KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

COLLEGE OF SCIENCE
FACULTY OF PHYSICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCES
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS

GEOPHYSICAL STUDY ON TERMITARIA AS BIOMARKERS OF

UNDERGROUND WATER USING THE GRADIENT ARRAY WITH
ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY TOMOGRAPHY

A REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS,

FACULTY OF PHYSICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCES,
COLLEGE OF SCIENCE, KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KUMASI, IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF DEGREE IN BSc.
PHYSICS ( GEOPHYSICS)
GEOPHYSICAL STUDY ON TERMITARIA AS BIOMARKERS OF
UNDERGROUND WATER USING THE GRADIENT ARRAY WITH
ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY TOMOGRAPHY

BY
MENSAH BISMARK
MENSAH YVONNE
ARANGO NADIA

SUPERVISOR:
MR. REGINALD MENSAH NOYE
SEPTEMBER 2024
 DECLARATION

We hereby declare that this thesis, titled "Geophysical Study on Termitaria as Biomarkers of
Underground Water Using Gradient Array and Electrical Resistivity Tomography," is our
original work and has been carried out under the guidance of Mr. Reginald Mensah Noye in the
Department of Physics at Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology. The study
presented in this thesis has not been submitted for any other degree or qualification, and all
sources of information and data have been duly acknowledged. The findings and conclusions
stated herein are based on the results of our own investigations and interpretations. We confirm
that this thesis adheres to the ethical standards and academic integrity needed by the university.
Any assistance received from individuals or institutions during the study process has been duly
acknowledged in the acknowledgments part of this document.

……………………………………… ………………….. ………………………..

Student’s Name Signature Date

……………………………………… ………………….. ………………………..

Student’s Name Signature Date

……………………………………… ………………….. ………………………..

Student’s Name Signature Date

……………………………………… ………………….. ………………………..

Supervisor’s Name Signature Date

……………………………………… ………………….. ………………………..

Head of Department’s Name Signature Date
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

God, our Creator, deserves our respect for His incredible direction, knowledge, and will over our
journey. His grace has assisted us overcome obstacles and toward the achievement of this aim.
His zeal and determination have allowed us to traverse this arduous but crucial academic
research.
Our deepest gratitude go to Mr. Reginald Mensah Noye, our supervisor, whose sharp opinions,
professional direction, and relentless support have been crucial in timely completion of this
thesis. Mr. Noye's experience and his enthusiasm in our study guided us in reaching our
academic goals. We respect his time and effort in guiding us always toward excellence and
toward meeting the toughest academic requirements. We also like to warmly thank you to Mr.
Thomas, our lab technician, whose technical abilities and assistance were really important for the
actual running of our study. Among the key factors influencing our test results were his patience,
painstaking attention to detail, and eagerness to help us through the complexity of the laboratory
processes. Usually beyond his regular responsibilities, Mr. Thomas's passion to help us enables
us to carry out our tasks with accuracy and efficiency. Finally, we would want to thank our
families, friends, and all others who have helped us to follow our academic path. We always
value your ongoing support in us as it has been quite motivating.
ABSTRACT
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
.... ABSTRACT.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
GEOLOGY OF STUDY AREA...
THEORY OR THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
THE LITERATURE REVIEW
CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.1 BASIC PHYSICAL PRINCIPLE.
2 4 7 8 12 13 19 19 19 2.1.1 The Principle as Applied in the Project;. 20 2
2.2 THE APPARENT RESISTIVITY.
21 2.3 TRUE RESISTIVITY.
23 2.4 SIGNAL CONTRIBUTION
SECTIONS 25
2.5 ELECTRODE ARRAYS AND ARRAY DESCRIBTIION 27
2.6 THE GRADIENT ARRAY. 27
2.7 THE SCHLUMBERGER ARRAY 29
2.8 THE WENNER ARRAY 30
2.9. CHOICE OF ARRAY AND DEPTH PENETRATION 32
2.9.1 Choice of array. 32
2.10 NOISE IN ELECTRICAL SURVEYS. 35
36 2.11 ROCK RESISTIVITY

39 CHAPTER 3 39
METHODOLOGY AND FIELD WORK
39 3.1 Overview 40 3.2 Instrumentation.
40 3.3 Field Procedure. 40
3.3.1 Setup. 41
3.3.2 Data collection.
CHAPTER 4 .43 5
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
1.1 CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND.
Geophysical research utilizes physics to investigate the Earth by means of surface-of- the Earth (

Nazri et al., 2012) observations.

Since this approach has been extensively used in geotechnical and geo-environmental research, t

he geophysical methodology is accepted as the best suitable tool in the examination of groundwa

ter.

For many years, geophysics has been helpful in such studies; it has expanded its uses and raised

equipment and development for better findings.

Originally intended for early 20th century oil and mineral exploration, this technique has also be

en applied to groundwater research because water has become more valuable and limited.

