Rjeas

Research Journal in Engineering and Applied Sciences 1(3) 190-196

Emerging Academy Resources (2012) (ISSN: 2276-8467)
www.emergingresource.org

Rjeas

COMPARISON OF SCHLUMBERGER AND MODIFIED SCHLUMBERGER

ARRAYS VES INTERPRETATION RESULTS
Akintorinwa, O. J1 and Abiola, O2
Department of Applied Geophysics,
Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria
2
Department of Geology, Adekule Ajasin University,
Akungba-Akoko, Ondo State, Nigeria
Corresponding Author: Akintorinwa, O. J
___________________________________________________________________________
1

ABSTRACT
Schlumberger array is the most commonly used among other arrays for vertical electrical sounding
(VES) and it requires large spacing at both ends for deeper subsurface information. The problem of
limited space for spreading in built up areas could lead to incomplete information from deeper depth.
In this research, the interpretation results of the VES data acquired using the conventional
Schlumberger and modified Schlumberger arrays were compared with view to assessing the
effectiveness of the Half Schlumberger array as an alternative to the convectional Schlumberger array
at sites with space constraints. Fourteen VES data which were distributed across different lithologies
using the Schlumberger and modified Schlumberger arrays with AB/2 varying from 1 to 65m were
used for the study. The resulting VES curves from both arrays were interpreted using the partial curve
matching technique and computer iteration. The resulting field curves from both arrays were the same
and the geoelectric sections across different directions for both arrays display the same
geoelectric/geologic sequences with similar parameters. The coefficiency of correlation R from the
crosspots of the interpretation parameters are approximately equal to 1, indicating a perfect
correlation between the interpretation parameters for both Schlumberger and modified Schlumberger
arrays, hence, modified Schlumberger array can be said to be a good alternative to the convectional
Schlumberger array especially in a space constraint area.
Emerging Academy Resources
KEYWORDS: Schlumberger, VES, computer iteration, crosspots
________________________________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION
exploration, pollution plumes and road failures. The
An alternative method of investigating the subsurface
problem of limited space for spreading could lead to
is by drilling, which is expensive and provides
wrong judgment and recommendations because of
information only at discrete location and it is limited
incomplete information about the subsurface
to some terrain. Geophysical survey, though
resulting from short spreading. In electrical resistivity
sometimes are prone to major ambiguities of
method, there are many arrays which can be used.
interpretation provides a relatively rapid and cost
This includes Schlumberger, modified Schlumberger,
effective means of obtaining subsurface geology.
Dipole-Dipole, Wenner, Pole-Pole and others. Most
Geophysical methods can provide reasonable and
commonly used among the arrays mentioned above
genuine information which could assists in the
for vertical electrical sounding (VES) is the
effective identification and location of subsurface
Schlumberger array, which requires large spacing at
geological structure like faults, fracture zones, fissure
both ends for deeper information. The modified or
zones, weathered rock materials, shear zones, and
the so called Half Schlumberger array which enables
fresh basement. Information concerning the lithology,
vertical electrical sounding with the movement of
stratigraphic
sequence
and
hydro-geological
current electrode (A) while the other current electrode
characteristics of the subsurface material can be
(B) is fixed orthogonally at a large distance away and
provided through the aid of electrical resistivity
relative to the centre of the potential dipole (M-N)
prospecting method. This geophysical method
(Frohlich and Rosenbach, 1986) together with
determines the variation in the subsurface distribution
Schlumberger array were used for vertical electrical
of electrical properties within the homogenous entity
sounding and the results were compared for
of the earth. Electrical Resistivity method has been
correlation. This research attempts a comparative
widely used in prospecting for groundwater,
study of the Schlumberger and Half Schlumberger
foundation studies, dam site location, mineral
arrays in terms of deduced geoelectrical parameters,
190

Research Journal in Engineering and Applied Sciences (ISSN: 2276-8467) 1(3):190-196

