ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES FOR GROUNDWATER

CONTAMINATION ALONG IKANYA ROAD, OKITIPUPA, USING

GEOELECRICAL INVESTIGATION AND HYDROCHEMICAL

ANALYSIS

BY

ADEGEYE OLUYEMI MICHAEL

160406002

A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICAL SCCIENCES,

SCHOOL OF SCIENCES

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY (B.TECH.) IN APPLIED GEOPHYSICS OF

OLUSEGUN AGAGU UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, OKITIPUPA,

NIGERIA

JANUARY, 2023
 DECLARATION

I, ADEGEYE OLUYEMI MICHAEL, Matriculation Number 160406002, in the Physical

Sciences Department, Geophysics Programme, School of Science of Olusegun Agagu University

of Science and Technology, hereby declare that all information and activities reported in this

project report were written and carried out by me during the period of research. All sources of

information are acknowledged using references.

Student’s Signature: .................................... Date: ...........................................

i
 CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the research work reported in this project write-up was carried out by

ADEGEYE OLUYEMI MICHAEL, with Matriculation number 160406002, and submitted to

the Department of Physical Sciences, School of Science, Olusegun Agagu University of Science

and Technology, Okitipupa, Ondo State. Having met the standard as required and approved by

the institution for the award of B.Tech in Geophysics.

DR. A.O. ADEGOKE

………………………………. ……………………………….
PROJECT SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE/DATE

DR. N.O. BAKARE

………………………………. ……………………………….
H.O.D PHYSICAL SCIENCE SIGNATURE/DATE

………………………………. ……………………………….
EXTERNAL SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE/DATE

ii
 DEDICATION

This Project work is dedicated to God Almighty who gave me the ability to carry out this

exercise, and to my Parents Mr. and Mrs. Adegeye who has been of great support to me in every

area academically, financially, and every other area of my life.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My profound appreciation goes to God who has sustained me thus far in His goodness and mercy

at every face of my life.

I also acknowledge my Supervisor Dr. A. O. Adegoke, a father indeed, who has favourably

looked upon me, the great help I’ve received thus far academically. My prayer is that you reap

much more than you’ve sown, may you find favor even at closed doors, and may your children

never lack support in every area of their life in Jesus’ name. Amen.

I as well acknowledge my Departmental Lecturers and Technologists in person of Mr. Omotosho

and Mr. Bobola, for adequately preparing academically for the challenges I encountered during

the course of the field work.

And lastly, I acknowledge my fellow course mate, Amah Charles Ojoajogwu Emmanuel, Oke

Samuel, Aluko Isreal, Owadara Opeyemi, for the great help rendered in the course of this

project. And my friends, Abe Samuel, Akinbobola Oluwayemisi, Olasoji John who in different

areas have been supportive. I pray the blessings of the Lord will not cease in their lives.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENT

DECLARATION..............................................................................................................................i

CERTIFICATION...........................................................................................................................ii

DEDICATION...............................................................................................................................iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................iv

TABLE OF CONTENT...................................................................................................................v

LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................................viii

LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................................ix

ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................x

CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................1

1.0 INTRODUCTION:...........................................................................................................1

1.1 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM.........................................................................................2

1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY......................................................................2

1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA........................................................................3

1.4 PREVIOUS WORKS........................................................................................................5

1.5 EXPECTED CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE.....................................................6

CHAPTER TWO.............................................................................................................................7

LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................................7

2.1 GEOLOGY OF THE STUDY AREA..............................................................................7

2.2 PHYSIOGRAPHIC SETTING.......................................................................................10

v
 2.3 BASIC THEORY OF ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY METHOD.................................10

2.5 FIELD TECHNIQUES...................................................................................................15

2.6 TYPES OF ELECTRODE ARRAY...............................................................................15

2.6.1 SCHLUMBERGER ELECTRODE ARRAY.........................................................16

2.7 APPLICATIONS OF ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY METHOD.................................19

2.8 FACTORS AFFECTING ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY METHOD...........................20

2.9 FACTORS FAVOURABLE TO THE USE OF ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY..........20

2.10 FIELD OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS.......................................................................21

2.10.1 LIMITATIONS........................................................................................................21

2.10.2 AMBIGUITIES.......................................................................................................22

CHAPTER THREE.......................................................................................................................23

MATERIALS AND METHODS..................................................................................................23

3.1 INSTRUMENTATION.....................................................................................................23

a Terameter........................................................................................................................23

b Electrodes........................................................................................................................23

3.1.1 MATERIALS USED FOR THE HYDROCHEMICAL ANALYSIS.....................24

3.2 METHOD OF STUDY...................................................................................................24

3.1.1 The Schlumberger Array.........................................................................................25

CHAPTER FOUR.........................................................................................................................26

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS..................................................................................................26

vi
 4.1 VERTICAL ELECTRICAL SOUNDING (VES) RESULTS.............................................26

4.1.1 GEOELECTRIC SECTIONS...........................................................................................26

CHAPTER FIVE...........................................................................................................................39

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION............................................................................39

REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................40

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Summary of VES Interpreted Results

Table 4.2a: Hydrochemical parameters of the study area with okpa and WHO 2017

Table 4.2b: Hydrochemical parameters of cassava effluent sample

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Location Map of the Study Area.

Figure 1.2: Geological map showing the study area, Ondo state, Okitipupa.

Figure 2.1: Schematic Diagram of the flow of current through a cylindrical model.

Figure 2.2: Array configuration for generalized apparent resistivity equation.