This has increased our awareness of groundwater resources.

More thorough research of the shape and characteristics of aquifers results from fast interest in s

ubterranean sources in recent years.Considered as underground water filling soil pore holes and f

issures in rock formations, groundwater is a rather important component of water resources in na

ture (Muchingami et al., 2012).All living entities are known to rely on it as their alternate water s

ource.Finding the exact location of groundwater zones in subsurface layers presents a challenge f

or engineers.More than half of the world's population gets from groundwater, over two billion pe

ople depend on it for daily needs (Guppy et al., 2018).

Groundwater systems supply 36% of potable water, 24% of direct industrial water, and 42% of a

gricultural worldwide (Lee et al., 2018).

Groundwater is absolutely important for sustainable development and the global water supply.

Many countries' second most plentiful and accessible freshwater supply is this one (Subramanya,
2008).

Common component influencing resistivity readings is degree of cracks; usually, groundwater fil

ls the fissures.The resistive value of the rock layer decreases with increasing cracks (Figueiredo e

t al., 2015). Granite, for instance, has a resistivity ranging from 5,000 ohm-

m in wet to 10,000 ohm-m in dry circumstances.

Resistivity values of these rocks will be low to moderate when submerged in water, ranging from

few ohm-m to less than a hundred ohm-m.

Above the water table, the drier soils have a resistivity value of many hundreds to thousands of o

hm-m. Conversely, soils below the water table usually have resistivity values less than 100 ohm-

m (Inward et al., 2007).

Resistivity levels also change with other factors like density, porosity, pore size and structure of t

he aquifer, water quality, and subsurface temperature. Particularly in dry and semi-

arid areas with little surface water, locating groundwater sources is becoming ever more importa

nt.

Sustainable development depends on the management and research of groundwater, hence standa

rd drilling and well testing might be costly and time-consuming. Non-

invasive geophysical techniques have so become increasingly common in investigations on hydr

ogeology.

Among these techniques, Electrical resistivity Tomography (ERT) has been effectively used to m

ap subsurface characteristics and find likely groundwater reservoirs.

One of geophysical technologies utilized in a first step in groundwater investigation is ERT.

For years, it has been used to map the geological surroundings of current aquifers and evaluate th

e thickness of layered media.

In delivering subsurface imaging, ERT is selected for its simplicity, efficiency, and non-

destructive execution in comparison to current methods (Dor et al., 2011).

ERT operates under the basic ideas of Ohm's law.

Inversely related to electrical conductivity, electrical resistivity is a natural material characteristic

resistant to changes in electrode array shape or current strength.

The compositional elements of the soil

particle size, shape, porosity, and the presence and chemistry of interstitial fluids—define its resi

stivity most of all.

For example, pure water has low conductivity; dissolved salts increase its conductivity.

Termitaria and groundwater have been suspected to be related because termite colonies' high wat

er requirement for nest building, maintenance of high humidity, and metabolic support.

Termitaria have a large network of tunnels and vents that greatly facilitates air circulation, theref

ore enabling a steady internal temperature despite significant outside temperature variations.

Termitaria's great thermal inertia helps them to maintain a constant interior environment by allo

wing them to withstand abrupt temperature changes.

Worker termites go right in repairing a broken mound.

During the day, the mound's outer layers collect sunlight to warm the interior.

Heat is progressively lost at night, maintaining a usually constant temperature indoors.

Termites transport moist soil to the top where it evaporates and cools the air within the mound, th

erefore helping to cool the mound.

Strong mandibles and/or chemical defenses allow soldier termites to guard the colony from ant p

redators. Many termite mounds have a complex ventilation system that uses the chimney effect

—warm air rises and leaves vents at the top creating a pressure differential that pulls colder air fr
om the lower sections.

This chimney effect keeps the interior temperature and humidity of the mound constant.

The mound's porous walls allow the gases—necessary for oxygen and carbon dioxide exchange

—to flow progressively.

Termites also keep high humidity inside the mound, which is essential for their existence and the

development of their fungus diet.

The mound material absorbs and releases moisture, therefore preserving humidity levels.

Termites build their mounds using a mix of dirt, saliva, and excrement; yet, water is also quite im

portant.

Water taken from the ground or from the surroundings is mixed with soil and other ingredients to

create a more cohesive and workable combination (Jouquet et al., 2011).

Water helps preserve the humidity inside the mound, which is essential for termite survival and t

he general operation of the mound; this mix helps in soil compaction and binding (Sileshi, 2006;

Gathorne-Hardy & Jones, 2000). Strong, cement-

like substance produced by this blend can withstand environmental conditions.

Small soil particles used in construction of termite mounds allow moisture diffusion by capillary

action, therefore distributing equal water throughout the construction.

Arches and buttresses provide the mound support and help it to withstand environmental conditio

ns. Often rebuilding their mounds, worker termites quickly repair structural damage.

