62, 63. AA-Type 26, 38, 52, 58, 59.
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
143 www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
144 www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
145 www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
146 www.jiarm.com
References
1. Abd Alla MA, El-Qady G, Fathy R (2005) Groundwater exploration using geophysics at wadi EL-Assuity, Eastern Desert, Egypt. Journal of Geophysics 4(1):23-34.
2. Abd El-Rahman A, Khaled MA (2005) Geophysical Exploration for Groundwater Possibilities in Wadi El-Rahba, Eastern Desert, Egypt. Geophysical Society Journal 3(1):99-108.
3. Al-Abaseiry A, Abdel Rahman, Ezz El-Deen MM (2005) Geophysical Exploration for Groundwater Potientialities in Wadi El-Rahba, Eastern Desert, Egypt. Geophysical Society Journal 3(1):119-1128.
4. Alotaibi AM, AlAmri AM (2007) Ground Water Potentialities of Wadi Malakan-Southern Makkah AlMokadash City, Saudi Arabia. Geophysical Society Journal 5(1):101-116.
5. Ariyo SO, Adeyemi GO (2009) Role of electrical resistivity method for groundwater exploration in hard rock areas: A case study from Fidiwo/Ajebo areas of southwestern Nigeria. The Pacific Journal of Science and Technology 10(1):483-486.
6. Barker RD (1980) Application of geophysics in groundwater investigations, Water Surv. 84:489-492. 7. Barker R, Rao TV, Thangarajan M (2001) Delineation of contaminant zone through electrical imaging
technique. Current Science 81(3):277-283. 8. Bernard J, Valla P (1991) Groundwater exploration in fissured media with electric and VLF methods.
Geoexploration. 27:81-91. 9. Bhattacharya PK, Patra HP (1968) Direct current geoelectric sounding. Elsevier, Amsterdam., 25-30 10. Ballukraya PN, Santhivadivel R, Baratan R (1981) Inadequancies in the Techniques of Resistivity
Method for location of water well sites in Hard Rock Areas, Jour. Nordic Hydrology, Vol. 12, No.3, p.185-192.
11. Das SN, Mondal NC, Singh VS (2007) Groundwater exploration in hard rock areas of Vizianagaram district, Andhra Pradesh, India. J. Ind. Geophys. Union 11(2):79-90.
12. Hosny, M.M., EZZ El-Deen, Abdallah, A.A., Abdel Rahman and Barseim, M.S.M. (2005) Geoelectrical Study on the Groundwater Occurrence in the Area Southwest of Sidi Barrani, Northwestern Coast, Egypt, Geophysical Society Journal, 3(1): 109-118.
13. Ibrahim, E.H., Shereef, M.R., El Galladi, A.A. and Pederson, L.B. (2004) Geoelectric Study on Quaternary Groundwater Aquifers in Northwest Sainai, Egypt, Geophysical SocietyJournal, 2(1): 69-74.
14. Karanth KR, Jeganathan V, Prakash VS, Saivasa V (1992) Pegmatites- A potential source for setting high yielding wells. J.Geol. Soci.India, 39(1):pp.77-81.
15. Kshirasagar TVSR, Nagamalleswara Rao (1989) Electrical resistivity survey for groundwater in Varaha river basin, AP, India. International workshop on appropriate methodologies for development and management of groundwater resources in developing countries. NGRI, Hyderabad 1:329-332.
16. KrishnamurthyMS et al (2003) Comparison of surface and sub-surface geophysical investigations in delineated fractured zones. Cur.Sci., 84(9):1242-1245
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 2, Issue 3, April 2014
147 www.jiarm.com
17. Mohamaden IIM, Shagan SA, Allah GA (2009) Geoelectrical survey for groundwater exploration at the Asyuit Governorate, Nile Valley, Egypt. Mar. Sci. 20:91-108.
18. Mack JJ, Johnson CD, Lane JW (1998) Geophysical characterization of a high yield fracture bedrock well, Senrock, New Hamphire .U.S.Geol.Survey. Open file report, 98-176, 22 p.
