GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA

OPEN FILE 7549

Results from a Magnetotelluric and Rock Property Study

near Churchill, Manitoba

B. Bancroft, J.A. Craven, R.J. Enkin, M.P.B. Nicolas, B. Roberts

2014

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA

OPEN FILE 7549

Results from a Magnetotelluric and Rock Property Study

near Churchill, Manitoba

B. Bancroft1, J.A. Craven2, R.J. Enkin3, M.P.B. Nicolas4, B. Roberts2

1

47 Kalbrook Street, Ottawa Ontario K2T 1A6

Geological Survey of Canada, 615 Booth Street, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0E9
3
Geological Survey of Canada, 9860 West Saanich Road, Sidney, British Columbia V8L 4B2
4
Manitoba Geological Survey, 360-1395 Ellice Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba R2G 3P2
2

2014
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada 2014
doi:10.4095/293454
This publication is available for free download through GEOSCAN (http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/).
Recommended citation
Bancroft, B., Craven, J.A., Enkin, R.J., Nicolas, M.P.B., and Roberts, B., 2014. Results from a Magnetotelluric
and Rock Property Study near Churchill, Manitoba; Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 7549, 21 p.
doi:10.4095/293454

Publications in this series have not been edited; they are released as submitted by the author.

Contents
Figures.......................................................................................................................................................3
Introduction..............................................................................................................................................4
LithostratigraphicFramework...................................................................................................................4
TheMagnetotelluric(MT)Method...........................................................................................................6
MTDataProcessingandModeling...........................................................................................................9
RockCoreSampleProcessingandMeasurement..................................................................................10
Conclusions.............................................................................................................................................14
Acknowledgements.................................................................................................................................14
References..............................................................................................................................................15
Appendix1.AAVModels,comparison.......................................................................................................i
Appendix2.AveragedDataandFitCurvesfromthe1DInversion.........................................................ii
Appendix3:SampleRockPropertyData................................................................................................iii

Figures
Figure1:LithostratigraphicframeworkofthePaleozoicintheHudsonPlatform.ModifiedfromZhang
(2010)............................................................................................................................................................5
Figure2:Mapofthestudyarea.ThedashedlineisthelocationofthesectionshowninFigure7.
ModifiedfromRobertsandCraven(2012)...................................................................................................6
Figure3:ApparentresistivityandphasedataforsiteChu_36.Sectionsoflowqualitydata(greyed)
wereomittedfromthe1Dinversionsduetoitspoorqualityorobviousdeparturesfrom1Dbehavior. 8
Figure4:ExampleofthearithmeticaverageinversionsconductedinthisstudyatsiteChu_36.The
modelsresultingfrominversionoftheXYandYXdataareshownalongsidetheinversionofthe
arithmeticaverage.Theresponseofthearithmeticmodelissuperimposedontheaverageapparent
resistivityandphasedataplottedassymbols..............................................................................................9
Figure5:ResistivityandskeletaldensityofrocksamplesdetailedinAppendix1categorizedby
stratigraphicunit.Trendsinthedataarehighlightedingrey.Thepointsarecolouredbysusceptibility,
blue:~3x106SI,green:~2x105SI,yellow:~5x105,red:~3x104SI......................................................11
Figure6:InversionresultsatChu_36plottedalongsidetherockpropertyderivedresistivities...............12
Figure7:Schematiccrosssectionofgeologicalstratafortheeightsitesofthisstudybasedonthe
inversionoftheMTdataandrockpropertydata.......................................................................................13
Figure8:1DInversionresultsfromarithmeticaveragesofdata.Pseudoscalebarshowsrelative
separationbetweensitesalongthedashedlineinFigure1.........................................................................i
Figure9:Averagedapparentresistivityandphasediagramswiththefitcurvedobtainedfromthe
inversion.Dataingreywerenotusedintheinversion...............................................................................ii
Figure10:PetrophysicalDataPlots.............................................................................................................iv

