Docu
Docu
Docu
Electrical Resistivity
Basic Concept
The basis for electrical resistivity methods is that an electrical potential difference
(i.e., voltage) forms around current-carrying electrodes that are implanted within a
conductive medium. The voltage distribution surrounding current electrodes that
are driven into the subsurface depends the electrical resistivities of the
subsurface materials and their spatial variations. Thus, electrical resistivity
methods can be used to detect lateral and/or vertical variations in certain
subsurface electrical properties (i.e., resistivity or its inverse, conductivity).
Electrical resistivity methods involve injecting electrical current into the subsurface
via two current electrodes and measuring the potential difference across two
potential electrodes. A single resistivity measurement requires four electrodes
coupled to the ground and yields the apparent resistivity of the materials located
between the potential electrodes. Resistivity surveys typically employ multiple
electrode pairs in various arrays (i.e., spatial geometries), which are selected
based on site parameters and/or survey applications (Binley, 2015).
Theory
Apparent resistivity (ρa) is the value of resistivity (in ohm-m) that an electrically
homogeneous and isotropic half-space would yield given the arrangement and
spacing of electrodes. Because resistivity surveys collect subsurface
measurements, resistivity data represent a half-space, which excludes any space
above the surface that, if added, would render a whole space. Apparent resistivity
calculations involve a geometric factor, which depends on the electrode array and
spacing, that corrects a measured resistance (in ohm) for a given electrode
configuration (Mussett, 2000).
Many different array geometries exist. The most commonly used arrays are the
Wenner, Schlumberger, reverse-Schlumberger, gradient, dipole-dipole, or
combinations of these. The array employed at a site is chosen based the survey
objectives, predicted resistivity structure (e.g., lateral vs vertical variation), and/or
target depth. The depth of investigation (DOI) of a resistivity measurement is the
depth below which data are insensitive to subsurface resistivity and generally
varies with electrode array geometry.
In a uniform medium, the Wenner, dipole-dipole, and Schlumberger arrays have
DOIs that are approximately 30%, 25%, and 20% of their current electrode
separation, respectively. Thus, electrode spacing can be manipulated to achieve
sufficient depth. However, such processes are rather general, and site-specific
DOI evaluation techniques can be employed during data inversion. In such
techniques, various input models are compared to output models to determine the
depth beyond which subsurface resistivity are no longer constrained by the data
(Oldenberg and Li, 1999).
Applications
The mineral grains that comprise soil and rock are essentially nonconductive (i.e.,
highly resistive). Resistivity tends to decrease with the presence of certain ore
minerals, fine grain materials (e.g., clay minerals), and high temperatures.
However, subsurface resistivity prominently depends on the amount of fluid
present in pores and/or fractures and the dissolved solids within it the fluid. Thus,
resistivity surveys are typically used to map the variations of rocks and/or
sediments that occur concurrently with changes in porosity.
Aylsworth Jr, R.L., Van Dam, R.L., Larson, G.J., and Jessee, M.A., 2016,
Characterizing large-scale glaciotectonic sediment deformation using electrical
resistivity methods: Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, v. 13:2, p. S39-S49,
doi:10.1088/1742-2132/13/2/S39.
Chambers, J.E., Kuras, O., Meldrum, P.I., Ogilvy, R.D., and Hollands, J., 2006,
Electrical resistivity tomography applied to geologic, hydrogeologic, and
engineering investigations at a former waste-disposal site: Geophysics, v. 71:6, p.
1ND-Z126, doi:10.1190/1.2360184.
Abstract: A former dolerite quarry and landfill site was investigated using 2D and
3D electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), with the aims of determining buried
quarry geometry, mapping bedrock contamination arising from the landfill, and
characterizing site geology. Resistivity data were collected from a network of
intersecting survey lines using a Wenner-based array configuration. Inversion of
the data was carried out using 2D and 3D regularized least-squares optimization
methods with robust (L1-norm) model constraints. For this site, where high
resistivity contrasts were present, robust model constraints produced a more
accurate recovery of subsurface structures when compared to the use of smooth
(L2-norm) constraints. Integrated 3D spatial analysis of the ERT and conventional
site investigation data proved in this case a highly effective means of
characterizing the landfill and its environs. The 3D resistivity model was
successfully used to confirm the position of the landfill boundaries, which
appeared as electrically well-defined features that corresponded extremely
closely to both historic maps and intrusive site investigation data. A potential zone
of leachate migration from the landfill was identified from the electrical models;
the location of this zone was consistent with the predicted direction of
groundwater flow across the site. Unquarried areas of a dolerite sill were imaged
as a resistive sheet-like feature, while the fault zone appeared in the 2D resistivity
model as a dipping structure defined by contrasting bedrock resistivities.
Fadillah, T., Gross, L., and Schaa, R., 2018, Estimation of Aquifer Properties
Using Surface Based Electrical Resistivity Tomography, doi:10.3997/2214-
4609.201800374.
Lane Jr., J.W., Haeni, F.P., and Watson, W.M., 1995, Use of a Square‐Array
Direct‐Current Resistivity Method to Detect Fractures in Crystalline Bedrock in
New Hampshire: Groundwater, v. 33, no. 3, p. 476-485, doi:10.1111/j.1745-
6584.1995.tb00304.x.
Mosuro, G.O., Omosanya, K.O., Bayewy, O.O., Oloruntola, M.O., Laniyan, T.A.,
Atobi, O., Okubena, M., and Popoola, E., 2017, Assessment of groundwater
vulnerability to leachate infiltration using electrical resistivity method: Applied
Water Science, v. 7:5, p. 2195-2207, doi:10.1007/s13201-016-0393-4.