19. Mousa, D.A. (2003) The role of 1-D sounding and 2-D resistivity inversions in delineating the near-surface lithologic variations in Tushka area, south of Egypt, Geophysical Society Journal, 1: 57-64.
20. Murali S, Patangay NS (1998) Principles and applications of groundwater Geophy. Asso. of Explo.Geophy. p 419.
21. Nigm AA, Elterb RA, Nasr FE, Thobaity HM (2008) Contribution of Ground Magnetic and Resistivity Methods in Groundwater Assessment in Wadi Bany Omair. Holy Makkah Area, Saudi Arabia, Egyptian. Geophysical Society Journal 6(1):67-79.
22. Nowroozi A, Horrocks B, Henderson P (1999) Saltwater intrusion into the freshwater aquifer in the eastern shore of Virginia: a reconnaissance electrical resistivity survey. J. Applied Geophysics 42:1-22.
23. Oseji JO (2010) Geoelectric investigation of groundwater resources and aquifer characteristics in Utagba-Ogbe Kingdom Ndokwa land area of Delta State, Nigeria. Journal of Env. Chemistry and Ecotoxicology 2(3):38-46.
24. Orellana E, Mooney HM (1966) Master tables and curves for vertical electrical sounding over layered structures. Madrid Intercieneia, pp. 150-166.
25. Palanivel S, Ganesh A and Vasantha Kumaran T (1996). Geohydrological evaluation of Upper Agniar and Vellar Basins, Tamil Nadu: An integrated approach using Remote Sensing, Geophysical well inventory data. J.Indian Soc. Remote Sensing,24(3): pp.153-168.
26. Parasnis D (1997) Principle of Applied Geophysics, London: Chapman & Hall. 275 p. 27. Reddy PR, Saleem MA (1986) Hydrogeological and Geoelectrical investigations in Anatapur and
Karimnagar district, A.P. Geo.Phy.Res. Bull, Vol.24, PP 140-146 28. Raju NJ, Reddy TVK, Nayudu PT (1996). Electrical resistivity surveys for groundwater in the upper
Gunjanaeru Catchment, Cuddapah district, Andhra Pradesh. Journal Geological Society of India 47:705-716
29. Raju NJ, Reddy TVK (1998). Fracture pattern and electrical resistivity studies for groundwater exploration. Environmental Geology 34(2/3):175-182.
30. Schwartz FW, McClymont GL (1977). Application of surface resistivity methods. Groundwater 18:197-202.
31. Todd DK (1980) Groundwater hydrology, 2nd edn. New York: Wiley. 32. Van Overmeeren R (1989) Aquifer boundaries explored by geoelectrical measurements in the coastal
plain of Yemen, A Case of Equivalence. Geophysics 54:38-48. 33. Verma RK (1983) Geoelectrical soundings over lower Gondwana formations of Damodar valley. Geo
.Phy. Res. Bull 21(1):101-102 34. Yadav GS and Lal T (1989) Investigation of groundwater resources at selected levels in drought prone
area of Pahari block, District Mirzapur, UP, India. International workshop on appropriate methodologies for development and management of groundwater resources in developing countries. NGRI, Hyderabad 1:209-219.
35. Youssef, A.M.A., Abdellatief, T.A., El Mousa, S.E.D. and Tamamy, M.M.A. (2004) Geoelectrical Survey to Delineate the Extension of the Water Bearing Formations in Wadi Gharandal, Southwest Sainai, Egypt, Geophysical Society Journal, 2(1): 75-84.
36. Zohdy AAR (1975) Automatic interpretation of Schlumberger sounding curves using modified Dar Zarrouk functions, U.S. Geological Survey Bull., 13 B-E.
37. Zohdy AAR (1989) A new method for the automatic interpretation of Schlumberger and Wenner sounding curve, Geophysics, 54(2): 245-253.