Utilization of Resistivity Imaging technique for design of earthmat at Dam

foundation, Subansiri Lower H.E. Project, Gerukamukh, Assam

*
Sanjit Kumar Pal and Alok Kumar Rahut
Subansiri Lower H.E. Project, NHPC Limited, Gerukamukh, Assam
*
Corresponding author’s email: sanjit_iitkgp@yahoo.co.in

Abstract

Subansiri Lower HE Project (SLP), a run-of-river scheme to harness the hydro potential
of River Subansiri has been undertaken by NHPC Limited, a Government of India
enterprise. The dam site falls in a moderately high lightning prone area and consequently,
ligntning protection system should be adopted in the Dam structure. Proper design and
installation of earthmat would be possible through suitable understanding of resistivity
characteristic of the foundation area of Dam structure in the river bed. In the present
study a state-of-the-art Resistivity Imaging survey has been carried out at Dam
foundation area, Subansiri Lower HE Project, NHPC Limited Gerukamukh to explore the
resistivity distribution of surface/ sub-surface earthmaterial/ rock which have a great role
for proper design of earthmat. The state-of-the-art Resistivity Imaging technique has been
exploited efficiently in a completely exposed rock and rugged terrain.

1. Introduction

Subansiri Lower HE Project (SLP) is the biggest (2000MW) hydroelectric project

undertaken in India so far. This project is located near North Lakhimpur on the border of
both the states of Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. The estimated annual energy generation
from the project is 7421MU in a 90% dependable year (Detailed Project Report, SLP,
NHPC Ltd., 2001).

For such a mega hydroelectric project, it is essential for proper planning against the
lightning and subsequently, installation of earthing mats (lightning protection systems)
are also very crucial in various mega structures like Power House, Head Race Tunnel
Intake (HRT Intake) and Dam etc. through proper design, since the site lies in a

1
 moderately high lightning prone area (figure 1). The earthing system, fundamentally
provides the lowest resistance path to a faulty current flow and protect humans as well as
equipment from lightning, short circuit etc. The earthing system comprise of an earthing
mat i.e., mesh of current conducting MS stripe, buried horizontally at a depth of about
half-a meter below the surface and ground rods at suitable points. All non-current
carrying parts contribute little towards lowering the ground resistance.

Project
site

Figure1. World lightning map. Average yearly counts of lightning flashes per square
kilometer based on data collected by NASA satellites between 1995 and 2002
(http://geology.com/articles/lightning-map).

Several variable factors are involved in the design of earthing mat conductor. The
earthing mat has to be designed for the site conditions to have low overall impedance and
a current carrying capacity consistent with the fault current magnitude. The following
parameters are most controlling factors for the design of earthing mat (Mousa, 1998;
Zipse, 1994; Sen, 2001 and Choudhary, 2008):
• Magnitude of fault current
• Duration of fault
• Soil resistivity
• Resistivity of surface material
• Shock duration

2
• Material of earthing mat conductor
• Earthing mat geometry

However, in the present study Geophysical Resistivity Imaging survey has been carried
out for estimation of earth resistivity of surface/ sub-surface earthmaterial/ rock which
have a great role for proper design of earthmat. The Earth resistivity measurements of
Power house site and HRT Intake-I & II foundations for earthmat designing, have been
conducted by Kapil and Ramanaiah (2004) and Pal (2009) respectively. Present scope of
study is to carryout Resistivity Imaging survey at Dam foundation area using state-of-the-
art instrument, Terrameter SAS 4000 and ES464, Resistivity Imaging System. Figure-2
shows location of Resistivity Imaging survey for earthmat design of Dam Foundation,
Subansiri lower HE Project.

