See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/307880837

Electrical resistivity and induced-polarization imaging for groundwater

exploration

Conference Paper · September 2016

DOI: 10.1190/segam2016-13857737.1

CITATIONS READS
5 395

3 authors:

Ahzegbobor Philips Aizebeokhai Kehinde Oyeyemi

Covenant University Ota Ogun State, Nigeria Covenant University Ota Ogun State, Nigeria
54 PUBLICATIONS   320 CITATIONS    65 PUBLICATIONS   169 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Emmanuel Sunday Joel

Covenant University Ota Ogun State, Nigeria
45 PUBLICATIONS   99 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Groundwater Investigations View project

Thermal Properties of Soil View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kehinde Oyeyemi on 07 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Electrical resistivity and induced polarization imaging for groundwater exploration
Ahzegbobor P. Aizebeokhai* , Kehinde D. Oyeyemi and Emmanuel S. Joel; Covenant University
Downloaded 09/07/16 to 129.96.252.188. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Summary
Electrical methods of geophysics are widely used in
addressing a variety of hydrologic problems including
groundwater exploration, groundwater quality and
contamination studies. This study presents the integration
of electrical resistivity techniques with time-domain
induced polarization (IP) imaging for groundwater
exploration in a sedimentary terrain, southwestern Nigeria.
The subsurface was characterized to identify the lithologic
units and delineate the underlying aquifer.
Introduction
Geophysical methods are increasingly becoming more
relevant in hydrological investigations (e.g. Chandra et al.,
2008; Niwas and Celik, 2012; Rubin and Hubbard, 2005).
They provide information about the spatial and/or temporal
distribution of subsurface features. Electrical methods
including electrical resistivity, induced polarization (IP)
and self potential (SP) are the most common geophysical
methods for hydrological investigations. Electrical
resistivity techniques (vertical electrical sounding (VES),
profiling, 2D or 3D imaging) have been widely used in
hydrological studies. Numerical inversion techniques are
used to obtain inverse models of the resistivity distribution
from the measured apparent resistivity data by solving the
nonlinear and mixed-determined inverse problem, whose
solution is inherently non-unique and sometimes unstable.
Typically, the resolution of the inverse models differs
spatially; thus, some regions may be well resolved while
others may exhibit artefacts or anomalies that are not
representatives of the subsurface features (Day -Lewis et al.,
2005; Loke et al., 2013). In particular, the resolution of the
inversion models decreases with depth. Also, it is often
difficult to distinguish between clay and saturated sandy
formations as both are characterised with low resistivity
anomaly. Other geophysical techniques sensitive to clay
mineralization can be integrated with electrical resistivity
to distinguish between clay and saturated sand formations.
The present study integrates electrical resistivity techniques
with time-domain IP to characterise the subsurface and
delineating the aquifer unit in Iyana-Iyesi and Canaan Land
area, Ota, southwestern Nigeria. This exploratory study is
required for groundwater resource evaluation and
development planning. Thirty-two (32) VESs, and seven
(7) 2D electrical resistivity and time-domain IP surveys
were conducted across the area; the geoelectric parameters
resulting from the inversion models were integrated for
improved subsurface characterization.
© 2016 SEG
SEG International Exposition and 87th Annual Meeting
Description and Geological Setting
The study area is located in Ota, Ogun State, southwestern
Nigeria. The topography is gentle sloping with elevation
averaging about 75 m above mean sea level. The regional
climate is tropical humid characterized by two major
climatic seasons – dry and rainy seasons. The dry season
spans from November to early M arch while the rainy
season, dominated by heavy rainfall, is between late M arch
and October. M ean annual rainfall exceeds 2000 mm and
forms the major source of groundwater recharge as in most
tropical humid regions. The average monthly temperature
ranges from 23 C in July to 32 C in February.
Geologically, the area is within eastern Dahomey Basin; its
stratigraphy has been grouped into six lithostratigraphic
formations including, from the oldest to the youngest,
Abeokuta, Ewekoro, Akinbo, Oshosun, Ilaro and Benin
Formations. The local geology, generally consistent with
the regional geology, is predominantly Coastal Plain Sands
which consist of poorly sorted clayey sands, reddish
mud/mudstone, clay and sand lenses, and sandy clay with
lignite of M iocene to Recent. These sediments are
underlain by a sequence of coarse sandy estuarine, deltaic
and continental beds of the Ilaro Formation which are
largely characterized by rapid changes in facies.
Geophysical Survey
The geophysical survey consists of VES, and 2D electrical
resistivity and time-domain IP imaging; the data sets were
manually measured with ABEM Terrameter (SAS 1000).
The survey was designed such that the VESs and 2D
traverses cover the entire area of interest; but this was
largely controlled by accessibility and road network. The
data sets were collected during the dry season (January and
February), although occasional rainfall was witnessed
mainly during the nights. A total of thirty -two (32) VESs
were conducted using Schlumberger array with maximum
half-current electrode spacing (AB/2) ranging from 240 –
420 m. The 2D electrical resistivity and time-domain IP
survey was conducted alon g seven (7) traverses using
Wenner array. Each of the traverses was 500 m in length,
except for Traverse 6 which was 450 m long due to space
limitation. The electrode separation used for the
measurements ranges from 10.0 m to 160.0 m in an interval