Figure 2.3: Typical Schlumberger configuration array

Figure 4.1.1: Typical sounding curves (a – e) on the study area

Figure 4.1.2a: Geoelectric section for Veses 1 – 5

Figure 4.1.2b: Geoelectric section for Veses 6 – 10

ix
 ABSTRACT

A geophysical survey was carried out with the aim of identifying the quality of groundwater at a

cassava factory along Ikanya road, Okitipupa, Ondo State. The study area lies within Latitude

6°30'14"N and Longitude 4°46'45"E in the sedimentary area of Western Nigeria. A total number

of 10 VESES was recorded with the aid of a Terameter and the Data were presented in profiles

and 2D Geoelectric sections, to map out the lithology of the study area. A hydrochemical

analysis was also carried out on the water sample and cassava effluent collected from the study

area. Certain parameters tested for are: PH, EC, Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Hardness

(TH), Alkalinity, Acidity, Sulphate (SO4), Nitrates (NO3), Carbonate ion (CO3), Chlorine (Cl),

Calcium (Ca), Magnesium (Mg), Sodium (Na), Potassium (K), Iron (Fe), Cyanide (CN), and

Manganese (Mn). The result collected was then compared to the standard for quality of water by

the World Health Organization (WHO) 2017. The study shows that the water collected from the

study area could still be regarded as a quality water due to low values in the hydrochemical tests.

x
 CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION:

Environmental Geophysics is the use of geophysical methods to image and understand the

properties and processes in the top ~100 meters of the earth. This is the region of the earth that

has a direct and daily impact on our lives (and on which we have a direct and daily impact), yet

we know surprisingly little about this near-surface region. Our work in environmental

geophysics involves laboratory studies, theoretical modeling, and field work. We use these three

different approaches to investigate the links between the geophysical parameters that we can

measure and the physical, chemical and biological properties and processes of interest. Many of

our research projects can be described as “hydro-geophysics” or using geophysics to address

problems in hydrogeology.

Environmental geophysics is a relatively new field. It is primarily used to identify, map or

predict the presence and potential movement of surface water and groundwater and to identify

contaminants in the soil within the upper 10 to 50 m of the Earth's surface. It can also be used to

help locate sites for underground waste disposal, examine archaeological sites or even assist the

police in their investigations of possible burial sites.

Groundwater is water that exists in the pore spaces and fractures in rocks and sediments beneath

the water table. It originates as rainfall or snow, and then moves through the soil and rock into

the groundwater system, where it eventually makes its way back to the surface streams, lakes, or

oceans. Groundwater makes up about 1% of the water on the Earth (most water is in oceans).

Groundwater is found beneath the unsaturated zone where all the open spaces between

sedimentary materials or in fractured rocks is filled with water and the water has a pressure

greater than atmospheric pressure. To understand the ways in which groundwater occurs, it is
1
needed to think about the groundwater bearing formation properties such as porosity and

permeability. The water bearing formation is termed aquifer.

A relatively inexpensive way to prospect for groundwater, both on a small and large scale is by

using electrical resistivity method of geophysical prospecting; This method is fast, repeatable,

relatively cheap and non-intrusive, thus making it a practical alternative to traditional approaches

(Skinner and Heinson, 2004).

1.1 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The existence of life depends importantly on water and as the population rises, the call for clean

and reliable water increases. Perhaps the pollution of groundwater sources by means of leachate

from industrial activities and landfills have been for a long time. Solid wastes are dumped into

uninhibited sites of excavations, valleys, quarries or probably within urban settlements,

commercial and even residential, which are collected, processed and reused in a safe way, to

reduce cost by technological or industrial companies. Landfill practices are considered as ways

to manage the disposal of waste and this is far from the expected goal in many developing

countries.

Indiscriminate disposal of industrial and domestic garbage has been recognized as some of the

medium through which unhealthy materials and heavy metals are delivered into the soil and a

problem that maintains to grow with human development and no approach to this point is

absolutely secure. Due to this, a study was carried out at a garri factory to state the quality of

groundwater in the environment.

2
1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

The aim is to delineate for the effect of groundwater contaminant by using geoelectrical method

and hydrochemical analysis.

The objectives are to:

1. generate Base Map of the study area using ArcGIS 10.3 software and undertake vertical

electrical sounding (VES) at randomly selected location;

2. identify and map or predict the presence and potential movement of surface water and

groundwater;

3. improve our ability to manage and monitor water resources and environmental

contaminants; and,

4. conduct a hydrochemical analysis of surface water in the environment.

1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

The study area is located at a cassava factory, along Ikoya road, Okitipupa, Ondo State, within

Latitude 6°30'14"N and Longitude 4°46'45"E in the sedimentary area of Western Nigeria. as

shown in Figure 1. The town covers an area extent of about 803 square kilometers. The National

Population Commission (2016) puts the population at 316,100. The climate is savanna tropical

dry type with a mean annual temperature of about 28°C and a mean annual rainfall of over 1600

mm.

3
4
Figure 1.1: Location Map of the Study Area.

1.4 PREVIOUS WORKS

• Akintorinwa and Olowolafe (2013) worked on Geoelectric Evaluation of Groundwater

Prospect within Zion Estate, Akure involving Vertical Electrical Sounding (VES) has been used

to evaluate the groundwater potential and aquifer protective capacity of the overburden units

within Zion Estate area. Sixty-eight Vertical Electrical Soundings were carried out using

Schlumberger configuration with AB/2 varying from 1 to 65 m and was interpreted manually by

partial curve matching and was fed into computer software for iteration, results were able to

delineate prospect for groundwater in the study area.