2. Field setup

Conducting Resistivity Imaging survey over a rugged terrain with completely rock
exposed, is a challenging task and therefore, need special arrangements at the site. As per
protocol of Resistivity Imaging survey, forty one electrodes are to be properly inserted in
the ground along a line at a constant interval, for transmission of sufficient current during
data acquisition. Inserting forty one electrodes in the exposed rock is very difficult task.
Further, if it is inserted in the rock, then also transmission of current is impossible. To
overcome these problems, forty one holes of 1ft depth have been drilled using Jack
hammer (45mm diameter) at five meter interval along the straight line at El 90m, which
runs along block joint of S-4 and S-5 of the Dam foundation. The line has been shown in
Figure-2. A mixture of clay-mud and salt in 1:5 ratio has been prepared. All the drilled
holes are filled up with the clay-mud and salt mixture. Then steel electrodes are inserted
in these holes. Two numbers 21-takeout 5meter spacing Lund Imaging cable have been
spread in continuous order. The 1st Lund Imaging cable has been spread starting from 1st
electrode at upstream and ending at 20th electrode. The 2nd cable has been spread from
20th electrode and ending at 41st electrode in the down stream. The electrodes have been
connected to the corresponding takeouts of Lund Cables through connecting clips. Last
takeout of the 1st Lund cable and 1st takeout of the 2nd Lund cable have been connected to
the electrode selector, ES464 and further, connected with the main resistivity meter,
Terrameter SAS4000. Figure-3 shows the field set up for Resistivity Imaging survey.

3
 3. Instrument and software used

A state-of-art microprocessor based resistivity meter, Signal Averaging System

Terrameter, SAS 4000 and Electrode Selector ES464 manufactured by ABEM, Sweeden
has been used for conducting the resistivity imaging survey. It has three main units viz.,
Transmitter, Receiver and Microprocessor. The resistance of layered earth is
automatically calculated using inbuilt microprocessor and displayed and also written in
digital form. The Signal Averaging System takes a numbers of consecutive readings
automatically and displays the averages of the consecutive readings. Hence, the obtained
apparent resistivities are highly authentic (Kapil, et, al. 2006).

RES2DINV 3.58 software has been used for construction of 2D cross-section of

resistivity distribution. Figure-4 is a schematic diagram, representing an example of
the electrodes arrangement and measurement sequence which is used for a 2D resistivity

4
imaging survey. The 2D model used by the inversion program in RES2DINV, which
consists of a number of rectangular blocks (Griffiths and Barker 1993), as shown in

U/S Coffer Dam DT Inlet

Dam Excavation and

concreting on progress

Field setup of
Electrode connected SAS4000 and
to the Lund cable ES464
through connector

Figure 2. Field set up for Resistivity Imaging survey and data acquisition at Dam
foundation.

Figure-5. The arrangement of the blocks is loosely tied to the distribution of the data
points in the pseudo section. The distribution and size of the blocks is automatically
generated by the program using the distribution of the data points as a rough guide. The
depth of the bottom row of blocks is to be set approximately equal to the equivalent depth
of investigation (Edwards 1977) of the data points with the largest electrode spacing. The
survey is usually carried out with a system where the electrodes are arranged along a line
with a constant spacing between adjacent electrodes. A forward modelling subroutine is
used to calculate the apparent resistivity values, and a non-linear least-squares
optimization technique is used for the inversion routine (deGroot-Hedlin and Constable
1990, Loke and Barker 1996). The program supports both the finite-difference and finite-
elementforward modelling techniques. This program is useful for surveys using the
Wenner, pole-pole, dipole-dipole, pole-dipole, Wenner-Schlumberger and equatorial
dipole-dipole (rectangular) arrays (Loke, 2001).

5
 Terrameter
ES464 SAS-4000

Figure 4. Schematic diagram representing resistivity imaging data acquisition procedures

using Terrameter SAS-4000 and ES464, a computer controlled multi-electrode
survey setup.

Figure 5. Arrangement of the blocks used in a model together with the apparent
resistivity datum points for generation 2D cross section

4. Geology of the area

6
The rocks exposed in the Subansiri Lower HE Project are sandstone of Middle Siwalik
formation. These are soft/ weakly cemented rocks with variation in grain size. Generally,
sandstones are grey in colour, medium to fine grained and have characteristic of salt and
pepper texture. At dam site rocks are steeply dipping with southern and southeasterly
dips. The rock masses are mostly massive to moderately jointed in nature. These
sandstones occasionally contain quartzite pebbles, of older geological formation,
deposited with sandy sediments.