Introduction
In2012,amagnetotelluric(MT)surveywasconductedbyRobertsandCraven(2012)acrossthe
UpperOrdoviciansectionofthePaleozoicstratanearChurchill,Manitoba,atthemarginoftheHudson
BayBasin.ThissurveysoughttoevaluateMTasmethodtoidentifypotentialsourceorreservoirrocks
inaregionwhoseresourcepotentialiscurrentlybeingreevaluated(Lavoieetal.,2013).Duetothe
facttheUpperOrdoviciansectionofthePaleozoicstratainthisregionisclosetothesurfaceand
potentiallycontainsbothreservoirrocks(e.g.poroushydrothermallyalteredlimestone)andsource
rocks(e.g.oilshaleswithintheRedHeadFormation)abetterunderstandingofthisregioncouldassist
informedexplorationatdeeperportionsoftheHudsonBayBasin.Thisstudyfocusesoneightofthe55
MTsitesthatwerelocatedclosetotheChurchillairportandthetownofChurchillitself.Thedatafrom
thesesiteswerenotanalyzedbyRobertsandCraven(2012)duetotheconsiderableelectromagnetic
(EM)noisepresentinthedata.TheMTsitesusedinthecurrentanalysisareclosetoastratigraphic
well.Electricalrockpropertyasassessmentshavebeenmadeonthecorefromthiswellandarealso
reportedherein.ResultsfromtheinversionofthedatanearChurchillarecomparedtotherockproperty
informationtodetermineifareasonableestimationofthestratigraphiccolumncanbemadefromthe
MTdata.

Lithostratigraphic Framework
TheHudsonPlatformiscomprisedoftheHudsonBayBasinandsmalleradjoiningFoxe

andMooseRiverbasinsdepositeduponPrecambrianChurchillandSuperiorprovinces.
Althoughithasasurfacearealargerthanthemajoroilandgasproducingintratronicbasinsof
centralNorthAmerica,thePlatformistheleastwellstudied.ThePaleozoicstratigraphy(Figure
1)withinthePlatformissummarizedbySanford,NorrisandBostock(1968),Norris(1993),

Hamblin(2008)andZhang(2008).IntheHudsonBayLowland,primarilymarinedeposition
occurredperiodicallyfromtheLateOrdoviciantoLateDevonian.Composedofcarbonateswith
smallamountsofevaporiteandshale,theUpperOrdovicianportionofthesuccessionisdivided
intotheBadCacheRapidsandChurchillRivergroupswiththeRedHeadRapidsFormationlying
unconformablyontopofbasement(Nelson,1963,1964).TheBadCacheRapidsGroupis
composedofadarkgreyorbrownishgreylimestoneoverlyingathinsequenceofclasticrocks,
andisrichincorals,gastropods,nautiloidcephalopods,algae,crinoidsandtracefossils.

ThethicknessoftheBadCacheGroupthickensonly5mfromHudsonBayLowland(~76.7m)to
offshore(ZhangandTrendsinthedataarehighlightedingreyBarnes,2007).TheChurchillRiverGroup,
about103105mthickintheHudsonBayLowlandandoffshoreareas(ZhangandBarnes,2007),isa
greenishgreyorgreyishbrownargillaceouslimestonerelativelydevoidofmacrofossils.Sanford(in
HeywoodandSanford,1976)insertedtheBoasRivershalebetweentheBadCacheRapidsand
ChurchillRivergroupswithoutseeingthecontactinoutcrop.Zhang(2008)demonstratestheregional
natureofthisshalebyfindingcorrelativeunitsonSouthamptonIsland.Thethirdprimaryunitinthe
areaisRedHeadRapidsFormationnamedbyNelson(1963).ExposedalongtheChurchillRiverin
Manitoba,thisunitiscomposedof14mofrelativelyunfossiliferousmicrocrystallinedolomite.TheRed
HeadRapidsFormationexhibitsadistinctiveorangetancolour,incontrasttothegreyoftheBadCache
RapidsandChurchillRivergroups.Zhang(2008)documentstwonewfindingswithintheRedHead
RapidsFormationonSouthamptonIsland.First,thereexistthreeoilshaleintervalswithinthelaminated
limestoneand,secondly,acarbonatebrecciaunitislocatedbetweenlaminatedlimestoneandcertain
biostromalunits.Lavoieetal.(2011)documentinthesubsurfaceofthePlatformthepresenceof
hydrothermallyaltereddolomites,whichisarelativelynewstyleofplayintheWillistonBasin.

