Geophysical Prospecting, 1997, 45, 127139

Resistivity and IP modelling of an anisotropic body

located in an isotropic environment1
L. Eskola2 and H. Hongisto2

Abstract
A solution based on Tabarovskiis coupled pair of surface integral equations is given for
the potential of a direct current owing in an electrically anisotropic body and within
the enclosing isotropic surroundings. The sources of the secondary potential exterior
and interior to the body are ctitious surface charge distributions. The equations are
solved numerically using point matching with pulse functions as subsectional basis
functions. The model used in the applications is a long prism, excited by long line
current electrodes aligned parallel to the strike. The strike length is set at a length
sufcient to guarantee 2D behaviour of the model.
Comparisons of computation results indicate that for the models, electrode arrays
and numerical procedures applied, the solutions based on ctitious surface sources
converge faster and behave more regularly than those based on real surface charges.
When compared with previously published integral equation solutions, the present
solution seems to be relatively efcient, even in the case of purely isotropic models. The
model experiments also showed that at moderate resistivity contrasts, the anomaly
shapes are strongly dependent on the directions of the principal axes of the body
resistivity. However, when the external resistivity is more than 100 times that of the
geometric mean of the principal resistivities in the body, with the principal resistivities
differing from each other by at most one order of magnitude, the contribution of the
anisotropy to the anomaly diminishes as a result of electrical saturation.
Introduction
The behaviour of conductivity and IP anomalies of an isotropic polarizable conductor
within an isotropic environment as a function of model parameters is well known from
numerical modelling results. However, mineralized formations often have a laminated
structure that makes them electrically anisotropic. The bulk resistivity and polarizability of an anisotropic body depend on the direction of consideration in relation to the
principal axes of resistivity and polarizability, so that the number of electrical
parameters controlling the anomalies is three times that of isotropic bodies. A current
owing transversely to the lamination alternately encounters highly conductive mineral

1
2

Received September 1995, revision accepted March 1996.

Geological Survey of Finland, FIN-02150 Espoo, Finland.

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers

127

128

L. Eskola and H. Hongisto

laminae and purely conductive barren layers. The transverse polarizability of the body
may be strong due to the cumulative effect of surface polarizable lamellar interfaces,
whereas the bulk conductivity is not necessarily very high. Conversely, strong bulk
conductivity may exist parallel to the laminae, due to the high longitudinal
conductance of individual laminae, while the bulk polarizability may remain low,
since the polarizable interfaces are predominantly orientated parallel to the current
ow.
Numerous methods have been published for solving electromagnetic and direct
current problems of isotropic models, based on both differential and integral equation
techniques. Due to the subject of this work we are mainly concerned with surface
integral equations applied to d.c. problems. Daniels (1977) applied surface integral
equations with real surface charges as secondary sources for modelling resistivity and
IP anomalies of 3D bodies with buried electrodes. Soininen (1985) used this technique
to model resistivity and IP anomalies of inclined prisms in a two-layered earth. Le
Masne and Poirmeur (1988) considered the behaviour of resistivity and IP anomalies
of 3D bodies for a hole-to-surface method. Eloranta (1986a) based his resistivity and
`
mise-a-la-masse modelling on surface integral equations with ctitious double sources.
Xu, Gao and Zhao (1988) applied this technique to 3D terrain modelling associated
with resistivity surveys. Doherty (1988) gave a coupled set of surface integral
equations for modelling electromagnetic anomalies. The secondary sources for the
electric and magnetic elds were represented by tangential electric and magnetic
sources distributed on the surface of the anomalous body.
Integral equation modelling of anisotropic anomalous bodies has received less
attention in the published literature. This is partly due to the fact that formulation of an
integral equation solution for an anisotropic body is conceptually difcult. For
example, a surface charge generated on an anisotropic body is associated with volume
charges in the body (Eskola 1988), which renders the formulation of surface integral
equations using real physical surface charges as secondary sources inappropriate for
modelling anisotropic bodies. The differences between the real and ctitious surface
sources of anisotropic models are also considered by Eskola (1992, pp. 8393).
`
Eloranta (1988) modelled mise-a-la-masse anomalies of a perfect conductor in an
anisotropic earth. Xiong et al. (1986) calculated IP and electromagnetic anomalies of
an isotropic 3D body in a uniaxially anisotropic two-layer earth using a volume integral
equation.
Based on the work of Tabarovskii (1977), we present a coupled pair of surface
integral equations for a model consisting of an anisotropic body located in an isotropic
half-space. Model results are computed for some very simple truncated 2D models.
The convergence of the numerical solution as a function of boundary element density
is tested by comparing results obtained for some isotropic models using the equations
given in this work and those obtained with the equations given by Soininen (1985).
Some models are also computed in order to consider the effect of anisotropy on
apparent resistivity and IP anomalies. The 2D model is used in the present applications
for computational ease and accuracy. In particular this enables testing of the