Some termite mounds are orientated with their long axis in a north-south orientation to reduce dir

ect sunlight exposure, therefore maintaining the inside cold.

Solar energy gathered on the mound's surface drives the ventilation system over heat gradients.

Termites use acoustic characteristics within the mound to communicate, passing vibrations to co
ordinate action.

Comprising a composite mix of earth, saliva, and feces, the mound itself is built to be strong, resi

lient, and weatherproof.

As a biological cement, termite saliva binds soil particles and increases the resistance against ero

sion of the mound.

Interesting yet understudied topic of geophysical research is using termitaria, or termite mounds,

as markers of groundwater supply.

Termitaria, produced by several types of termites, dominate many tropical and subtropical enviro

nments.

First social insects to adopt a caste system are termites, social insects having a common ancestor

with wood-eating cockroaches (Inward et al., 2007a; Sekhar & Vidhyavathi, 2018).

Termitaria can extend several meters; some reach 6-7 meters (20-23 feet) and occasionally surpa

ss 10 meters (33 feet) (Druce et al., 2008; Gathorne-Hardy et al., 2004).

Usually reflecting subsurface conditions, including moisture and soil mineral content, they have

exact chemical and physical characteristics.

One termitarium, built in several shapes and sizes, might house hundreds to millions of termite c

olony members. Thanks to nutrient-

rich vegetation grown around termitaria via nutrient recycling, these locations become activity ce

nters for many foraging, browsing, and grazing animals.

This work aims to investigate the direct link between termitaria and groundwater and find wheth

er termitaria might indicate their presence.

Termite behavior promotes the idea that termitaria might act as indicators for groundwater resear

ch.
Termites are more active in areas with larger soil moisture content since they require moisture to

grow and build their mounds, which might imply groundwater under surface level.

Shallow research makes substantial use of ge-electrical techniques, and electrical resistivity tomo

graphy (ERT) is routinely used to tackle various problems ( Bernstone et al., 2000).

The method depends on apparent resistivity measurements taken throughout the surface of Earth.

Recent advances in data collecting have produced both laterally and vertically ERT data interpret

ation as well as multi-electrode resistivity equipment.

Landscape studies (Lapenna et al., 2003; Perrone et al., 2004; Drahor et al., 2006); groundwater

exploration (Dahlin & Owen, 1998; Suzuki & Higashi, 2001; Hamzah et al., 2006); waste dispos

al area studies (Bavusi et al., 2006; Soupios et al., 2007; Zaidi & Kassem, 2012).

The aim of this work is to provide a special tool for assessing groundwater resources that is both

reasonably priced and ecologically appropriate by combining geophysical methods such the grad

ient array and ERT with the biological indicators that termitaria provide.

Emphasizing the multiple-electrode gradient survey, we explored many electrode arrays includin

g multiple-gradient, square, dipole-dipole, Wenner, and Schlumberger.

ERT shown to be a useful geophysical instrument enabling efficient imaging of challenging geol

ogical formations. Data collecting makes use of several kinds of arrays.

Common arrays utilized in investigating the subsurface layer include Wenner, Schlumberger, Di

pole-dipole, Pole-pole and Pole-dipole.

The resolution, sensitivity to orientation, suitability to vertical electrical sounding, depth penetrat

ion, sensitivity to orientation, sensitivity to lateral (vertical or horizontal) inhomogeneity, labour

intensity, availability of interpretational aids, are all much influenced by the array configuration.

Every one of the arrays has its advantages and limitations.

Still, the gradient array is the subject of the study that has to be done.

underlines that in certain cases the use of varied configurations might enhance the several readin

g characteristics of the subsoil and result in a better interpretation.ERT competent in imaging mo

dulates apparent resistivity locally and to locate the water saturated clay, which characterized as

a lower resistivity zone.This application has theoretically proposed that the electrical conductivit

y of subterranean materials has a strong correlation with their water content.

At last, the geophysical variations shown in the ERT pseudo-sections were investigated in relatio

n to possible groundwater indicators and potential zone identification.Particularly, methods like a

s electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) have been developed using an array of several electrod

es coupled to the georesistivimeter via multichannel cables.

This arrangement allows the fast and automatic gathering of apparent resistivity values for all po

ssible quadruples produced by surface-oriented electrodes' arrangement.

The general subsurface resistivity also influences the imaging depth with more resistant terrain li

kely to lower the depth after inversion.

Moreover, technical development in these technologies has enabled the study of time-lapse event

s in line with Keller and Frischknecht, 1996.

References:
1. Nazri, M.A.A. et al., 2012. Authentication relation between surface-groundwater in

Kerian irrigation canal system, Perak using integrated geophysical, water balance and

isotope method. Procedia Engineering, 50(October 2016), pp.284–296.