Figure1:LithostratigraphicframeworkofthePaleozoicintheHudsonPlatform.ModifiedfromZhang(2010).

Figure2:Mapofthestudyarea.ThedashedlineisthelocationofthesectionshowninFigure7.ModifiedfromRobertsand
Craven(2012).

The Magnetotelluric (MT) Method

TheMTmethodusesmeasurementsofnaturallyoccurring,transientelectricand
magneticfieldsatthesurfacetoproduceanestimateofsubsurfaceelectricalconductivity
(ChaveandJones,2012).Thesignalsaretransformedintothefrequencydomainandusedto
calculateacompleximpedancebetweenthetwomeasurementswhichcanequivalentlybe
expressedintermsofapparentresistivity(
and

andphase(

intermsoffrequency.If

arehorizontalelectricandmagneticfieldcomponentsforagivenfrequency

( ),thentheimpedance

)isdefinedas:

where i

x, y;

x, y

Aseparateapparentresistivitycanbecalculatedfromeachofthefourimpedancesas:
1

| |

where isthepermeabilityoffreespace.Electromagneticsignalstravelthroughconductive
materialdiffusively,andthedepthofpenetrationincreaseswiththeperiod(i.e.theinverseof
frequency)ofthesignal.TheskindepthisdefinedasthedistanceoverwhichadiffusiveEM
signalisattenuatedto1/eofitsoriginalamplitude.Theapparentresistivitycanbeconsidered
astheaverageresistivityfromthesurfacetoadepthequaltotheskindepth.Thususingthe
factthatlowerfrequenciespenetratedeeperintheEarth,thedepthvariationofresistivitycan
bedefined.Thephase(

ofthetensorelements

isusefulbecauseitissensitivetochangesinresistivitywithdepth.
Theapparentresistivityandphasearetransformedintoestimatesoftruesubsurface
resistivityusinginversionalgorithmsbasedonapproximationsoftheearthaseitherspatially
variantonlywithdepth(i.e.1D)orvariantintwoorthreedirections(i.e.2Dor3Dmodels).
Thedecisiontousea1,2or3Dinversionalgorithmisbasedontheknowncomplexityofthe
geologyintheregionandthemanifestationofthatcomplexityintheMTdata(apparent
resistivitiesandphases).Importantforourstudyisthe1Dcase,whereintwoofthefour
impedanceelementsareequalbutreversepolarization,(i.e.

equalto

)whereasthe

remainingtwoelementsoftheimpedancetensorarezero.Theserelationshipscanalsobe
exhibitedthroughsimilarcorrespondingapparentresistivitiesandphasesoffsetby180
degrees.

Figure3:ApparentresistivityandphasedataforsiteChu_36.Sectionsoflowqualitydata(greyed)wereomittedfromthe
1Dinversionsduetoitspoorqualityorobviousdeparturesfrom1Dbehavior.

Typically,shalesarethemostconductivesedimentarylithology(approx.10m)dueto
theelectricalconductivityalongclaysurfaces.Inwatersaturatedcondition,limestonesare
typicallyresistive(>100m),andsandstonestypicallyhaveresistivitiesoftheorder100m.
Whilethesubsurfaceresistivityprovidesanindicationofthelithologicalunit,itcanalsobe
sensitivetoelectricallyconductivematerialsuchasgraphiteorinterconnectedgrainsof
metallicsulphides.Salinefluids,suchasbasinalbrines,decreaseresistivitythroughionic
conductionwithintheporespace.ThesensitivityofMTtothesegeologicalconstituentsmeans
themethodcanprovideuniquegeologicalinformationthatiscomplementarytoother
geophysicalmethods.

Figure4:ExampleofthearithmeticaverageinversionsconductedinthisstudyatsiteChu_36.Themodelsresultingfrom
inversionoftheXYandYXdataareshownalongsidetheinversionofthearithmeticaverage.Theresponseofthearithmetic
modelissuperimposedontheaverageapparentresistivityandphasedataplottedassymbols.