Comparison of Schlumberger and Modified Schlumberger Arrays VES Interpretation Results

in vertical electrical sounding, in a typical basement

complex environment
Description of the Case Study Area
The case study covers some parts of Akure and its
falls within longitudes 50 7 E and 50 14 E and
latitudes 70 13 N and 70 19 N (Fig. 1). The areas are
characterized by fairly populated vegetation with
trees and herbs growing favorably. The areas lie
within the tropical rainforest climatic region of
Nigeria. It is characterized by two distinct seasons,
the wet season (between April and October) and the
dry season (between November and March). The
mean annual rainfall is about 1660mm, while the
average daily temperature of 290C. (Adeleke and
Goh Cheng Leong, 1978). The case study areas are
underlain by rocks of the Precambrian Basement
Complex of Southwestern Nigeria (Rahaman, 1989).
The crystalline rocks are porphyritic granite,
migmatite gneiss, biotite granite, charnockite and
quartzite. Although the basement is concealed within
the VES stations, several outcrop of this rock were
seen closed to some VES stations.

fixed central point. Current electrode spread AB/2

was also varies from1m to 65m. The apparent
resistivity values a were calculated by multiplier
the resistance R measured with the geometric
factor G (Equation 2).
[G =

L2
]
2l

The apparent resistivity measurements at each VES

stations for both the Schlumberger and modified
array were plotted against electrode spacing on bilogarithmic graph sheets. The resulting curves were
then inspected visually to determine the nature of the
subsurface layering delineated by both array. Partial
curve matching was carried out for the quantitative
interpretation of the curves (Koefoed, 1979 and
(Orellana and Mooney, 1966). The results of the
curve matching (layer resistivities and thicknesses)
were fed into the computer as starting model
parameter in an iterative forward modeling technique
using WINRESIST computer software (Vander
Velper, 1988). From the interpretation results (layer
resistivities and thicknesses), geoelectric sections
along the different direction were generated. The
results were also used to generate layer parameter
charts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS OF STUDY

Vertical Electrical Sounding (VES) measures vertical
variation of ground resistivity with depth in respect to
a fixed station. This is carried out by gradually
increasing the inter electrodes spacing at about a
fixed centre of array (Telford et al., 1990). Fourteen
vertical electrical sounding (VES) were carried out
across the case study area which were distributed
across the geological units as showing in Fig. 1 using
both Schlumberger and modified Schlumberger
arrays. The Omega Resistivity meter was used for
data collection. GARMINs Global Positioning
System (GPS) 12 Personal Navigator was used to
record the geographic coordinates of the VES
Stations. Schlumberger array utilizes four electrodes
system which are arranged linearly with different
inter-electrode spacing (Fig. 2a). The electrodes are
arranged such that the distance AB between the
current electrodes is greater or equal to five times the
distance MN, between the potential electrodes. The
potential electrodes are fixed about the data station in
which the current electrodes are spread until the
required maximum separation is attained. For this
study, the current electrode spread AB/2 was varies
from1m to 65m. The apparent resistivity values a
were calculated by multiplier the resistance R
measured with the geometric factor G (Equation 1).
[G =

L2
]
l

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Field Curve Characterization
The results of the research were presented as field
curves, tables, geoelectric sections, histograms and
cross plots. The summary of the VES Interpretation
results for the Schlumberger and modified
Schlumberger are presented in Tables 1 and 2.
Maximum of four layers were delineated by the field
curves generated from both arrays. The same curve
types were identified by both arrays at each of the
sounding stations (Table 1, Table 2 and Fig. 3). Atype curve constituting 71%, H-type curve
constituting 21% while the HA-type curves
constituting 7% of the total curves as identified by
both arrays. The predominant curve type by both
arrays is the A-type curves (Fig. 4).
Geoelectric Sequence
Three geoelectric sections were produced from the
interpretation of Schlumberger and modified
Schlumberger array along S N, W E and NE
SW directions. Fig. 5a and 5b shows the geoelectric
along N S for both arrays and three geoelectric
sequences were delineated by both arrays; topsoil,
weathered layer and the fresh basement rock. The
resistivity of the topsoil as delineated by the
Schlumberger and modified Schlumberger arrays
ranges from 61 105 and 69 99 -m and thickness
ranges from 0.8 2.3m and 0.9 1.9m respectively.
The ranges of this geoeletric parameters were
correlated and indicate composition of clay/sandy
clay. The weathered layer composed clay/sandy
clay/clayey sand with resistivity varies from 33 .270-m and 34 - 224 -m with thickness ranges
from 1.5 18.7m and 1.6 19.1m for Schlumberger