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

Resistivity and IP modelling

129

Figure 1. The truncated 2D models used in the examples. Line dipole-dipole array with varying
transmitterreceiver separation. The arrows in the small squares show the direction of layering;
empty squares denote isotropy.

convergence of numerical solutions up to quite high boundary element densities along

the cross-sectional line of the prism surface.
Integral equation solution
Consider an electrically anisotropic body Vi located in an isotropic environment Ve.
The subscripts i and e refer to the interior and exterior regions, respectively. In body Vi,
the resistivity is represented by the tensor with components ra , rb , rc in the directions
of the principal axes a, b, c. In Ve, the body is bounded by isotropic resistivity re.
In Ve, the electric potential Ue satises Poissons equation

2 Ue re I dR Rp ;

where d is the Dirac delta function, R is the calculation point and I is the current
emitted into the earth at point Rp.
In Vi, the potential Ui satises Laplaces equation
r1 ri Ui 0;

where ri is the geometric mean of the principal resistivities, given by

ri ra rb rc 1=3 :

Ue and Ui are required to be regular at innity. When Ve is a half-space, the normal

component of current density is zero on the earthair interface, i.e.
r1 Ue n 0:
e

Boundary conditions also require that the potential and the normal component of
current density are continuous across boundary S between Vi and Ve, so that
Ue Ui

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

130

L. Eskola and H. Hongisto

Figure 2. Apparent resistivity and frequency effect of isotropic model A1 as the solution of (a)
ctitious sources and (b) real sources. Line dipole-dipole array with n 15, re =ri 10,
FE 0:2. Boundary element density varies.

and
r1 Ue n r1 Ui n:
6
e
Following the procedure given by Tabarovskii (1977), we take Ue and Ui as being
generated by ctitious sources je and ji distributed on surface S, thus
1

Ue Up re

Ge je dS0

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

Resistivity and IP modelling

131

Figure 2. Continued.

and

U i ri

Gi ji dS0 ;

where Up is the primary potential. By analogy with (1) and (2), Greens functions Ge
and Gi are made to satisfy the equations
2 Ge dR R0

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

132

L. Eskola and H. Hongisto

Figure 3. Apparent resistivity and frequency effect of isotropic model A1 as the solution of (a)
ctitious sources and (b) real sources. Line dipole-dipole array with n 15, re =ri 100,
FE 0:2.

and
r1 ri Gi dR R0 :

10

In accordance with (4), the normal derivative of Ge must be zero on the earthair
interface, which gives the solution
Ge 1=4pjR R0 j 1=4pjR R00 j;
11
0
where R0 is the image of point R0 in the earthair interface. The exterior region Ve can
also be more complicated, and correspondingly Greens function Ge then also becomes
more complicated. For example, if Ve is a layered space, then the solution of (9) must
satisfy continuity of the potential and the normal component of current density across
each layer boundary.
In Vi, Greens function Gi satises the regularity condition at innity but no other
boundary conditions, which yields the solution to (10) in the form
Gi 1=4pr=ri R R0 R R0 1=2 :

12

In the system of principal axes a, b, c, (12) takes the form

Gi 1=4paa a0 2 bb b0 2 gc c0 2 1=2 ;

13

where a ra =ri , b rb =ri , g rc =ri .

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

Resistivity and IP modelling

133

Figure 3. Continued.

In order to solve for the source densities je and ji , we form two integral equations by
substituting the integral formulae (7) and (8) in the boundary conditions (5) and (6).
After moving the calculation point R on to the surface S and removing the singular
points R R0 from the integrals, we obtain the following two coupled surface integral
equations:

Ge je dS0 ri

U p re

Gi ji dS0

14

and
Ge nje dS0 je =2 ri

r1 Gi nji dS0 ji =2:

1

r1 Up n
e

15

The integrals in (15) are considered as the principal values. After solving the set of
equations (14) and (15) for je and ji , the potentials Ue and Ui can be calculated at any
arbitrary point within the regions of denition Ve and Vi using (7) and (8).
Model experiments
Integral equations (14) and (15) are solved numerically using the method of
subsections with pulse functions as basis functions. In more practical terms, the

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

134

L. Eskola and H. Hongisto

Figure 4. Apparent resistivity and frequency effect of model A2. Line dipole-dipole array with
n 15. re =rk 22, re =r ,2:2 re =ri 10, and re =rk 217, re =r ,22 re =ri 100.
FEk 0:2 for all k a, b, c.