• Olufunke and James (2016) unravel the Hydro geophysical assessment of Aule area in

Akure southwestern Nigeria using electrical resistivity method to evaluate the groundwater

potential of Aule and its environs, a total of sixty-five (65) Vertical Electrical Sounding datasets

were acquired using Schlumberger configuration with maximum current electrode spacing (AB)

of 300 m and was interpreted both qualitatively and quantitatively to delineate aquifers and water

bearing structures.

• Akinlalu et al., (2017) evaluated the groundwater potential of Oke Ana, Ilesa Area,

southwestern Nigeria. Electrical resistivity method involving vertical electrical sounding (VES)

5
been employed for the research. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in the context of

analytical hierarchy process (AHP) was applied as the data mining technique. Validation was

done using the available well and borehole information in the area. Lineament density, drainage

density, lithology, overburden thickness and aquifer resistivity were identified as the main

factors controlling groundwater occurrence in the area. The study classified Oke-Ana into low,

medium and high groundwater potential zones. Validation of the potential map showed over

70% accuracy. The study revealed the efficacy of geophysics as an important tool in

groundwater studies.

• Adiat et al., (2018) predict the groundwater prospect in a typical basement complex

environment through mining of geophysical data. Electrical resistivity method involving vertical

electrical sounding technique (VES). Geo-electric parameters were obtained from the VES data.

Coefficient of anisotropy, aquifer resistivity, aquifer thickness, overburden thickness and

overburden resistivity are the factors selected to control groundwater occurrence in the study

area. Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) was adopted as the data mining technique.

1.5 EXPECTED CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE

The result of this research has assisted in the hydro-geophysical characterization of the study

area and the possible means to overcome and avoid the contamination to groundwater.

Therefore, inferences made from this research are expected to guide the siting of borehole

location(s) in the study area. This research work has helped in the advancement of science and

environmental geophysics and serve as reference materials for future researchers in

environmental geophysics.

6
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 GEOLOGY OF THE STUDY AREA

The sedimentary basin of Ondo State is underlain by the Coastal Alluvium at the extreme south

and along major river flood plain, the Coastal Plain Sands, the Imo Shale, Upper Coal Measures

and Nkporo Shale. These formations have variable hydrogeological characteristics. The shallow

aquifers within the southern sedimentary portion of Ondo State have been investigated and found

to be vulnerable to near-surface contaminants (Ako, 1982; Omosuyi et al., 1999; Omosuyi, 2001;

Omosuyi et al., 2008 and Bello, 2011). Oteri and Atolagbe (2003) observed that potable water

supply to inhabitants in some of the communities in the sedimentary rock underlain southern

(coastal belt) part of Ondo State had been a major problem due to salt water intrusion. The Ondo

State Water Corporation currently cannot meet the daily water need of the growing population

within the state from its surface water schemes. Only 70.2 million litres of portable water out of

the state water 4 coastal area had yielded saline water. Siting of deep boreholes in this area

requires adequate knowledge and characterization of the aquifer units of the Coastal Plain Sands

and the Alluvial deposits. The Imo Shale is predominantly an aquiclude and aquitard of low

permeability with low groundwater yielding capacity. The Upper Coal Measures is made up of

7
fine sandstones at the top with aquiclude and aquitard at the base, and tendency for low

groundwater yield.

The Nkporo Shale is made up of shale, sandy clay and lenses of sand. The Upper Coal Measures

consists of clay/sandy clay, sand, limestone and shale. The Imo Shale Group is composed of

shale while the Coastal Plain Sands has alternations of clay/sandy clay and clayey sand/sand.

The Quaternary Coastal Alluvium is composed of an alternating sequence of sand and silt/clay

(Jones and Hockey, 1964 and Etu-Efeotor and Akpokodje, 1990). The aquifer units are sand,

sandstones, clayey sand and dissolved/fractured limestone which are unconfined and confined in

nature.

8
9
Fig 1.2 Geological map showing the study area, Ondo state, Okitipupa.

10
2.2 PHYSIOGRAPHIC SETTING

The physiographic settings of the area of study include the climate, drainage pattern,

topography, and vegetation. The topography is gentle in some areas with water divide in the

northeastern and southeastern part. The area is well drained with many rivers, some of which are

seasonal. The drainage patterns observed includes dendritic, parallel, and trellis. Humid tropical

climate is prevalent in the area, marked by the alternating wet and dry seasons. The temperature

is moderately high during the day and also varies from season to season (Kayode, 2006). Two

periods of high temperatures are recorded annually. The first period occurs in March-April and

the second period in November - December. The average daily temperature varies between about

20 ºC (for a very cold day) and about 35 ºC (for a very hot day). The coolest period is in the

middle of the raining season i.e., July - August (Kayode, 2006).

2.3 BASIC THEORY OF ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY METHOD

Consider a current flowing in a cylindrical conductor of length L, cross-sectional area A, with

current I, flowing through in it as shown in Figure 2.1.

The resistance R from ohms law is expressed as:

R α L ………………………………………...…………………...………….

(2.1)

R α 1/A ………………………………………...……………...…………….

(2.2)

Combining (2.1) and (2.2) gives:

R α L/ A …………………………………………….……………...………. (2.3)

11
 R=ρ L / A ………………………………………….………………...….... (2.4)

Where ρ is the constant of proportionality known as resistivity, measured in ohms-meter.

But from ohms law, V= IR

R= ∆V/I (where ∆V is the voltage across the conductor, wire).