MT Data Processing and Modeling

ThecompletedatasetdescribedbyRobertsandCraven(2012)wasimportedintothe
GeotoolsMTpackage.Thedatafortheeightsites(Figure2)notanalyzedbyRobertsand
Craven(2012)werethenmodeledusingthe1DOccaminversiontechnique(Constableetal.,
1987).AnOccaminversionproducesaconservativeestimateofthesubsurfacestructure
requiredtogenerateasyntheticresponsethatmatchesthedataateachsite.Frequencybands
consideredtobeoverlyinfluencedbyEMinterferenceassociatedwithhumaninfrastructure
wereremovedpriortoinversion.ThenoisesourcesarediscussedinmoredetailinRobertsand
Craven(2012).Datawerealsoeliminatedwheretherewasevidenceofacleardeparturefrom
the1Dbehavioroftheresistivitiesandphasesasdescribedabove.Anexampleofdata
eliminatedisshowninFigure3.

10

Twoinversionsforeachsiteutilizingtheeditedxyandyxapparentresistivitiesand
phaseswerecomputedtodeterminethekeybandsexhibiting1Dbehavior.Next,anarithmetic
average(seeFigure4)ofthetwo1Dresponseswascomputedandinvertedtocreateasingle
modelforeachsite.Thisprocesswasrepeatedforallsitesinthestudyandfinalmodelsare
showninAppendix1andresponsesinAppendix2.Theinversionprocessgavereasonable
resultscomparabletothoseobservedearlierbyRobertsandCraven(2012).

Rock Core Sample Processing and Measurement

FollowingtheproceduresoutlinedbyEnkinetal.(2012),rockpropertymeasurements
beginwithdryingeachcoresamplefor24hoursat40oC,followedbymeasurementofthedry
massbeforevacuumimpregnationwithdeionized,distilledwaterfor24hours.Impedances
aremeasuredusingaspectrumanalyzeratfivefrequenciesperdecadefrom1MHzto0.03Hz.
Therealresistanceismeasuredasthezerofrequencyextrapolationofthecompleximpedance
frequencycurve.Thesampleresistivityisdeterminedaftermultiplicationbythecrosssectional
areaanddivisionbythelengthofthesample.Allbutonecoresampleusedforthisstudywere
takenfromtheM22001stratigraphicwell(Figure1).Theoneexceptionisbasedonhand
samplesofthelocalPrecambrianunits.Thesamplesandmeasurementresults,including
density,porosity,magneticsusceptibility,electricalresistivityandchargeabilityaredetailedin
Appendix3andplottedaccordingtostratigraphicunitinFigure5.

11

Figure5:ResistivityandskeletaldensityofrocksamplesdetailedinAppendix1categorizedbystratigraphicunit.Trendsin
thedataarehighlightedingrey.Thepointsarecolouredbysusceptibility,blue:~3x106SI,green:~2x105SI,yellow:~5x10
5,red:~3x104SI.

ThePrecambriansamples(Figure5andFigure10)displaytypicalpropertiesofcrystalline
rocks.ThePortageChutesandstonesarehighporosity,lowdensity,andrelativelyhigh
resistivity.Theonecoarsesandstone(sample6),haslowresistivity,butingeneralthe
resistivitiestendtooverlapwiththoseofthePrecambrianunits.TheBadCache/ChurchillRiver
samplesarethemostconductiveofthesamples,butoverlapwiththeargillaceousunitsofthe
RedHeadRapidsGroup.Ingeneral,theRedHeadRapidsGroupcanbedifferentiatedfroma
rockpropertyperspectiveintermsoftheclaycontent.Theargillaceoussamplesaregenerally
higherdensity,lowerporosity,higherresistivity,andhigherchargeability.Thesepropertiescan
beexplainedwithincreasedclaycontentfillingpores.

12

Figure6:InversionresultsatChu_36plottedalongsidetherockpropertyderivedresistivities.