surface S is divided into boundary elements, for each of which the source densities je
and ji are assumed to be constant. Requiring that (14) and (15) be satised in the
centre of each boundary element, the unknown source densities can be solved by a
linear set of algebraic equations. A detailed treatment concerning the principles of
numerical solution of integral equations is given, for example, by Harrington (1968).
The IP anomaly is modelled as the apparent frequency effect FEA according to the
formula
FEA rA rk 1 FEk =rA rk 1;

16

where rA is the apparent resistivity, which is a function of the resistivity in the

environment and of the k components of resistivity, rk , and frequency effect, FEk , in
the body, with k a, b, c denoting the principal axes of anisotropy.
The test model (Fig. 1) used in numerical examples is a truncated 2D prism with a
square-shaped cross-section, and the principal axes of resistivity in the prism are
aligned parallel to the prism edges. The electrode array is a line dipole-dipole array
moving perpendicular to the strike of the body, with length and orientation of the
electrodes coinciding with those of the prism. The strike length used in computations is
200 times the side length of the cross-sectional square, which was shown by test

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

Resistivity and IP modelling

135

Figure 5. Apparent resistivity and frequency effect of model A3. Line dipole-dipole array with
n 15. Resistivities and FEk as in Fig. 4.

computations to guarantee the two-dimensional behaviour of the model up to a

resistivity contrast of 100.
Numerical results obtained for some isotropic models using (14) and (15) (referred
to below as the solution of the ctitious sources) are compared with the results obtained
using the equations given by Soininen (1985) (referred to as the solution of the real
sources). The body surface is divided homogeneously into boundary elements having
the length of the strike. The element densities are chosen so that the solutions to be
compared with each other have equal numbers of unknowns in discretized integral
equations. In the case of ctitious sources, the number of unknowns is twice the
number of boundary elements.
Figure 2 and 3 show resistivity and IP anomalies of isotropic model A1 (see Fig. 1)
at n values 15 (spacing between the inner transmitter and receiver electrodes in dipole
lengths) and resistivity contrast 10 and 100, computed using 20, 40 and 400 boundary
elements for the ctitious sources, and 40, 80 and 800 boundary elements for the real
sources. The computations were performed using a 100 MHz 486 PC with 20 MB
memory. For both source types, the computation time of a series of ve curves with the
highest number of boundary elements was 45 minutes. The results corresponding to
each n value are represented as separate curves.

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

136

L. Eskola and H. Hongisto

Figure 6. Apparent resistivity and frequency effect of (a) model B1 and (b) model B2. Line
dipole-dipole array with n 15. Resistivities and FEk as in Fig. 4.

The anomaly curves obtained from the ctitious sources show faster convergence
with growing element density than those obtained from the real sources. The solutions
of the ctitious sources obtained using 400 elements also show a reasonable reciprocity
of the anomaly curves. In general, the element density needed to achieve satisfactory
convergence of the results for the applied 2D models turns out to be rather high.
Considerable difculties in obtaining satisfactory convergence occur in the case of real
sources, as shown by Figs 2b and 3b, in which acceptable results are found only for the
resistivity anomaly at a resistivity contrast of 10 and when computed using the highest
number, 800, of boundary elements. This is particularly true when the current earthing
is close to the body.
The effect of resistivity contrast on the anomalies is best considered by comparing
the curves of Figs 2a and 3a when solved using 400 elements. A central high develops in
the apparent resistivity curves with increasing n, which is a feature reected in the IP
anomaly as a central low. The IP anomaly intensity decreases strongly with increase of
the resistivity contrast from 10 to 100, which is an expression of electrical saturation of
the model, and is in qualitative agreement with the results obtained for 3D models
(Soininen 1985; Eloranta 1986b). In a saturated state it is not possible to get much
more current inside the body, and therefore the IP effect is weak. However, the
intensity of the IP anomaly is still signicant at a resistivity contrast of 100 (Fig. 3a),

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

Resistivity and IP modelling

137

Figure 6. Continued.

which may indicate that the saturation in 2D models develops at higher resistivity
contrasts than in 3D models.
Figure 4 shows resistivity and IP anomalies of the horizontally layered model A2 at
resistivity contrasts re =ri of 10 and 100, computed using 400 elements, while Fig. 5
shows the corresponding anomalies of the vertically layered model A3. ri is now the
geometric mean of the principal resistivities in the prism. The anomalies of the
corresponding isotropic models are shown by the lowest curves in Figs 2a and 3a. The
isotropic case represents an intermediate form between the two layered cases, both as a
model and also with respect to their anomalies. At a resistivity contrast of 10, the
resistivity and IP anomalies of the horizontally and vertically layered models differ
considerably from one another. At a contrast of 100, however, the resistivity anomalies
of the models with mutually perpendicular layering, and also the anomaly of the
isotropic model with the same resistivity contrast, are very similar to each other
with respect to both shape and intensity. The shapes of IP anomalies of these three
models at resistivity contrast 100 differ from each other but considerably less than
at resistivity contrast 10. The decrease in IP anomaly intensity and the increase in
similarity of anomalies associated with different anisotropy following the increase in
resistivity contrast from 10 to 100 is a consequence of electrical saturation in the
model.