Substituting the expression, ∆V/I for R in equation (2.4) gives:

ΔV L
=ρ
I A ……………………………………………………...………… (2.5)

Making ρ the subject of the formula in equation (2.5) gives:

ρ= ( AL ) ∆ V /I ……………………………………………………...………… (2.6)
Where V = Potential difference between any two points measured in volts.

The equation above forms the fundamental formula used in electrical resistivity method in

deriving the geometric factor which is a variable factor depending on the configuration or array

used on the surface of the earth.

12
Figure 2.1: Schematic Diagram of the flow of current through a cylindrical model.

Where A= Cross-sectional area of the cylindrical model

L= Length of the cylindrical Model

I = Current flowing through the cylindrical model

Figure 2.2: Array configuration for generalized apparent resistivity equation.

13
2.4 GENERALIZED APPARENT RESISTIVITY EQUATION

The diagram in figure 2.2 illustrates a simple current source at the surface of the earth. The

potential ‘V’ is at a distance ‘R’ from the current source. The potential at point P 1 due to current

at point C1 at the current surface is given as:

In practice, four electrodes are usually used in resistivity survey as shown in figure 2.2:

From the diagram,

The potential at P1 due to current at C1 is:

The potential at P1 due to current at C2 is;

The sum total of potential at P1 due to current at C1 and C2 is;

…………………………………………………………………………..

(2.8)

Similarly,

Potential at P2 due to current at C1 is

14
The potential at P2 due to current at C2 is

The sum total of P2 due to current C1 and C2 is;

…………………………….……………………………..................... (2.9)

But the potential difference V between P1 and P2 can be obtained by subtracting equation (2.8)

and (2.9)

V = V11, 12 – V21, 22

………………………...………………………………….…... (2.10)

But, ………………………..…………………………….…

(2.11)

Therefore,

………………………………………...………………..…

(2.12)

15
Equation (2.12) is the generalized resistivity equation for any electrode array system. An aspect

of the generalized equation

Is called the Geometric factor (K) because it can be regarded as the contribution of the geometry

of the electrode system to the observed voltage.

Therefore, ρ a = KR

2.5 FIELD TECHNIQUES

 Horizontal Profiling (HP): The horizontal profiling investigates the lateral variation in

resistivity of the subsurface with respect to a fixed depth.

 Vertical Electrical Sounding (VES): The Schlumberger configuration is usually used

for the vertical electrical soundings (VES). The VES technique observes the vertical

resistivity variation of the subsurface with respect to a fixed point. The midpoint of the

array is kept fixed while the distance between electrodes is progressively increased.

 Combined HP/VES: The dipole-dipole configuration is usually used for the combined

horizontal profiling (HP)/vertical electrical soundings (VES). This technique observes

both the vertical resistivity variation and the lateral variation in resistivity of the

subsurface.

2.6 TYPES OF ELECTRODE ARRAY

 Schlumberger array

 Wenner array

 Pole-pole array

 Pole-dipole array

16
  Dipole-dipole array

 Gradient array

 Lee partition

2.6.1 SCHLUMBERGER ELECTRODE ARRAY

Schlumberger electrode array utilizes four electrodes system like Wenner array but they are

arranged linearly with different inter-electrode spacing as shown in the figure above. 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.

17
Figure 2.3: Typical Schlumberger configuration array

Where:

AB = Current Electrode Distance

MN = Potential Electrode Distance

AB = 2L

MN = 2I

18
 AB = 5MN

The apparent resistivity equation for schlumberger array is derived as:

………………………………………………………… (2.13)

Consider the array in figure 2.6

If AM = L – I

MB = L + I

AN = L + I

NB = L – I

By substituting into equation (2.13)

……………………………………………………………………………. (2.14)

But, l2 is negligible when comparing with L2 therefore, equation (2.14) becomes;

…………………………………………………………………………………… (2.15)

19
Equation (2.15) is the apparent resistivity for Schlumberger electrode array. Finally, in vertical

sounding, the potential electrodes remain fixed while the current electrodes spacing is expanded

symmetrically about the center of the spread. For large value of L 1 it is necessary to increase „l‟

also in order to maintain a measurable potential. The assumption is that, the wider the current

electrode spacing, the deeper the earth is being probed.

2.7 APPLICATIONS OF ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY METHOD

(a) Groundwater Exploration: The relevance of this method to groundwater exploration

involves:

 Direct location of subsurface water through mapping of the water table. Indirect location

of potential aquifer such as weathered zone, porous and permeable sandstones, alluvium

deposits and sand gravel within clay deposit, etc.

 Mapping of geological structures that are favorable to groundwater accumulation, such as

fractures, basement depressions, buried channels, Sand lenses and network of joints.

 Determination of saline zones and fresh/saline water interface in the coastal areas.

 Mapping of groundwater flow direction

(b) Engineering Site Investigation: Application of engineering study as earlier mentioned is

relevant in various areas;

 Determination of the depth to bedrock (overburden thickness) at construction site this

may include building highway roads, bridges and dam sites.

 To map sea page zones across contaminated structures such as dam embankment or

 reservoir floors.

20
  Mapping of subsurface structures inimical to Engineering foundations such as bedrock

depression, fault and fracture and joint.

(c) Environmental Pollution Studies: Mapping of chemical pollution plumes arising from

Industrial waste disposal or oil spillage.