ThematchoftheinversionresultsatsiteChu_36withtherockpropertydataisshown
inFigure6.Ingeneralthereisgoodagreementinthetrendsofthetwodatasets,butthe
invertedresultsareapproximatelyanorderofmagnitudemoreconductivethantherock
propertydata.Someofthedifferencesbetweentherockpropertyandinversionresultscanbe
explainedbythenatureofthephysicsinvolvedinMT.Electricalcurrentsarenotinducedas
stronglyinresistiveunitsandsoMTinversioncannotresolvetheseunitsandwilltendto
underestimatethetrueresistivity.Duetothesedifferences,ourmethodtoanalyzethe
inversionsmatchedtheresistivityvaluesobtainedfromeachinversiontothenearestresistivity
valuesfromthecoresamples.Whenthisprocessresultedinaunitinconsistentwiththe

13

expectedstratigraphicorder,theunitwasreplacedwiththeunitwiththeclosestresistivity
valueconsistentwiththestratigraphiccolumninFigure1.
Acartoonsection(Figure7)wasconstructedutilizingthescriptonalleightmodels.The
pseudocrosssectiondemonstratesapredominantlylayeredappearancevalidatingthe1D
methodologyutilized.ThethicknessesobservedinFigure7arereasonableaswell.Itis
importanttonotethatthicknessoftheunitswasnotusedasaconstraintinthemodeling.
Indeed,noaprioriinformationwasusedfortheinversion.MTdatacanidentifylayer
interfacesgivenappropriateresistivitycontrastsandsufficientlyprecisedatameasurement.

Figure7:SchematiccrosssectionofgeologicalstratafortheeightsitesofthisstudybasedontheinversionoftheMTdata
androckpropertydata.

14

Conclusions
TheMTdatacollectednearChurchill,MBareaffectedbyavarietyofnoisesources
relatedtotheelectricalsystemsattheairportandpowergenerationforthetown.Exposureto
thesenoisesourcesinsuchlocalesisunavoidable;however,carefulselectionofdataandthe
generallayeredstratigraphyintheregionenabledusefulmodelsofthesubsurfacetobe
achieved.Theknownstratigraphyenablestheresulting1Dmodelstobeinterpretedinterms
oftheactualrockformationsintheregioneventhoughtheresistivitiesderivedfromthecore
samplesarenonunique.
TheMTdatavalidatedbytherockpropertymeasurementsresolvereasonablywellthe
transitionbetweentheChurchillRiverandBadCacheRapidsgroupsduetothesignificant
differenceinresistivityvaluesbetweenthedolostonesoftheChurchillRiverGrouptothe
sandstonesoftheBadCacheRapidsGroup.TransitionsatthePrecambriancontactand
betweentheRedHeadRiverandChurchillRiverFormationsarelesswellresolvedtotothe
overlapsinrockproperties.Overall,theconsistencyofthemodelsderivedfromtherock
propertydatawiththegeneralstratigraphicframeworkfortheregionindicatesMTisauseful
toolforlocalorregionalexplorationoftheHudsonBasin.Thecrosssectioninthestudyarea
suggeststhebasindeepensabruptlywestofChurchillbetweensitesChu40andChu37,
perhapsduetofaulting;althoughitispossiblethatnoiseinthedatasensitivetothedeeper
elementsofthestratigraphymayhaveimpactedontheabilityofMTtoresolvethisfeature.It
isunlikelynoiseinthedatawillbeanissuewhenasiteislocatedwellawayfrommanmade
noisesourcesandthereforeMTisausefulreconnaissancetoolinthisregionandregionswith
similarstraigraphy

Acknowledgements
TheauthorswouldliketoacknowledgeJenniferTignerandDevinCowanwhocarried
outtherockpropertymeasurementsonthecoreresistivitysamplesintheGSC
PaleomagnetismandPetrophysicsLaboratory.