5. Data Processing

The measured resistivities are stored in a raw data binary format with the file extension
“.S4k”, in the ABEM Terrameter SAS 4000 during data acquisition. At the end of the
survey, SAS 4000 has been connected to the PC through RS232 data transfer cable. The
raw data collected at site has transferred to the PC using Import tool of SAS4000 Utility
software (the baud rates of both the Terrameter and PC have been kept same for data
transfer). The raw data then converted to “.dat” format using Data conversion tool of the
Utility software for further processing in RES2DINV 3.58. The converted “.dat” file can
be opened in a notepad to visualize the nature (high/ low/ moderate resistivity) of the
recorded data and could also be edited. In the notepad, the converted data file has been
arranged so that the topography data are placed immediately after apparent resistivity
data points with starting of flag 2 followed by the number of topographical data points.
At the end of the topography data points, four Zeros have been placed to indicate the end
of the file. Noise could be removed using “Exterminate bad datum points” tool of
RES2DINV. The apparent resistivity data values are displayed in the form of profiles for
each data level. The bad data points usually have comparatively too large or too small
apparent resistivity, which could obviously be identified and also could be removed
through selection. Optimized damping factor has been utilized for data inversion. The
results of inversion process have been displayed through Display tool of RES2DINV. In
the Display section original data has been examined and edited/ filtered out the bad data
points on the basis of distribution of the percentage difference between logarithms of the
observed and calculated apparent resistivity values. Further, the inversion of the filtered
data has been carried out using least-squares-inversion method through finite-element
forward modeling technique. At the end of the inversion process, three numbers 2D
model cross sections viz., Measured Apparent Resistivity Pseudosection, Calculated
7
Apparent Resistivity Pseudosection and Inverse Model Resistivity section are
constructed. Finally, 2D cross section of resistivity distribution has obtained by including
topography in the model resistivity section using logarithmic contour intervals.

6. Results

2D model of resistivity distribution along the profile at Dam foundation as shown in

figure-2, has been estimated using Wenner Profiling technique and presented in figure-6.
Vertical exaggeration of this cross section is 3. The profile length is 200m with 5m
electrode spacing. The resistivity distribution in this section represents about 8m in depth
from the excavated surface. The lowest resistivity observed in this section is 40 Ohm-m,
and maximum resistivity found is 200 ohm-m with an average of 78 ohm-m.

2D model of resistivity distribution along the profile at Dam foundation as shown in

figure-2, has been estimated using Wenner Sounding technique and presented in figure-7.
Vertical exaggeration of this cross section is 1. The profile length is 200m with 5m
electrode spacing. The resistivity distribution in this section represents about 30m in
depth from the excavated surface. The resistivity distribution in this section varies from
minimum 25 Ohm-m to maximum 250 ohm-m with an average of 76 ohm-m.

Figure 6. 2D model of resistivity distribution of Dam foundation area using Wenner

Profiling technique. The profile length is 200m with 5m electrode spacing. The resistivity
distribution in this section represents about 8m in depth from the excavated surface
(minimum 40 Ohm-m, average 78 ohm-m and maximum 200 ohm-m).

8
Figure 7. 2D model of resistivity distribution of Dam foundation area using Wenner
Sounding technique. The profile length is 200m with 5m electrode spacing. The
resistivity distribution in this section represents about 30m in depth from the excavated
surface (minimum 25 Ohm-m, average 76 ohm-m and maximum 250 ohm-m).

2D model of resistivity distribution along the profile at Dam foundation as shown in

figure-2, has been generated using Dipole Dipole technique and presented in figure-8.
Vertical exaggeration of this cross section is 1. The profile length is 200m with 5m
electrode spacing. The resistivity distribution in this section represents about 35 m in
depth from the excavated surface. The resistivity distribution in this section varies from
minimum 15 Ohm-m to maximum 400 ohm-m with an average of 76 ohm-m.