(e) Mineral Exploration:

The method is limited in its application to mineral exploration. However, it could be use in

location or mapping of massive mineral deposit; non-metallic or metallic such as pyrite,

Chalcopyrite, graphite, Chalcocite, salt, clay, Kaolin, Barite etc.

(f) Geothermal Studies

The Electrical Resistivity method is used in the delineation of geothermal reservoirs and

fractures/faults associated with geothermal centres.

2.8 FACTORS AFFECTING ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY METHOD

There are various factors that influence the electrical Resistivity method which include:

 Mode of conduction of rocks and soils.

 Rock texture

 Rock types

 Temperature

 Degree of water saturation

 Permeability and porosity

 Geological processes e.g. weathering, jointing, faulting etc.

21
2.9 FACTORS FAVOURABLE TO THE USE OF ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY

METHOD FOR SITE INVESTIGATION

 Existence of sufficient geophysical contrast between the bedrock and the overlying

deposit.

 Existence of simple geologic features.

 Existence of suitable contrast in the electrical property of the targeted feature.

 Existence of large expanse of hand to work with little or no restriction.

 Availability of electrolyte in formation.

 Absence of fill materials over the site, scattered metal and brick, buried Pipes and wire,

fences, buried and overhead power lines and nearby industries using electrical plant that

adversely affect electrical sounding.

2.10 FIELD OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS

 Lateral inhomogeneity: This usually degrades the quality of our resistivity data. The

problem could be reduced by employing a special land of configuration called Tri-

potential array system.

 Poor electrical contact: This could lead to acquisition of erroneous data especially if the

poor contact is at current electrodes position. It may be due to a very dry ground surface.

The problem could be solved by creating saline water medium around the electrodes.

 Dip effect: In a situation where the horizontal interface is dipping, the quality of data is

seriously affected likewise the interpretation. However, if the dip angle is less than 45 o

then it is negligible.

2.10.1 LIMITATIONS

 Instrumental malfunctions and cable leakage.

22
  Cultural and or geographical noise from telluric, magneto-telluric currents, power lines.

 Buried pipes, buried or overhead power line, fence, barbed wire etc.

 Electrical Resistivity method cannot determine the amount of stress in the soil.

 Inconsistency in readings at particular points at different time or season

2.10.2 AMBIGUITIES

 Equivalence: This is a phenomenon whereby a multiple layer resistivity curve can

correspond to a great number of different geo-electrical models.

 Suppression: This occurs when the layers are having a resistivity, which is intermediate

between those of enclosing layers. It may be suppressed and not having any significant

influence on the appreciable thickness.

23
 CHAPTER THREE

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 INSTRUMENTATION

The instrumentations used for the vertical electrical sounding includes the Ohmega Resistivity

Meter and its accessories like the connecting cables, four electrodes (steel rods), measuring

tapes, hammers and the Global Positioning system (GPS)

a Terameter: It is a compact digital resistivity meter that contains a transmitter and

receiver functions packed in one unit. It is designed to measure extremely weak electrical

signal. The instrument can transmit up to 2900mA or less 200V, which is sufficient

enough for ordinary resistivity surveying. It is highly sophisticated, compact lightweight

equipment with inbuilt power source, signal receiver. It takes consecutive resistivity in

several cycles and averaging the values obtained at each cycle to give the final resistivity.

b Electrodes: The four electrodes used were made of steel and are driven into the surface

of the earth to the subsurface (few cm) with the aid of a hammer for good contact. These

electrodes are connected to their respective cables.

c Cables: There are four cables used on the field, two of which are about 500m in length

used in connecting current electrodes (C1 and C2) while the other two cables of about

500m in length are used in connecting potential electrodes (P1 and P2).

d Measuring Tape: The measuring tapes are of various lengths used to mark off the

electrode spread.

e Hammer: The hammer is used in driving in the electrode into the ground for proper

electrical contact.

24
 f Global Positioning System: This is a very compulsory geologic instrument in any

geophysical survey. It is used to mark the position of one’s location on the globe which is

the X, Y and Z, longitude, latitude and the elevation above the sea level which is also

known as the altitude at that point.

3.1.1 MATERIALS USED FOR THE HYDROCHEMICAL ANALYSIS

Materials used for the hydrochemical analysis includes PH Meter with glass; reference electrode

(saturated calomel) preferably with; temperature compensation; Magnetic stirrer with

polytetrafluoroethylene coated stirring bar; Thermometer with least count of 0.5°C;

Spectrophotometer; Distillation assembly; Filter photometer; Colorimeter; Kjeldahl assembly is

suitable. And appropriate reagent for various test.

3.2 METHOD OF STUDY

In an attempt to determine the depth to bedrock and thickness of layers, reconnaissance

field mapping exercise was carried out in order to have a picture of the geology of the area.

Schlumberger Configuration was used to carry out vertical electrical sounding. Ten vertical

soundings were carried out on the field. This was done by changing the distance between the

current electrodes so that the depth range to which the current penetrates changes, Telford et al

(1976). A succession of apparent resistivity reading was taken for increasing electrode spacings.

The half electrode spacing of the current electrode (AB/2) and its corresponding potentials were

recorded. The instrument used for this survey is Ohmega Terameter and its accessories (the

connecting cables and clips, four Reels of long electronics cables, hammers, battery which is

inbuilt power source and Global positioning system (GPS)). The electrodes used are made of

steel, that is, aluminum or stainless which are driven into the surface of the earth for few

centimeters with the aid of hammer for good electrical contact. The electrodes were connected to

25
their reels (current and potential) by wire from the reel of long cable. Four reels were used on the

field, two of which are reels with cables of about 100metres in length in connecting current

electrodes while the other two reels with cables of about 500 meters in length were in connecting

the voltage electrodes.