15

References

Chave,A.D.,&Jones,A.G.(Eds.),2012,Introductiontothemagnetotelluricmethod.Cambridge
UniversityPress,552p.
Constable,S.C.,Parker,R.L.,&Constable,C.G.,1987,Occam'sInversion:Apracticalalgorithmfor
generatingsmoothmodelsfromelectromagneticsoundingdata.Geophysics,52(3),289300.
Hamblin,A.P.,2008,HydrocarbonpotentialofthePaleozoicsuccessionofHudsonBay/JamesBay:
Preliminaryconceptualsynthesisofbackgrounddata.GeologicalSurveyofCanada,OpenFile
5731,12p.
Heywood,W.W.andSanford,B.V.,1976,GeologyofSouthampton,CoatsandManselIslands,Districtof
Keewatin,NorthwestTerritories.GeologicalSurveyofCanada,Memoir382,35p.
Kushnir,A.,Andrews,G,Russell,J.,Enkin,R.,Kennedy,L.,&Heap,M.,2012,RockPhysicalProperty
MeasurementsfortheNechakoBasinOilandGasRegion,CentralBritishColumbia(PartsofNTS
093B,C,E,F,G,K,L).GeoscienceBCSummaryofActivities2011,GeoscienceBCReport20121,,
125150.
Lavoie, D., Pinet, N., Dietrich, J., Zhang, S., Hu, K., Asselin, E., Chen, Z., Bertrand, R.,
Galloway, J., Decker, V., Budkewitsch, P., Armstrong, D., Nicolas, M., Reyes, J.,
Kohn, B P., Duchesne, M J., Brake, V., Keating, P., Craven, J., Roberts, B., 2013,
Geological framework, basin evolution, hydrocarbon system data and conceptual
hydrocarbon plays for the Hudson Bay and Foxe basins, Canadian Arctic, Geological
Survey of Canada, Open File 7363, 2013, 210 pages, doi:10.4095/293119

Lavoie,D.,Zhang,S.andPinet,N.,2011,HydrothermaldolomitesinHudsonBayplatform:preliminary
fieldandgeochemicaldata,GeologicalSurveyofCanada,OpenFile7002.,22pages,
doi:10.4095/289303
Nelson,S.J.1963,OrdovicianpaleontologyoftheHudsonBayLowlands.GeologicalSocietyofAmerica,
Memoir90,152p.

16

Nelson,S.J.,1964,OrdovicianstratigraphyofnorthernHudsonBayLowlands,Manitoba.Geological
SurveyofCanada,Bulletin108,36p.ofPetroleumGeologistsBulletin,v.65,n.6,p.11661175.
Nelson,S.J.andJohnson,R.D.1966,GeologyofHudsonBay,BulletinofCanadianPetroleumGeology.v.
14,n.4,p.520578.
Norris,A.W.1993.HudsonPlatformGeology.In:SedimentarycoverofthecratoninCanada.D.F.Stott
andJ.D.Aitken(eds.).GeologicalSurveyofCanada,GeologyofCanada,n.5,p.653700(also
GeologicalSocietyofAmerica,TheGeologyofNorthAmerica,v.D1).
Roberts,B.,&Craven,J.,2012,ResultsofaMagnetotelluricSurveyinChurchill,Manitoba:GEMEnergy,
HudsonBay.GeologicalSurveyofCanada.
Sanford,B.V.,Norris,A.W.andBostock,H.H.1968.GeologyoftheHudsonBayLowlands(Operation
Winisk),GeologicalSurveyofCanada,Paper6760,118p
Zhang,S.andBarnes,C.R.2007.LateOrdovicianEarlySilurianconodontbiostratigraphyandthermal
maturity,HudsonBayBasin.BulletinofCanadianPetroleumGeology,v.55,n.3,p.179216.
Zhang,S.,2008,NewinsightsintoOrdovicianoilshalesinHudsonBayBasin:theirnumber,stratigraphic
position,andpetroleumpotential,BulletinofcabnadianPetroleuemGeology,v.56,NO.4,P.
300324.
Zhang,S.,2010,UpperOrdovicianStratigraphyandOilShalesonSouthamptonIslandFieldTrip
Guidebook.

Appendix 1. AAV Models, comparison

Figure8:1DInversionresultsfromarithmeticaveragesofdata.PseudoscalebarshowsrelativeseparationbetweensitesalongthedashedlineinFigure1.

ii

Appendix 2. Averaged Data and Fit Curves from the 1D Inversion

Figure9:Averagedapparentresistivityandphasediagramswiththefitcurvedobtainedfromtheinversion.Dataingreywerenotusedintheinversion.

iii

Appendix 3: Sample Rock Property Data
Sample #
M-2-2001-1
M-2-2001-2
M-2-2001-3
M-2-2001-4
M-2-2001-5
M-2-2001-6
M-2-2001-7
M-2-2001-8
-2-2001-9
M-2-2001-10
M-2-2001-11
M-2-2001-12
M-2-2001-13
M-2-2001-14
M-2-2001-15
M-2-2001-16
M-2-2001-17
M-2-2001-18
M-2-2001-19
M-2-2001-20
M-2-2001-21
M-2-2001-22
M-2-2001-23
M-2-2001-24
M-2-2001-25
52-10-2277A01