Figure8. 2D model of resistivity distribution of Dam foundation area using Dipole

Dipole technique. The profile length is 200m with 5m electrode spacing. The resistivity
distribution in this section represents about 35 m in depth from the excavated surface
(minimum 15 Ohm-m, average 76 ohm-m and maximum 400 ohm-m).

2D model of resistivity distribution along the profile at Dam foundation as shown in

figure-2, has been generated using Schlumberger technique and presented in figure-9.

9
The profile length is 200m with 5m electrode spacing. The resistivity distribution in this
section represents about 40m in depth from the excavated surface. The lowest resistivity
observed in this section is 15 Ohm-m, and maximum resistivity found is 350 ohm-m with
an average 75 ohm-m.

7. Discussion

The results obtained from different 2D resistivity sections viz. figure-6 to figure-9 of
Dam foundation area reveal that the estimated minimum, maximum and average
resistivities have been observed to be varied with different resistivity measurement
protocols. The different resistivity imaging techniques utilize different geometric
configurations (flow path) for current transmission/ current flow. Due to different flow
paths (depth of current penetration) utilized in different techniques (Wenner profiling,
Wenner sounding, Dipole-

Location
ongoing Drill
hole

Figure9. 2D model of resistivity distribution of Dam foundation area using

Schlumberger technique. The profile length is 200m with 5m electrode spacing. The
resistivity distribution in this section represents about 40m in depth from the excavated
surface (minimum 15 Ohm-m, average 75 ohm-m and maximum 350 ohm-m).

Dipole and Schlumberger) at a particular profile, the minimum, maximum and average
resistivity values have been varied in different sections. Different high and low resistive
10
pockets of dry rock/ moist weathered zones have been encountered during the survey
through different resistivity measurement techniques and consequently values of
resistivity lows and highs have also been changed. The real earth is not homogeneous, it
is typically heterogeneous in nature. The estimation of 2D true resistivity section is done
through forward modeling and least-squares optimized inversion technique considering
hemispherical layered-earth model. A comparatively low resistive vertical zone has been
found near RD-80 of the 2D resistivity sections (figure-6 to figure-9), and is inferred to
be due to mud accumulation consequent to drilling activity. The drilled hole and
surroundings is saturated with this mud-water.

Present study reveals that average resistivity value at Dam foundation varies in a range of
75 ohm-m to 78 ohm-m as obtained using different resistivity measurement protocols.
The average resistivity value at Intake-I foundation area varies in a range of 80 ohm-m to
85 ohm-m while, the average resistivity value at Intake-II foundation area varies in a
range of 74 ohm-m to 76 ohm-m as obtained using different protocols (Pal, 2009).
Similarly, the resistivity value varies in a range of 40 ohm-m to 80 ohm-m at Powerhouse
area (Kapil and Ramanaiah, 2004). These comparative studies indicates that the
resistivity value of sandstone of Middle Siwalik formation around the project site is about
80 ohm-m.

.8 Summary

The present study reveals that the technique applied for conducting Resistivity Imaging
Surevey in the rugged terrain is very efficient and could be effectively utilized to provide
Earth resistivity for proper design of Earthmat. The average resistivity value at Dam
foundation varies in the range 75 ohm-m to 78 ohm-m as obtained using different
resistivity measurement protocols viz., Wenner, Dipole Dipole, Schlumberger etc. of
Resistivity Imaging surveys. As such, resistivity approximation of 78 ohm-m can be
utilized for suitable design of Earthmat and calculation of Touch and Step Potential
voltages. On the basis of observed resistivity distribution, the mesh of earthmat
conductors could be augmented in the high resistive areas and accordingly, earthmat
could be reduced in the comparatively low resistive areas.
Acknowledgement

11
The authors are thankful to Dr. Gopal Dhawan, Executive Director, Engineering Geology
and Geotechnical Division, Faridabad; Sh.Om Prakash, General Manager(SLP);
Sh.N.K.Mathur, Chief(Geology); Sh.S.L.Kapil, Chief(Geophysics); for their keen interest
in this study. The authors are also thankful to Sh. Suman Hazra, AM(Geology); Sh.Vinod
Kumar, Geologist and Sh.Manoj Kumar Brahma, Supervisor(Survey), NHPC
Gerukamukh, Assam for their help and cooperation during this study.