Also, two water sample was collected from the location to test for the quality of water in the

environment. The water sample was collected some days after the data acquisition of the

environment. One litre of water sample from the borehole and another of cassava effluent. The

bottle was washed with distilled water to avoid contamination and was as well sent to test for

some hydrochemical parameters such as PH, EC, Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Hardness

(TH), Alkalinity, Acidity, Phosphate ion (PO4), Sulphate (SO4), Nitrates (NO3), Carbonate ion

(CO3), Chlorine (Cl), Calcium (Ca), Magnesium (Mg), Sodium (Na), Potassium (K), Iron (Fe),

Cyanide (CN), Manganese (Mn).

3.1.1 The Schlumberger Array

This array is the least cumbersome compared to the other three and it is not necessary to change

the potential electrodes every time the current electrode spacing is altered. It is most commonly

used to observe the variation of resistivity with depth. The mid-point is kept fixed while the

distance between the current electrodes is progressively increased.

26
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 VERTICAL ELECTRICAL SOUNDING (VES) RESULTS

The interpretation of the VES data by partial curve matching and computer iteration using

WIN RESIST software (Vander Velphen., 2004), are shown in Table 4.1.

Figure 4.1a to 4.1j shows the curve types distribution of the study area. The sounding curves

obtained from the study area are HA, A, KHA, and H. These results were utilized in

generating geoelectric sections (Figure 4.2a and 4.2b) to give a pictorial view of the

subsurface and inferred lithology using the SURFER software.

4.1.1 GEOELECTRIC SECTIONS

Figure 4.2a presents the geoelectric section along NW-SE direction. This section connects

VES 1, 2, 3, 4 and, 5. The geoelectric layers delineated in this section is having maximum of

four (4) layers. The layers in this section are characterized as top soil, clay, sandy slay, clayey

sand and coarse sand. The first layer, top soil has a layer resistivity range of 12 to 557 Ωm,

with a layer thickness of 0.5 – 1.7m. The second layer is composed of clay in VES 1 with

layer resistivity of 96 Ωm and clayey sand resitivity value of 128 – 731 Ωm with a depth of

1.5m to 4.1m and a layer thickness of 0-9m to 2.9m. The third layer has a resisitivity value

range of 232 to 967 Ωm which is characteriszed to be a clayey sand environmrnt. The fourth

layer has a resistivity value range of 582 to 22562 Ωm and layer depth to infinity. The fourth

layer of VES 4 is seen to have a high resistivity value of 22562 Ωm.

Figure 4.2b presents the geoelectric section along NW-SE direction. This section connects VES

6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. The geoelectric layers in this section is having a maximum of five (5) layers in

27
VES 6 and a minimum of three (3) layers in VES 10. The first layer, the top soil is characterized

by layer resistivity values ranging from 540 to 4209 Ωm and its thickness between 0.5 – 1.7m.

The second layer of VES 7 composing of sandy clay has a resistivity of 249 Ωm; while other

VESES composes of clayey sand with resistivity value range of 393 to 744 Ωm. The third layer

is predominantly a clayey sand with a resistivity value range of 463 to 1114 Ωm and a layer

thickness range of 1.8 to 11.7m. The fourth and fifth layer composes of clayey sand and has a

layer resistivity range of 887 to 4426Ωm.

28
Table 4.1 Summary of VES Interpreted Results

29
VES Layers Apparent Thickness(m) Depth(m) Curve Lithology
Points number Res. (Pa) Type
1 1 11.8 1.7 0.9 HA Top Soil
2 96.3 1.4 1.5 Clay
3 9673.0 20.9 22. Coarse Sand
4
4 581.9 Clayey Sand
2 1 11.8 0.6 0.6 A Top Soil
2 128.0 0.9 1.6 Sandy Clay
3 1065.4 3.5 5.0 Clayey Sand
4 22561.7 Coarse Sand
3 1 449.1 1.3 1. KHA Top Soil
3
2 250.1 1.5 2. Sandy Clay
8
3 282.5 3.7 6. Sandy Clay
5
4 8094.9 Coarse Sand
4 1 556.9 1.2 1.2 HA Clayey
Sand
2 238.9 2.9 4.1 Sandy Clay
3 447.8 3.4 7.5 Clayey Sand
4 5205.6 Coarse
Sand
5 1 461.1 0.5 0.5 A Top Soil
2 730.7 2.2 2.8 Sandy Clay
3 1733.9 5.0 7.8 Coarse Sand
4 3067.2 Coarse Sand
6 1 540.4 1.1 1. H Top Soil
1
2 393.4 1.0 2. Sandy Clay
1
3 463.4 1.8 3. Clayey
9 Sand
4 3350.6 4.2 8. Coarse
2 Sand
5 3229.7 Coarse
Sand
7 1 4209.9 0.6 0. H Top Soil
6
2 249.6 1.4 2. Sandy Clay
0
3 422.0 4.6 6. Clayey
6 Sand
4 4426.5 Coarse
Sand
8 1 3085.5 0.5 0.5 H Top Soil
2 563.9 2.0 2. Clayey Sand
5
3 472.5 5.0 7.5 Clayey Sand
4 1693.7 Coarse
30 Sand
9 1 987.6 0.9 0. H Top Soil
9
2 744.6 2.0 2.9 Clayey Sand
a.

Figure 4.1a:
Typical Sounding Curve of VES 1 from The Study Area
b.