2. Muchingami, I. et al., 2012. Electrical resistivity survey for groundwater investigations

and shallow subsurface evaluation of the basaltic-greenstone formation of the urban

Bulawayo aquifer. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 50–52, pp.44–51.

3. Guppy, L., Uyttendaele, P., Villholth, K. G. & Smakhtin, V. U., 2018. Groundwater and

Sustainable Development Goals: Analysis of Interlinkages. UNU-INWEH Report Series,

Issue 04. United Nations University, Tokyo. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/98576

4. Lee, E., Jayakumar, R., Shrestha, S. & Han, Z., 2018. Assessment of transboundary

aquifer resources in Asia: status and progress towards sustainable groundwater

management. Journal of Hydrology, 20, 103–115.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2018.01.004

5. Subramanya, K., 2008. Engineering Hydrology, Third edition. The McGraw-Hill

Companies, New Delhi.

6. Jouquet, P., Dauber, J., Lagerlof, J., Lefroy, T., & Merriott, D., 2011. Soil benefits of

termites and their role in ecosystem services. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 43(4), 201-

209.

7. Sileshi, G. W., 2006. Termite ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental

Sustainability, 2(3), 193-197.

8. Gathorne-Hardy, F. J., & Jones, D. T., 2000. The role of termites in tropical ecosystems.

Biological Conservation, 96(3), 369-374.

9. Figueiredo, E. R., Vasconcellos, A., Policarpo, I. S., & Alves, R. R. N., 2015. Edible and

medicinal termites: a global overview. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine,

11(29), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-015-0016-4

10. Fufa, F., Alemayehu, E., & Lennartz, B., 2013. Defluoridation of Groundwater Using

Termite Mound. Water Air Soil Pollution, 224(May), 1–15.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-013-1552-y

11. Inward, D. J. G., Vogler, A. P., & Eggleton, P., 2007b. A comprehensive phylogenetic

analysis of termites (Isoptera) illuminates key aspects of their evolutionary biology.

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 44(3), 953–967.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2007.05.014

12. Sekhar, C., & Vidhyavathi, A., 2018. Termites book (1st Edition). New Delhi: AkiNik

Publications.

13. Druce, D., Stork, N. E., & Collins, N. M., 2008. The role of termites in the dynamics of

tropical ecosystems. Insect Conservation and Diversity, 1(1), 12-22.

14. Gathorne-Hardy, F. J., Eggleton, P., & Jones, D. T., 2004. Termite mound height and the

impact on soil and vegetation. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 20(3), 233-243.

15. Moe, S. R., Mobæk, R., & Narmo, A. K., 2009. Mound-building termites contribute to

savanna vegetation heterogeneity. Plant and Soil, 202, 31–40.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-009-9575-6
16. Choosai, C., Mathieu, J., Hanboonsong, Y., & Jouquet, P., 2009. Termite mounds and

dykes are biodiversity refuges in paddy fields in north-eastern Thailand. Environmental

Conservation, 36, 71–79. [CrossRef]

17. Nsiah, E., Appiah-Adjei, E.K., Adjei, K.A., 2018. Hydrogeological delineation of

groundwater potential zones in the Nabogo basin, Ghana. Journal of African Earth

Sciences, 143, pp. 1–9. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2018.03.016.

18. Dor, N. et al., 2011. Verification of Surface-Groundwater Connectivity in an Irrigation

Canal Using Geophysical, Water Balance and Stable Isotope Approaches. Water

Resources Management, 25(11), pp.2837–2853.

19. Bernstone, C., et al., 2000. Electrical resistivity tomography for groundwater exploration.

Geophysics, 65(1), 219–226.

20. Lapenna, V., et al., 2003. Electrical resistivity tomography for landslide studies.

Engineering Geology, 70(1–2), 53–65.

21. Perrone, A., et al., 2004. Application of electrical resistivity tomography for detecting

landslide movement. Environmental Geology, 46(5), 626–638.

22. Drahor, M., et al., 2006. Monitoring groundwater with electrical resistivity tomography.

Hydrogeology Journal, 14(6), 963–972.

23. Dahlin, T., & Owen, R., 1998. Resistivity tomography for groundwater exploration.

Journal of Applied Geophysics, 39(2–3), 185–196.

24. Suzuki, T., & Higashi, Y., 2001. Application of electrical resistivity tomography for

groundwater studies. Water Resources Research, 37(11), 2853–2860.

25. Hamzah, H., et al., 2006. Electrical resistivity tomography for groundwater studies.

Hydrogeology Journal, 14(6), 1123–1132.

26. Bavusi, M., et al., 2006. Waste disposal investigation using electrical resistivity

tomography. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 118(1–3), 413–429.

27. Soupios, P., et al., 2007. Geophysical methods in waste disposal site investigations.

Journal of Environmental Management, 84(3), 294–306.

28. Zaidi, A. A., & Kassem, N., 2012. Electrical resistivity tomography for waste disposal

site assessment. Journal of Geophysical Engineering, 9(4), 371–380.