Lab ID

Depth

Lithology Notes

Sat Bulk
Density
[g/cc]

Porosity
(Connected)
[%]

Magnetic
Susceptibility
[SI]

Resistivity
[Ohm.m]

Chargeability
[ms]

MB-00001
MB-00002
MB-00003
MB-00004
MB-00005
MB-00006
MB-00007
MB-00008
MB-00009
MB-00010
MB-00011
MB-00012
MB-00013
MB-00014
MB-00015
MB-00016
MB-00017
MB-00018
MB-00019
MB-00020
MB-00021
MB-00022
MB-00023
MB-00024
MB-00025

102.7
101.54
99.75
97.25
95.10
88.75
85.90
83.65
81.20
76.80
57.40
54.00
47.90
41.25
31.20
30.90
26.95
24.00
19.70
13.25
12.85
6.75
3.20
2.50
0.20

Precambrian quarztite (fresh)

Precambrian quarztite (fresh)
Precambrian quarztite (weathered)
Bad Cache Rapids Gp, Portage Chute Fm, Member 1; argillaceous sandstone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp, Portage Chute Fm, Member 1; argillaceous sandstone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp, Portage Chute Fm, Member 1; coarse sandstone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp, Portage Chute Fm, Member 1; argillaceous sandstone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp, Portage Chute Fm, Member 1; quartzose sandstone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp, Portage Chute Fm, Member 1; quartzose sandstone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp or Churchill River Gp(?); dolomitic wackestone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp or Churchill River Gp(?); sandy, dolomitic limestone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp or Churchill River Gp(?); dolomitic wackestone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp or Churchill River Gp(?); dolomitic limestone
Bad Cache Rapids Gp or Churchill River Gp(?); dolomitic wackestone
Red Head Rapids Fm; argillaceous, dolomitic mudstone
Red Head Rapids Fm; argillaceous, dolomitic wackestone
Red Head Rapids Fm; argillaceous, dolomitic mudstone
Red Head Rapids Fm; dolomitic wackestone
Red Head Rapids Fm; porous dolomitic wackestone
Red Head Rapids Fm; argillaceous, dolomitic mudstone
Red Head Rapids Fm; dolomitic wackestone
Red Head Rapids Fm; dolomitic mudstone
Red Head Rapids Fm; mottled, porous, dolomitic mudstone
Red Head Rapids Fm; argillaceous, dolomitic mudstone
Severn River Fm; dolomitic mudstone

2.672
2.686
2.475
2.235
2.213
2.394
2.207
2.197
2.208
2.572
2.553
2.528
2.534
2.511
2.736
2.652
2.760
2.683
2.561
2.674
2.502
2.406
2.677
2.732
2.637

0.31
0.32
11.35
22.31
25.89
15.84
24.59
24.49
7.68
8.92
10.17
11.96
12.34
12.04
3.29
5.29
1.36
6.26
13.53
7.39
17.15
22.9
7.69
2.85
6.39

1.48E-04
2.50E-04
5.70E-05
4.62E-05
3.17E-05
2.03E-05
7.23E-06
-3.59E-06
3.05E-06
4.53E-05
1.56E-05
1.03E-05
5.30E-06
9.31E-06
5.17E-05
3.54E-05
3.01E-05
4.41E-05
4.70E-05
4.27E-05
2.21E-05
3.69E-05
2.21E-05
7.69E-06
2.47E-05

4858
5579
1457
430
1681
42
4822
7431
9821
330
73
91
65
79
377
195
2478
267
106
148
31
28
771
7557
239

11.9
5.0
16.5
1.4
1.5
0.7
6.2
4.2
0.8
8.0
0.1
0.7
0.1
1.3
3.2
10.7
1.1
4.5
0.9
4.3
0.4
0.1
0.8
6.1
1.1

MB-00027

outcrop

Precambrian granite

2.671

0.24

2.04E-04

7343

4.6

iv

Figure10:PetrophysicalDataPlots.