Where L = AB/2 and l = MN/2

In modified Schlumberger array, one of the current
electrodes, C2 is kept at infinity (100m) distance
perpendicular to the centre of the spread (Fig. 2b),
hence not collinear with the other three electrodes,
it is at right angle to the other collinear electrodes.
The current and the potential electrodes are
maintained at the same relative spacing and the
whole spread is progressively expanded about a
191

Research Journal in Engineering and Applied Sciences (ISSN: 2276-8467) 1(3):190-196

Comparison of Schlumberger and Modified Schlumberger Arrays VES Interpretation Results

and modified Schlumberger array respectively (Fig.

5a and 5b); this indicate similar ranges of geoelctric
parameters for the weathered layer from both arrays.
The resistivities of basement rock delineated by both
arrays are very similar and it ranges from1423 - 1958
-m and 1575 - 2671 -m respectively (Fig. 5a and
5b). The geoelectric along E W direction for both
arrays delineates three geoelectric sequences (Fig. 6a
and 6b); topsoil, weathered layer and the fresh
basement rock. The topsoil resistivity ranges from 51
163 and 46 163 -m with thickness ranges from
1.2 1.6m for both arrays, hence composed of
clay/sandy clay/clayey sand. The weathered layer
composed of clayey sand/laterite with resistivity
varies from 265 -887-m and 264 - 938 -m and
thickness ranges from 1.7 26.3m and 1.7 22.3m
for Schlumberger and modified Schlumberger array
respectively (Fig. 6a and 6b). These ranges of
geoelectric parameters for the weathered layer were
virtually the same for both arrays. The resistivities of
basement rock are very similar and it ranges from
917 - 9833 -m and 916 - 7339 -m respectively
(Fig. 6a and 6b). Three geoelectric sequences were
delineated by both arrays along SW - NE direction
(Fig. 7a and 7b); topsoil, weathered layer and the
fresh basement rock. The topsoil ranges from 33
125 and 30 125-m and thickness ranges from 1.0
2.1m and 0.9 2.5m for Schlumberger and
modified Schlumberger arrays respectively. The
ranges of this parameters correlates with each other
and indicate composition of clay/sandy clay. The
weathered layer composed sandy clay/clayey sand
with resistivity varies from 78 -.130-m and 83 130-m and thickness ranges from 5.7 14.6m and
5.6 14.5m for Schlumberger and modified
Schlumberger array respectively (Fig. 7a and 7b).
The resistivities of basement rock delineated by both
arrays are very similar and it ranges from1337 18351-m and 1337 - 22602-m respectively (Fig.
7a and 7b).

bedrock resistivity values determined from the two

arrays (Fig. 12b) and it indicates a good linear
relationship. The coefficient of correlation R for the
cross plotting of the interpreted parameters (Layer
thickness and Resistivity) for the three delineated
layers (topsoil, weathered layers and bedrock) from
the Schlumberger and modified Schlumberger arrays
were approximately equal to 1. This indicated that,
the results of VES Interpretation by adopting
Schlumberger and modified Schlumberger arrays are
perfectly correlated.
CONCLUSION
This research involved the correlation of VES
Interpretation results from the data acquired using
Schlumberger and modified Schlumberger arrays.
The interpretation results from both arrays were
correlated with each other i.e. the field curves and
geoelectric sections. The cross plots of the interpreted
parameters (layer thickness and resistivity) for the
delineated layers were produced and the coefficiency
of correlation R for the relationship between the
two arrays was also determined. The results show a
perfect relationship between the interpretation
parameters for both Schlumberger and modified
Schlumberger arrays (Anjorin and Olorunfemi,
2011), hence, modified Schlumberger array can be
said to be a good alternative to the convectional
Schlumberger array especially in a space constraint
area.
REFERENCES
Adeleke, B.O. and Goh Chen Leong. (1978):
Certificate Physical and Human Geography West
African Ed. Oxford University Press, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Anjorin, M. P. and Olorunfemi, M. O. (2011): Pacific
Journal of Science and Technology, Volume 12.
Number 2.
Frohlich, R.K. and O.K. Rosenbach. 1986.
Geoelectrical DC Equipment GGA 30/31.
Technical Bulletin No. 22, 23 pp. Bodenseewerk
Geosystem.