of 10.0 m (10.0 m to 120.0 m was used in Traverses 1, 2,
and 6). The 2D apparent resistivity and IP effect
(chargeability) were measured concurrently.
To ensure data quality, the electrode positions were clearly
marked and pegged before the commencement of the data
Page 2487
 Resistivity and IP Imaging
measurements for each traverse and sounding points. This
ensured that electrode positioning error associated with
Downloaded 09/07/16 to 129.96.252.188. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
manual multi-electrode data collection was minimised. The
earth resistivity meter was set for repeat measurements with
minimum data stacking of 3 and maximum of 6. Good
connectivity between the electrodes and the connecting
cables was ensured, while maintaining effective contact
between the ground and the electrodes. The root-mean-
squares error in the measurements was generally less than
0.3%; isolated cases with root-mean-squares error up to
0.5% were repeated after ensuring the electrodes were
maintaining good contact with the ground.
Data Processing and Inversion
The observed apparent resistivity data for the soundings
were plotted against AB/2 on bi-logarithmic sheets. The
field curves were then curve-matched with Schlumberger
master curves to obtain estimate of the resistivity and
thickness of the delineated layers. The estimated geo-
electric parameters were then used as initial models for
computer iteration on Win-Resist program to obtain model
geoelectric parameters for the delineated layers.
Similarly, the 2D apparent resistivity and chargeability data
sets for each traverse were inverted concurrently using
RES2DINV inversion code (Loke and Barker, 1996). The
RES2DINV program uses nonlinear optimization technique
that automatically determines the inverse model of the 2D
resistivity and chargeability distribution of the subsurface
for the apparent resistivity and chargeability (Griffiths and
Barker, 1993; Loke and Barker, 1996). The program
subdivides the subsurface into a number of rectangular
blocks based on the spread and density of the observed data
as well as the survey parameters (electrode configuration,
electrode spacings and positions, and data level). Least-
squares inversion technique with standard least-squares
constraint (L2-norm), which minimizes the square of the
difference between the observed and the computed
apparent resistivity and chargeability values, was used for
the inversion. The least-squares equation for the inversion
was solved using the standard Gauss-Newton optimization
technique; appropriate damping factor for the inversion was
based on the estimated noise level on the measured data.
Results and Discussions
Representative model curves of the resistivity soundings
are shown in Figure 1. In general, nine geoelectric layers
were delineated; the layers are laterally continuous and
correlate well in terms of geoelectric-lithology as expected
in a sedimentary terrain, particularly in the deeper section
where the resistivity and thickness of the layers are
relatively uniform. The lithology of the delineated layers
was established by integrating all available information
© 2016 SEG
SEG International Exposition and 87th Annual Meeting
from boreholes, hand-dug wells, known geology and
previous studies (e.g. Aizebeokhai and Oyebanjo, 2013;
Aizebeokhai and Oyeyemi 2014). The geoelectric layers
(from top to bottom) are characterized as top soil, sandy
mud/mud stone, sandy/silty clay lens, consolidated lateritic
clay, sand lens, lateritic/kaolinitic clay, clayey sand,
unconsolidated sand and clay/shale.
The top soil is composed of unconsolidated sandy clay and
is characterised with low resistivity ( 39.7  313.2 m )
and thickness (0.5 – 2.3 m). It is underlain by a resistive
sandy mud/sandy mudstone with model resistivity and
thickness varying from 202.9 1167.6 m and 0.9 –
16.6 m, respectively. This layer is underlain by a low
resistive sandy/silty clay unit that is laterally discontinuous
and appears as a lens with varying model resistivity ranging
from 56.4  618.8 m and thickness ranging between
2.4 m and 22.9m. The fourth layer is high resistive which is
underlain by a sand lens in some parts and merges with the
sixth layer in areas where the sand lens is absent. This lens
may have been masked in some of the VESs locations due
to the high resistivity of the overlying and underlying units.
The sixth layer is very resistive and relatively thick with
largely uniform model resistivity and thickness. This unit is
underlain by clayey sand with model resistivity ranging
from 278.7  415.3 m and thickness ranging from
10.1 – 16.2 m respectively. Underlying the clayey sand is
unconsolidated sand characterised with low resistivity that
ranges from 58.8  228.3 m and thickness ranging
between 11.8m and 13.3 m. The last layer delineated is
thought to be a clay/shay unit due to its very low resistivity;
however, this layer was not distinguished from the
overlying unit in some of the VES locations.
Representatives of the 2D inverse model resistivity and
chargeability images are presented in Figures 2 and 3. The
2D inverse models show a general geoelectric-lithology
trend similar to that of the resistivity soundings with
reasonable correlation. The lateral continuities of the
geoelectric layers (geoelectric-lithology) and near-surface
heterogeneity observed in the resistivity soundings are
clearly depicted in the 2D resistivity images. The top soil
delineated in the resistivity soundings is not distinctly
observed in the 2D images due to its small thickness (0.5 –
2.3 m) relative to the minimum electrode spacing (10.0 m)
used for the 2D survey. The clay and sand lenses delineated
in the resistivity soundings is observed Traverse 6, where a
sand lens overlies a clay lens. The sand lenses often form
shallow perched aquifers in the area which may not yield
appreciable groundwater to drilled wells.
Page 2488
 Resistivity and IP Imaging