Abstract: This aim of this work is to assess the degree of leachate infiltration at a
dumpsite in Agbara industrial estate, Southwestern Nigeria using electrical
resistivity techniques. Around the dumpsite were 45 vertical electrical sounding
(VES) stations and 3 electrical resistivity tomography profiles. Current electrode
spread varied from 300 to 600 m for the electrical sounding. Electrode
configuration includes Schlumberger and Wenner array for sounding and profiling.
The state of leachate contamination was tested using parameters such as aquifer
vulnerability index, overburden protective capacity and longitudinal unit
conductance (Si) derived from the apparent resistivity values. Four principal
geoelectric layers inferred from the VES data include the topsoil, sand, clayey
sand, and clay/shale. Resistivity values for these layers vary from 3 to 1688, 203
to 3642 123 to 388, and 67 to 2201 Ω m with corresponding thickness of 0.8–2.4,
2.5–140, 3–26 m and infinity, respectively. The leachate plume occurs at a
maximum depth of 10 m on the 2-D inverse models of real electrical resistivity
with an average depth of infiltration being 6 m in the study area. The correlation
between longitudinal conductance and overburden protective capacity show that
aquifers around the dumpsite have poor protective capacity and are vulnerable to
leachate contamination. Leachate infiltration is favored by the absence of
lithological barriers such as clay which in the study area are either mixed with
sand or positioned away from the aquifer.
Nawikas, J.M., O’Leary, D.R., Izbicki, J.A., and Burgess, M.K., 2016, Selected
techniques for monitoring water movement through unsaturated alluvium during
managed aquifer recharge: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2016-1180,
8 p., doi:10.3133/ofr20161180.
Zhou, W., Beck, B.F., and Adams, A.L., 2002, Effective electrode array in
mapping karst hazards in electrical resistivity tomography: Environmental
Geology, v. 42:8, p. 922-928, doi:10.1007/s00254-002-0594-z.
References
Aylsworth Jr, R.L., Van Dam, R.L., Larson, G.J., and Jessee, M.A., 2016,
Characterizing large scale glaciotectonic sediment deformation using electrical
resistivity methods: Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, v. 13:2, p. S39-S49,
doi:10.1088/1742-2132/13/2/S39.
Binley, A., 2015, Tools and Techniques: Electrical Methods, in Schubert, G., ed.,
Treatise on Geophysics: Cambridge, MA, Elsevier Science, v. 11, p. 233–259,
doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-53802-4.00192-5.
Chambers, J.E., Kuras, O., Meldrum, P.I., Ogilvy, R.D., and Hollands, J., 2006,
Electrical resistivity tomography applied to geologic, hydrogeologic, and
engineering investigations at a former waste-disposal site: Geophysics, v. 71:6, p.
1ND-Z126, doi:10.1190/1.2360184.
Fadillah, T., Gross, L., and Schaa, R., 2018, Estimation of Aquifer Properties
Using Surface Based Electrical Resistivity Tomography, doi:10.3997/2214-
4609.201800374.
Lane Jr., J.W., Haeni, F.P., and Watson, W.M., 1995, Use of a Square‐Array
Direct‐Current Resistivity Method to Detect Fractures in Crystalline Bedrock in
New Hampshire: Groundwater, v. 33, no. 3, p. 476-485, doi:10.1111/j.1745-
6584.1995.tb00304.x.
Maurya, P.K., Rønde, V.K., Fiandaca, G., Balbarini, N., Auken, E., Bjerg, P.L.,
and Christiansen, A.V., 2017, Detailed landfill leachate plume mapping using 2D
and 3D electrical resistivity tomography - with correlation to ionic strength
measured in screens: Journal of Applied Geophysics, v. 138, p. 1-8,
doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.01.019.
Mosuro, G.O., Omosanya, K.O., Bayewy, O.O., Oloruntola, M.O., Laniyan, T.A.,
Atobi, O., Okubena, M., and Popoola, E., 2017, Assessment of groundwater
vulnerability to leachate infiltration using electrical resistivity method: Applied
Water Science, v. 7:5, p. 2195-2207, doi:10.1007/s13201-016-0393-4.
Mussett, A.E. and Khan, M.A., 2000, Looking Into The Earth: An Introduction to
Geological Geophysics: New York, Cambridge University Press, 470 p.
Nawikas, J.M., O’Leary, D.R., Izbicki, J.A., and Burgess, M.K., 2016, Selected
techniques for monitoring water movement through unsaturated alluvium during
managed aquifer recharge: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2016-1180,
8 p., doi:10.3133/ofr20161180.
Zhou, W., Beck, B.F., and Adams, A.L., 2002, Effective electrode array in
mapping karst hazards in electrical resistivity tomography: Environmental
Geology, v. 42:8, p. 922-928, doi:10.1007/s00254-002-0594-z.
Environmental Geophysics
Last updated on March 28, 2024
Assistance
Ayuda
مساعدة
帮助 (简体版)
幫助 (繁體版)
Aide
Asistans
지원
Assistência
Помощь
Tulong
Trợ Giúp
Discover.
Accessibility Statement
Budget & Performance
Contracting
EPA www Web Snapshot
Grants
No FEAR Act Data
Plain Writing
Privacy
Privacy and Security Notice
Connect.
Data
Inspector General
Jobs
Newsroom
Regulations.gov
Subscribe
USA.gov
White House
Ask.
Contact EPA
EPA Disclaimers
Hotlines
FOIA Requests
Frequent Questions
Follow.