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

138

L. Eskola and H. Hongisto

Figure 6a shows resistivity and IP anomalies for the isotropic model B1 and Fig. 6b
shows the anomalies for the anisotropic model B2, both at resistivity contrasts of 10
and 100. At a resistivity contrast of 10, the anomalies of the isotropic and anisotropic
bodies again differ considerably from one another, principally in the strong asymmetry
caused by anisotropy. The deepest minimum in the resistivity anomaly is located above
the upper right-hand face of the prism, which coincides with the lower principal
resistivity of the prism. Compared to the resistivity anomalies, the asymmetry of the IP
anomalies shows complementary behaviour. At resistivity contrast 100, the resistivity
anomalies of the isotropic and anisotropic bodies are almost similar, and the difference
between corresponding IP anomalies appears as a weak asymmetry in the anomaly of
the anisotropic model, which is again due to the effect of electrical saturation.
Summary
We have derived a coupled pair of integral equations for ctitious surface sources for
modelling resistivity and IP anomalies of an anisotropic body located in an isotropic
environment. The solution was originally formulated by Tabarovskii (1977) for solving
direct current problems for a model consisting of an anisotropic body located in an
anisotropic full-space. The computer code was written at this rst stage for a truncated
2D model, in which the anomalous body is represented by a long rectangular prism
with the principal axes of resistivity being aligned parallel to the prism edges. The
numerical solution was made using point matching with pulse functions as the
subsectional basis functions. The electrode conguration applied was a line dipoledipole array.
Comparison runs for isotropic models indicate that for the models, electrode arrays
and numerical procedures applied in the present experiments, the solutions based on
ctitious sources converge faster and behave more regularly than the solutions based
on real surface charge distributions. Although originally formulated for anisotropic
problems, the technique seems to compare favourably in efciency with other integral
equation formulations for solving direct current problems, including the case of
isotropic models.
At moderate resistivity contrasts between the model and its environment, the
anomaly shapes are strongly inuenced by the direction of the principal axes of
anisotropy. However, when resistivity in the environment exceeds 100 times the
geometric mean of the principal resistivities in the body, and when at the same time the
contrast between the principal resistivities is not very high (in the applications in this
work r =rk 10, the inuence of anisotropy on the anomaly weakens as a result of
electrical saturation taking place in the model.
References
Daniels J.J. 1977. Three-dimensional resistivity and induced-polarization modeling using buried
electrodes. Geophysics 42, 10061019.

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139

Resistivity and IP modelling

139

Doherty J. 1988. EM modelling using surface integral equations. Geophysical Prospecting 36, 644668.
Eloranta E.H. 1986a. Potential eld of a stationary electric current using Fredholms integral
equations of the second kind. Geophysical Prospecting 34, 856872.
`
Eloranta E.H. 1986b. Studies on integral-equation based modeling of mise-a-la-masse anomalies
for geophysical surveying. Acta Polytechnica Scandinavica, Applied Physics Series, No 153.
`
Eloranta E.H. 1988. The modelling of mise-a-la-masse anomalies in an anisotropic half-space by
the integral equation method. Geoexploration 25, 93101.
Eskola L. 1988. Reections on the electrostatic characteristics of direct current in an anisotropic
medium. Geoexploration 25, 211217.
Eskola L. 1992. Geophysical Interpretation Using Integral Equations. Chapman & Hall.
Harrington R.F. 1968. Field Computation by Moment Methods. The Macmillan Publishing Co.
Inc.
Le Masne D. and Poirmeur C. 1988. Three-dimensional model results for an electrical hole-tosurface method - application to the interpretation of a eld survey. Geophysics 53, 85103.
Soininen H. 1985. Calculating galvanic anomalies for an inclined prism in a two-layered halfspace. Geophysical Transactions 31, (4), 359371.
Tabarovskii L.A. 1977. Integral equations in anisotropic media. Geologiya i Geozika 18, (5),
8188.
Xiong Z., Luo Y., Wang S. and Wu G. 1986. Induced-polarization and electromagnetic modeling
of a three-dimensional body buried in a two-layered anisotropic earth. Geophysics 51, 2235
2246.
Xu S.-Z., Gao Z. and Zhao S.-K. 1988. An integral formulation of three-dimensional terrain
modeling for resistivity surveys. Geophysics 53, 546552.

1997 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 127139