Synthesis of Schlumberger and Modified

Schlumberger Arrays Results
Fig. 8 shows that topsoil resistivity and thickness
determined from Schlumberger and modified
Schlumberger were virtually the same and the
crossplots of the of the topsoil geoelectric parameters
(resistivity and thickness) (Fig. 9) shows a good
linear relationship between topsoil parameters
determined from the two arrays with coefficiency of
correlation (R) of 0.96 and 0.98 respectively. Fig. 10
(a and b) shows that, the weathered layer parameters
determined from the Schlumberger and modified
Schlumberger are significantly over lap. The
crossplot of the weathered layer resistivities and
thicknesses determined from both array (Fig. 11)
shows a good relationship with coefficiency of
correlation of 0.997 and 0.988 respectively. Fig. 12a
shows that the bedrock resistivity values from both
arrays are very similar. The coefficient of correlation
R of 0.936 was obtained from the crossplots of the

Owoyemi, F.B. 1996. A Geological-Geophysical

Investigation of Rai-Induced Erosional Features in
Akure Metropolis. Unpubl. M.Tech thesis, Federal
University of Technology: Akure, Nigeria. 11-18.
Rahaman, M.A., (1989): Review of the basement
geology of Southwestern Nigeria In: Kogbe C.A. (ed
Geology of Nigeria Rock View (Nig) Limited, Jos,
Nigeria pp. 39 56.
Telford, W.M., L.P. Geldart, R.E. Sheriff, and D.A.
Keys. 1990. Applied Geophysics (Second Edition).
Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. 344536.

192

Research Journal in Engineering and Applied Sciences (ISSN: 2276-8467) 1(3):190-196

Comparison of Schlumberger and Modified Schlumberger Arrays VES Interpretation Results

Vander Velper, B.P.A. (1988): Resist version 1.0,

Msc. Research project, ITC, Delf Netherland
APPENDIX

Fig. 1: Geologic Map of Some Parts of Akure (after

Owoyemi, 1996) Showing the VES Stations.
C2

C1
P1

P2

2l

(a)

(Mobile)

C1

(a)

(Fixed)

L/2
P1

C2

2l

P2
N

(b)

Fig. 2: Typical Four Electrodes Array (a)

Schlumberger Array and (b) Modified
Schlumberger

193

Research Journal in Engineering and Applied Sciences (ISSN: 2276-8467) 1(3):190-196

Comparison of Schlumberger and Modified Schlumberger Arrays VES Interpretation Results

Schlumberger Array

Frequenc y (U nit)

12
Modified Schlumberger
Array

10
8
6
4
2
0
H

HA

Curve Types

Fig. 4: Histogram of the Curve Types for both Arrays

(a)

(b)

Topsoil
Weathered layer
Bedrock

(b)
Fig. 5: Geoelectric Section along the N - S Direction
(a) Schlumberger Array and (b) Modified
Schlumberger Array

(a)

(b)
Fig. 6: Geoelectric Section along the E - W Direction
(a) Schlumberger Array and (b) Modified
Schlumberger Array

(c)
Fig. 3: Typical Curve Types (a) A-Type (b) H-Type
and (c) HA-Type
194

Research Journal in Engineering and Applied Sciences (ISSN: 2276-8467) 1(3):190-196

Comparison of Schlumberger and Modified Schlumberger Arrays VES Interpretation Results

350

Resistivity (ohm-m)

300

(a)

250
200
150
100
50
0
1

9 10 11 12 13 14

VES Stations
Schlumberger
Modified Schlumberger
4

Topsoil
Weathered layer

3.5
Thickness (m)

(b)
Bedrock
Fig. 7: Geoelectric Section
along the SW - NE Direction (a) Schlumberger Array
and (b) Modified Schlumberger Array

3
2.5
2
1.5
1

350

0.5

Res istiv ity (ohm-m)

300

0
1 2
Schlumberger

250

10 11 12 13 14

VES Stations

Modified Schlumberger

200

(a)

150

(
b
)

100

Fig. 8: Histogram of the Topsoil (a) Resistivity and

(b) Thickness

50
0

350

Schlumberger

Tops oil Res is tiv ity (ohm-m)