References

ABEM Instrument AB, S-172 66 Sundbyberg, Sweden, 2007. Terrameter SAS 1000 /
4000 Manual, 2007, ABEM Printed Matter No 93109.
Choudhary, M.K., 2008. Earthinhg practice-additional. Best Practices in Distribution
Systems Operation and Maintenance (O&M), Distribution Reform, Upgrades and
Management (DRUM) Training Program, 2008. obtained from following website,
on January, 2009. www.scribd.com/doc/3417042/OM-65B-Earthing-Practices-
Additional.
deGroot-Hedlin, C. and Constable, S., 1990. Occam's inversion to generate smooth, two-
dimensional models form magnetotelluric data. Geophysics, 55, 1613-1624.
Edwards, L.S., 1977. A modified pseudosection for resistivity and inducedpolarization.
Geophysics, 42, 1020-1036.
Griffiths D.H. and Barker R.D., 1993. Two-dimensional resistivity imaging and
modelling in areas of complex geology. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 29, 211-
226.
Loke, M.H. and Barker, R.D., 1996. Rapid least-squares inversion of apparent resistivity
pseudosections by a quasi-Newton method. Geophysical Prospecting, 44, 131-152
Loke, M.H., 2001. Tutorial : 2-D and 3-D electrical imaging surveys. Geotomo Software,
Malaysia.
Kapil, S.L. and Ramanaiah, D.V., 2004. Report on dry season earth resistivity
measurements at powerhouse site, Subansiri Lower Project, Arunachal Pradesh.
NHPC LTD Internal Report.
Kapil, S.L.; Jyotirmoy and Pal, S.K., 2006. Report on geophysical survey involving
seismic tomography, seismic refraction and resistivity imaging, Siang Lower HE
Project, Arunachal Pradesh. NHPC LTD Internal Report.

12
Mousa, A. M., 1998. The Applicability of Lightning Elimination Devices to Substations
and Power Lines, IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, Vol. 13, No. 4, October 1998,
pp. 1120-1127.
Pal, S. K., 2009. Final Report on earth resistivity measurements for design of earthmat at
Intake-I and Intake-II foundations, Subansiri Lower H. E. Project. NHPC LTD
Internal Report.
RES2DINV 3.58, 2009. Geoelectrical Imaging 2D & 3D Geotomo software, 115 Cangkat
Minden Jalan 5, Minden Heights, 11700 Gelugor, Penang, Malaysia.
Sen, P. K., 2001. Understanding Direct Lightning Stroke Shielding of Substations.
PSERC Seminar Golden, Colorado, November 6, 2001.
Zipse, D. W., 1994. Lightning Protection Systems: Advantages and Disadvantages, IEEE
Trans. On Industry Applications, Vol. 30, No. 5, Sept/Oct. 1994, pp. 1351-1361.

List of Figures

Figure 1. World lightning map.

Figure2. Location of Resistivity Imaging survey for earthmat design of Dam Foundation
Figure3. Field set up for Resistivity Imaging survey and data acquisition at Dam
foundation.
Figure 4. Schematic diagram representing resistivity imaging data acquisition procedures
using Terrameter SAS-4000 and ES464, a computer controlled multi-electrode
survey setup.
Figure5. Arrangement of the blocks used in a model together with the apparent resistivity
datum points for generation 2D cross section
Figure6. 2D model of resistivity distribution of Dam foundation area using Wenner
Profiling technique.
Figure7. 2D model of resistivity distribution of Dam foundation area using Wenner
Sounding technique
Figure8. 2D model of resistivity distribution of Dam foundation area using Dipole Dipole
technique.
Figure9. 2D model of resistivity distribution of Dam foundation area using Schlumberger
technique.

13