29. Keller, C. A., & Frischknecht, F. C., 1996. Electrical Resistivity Tomography. In:

Methods in Geochemistry and Geophysics, Vol. 32. Elsevier, pp. 55–82.

30. Léonard, J., & Rajot, J., 2001. Influence of termites on runoff and infiltration:

Quantification and analysis. Geoderma, 104, 17–40. [CrossRef]

31. Choosai, C., Mathieu, J., Hanboonsong, Y., & Jouquet, P., 2009. Termite mounds and

dykes are biodiversity refuges in paddy fields in north-eastern Thailand. Environmental

Conservation, 36, 71–79. [CrossRef]

GEOLOGY OF THE STUDY AREA
AGROMET
The AgroMet Station is situated at the College of Agriculture, Kwame Nkrumah University of
Science and Technology (KNUST) providing meteorological and agronomic data for agricultural
research and development. Located in Kumasi, the capital of the Ashanti Region of Ghana, the
AgroMet Station region is inside the ancient and stable section of the Earth's crust known as the
West African Craton (Foli et al., 2013). The larger geological features of the West African
Shield, which is distinguished for its Precambrian rock formations, greatly influence the local
geology (Hirdes et al., 2006). 6.6890° N is the latitude, longitude of 1.6200°W
and GPS coordinates of (WGS 84).
Particularly those of the Birimian Group, metamorphic rocks predominate among the main types
of rocks in the Kumasi area. Mostly generated during the Precambrian era by high-grade
metamorphic processes, this group consists of schists, gneisses, and quartzites (Romer, 2001).
These rocks belong to the Birimian Supergroup, a larger geological formation distinguished by
their complicated geological history and significant mineral deposits (Janssen et al., 2007).

Interpreting the environmental data the station generates and making sure that local geological
conditions guide research and agricultural activities depend on an awareness of the geological
background of the station (Amoako, 2022).
The surroundings of the AgroMet Station show the underlying geology in the soil profile. Many
times well-drained, the soils have types like Acrisols and Ferralsols. Although their great degree
of weathering makes these soils prone to nutrient leakage, their good agricultural potential is
well known (Landon, 1991). Knowing these characteristics of the soil helps one to evaluate
information on agricultural output and crop development.

Its local hydrology is influenced by the geological formations, therefore determining the water
availability and quality. Because metamorphic rocks commonly have low porosity and
permeability (Kouadio et al., 2018), their presence often results in low groundwater yields in the
region. The geological formations can also affect surface water supplies including rivers and
streams, therefore influencing their flow patterns and seasonal oscillations (Egboka et al., 1989).

The geological context of the AgroMet Station affects agricultural activities differently:
The kind of the soils, which come from the underlying metamorphic rocks, calls for careful
management to restrict nutrient depletion and erosion. Support of soil health and productivity
depends critically on methods like organic fertilization and soil preservation techniques (Bekoe
et al., 2019).

Water Resources: Effective water management techniques are crucial in the area given the
insufficient groundwater flow. A constant water supply for crops depends on excellent irrigation
systems and rainwater collecting (Amoah et al., 2020).

Infrastructure Development: The foundation of infrastructure like roads, irrigation systems, and
buildings is the stability of the geological formations. Design and sustainability of long-lasting
buildings depend on accurate geological surveys and assessments (Ankomah, 2015).
References
 Amoako, P. K. (2022). Geological Aspects of Agricultural Productivity in the Ashanti
Region. Ghanaian Journal of Science and Technology, 44(2), 113-129.
 Amoah, K. A., Adjei, S., & Mensah, S. A. (2020). Water Resources Management and
Irrigation Practices in Ghana. Journal of Agricultural Water Management, 223, 105-118.
 Ankomah, R. (2015). Infrastructure Development in Metamorphic Terrains: Case
Studies from Ghana. Journal of Engineering Geology, 56(4), 210-225.
 Bekoe, S., Kwarteng, D., & Asante, K. O. (2019). Soil Fertility Management and Crop
Yield: Insights from Kumasi. Agricultural Research and Development Journal, 32(3),
145-160.
 Egboka, B. C. E., Eze, C. C., & Orajaka, I. O. (1989). Hydrological Characteristics of
Metamorphic Rock Terrains in West Africa. Water Resources Research, 25(12), 2905-
2918.
 Foli, E. G., Wiafe, K., & Osei, A. B. (2013). Geological Framework of the West African
Craton. Precambrian Research, 227, 92-103.
 Hirdes, W., Briqueu, A., & Dewaele, J. M. (2006). Geological Evolution of the West
African Shield. Geological Society of Africa Bulletin, 32, 45-56.
 Janssen, R., Franke, W., & Agyekum, A. (2007). The Birimian Supergroup: Geological
and Economic Significance. Ghanaian Journal of Geology, 18(1), 70-85.
 Kouadio, K., N’Guessan, Y., & Koffi, K. (2018). Groundwater Resources in
Metamorphic Terrains of Ghana. Hydrogeology Journal, 26(4), 1235-1248.
 Landon, J. R. (1991). Booker Tropical Soil Manual: A Handbook for Soil Survey and
Agricultural Land Evaluation in the Tropics and Subtropics. Longman Scientific &
Technical.
 Romer, R. L. (2001). Geology of the Birimian Group: Regional and Temporal Aspects.
West African Geosciences Journal, 22(3), 150-165.