Figure 4.1b: Typical Sounding Curve of VES 2 from The Study Area

31
c.

Figure 4.1c: Typical Sounding Curve of VES 3 from The Study Area
d.

Figure 4.1d: Typical Sounding Curve of VES 4 from The Study Area

32
e.

Figure 4.1e: Typical Sounding Curve of VES 5 from The Study Area
f.

Figure 4.1f: Typical Sounding Curve of VES 6 from The Study Area

33
g.

Figure 4.1g: Typical Sounding Curve of VES 7 from The Study Area

h.

Figure 4.1h: Typical Sounding Curve of VES 2 from The Study Area

34
i.

Figure 4.1i: Typical Sounding Curve of VES 9 from The Study Area

j.

Figure 4.1j: Typical Sounding Curve of VES 10 from The Study Area

35
 VES 1 VES 2 VES 3 VES 4 VES 5
12 449 557 461
96 12

128 239 731

250
5 1065
447
282 1734

3067
22562
5206
8094

9673

582

Legend
15m Top Soil Sandy Clay Coarse Sand

Clay Clayey Sand

5m

Figure 4.2a: Geoelectric section for VESES 1 – 5

36
 VES6 VES 7 VES 8 VES 9 VES 10
540 4209 3085 1820
985
25 50 75
0 -5
249 556
393 744
463
422 600
5 472 645

10 700
3000 4000 800
1500

15

15m Legend
Topsoil Clayey sand

Sandy clay sand

5m

Figure 4.2b: Geoelectric section for VESES 6 – 10

37
4.2 Hydrochemical Analysis

The range and mean of the major chemical components and different parameters i.e. PH,

Electrical Conductivity (EC), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Hardness (TH), Alkalinity,

Acidity, Phosphate ion (PO4), Sulphate (SO4), Nitrates (NO3), Carbonate ion (CO3), Chlorine

(Cl), Calcium (Ca), Magnesium (Mg), Sodium (Na), Potassium (K), Iron (Fe), Cyanide (CN),

Manganese (Mn) was worked out and is presented in the Table 4.2a. The table shows the

comparison of the water sample test with the standard quality of water by WHO 2017. The range

of these hydro-chemical components and parameters showed a lot of variation in the

groundwater samples. Water containing a high pH would not affect human health; however, it

may change the taste of the groundwater and it is closely associated with other water elements

(Wagh et al. 2016b). Chloride and sodium were the major anion and cation, respectively, in the

water samples. Variation in electrical conductivity reflects the variation of total salt

concentration and ultimately the salinity of the groundwater samples. Elevated EC is attributed to

dissolution of salts and load of anthropogenic inputs such as agricultural and domestic activities

(Morrison et al. 2001). A low TDS level according to the water sample test result shows that the

water sample has high-quality water, but it may have a flat taste, as it is devoid of many

minerals.

Table 4.2b shows hydrochemical analysis of Cassava effluent which was seen to be the major

study for contaminant in the study area. The analysis shows high values of the cassava effluent

tested, which would definitely contaminate groundwater thereby putting human health at high

risk if consumed.

38
Table 4.2a: Hydrochemical parameters of the study area with okpa and WHO 2017
PARAMETER WATER SAMPLE Okitipupa WHO LIMIT 2017
Groundwater (DL-PL)
PH 6.02 10.1±0.900 6.5 – 9.2
Electric Conductivity (EC) 42 1503±211 500 – 1500
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 24 902±126 500 – 1500
Total Hardness (TH) 0.6 100 – 500
Alkalinity 184 250
Acidity 224 -
Phosphate ion (PO4) 7.40±7.79 0.4
Sulphate (SO4) 52.3885 201± 53.5 200 – 400
Nitrates (NO3) 0.04516 35.1±19.6 45
Carbonate ion (CO3) 0.8 -
Chlorine Cl 24.88 276±18.5 250 – 500
Calcium (Ca) 7.2144 75 – 200
Magnesium (Mg) 0.0144 50 – 100
Sodium (Na) 3 200 – 600
Potassium (K) 5 10
Iron (Fe) 0.085 Not exceeding 0.1
Cyanide (CN) ND -
Manganese (Mn) 0.01 0.1

All values in mg/L except pH; EC in (μS/cm); DL, desirable limit; PL, permissible limit.

39
Table 4.2b: Hydrochemical parameters of cassava effluent sample
PARAMETER EFFLUENT
PH 3.73
EC 5100
TDS 2540
TH 1.1
Alkalinity 1312
Acidity 792
PO4
SO4 301.592
NO3 0.17982
CO3 5.2
Cl 156.34
Ca 12.8256
Mg 0.0281
Na 5
K 25
Fe 0.124
CN 0.131
Mn 0.0528

40
 CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

In this study, electrical resistivity method using VES survey was carried out at 10 locations in the

study area using the Schlumberger electrode array with a view to understand the subsurface

geologic settings and to analyze the quality of groundwater. Analysis of the interpreted results

revealed the nature and composition of the subsurface lithologic units. This includes topsoil,

clay, sandy clay, clayey sand and coarse sand of the sedimentary environment. The layers

characterized also shows the major characterization to be a sandy slay environment with a

shown the easy percolation of contaminants from the environment, which is responsible to affect

the quality of groundwater in the environment.

The most dominant lithology in the study area is sandy Clay which is known to have a low level

of porosity and having the ability to permeate contaminant unlike a clay environment. The study

thereby shows the environment not being suitable for a good water consumption despite having a

lower TDS value indicating high quality groundwater.

