Advertisement

Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica

, Volume 53, Issue 4, pp 661–677 | Cite as

Examination of the validity of the computed intermediate apparent resistivity points in the Wenner and offset Wenner configuration of sounding

  • Miloud Chermali
  • Fouzi Bellalem
  • Mohamed Walid Belgroun
  • Amar Boudella
  • Mohand Ouabdallah Bounif
Original Study
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

The Wenner and offset Wenner array is among the quite recent configurations used to assess and reduce the disturbing lateral effect in resistivity soundings. Even if this system could be considered as one of the most efficient configurations for this purpose so far, the restricted number of measuring points makes its vertical resolution limited. To fix this limitation, Barker found out a specific equation by which resistance values at points halfway between the actual measuring ones are computed without being measured. This aim was reached by combining expressions of electric potentials at various electrode spacings. For the same purpose, three other equations were worked out and tested. For a single sounding, resistance values were computed at intermediate points by the mean of these equations. Observational errors were also calculated using Barker’s formulae. The computed resistance values were found to be contaminated by these errors, in varying degrees to the extent that some of them were lacking reliability. Furthermore, at each electrode spacing, the differences between the interpolated and the assumed resistivity values on a straight line joining the actual measuring points were calculated. After normalizing these differences to their corresponding averages, the RMS of these normalized differences were computed for a set of soundings using the four equations. Finally, a comparison of the obtained results with the errors of measurements from the reliability of the computed resistance values was made. This comparison allowed classifying these equations from the reliability of the intermediate resistivity values perspective. In addition, Barker’s choice of one of these equations as the one that gives the most satisfactory results is justified.

Keywords

Offset Lateral Observational Intermediate Reliability 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers and the associate editor Endre Turai for their constructive comments that improved an earlier version of our manuscript.

References

  1. Barker RD (1979) Signal contribution sections and their use in resistivity studies. Geophys J R Astron Soc 59:123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barker RD (1981) The offset Wenner system of electrical resistivity sounding and its use with a multicore cable. Geophys Prospect 29:128–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Broadbent B, Habberjam GM (1971) A solution of the dipping interface problem using the square array resistivity technique. Geophys Prospect 19:321–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carpenter EW (1955) Some notes concerning the Wenner configuration. Geophys Prospect 3:388–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carpenter EW, Habberjam GM (1956) A tripotential method of resistivity prospecting. Geophysics 21:455–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dasgupta SP (1984) A note on the conversion of d.c. dipole sounding curves to Schlumberger curves. Geoexploration 22(1):43–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dey A, Morrison HF (1979) Resistivity modeling for arbitrarily shaped three-dimensional structures. Geophys Prospect 27(1):106–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ghosh DP et al (1974) Transformation of dipole resistivity sounding measurements over layered earth by linear digital filtering. Geophys Prospect 22(3):476–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Habberjam GM (1969) The location of spherical cavities using tripotential resistivity techniques. Geophysics 34(5):780–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Habberjam GM (1972) The effects of anisotropy on square array resistivity measurements. Geophys Prospect 20(2):249–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Habberjam GM, Watkins GE (1967) The use of the square configuration in resistivity prospecting. Geophys Prospect 15:468–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Koefod O (1979) Resistivity sounding on an earth model containing transition layers with linear change of resistivity with depth. Geophys Prospect 27(4):862–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kumar R, Das US (1977) Transformation of dipole to Schlumberger sounding curves by mean of digital linear filters. Geophys Prospect 25(4):780–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kumar R, Das US (1978) Transformation of Schlumberger apparent resistivity to dipole apparent resistivity over layered earth by the application of digital linear filters. Geophys Prospect 26(2):352–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kunetz G (1966) Principles of direct current resistivity prospecting. Geopubl. Associates, Borntraeger, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  16. Lee FW, Swartz JH (1930) Resistivity of oil-bearing beds. US Bureau of Mines, Technical paper 448Google Scholar
  17. Patella D (1974) On the transformation of dipole to Schlumberger sounding curves. Geophys Prospect 22(2):315–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Roy A (1978) A theorem for direct current regimes and some of its consequences. Geophys Prospect 26:442–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sarma VVJ (1951) Modified tripotential prospecting method. Geophys Prospect 9(4):568–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stefanescu S et al (1932) Etudes théoriques sur la prospection electrique du sous sol II. Studii technice si economice 14(2). Institutul geologic al Rominiei, BucurestiGoogle Scholar
  21. Szalai S, Szarka S (2008) Parameter sensitivity maps of surface geoelectric arrays I. Linear arrays. Acta Geod Geophys Hung 43(4):419–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tang M (1980) Use of the second order derivatives of the potential caused by a d.c. point source in resistivity sounding method. Tap Chi Vat Ly (Physics) 5(2):19–24Google Scholar
  23. Tang M, Thanh Quynh V (1981) Nature of the apparent resistivities over inhomogeneous media. Tap Chi Vat Ly (Physics) 6(3):23–31Google Scholar
  24. Teisseyre R (1963) The theoretical curves of the potential-drop-ration method. Acta Geophys Polon 9(1–2):67Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miloud Chermali
    • 1
    • 2
  • Fouzi Bellalem
    • 2
    • 3
  • Mohamed Walid Belgroun
    • 2
  • Amar Boudella
    • 2
  • Mohand Ouabdallah Bounif
    • 2
  1. 1.Ecole Normale SupérieureLaghouatAlgeria
  2. 2.Department of Geophysics, Faculty of Earth SciencesUSTHBAlgiersAlgeria
  3. 3.Centre de Recherche en Astronomie Astrophysique et GéophysiqueCRAAGAlgiersAlgeria

Personalised recommendations