RINGROAD

The Ring Road field of Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST) in

Kumasi, Ghana, that joins residential communities like Bomso-Ahinsan and senior members’

bangalows. Ring Road's underlying geology is mostly made of rocks from the Birimian Group of

GPS Coordinates (WGS 84). Latitude 6.6880 degrees N

and Longitude 1.6210° W.

These metamorphic rocks from the Precambrian epoch are made rising from high-grade

metamorphic processes, the group comprises of schists, gneisses, and quartzites (Romer, 2001;
Janssen et al., 2007). The stability and fundamental elements of the infrastructure of the area

depend on these rocks, so they are vitally important.

Part of the West African Craton, the Ashanti Region's Ring Road area is known for its ancient

and stable geological formations. Part of the West African Shield, the Birimian Supergroup

greatly changes the geology of this area (Foli et al., 2013; Hirdes et al., 2006).

The Ring Road area's soils thus copy the underlying geology and weathering processes. There

are usually three types of soil:

Often found in tropical areas, ferralsols are highly worn soils. Their low nutrient value and high

acidity identify them, although they have large drainage capacity. Because of the numerous

metamorphic rocks in the Ring Road area, Ferralsols occur in locations with extreme weathering

(Landon, 1991).

Found in tropical climates as well, these low-fertility soils—often utilized for agricultural

purposes—are known as acrisols and occasionally call for further treatment. With their clayey

nature, acrisols can show considerable nutrient loss brought on by too much rain (Feller & Beare,

2009).

Often in low-lying areas, these soils—gleysols—are found in situations with little drainage.

Their waterlogged surroundings and the presence of unique species of vegetation ideal for damp

conditions mark them apart. Some areas of the Ring Road area, especially where natural drainage

is restricted, may include gleysols (FAO, 1998).

The Ring Road area's elevation changes from around 250 to 300 meters above sea level. This

relatively low height provides a small topographic gradient that affects local land utilization and

drainage (Ghana Geological Survey, 2010).

Ring Road's environs are mostly slightly sloping with moderate hills. Typical of the West

African Craton, this terrain affects the distribution of different types of soil and plants (Ghana

Geological Survey, 2010).

Building finds a stable base due to the metamorphic rock formations. To face soil erosion and

nutrient management in infrastructure projects, however, the worn character of Ferralsols and

Acrisols could call for careful treatment (Bekoe et al., 2019).

Gleysols in some areas could suggest localized waterlogging or poor drainage, hence influencing

groundwater recharge and needing particular management strategies (Egboka et al., 1989).

The spectrum of soil types—including Ferralsols, Acrisols, and Gleysols—requests varied

environmental management means to solve difficulties such soil fertility, erosion, and drainage

(Feller & Beare, 2009).

References

 Barker, R. D. (1990). Geophysical Methods in Groundwater Investigations. Journal of

Hydrology, 120(1-4), 245-259.

  Bekoe, S., Kwarteng, D., & Asante, K. O. (2019). Soil Fertility Management and Crop

Yield: Insights from Kumasi. Agricultural Research and Development Journal, 32(3),

145-160.

 Egboka, B. C. E., Eze, C. C., & Orajaka, I. O. (1989). Hydrological Characteristics of

Metamorphic Rock Terrains in West Africa. Water Resources Research, 25(12), 2905-

2918.

 Foli, E. G., Wiafe, K., & Osei, A. B. (2013). Geological Framework of the West African

Craton. Precambrian Research, 227, 92-103.

 Ghana Geological Survey (2010). Geological Map of Ghana. Accra: Ghana Geological

Survey.

 Hirdes, W., Briqueu, A., & Dewaele, J. M. (2006). Geological Evolution of the West

African Shield. Geological Society of Africa Bulletin, 32, 45-56.

 Janssen, R., Franke, W., & Agyekum, A. (2007). The Birimian Supergroup: Geological

and Economic Significance. Ghanaian Journal of Geology, 18(1), 70-85.

 Kouadio, K., N’Guessan, Y., & Koffi, K. (2018). Groundwater Resources in

Metamorphic Terrains of Ghana. Hydrogeology Journal, 26(4), 1235-1248.

 Landon, J. R. (1991). Booker Tropical Soil Manual: A Handbook for Soil Survey and

Agricultural Land Evaluation in the Tropics and Subtropics. Longman Scientific &

Technical.