The observed clay and sand lenses together with layers in characterising near-surface heterogeneities. The
discontinuities depicts rapid lateral facies changes and delineated aquifer is thought to be a high yield regional
Downloaded 09/07/16 to 129.96.252.188. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

near-surface heterogeneities that commonly characterised
the Ilaro Formation (Okosun, 1990). Samples from drilled
and hand-dug wells indicate that the high resistive unit
(Layer 6) is predominantly composed of swelling clay rich
in kaolin and intercalated with phosphate minerals. The
kaolin and phosphate minerals are thought to account for
the high resistivity values observed for this relatively thick
clayey unit. The unconsolidated sand unit in resistivity
soundings (Layer 8) is delineated as the main aquifer. Its
2D inverse model resistivity ranges from about
75 150m ; this corresponds to the model resistivity
observed from the resistivity soundings for the same unit
(Layer 8). The 2D resistivity images show that the
delineated aquifer occurs at an elevation of about 5 – 20 m
below mean sea level corresponding to an average depth-
to-aquifer of about 80 m to 100 m and average aquifer
thickness of about 15 m. This thickness agrees reasonably
well with that observed in the geoelectric parameters.
aquifer; its depth progressively increases northward in the
basin. The geoelectric parameters of aquifers are useful in
assessing groundwater resource potential as well as
groundwater development planning and monitoring.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Covenant University M anagement for
supporting this study. Our profound appreciation goes to
the Final Year students who helped with the field data
collection: Nelson-Atuonwu Cherish, Liadi Esther, Shotuyo
Yewade, Lesinwa Fortune, Ijioma Nanna, Utor Joy, Tucker
M iata, Uye Perpetual, and Ukabam Chukwuemeka.
a