The study area being a sedimentary environment also shows that it has potential for groundwater

within few depths to the subsurface. It will be recommended that a drainage pattern requiring

engineering studies is done to manage and control the contaminant being percolated to the

ground for the sake of human health.

41
 REFERENCES

Adeoti, L., and Ishola, K. S. (2008). Geophysical and Hydrogeological assessment of proposed

refinery site in the lower plains of Niger Delta, Nigeria. Journal of Science, Technology

and Environment, Vol. 8 No. 1/2, pp. 31-38.

Adepelumi, A. A., Yi, M. J., Kim, J. H., Ako, B. D., and Son, J. S. (2006). Integration of surface

geophysical methods for fracture detection in crystalline bedrocks of southwestern

Nigeria. Hydrogeology Journal, Vol. 14, pp.1284-1306.

Adiat, K. A. N., Nawawi, M. N. M., and Abdullah, K. (2012). Assessing the accuracy of GIS-

based elementary multi criteria decision analysis as spatial prediction tool: a case of

predicting potential zones of sustainable groundwater resources. Journal of Hydrology,

Vol. 440-441, pp. 75-89,

Adiat, K. A. N., Nawawi, M. N. M., and Abdullah, K. (2013). Application of multi-criteria

decision analysis to geoelectric and geologic parameters for spatial prediction of

groundwater resources potential and aquifer evaluation. Pure and Applied Geophysics,

Vol. 170, pp. 453-471. Ishola et al. Journal of Science (2013)

Adiat, K. A. N., Olayanju, G. M., Omosuyi, G. O., and Ako, B. D. (2009). Electromagnetic

profiling and electrical resistivity soundings in groundwater investigations in a typical

basement complex: a case study of Oda town, south western Nigeria. Ozean Journal of

Applied Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 333-359.

Adimalla N. 2019 Controlling factors and mechanism of groundwater quality variation in

semiarid region of South India: an approach of water quality index (WQI) and health risk

assessment (HRA). Environmental Geochemistry and Health 1–28.

42
Adimalla N. Li P. Venkatayogi S. 2018a Hydrogeochemical evaluation of groundwater quality

for drinking and irrigation purposes and integrated interpretation with water quality index

studies. Environmental Processes 5(2), 363–383.

Adimalla N. Vasa. K. LiP. 2018b Evaluation of groundwater quality, Peddavagu in Central

Telangana (PCT), South India: an insight of controlling factors of fluoride enrichment.

Modeling Earth Systems and Environment. 4(2), 841– 852.

Aizebeokhai, A. P., Oyeyemi, K. D. and Joel, E. L. (2016). A Groundwater potential assessment

in a sedimentary terrain southwestern Nigeria. Arabian Journal of Geoscience 9: 110–

117.doi.org/10.1007/s12517-016-2524-5

Amadi, A. N., and Olasehinde, P. I. (2010). Application of remote sensing techniques in

hydrogeological mapping of arts of Bosso Area, Minna, North-Central Nigeria.

International Journal Physical Science, Vol. 5 No. 9, pp. 1465-1474.

Anudu, G. K., Onwuemesi, A. G., Ajaegwu, N. E., Onuba, L. N., and Omali, A. O. (2008).

Electrical resistivity investigation for groundwater in the basement complex terrain: a

case study of Idi-Ayunre and its environs, Oyo state, southwestern Nigeria. Natural and

Applied Sciences Journal, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 1-12.

APHA 2005 Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public

Health Association/American Water Works Association/Water Environment Federation,

Washington, DC, USA.

Ariyo, S. O., and Adeyemi, G. O. (2009). Role of electrical resistivity method for groundwater

exploration in hard rock areas: a case study from Fidiwo/Ajebo areas of southwestern

43
 Nigeria. Pacific Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 483-486. Burke,

K. C., Freeth S. J., and Grant, N. K.

Environmental Geophysics, 2019, https://eesa.lbl.gov/capabilities/environmental-geophysics/

Environmental Geophysics, 2019, https://enviro.stanford.edu/, Stanford School of earth

energy and Environmental Sciences.

Groundwater qualityin Okitipupa township of Ondo State, Nigeria Ayedun H.* and Ediagbonya

T. F. Department of Chemical Sciences, Ondo State University of Science and

Technology, P. M. B 353, Okitipupa, Ondo State, Nigeria.

K.C.B. Raju, J. Geol. Soc. India, 51, 429 (1998).

L.A. Richards, Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline and Alkali Soil, USDA Agriculture Handbook No.

60, U.S. Government Printing Office (1954).

S.K. Som and A.K. Bhattacharya, J. Geol. Soc. India, 40, 453 (1992).

Study of groundwater contamination and drinking suitability in basaltic terrain of Maharashtra,

India through PIG and multivariate statistical techniques. Vasant Wagh; Shrikant

Mukate; Aniket Muley; Ajaykumar Kadam; Dipak Panaskar; Abhay Varade.

T. Shah, D. Molden, R. Sakthivadivel and D. Seckler, The Global Ground Water Situation:

Overview of Opportunity and Challenges, International Water Management Institute, Colombo,

Sri Lanka (2000).

Terra Dat geophysical Engineering & Environmental techniques, 2019,

https://www.terradat.co.uk/ Milsom J., 2003, Field Geophysics, 3rd Ed.,The Geological

Field Guide Series, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester,

West Sussex PO19 8SQ, England.

44
W. Stumm and J.J. Morgan, Aquatic Chemistry, Wiley, New York, N.Y. pp. 1022 (1970).

45