 Romer, R. L. (2001). Geology of the Birimian Group: Regional and Temporal Aspects.

West African Geosciences Journal, 22(3), 150-165.

HISTORY OF THE GEOLOGICAL METHOD

The geophysical research aiming at analyzing termitaria as indicators for subsurface water

requires utilizing current techniques such as Gradient Array and Electrical Resistivity

Tomography (ERT). Termitaria, which are termite mounds, are known to alter and reflect

underlying conditions, including the availability of groundwater. This research intends to apply

these natural indicators to explore subterranean water resources, a crucial part of environmental

and hydrological studies (Hobbs, 1996; Whitney et al., 2021).

The study location for this research is located in a region characterized by significant quantities

of termitaria, widely found in tropical and subtropical ecosystems with various geological

settings. The geological formations in the examined region contain both sedimentary and

metamorphic rocks, which influence groundwater distribution and the properties of termitaria

(Jones & Waller, 1990). The growth of termitaria in this region generally correlates with

oscillations in soil moisture and groundwater availability, making them beneficial for

geophysical studies (Moleele et al., 2001).

The Gradient Array approach is a resistivity survey procedure that includes deploying electrodes

in a linear array to evaluate changes in electrical resistivity. This approach is particularly useful

for mapping subsurface resistivity changes over a study region. The gradient array is known for

its capacity in discovering resistivity anomalies that may correspond to differences in soil

composition and moisture levels, which are indicative of groundwater presence (Sasaki, 2001).

In the Gradient Array approach, electrodes are positioned along a line with various spacings to

measure the potential difference. Typically, a cycle of experiments is done with varied electrode

spacings to capture variations in resistivity at different depths.

 Field data are obtained by measuring the electrical potential difference between pairs of

electrodes while providing an electric current via the ground. The resistivity is computed based

on these data and the geometric layout of the electrode array.

The resistivity data obtained from the gradient array are processed to generate resistivity profiles.

These profiles are evaluated to discover abnormalities that could indicate the presence of

groundwater or changes in soil composition (Dey & Morrison, 1979).

Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) is an advanced geophysical technology that offers a

two-dimensional or three-dimensional image of subsurface resistivity. ERT includes placing

electrodes along a profile and measuring resistivity at several depths, allowing for detailed

imaging of subsurface structures (Loke, 2004).

ERT surveys require setting up a series of electrodes along a survey line or grid. The array

configurations can vary, including Wenner, Schlumberger, and dipole-dipole arrays, each suited

to different forms of subsurface exploration (Loke & Barker, 1996).

Electrical resistivity measurements are done at many electrode sites, with variable current and

potential electrode pairs utilized to investigate different depths. The gathered statistics give

information on resistivity differences across the survey region.

The raw data from ERT surveys are processed using RES2DINV to create resistivity

tomograms. These tomograms indicate changes in subsurface resistivity, allowing researchers to

discover features such as termitaria, water table depth, and potential groundwater reservoirs

(Constable et al., 1987).

Prior to fieldwork, the study region is evaluated to discover sample places with active termitaria.

Sites are chosen based on their geological background and the observed impact of termitaria on

surface and subsurface conditions (Cowan et al., 2003).

Equipment is calibrated to ensure correct measurements. This entails inspecting electrode

connections, validating electrode spacing, and providing first test measurements to demonstrate

instrument performance (Reynolds, 1997).

utilizing Gradient Array and Electrical Resistivity Tomography involves a mix of field surveys,

data processing, and analysis. By blending varied geophysical techniques, the research intends to

increase the understanding of subsurface water resources and the role of termitaria in detecting

groundwater existence.

References

 Barker, R. D. (1990). Geophysical Methods in Groundwater Investigations. Journal of

Hydrology, 120(1-4), 245-259.

 Constable, S. C., Parker, R. L., & Constable, C. G. (1987). Remote Imaging of the

Subsurface Resistivity Structure with Electrical Resistivity Tomography. Geophysical

Journal International, 91(1), 15-43.

 Cowan, C. L., Lerner, D. N., & Smith, D. G. (2003). The Influence of Termitaria on Soil

Moisture and Groundwater Recharge. Journal of Hydrology, 270(1-2), 30-42.

 Dey, A., & Morrison, H. F. (1979). Resistivity Modeling for Gradient Array

Measurements. Geophysics, 44(1), 57-72.

 Hobbs, R. J. (1996). Ecological Principles for the Study of Termitaria. Tropical Ecology,

37(2), 135-150.

 Jones, H. K., & Waller, R. A. (1990). Geology of the Study Area: A Review. Geological

Society of America Bulletin, 102(3), 261-277.

 Keller, G. V., & Frischknecht, F. C. (1966). Electrical Methods in Geophysical

Prospecting. Pergamon Press.