The main aquifer unit is overlain with a more resistive layer

characterised with relatively uniform inverse model
resistivity ranging from about 280  400 m and an
average thickness of about 12.3 m. This unit is saturated
but relatively impermeable; consequently, it serves both as
a confining bed and aquitard to the main aquifer body.
M ost hand-dug wells in the area are tapping groundwater
from this aquitard unit because of the large diameters with
which the wells are dug. The aquitard is overlain with a
thick and very resistive layer that is conspicuously
observed in the 2D resistivity images. The resistivity of this
layer varies spatially due to changes in its degree of
compaction and mineralogy. The chargeability anomaly (IP
effect) observed for this high resistive layer is not very b
distinct, but a careful observation show that the high
resistive layer is characterised with a relatively high
chargeability anomaly indicating massive or compacted
clayey lithology. This is consistent with the results of
previous studies conducted within the same geologic
environment (Aizebeokhai and Oyeyemi, 2014). The
aquifer unit is underlain by a very low resistivity unit
(Layer 9) characterised with a distinct high chargeability
anomaly indicating that the delineated aquifer is underlain
with clayey/shaley formation. This is also consistent with
similar studies conducted around the area (Aizebeokhai and
Oyebanjo, 2013; Aizebeokhai and Oyeyemi, 2014).

Conclusion

Geophysical survey involving the integration of resistivity Figure 1: Representative sounding curves: (a) VES 12, and
soundings, 2D resistivity and time-domain IP imaging was (b) VES 22
conducted to characterise the subsurface and delineate the
underlying aquifer. This integration is found to be effective

© 2016 SEG Page 2489

SEG International Exposition and 87th Annual Meeting
 Resistivity and IP Imaging
Downloaded 09/07/16 to 129.96.252.188. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Delineated aquifer

Figure 2: 2D inverse model resistivity and chargeability for Traverse 3

Delineated aquifer

Figure 3: 2D inverse model resistivity and chargeability for Traverse 7

© 2016 SEG Page 2490

SEG International Exposition and 87th Annual Meeting
 EDITED REFERENCES
Note: This reference list is a copyedited version of the reference list submitted by the author. Reference lists for the 2016
SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts have been copyedited so that references provided with the online
metadata for each paper will achieve a high degree of linking to cited sources that appear on the Web.
Downloaded 09/07/16 to 129.96.252.188. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

REFERENCES
Aizebeokhai, A. P., and K. D. Oyeyemi, 2014, The use of multiple-gradient array for geoelectrical
resistivity and induced polarization imaging: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 111, 364–376,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2014.10.023.
Aizebeokhai, A. P., and O. A. Oyebanjo, 2013, Application of vertical electrical soundings to characterize
aquifer potential in Ota, Southwestern Nigeria: International Journal of Physical Sciences, 8,
2077–2085, http://dx.doi.org/10.5897/IJPS2013.4017.
Chandra, S., A. Ahmed, A. Ram, and B. Dewandel, 2008, Estimation of hard rock aquifers hydraulic
conductivity from geoelectrical measurements: A theoretical development with field application:
Journal of Hydrology, 357, 218–227, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.05.023.
Day-Lewis, F. D., K. Singha, and A. M. Binley, 2005, Applying petrophysical models to radar travel time
and electrical resistivity tomograms: Resolution-dependent limitations: Journal of Geophysical
Research-Solid Earth, 110, B08206, http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2004JB003569.
Griffiths, D. H., and R. D. Barker, 1993, Two dimensional resistivity imaging and modelling in areas of
complex geology: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 29, 211–226, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0926-
9851(93)90005-J.
Loke, M. H., and R. D. Barker, 1996, Practical techniques for 3D resistivity surveys and data inversion:
Geophysical Prospecting, 44, 499–523, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1996.tb00162.x.
Loke, M. H., J. E. Chambers, D. F. Rucker, O. Kuras, and P. B. Wilkinson, 2013, Recent developments in
the direct-current geoelectrical imaging method: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 95, 135–156.
Niwas, S., and M. Celik, 2012, Equation estimation of porosity and hydraulic conductivity of Ruhrtal
aquifer in Germany using near surface geophysics: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 84, 77–85,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2012.06.001.
Okosun, E. A., 1990, A review of the Cretaceous stratigraphy of the Dahomey Embayment, West Africa:
Cretaceous Research, 11, 17–27, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0195-6671(05)80040-0.
Rubin, Y., S. Hubbard, 2005, Hydrogeophysics, water science and technology library: Springer 50, 523.

© 2016 SEG Page 2491

SEG International Exposition and 87th Annual Meeting
View publication stats