Modified Sc hlum berger Array

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
VES Stations

Modified Schlumberger

300

R2 = 0.9228

250
200
150
100
50
0
0

50

100

150

200

250

Topsoil Resistivity (ohm-m)

Schlumberger Array

(a)
T o p s o il T h ic k n e s s ( m )
M o d if ie d S c h lu m b e r g e r A r r a y

R = 0.9522

0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

Topsoil Thickness (m)

Schlumberger Array

Fig. 9: Crossplot of the Topsoil Parameters (a)

Resistivity and (b) Thickness
195

Research Journal in Engineering and Applied Sciences (ISSN: 2276-8467) 1(3):190-196

Comparison of Schlumberger and Modified Schlumberger Arrays VES Interpretation Results

1000

W e a th e r e d L a y e r T h ic k n e s s ( m )
M o d ifie d S c h lu m b e r g e r A r r a y

Weathered Layer
Resistivity (ohm-m)

900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1
Schlumberger

9 10 11 12 13 14

30
R2 = 0.9764

25
20
15
10
5
0

VES Stations

Modified Schlumberger

10

20

25

30

(b)
Fig. 11: Crossplot of the Weathered Layer Parameters
(a) Resistivity and (b) Thickness

20
15

25000

10

Resistivity (ohm-m)

Thickness (m)

25

5
0
1 2
Schlumberger

9 10 11 12 13 14

VES Station

Modified Schlumberger

Fig. 10: Histogram of the Weathered Layer (a)

Resistivity and (b) Thickness

20000
15000
10000
5000
0

R2 = 0.9938

1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

1
Schlumberger

9 10 11 12 13 14

VES Stations

Modified Schlumberger

Fig. 12a: Histogram of the Bedrock Resistivity

25000

200

400

600

800

Be d r oc k R es is tiv ity ( oh m - m )
M o d ifie d Sc h lu m b e r g er A rr a y

W e a th e re d L a y e r R e s is tiv ity (o h m -m )
M o d ifie d S c h lu m b e rg e r A rra y

15

Weathered Layer Thickness (m)

Schlumberger Array

30

1000

Weathered Layer Resistivity (ohm-m)

Schlumberger Array

(a)

R2 = 0.8769

20000
15000
10000
5000
0
0

5000

10000

15000

Bedrock Resistivity (ohm-m)

Schlumberger Array

Fig. 12b: Crossplot of the Bedrock Resistivity

Table 1: VES Interpretation Results for Schlumberger
VES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

1
68.5
105.2
212.2
61
88
107
171
163
83
51
33

Resistivity (m)
2
3
118.1
1543.4
269.6
1423
130
3217
33
1958
78
421
231
12374
95
1217
265
917
431
1469
887
9833
90
3817

4
-

12370

H1
1.4
2.3
0.7
0.8
1.3
3.3
0.7
1.6
1.3
1.2
1.0
196

Thickness (m)
h2
h3
18.7
9.6
3.6
1.5
2.4
4.5
4.3
12.3
1.7
8,2
26.3
8.1
-

Curve type
h4
-

A
A
H
H
HA
A
H
A
A
A
A

20000

Research Journal in Engineering and Applied Sciences (ISSN: 2276-8467) 1(3):190-196

Comparison of Schlumberger and Modified Schlumberger Arrays VES Interpretation Results

12
13
14

89
65
125

122
78
130

18351
1337
2567

1.5
1.4
2.1

5.7
10.8
14.6

A
A
A

Table 2: VES Interpretation Results for Half Schlumberger

VES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

1
66.5
98.8
302.0
70
89
107
172
163
73
46
30
88
66
125

Resistivity (m)
2
3
117.3
1575.3
224.3
5833.5
128.8
3488
34
2671
84
367
243
8584
87
906
264
916
484
1343
938
7339
88
4027
120
22602
83
1337
130
3157

4
12947

H1
1.3
1.9
0.3
0.9
1.1
3.3
0.8
1.6
1.3
1.2
0.9
1.6
1.2
2.5

191

Thickness (m)
h2
h3
19.1
7.8
4.0
1.6
2.6
4.4
4.4
12.2
1.7
7.8
22.3
8.0
5.6
11.8
14.5
-

Curve type
h4
-

A
A
H
H
HA
A
H
A
A
A
A
A
A
A