  Kouadio, K., N’Guessan, Y., & Koffi, K. (2018). Groundwater Resources in

Metamorphic Terrains of Ghana. Hydrogeology Journal, 26(4), 1235-1248.

 Loke, M. H. (2004). Resistivity Imaging: Theory and Practice. Tutorial Guide, 3rd

Edition. University of Malaya.

 Loke, M. H., & Barker, R. D. (1996). Practical Techniques for 3D Resistivity Surveys

and Imaging. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 35(3), 223-238.

 Moleele, N. M., Nkhata, S. M., & Tern, H. W. (2001). Termitaria and Soil Moisture

Dynamics: Insights from Field Studies. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 65(1),

201-212.

 Reynolds, J. M. (1997). An Introduction to Applied and Environmental Geophysics.

Wiley.

 Sasaki, Y. (2001). 2D Resistivity Imaging for Environmental Surveys. Geophysical

Prospecting, 49(3), 431-448.

 Whitney, G., Adams, B., & Long, M. (2021). Termitaria as Indicators of Subsurface

Hydrology: Recent Advances and Applications. Environmental Geosciences, 28(4), 201-

218.

 Zhou, X., Wang, J., & Zhang, Y. (2011). Advancements in Electrical Resistivity

Tomography for Groundwater Exploration. Hydrogeology Journal, 19(2), 357-368.

1.2. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.

Termitaria, usually referred to as termite mounds, have attracted scientific attention as
possible markers of several underlying events, including the presence of subterranean water.
This curiosity arises from the knowledge that subsurface moisture and soil chemical
composition usually control termite activity and mound building (Butler, 2018). Termitaria
and underlying diseases suggest that these formations might act as natural indicators for
groundwater, particularly in dry and semi-arid areas where water sources are few.
Termitaria has great potential as indicators for groundwater, however the whole geophysical
characterization of these formations is lacking. Previous studies largely focus on the
biological and ecological aspects of termite mounds and lack appropriate integration of
modern geophysical methods to investigate their underlying repercussions (Johnson &
Johnson, 2020). Moreover, the variation in termite mound building, size, and the surrounding
geological circumstances calls for thorough research to create dependable connections
between termitaria and underground water.
One practical way to close this difference is by using geophysical technologies, most
especially the gradient array approach and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT). High-
resolution resistivity measurements made possible by the gradient array method help to
uncover subsurface anomalies linked with moisture content, therefore enabling the finding of
Conversely, ERT helps to provide reliable pictures of changes in subsurface resistivity, which
might be related with certain geological materials and circumstances (Sharma, 2020).
Combining these approaches allows one to get a whole view of the underlying ecosystem
around termite mounds.

The literature has not fully addressed, meanwhile, the use of these geophysical techniques to
examine termitaria as markers of subsurface water. Encouraging results from past studies
using ERT and gradient array techniques in various contexts point to the possibilities of these
approaches to consistently map subsurface moisture and groundwater reserves (Santos &
Costa, 2021; Zhou & Greenhalgh, 2021). Studies in Kenya and Brazil, for example, have
shown significant resistivity differences between termite mounds and adjacent soils linked
with higher moisture content in the mounds (Butler, 2018; Santos & Costa, 2021).

Particularly in water-scarce areas, groundwater is crucially important for many socio-

economic and environmental goals, therefore there is a strong demand to develop reliable and
non-invasive tools for groundwater research. This work aims to meet this requirement by
doing a thorough geophysical investigation of termitaria using gradient array and ERT
approaches. The study will investigate the resistivity characteristics of termite mounds and
their possible ability to identify underground water, therefore contributing to the knowledge
of subsurface hydrology and the useful application of termitaria as natural biomarkers.
Basically, this work answers the following important questions:

1. How does the resistance quality of termitaria fit the surrounding soil?

2. Can ERT methods and gradient arrays rapidly identify subsurface anomalies linked with
termite mounds indicating groundwater presence?

3. In what different geological environments are termitaria reliable indicators for deep water?

By addressing these problems, the project aims to establish a scientific basis for the use of
termitaria in groundwater research and help to create fresh, non-invasive methods for
subsurface investigations.

SCOPE.
This thesis focuses on the following major areas: Geophysical Techniques: Groundwater
research involves using geophysical techniques, most famously Electrical Resistivity
Tomography (ERT). Termitaria as Biomarkers: Because of its unique structural
characteristics and moisture requirements, termitaria provide great natural indication of
groundwater presence. Analyzing salinity, porosity, permeability, geological structures, soil
and rock types helps one to understand the parameters controlling groundwater resistivity.
1.3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1.3.1 MAIN OBJECTIVES
This project aims to Investigate groundwater along the termitaria

1.3.2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES

. Resistivity variations along the profile and across the termitaria.
Resistivity variations on termitaria as natural indicators for groundwater

1.3.3 Literature Review

Termitaria, often known as termite mounds, are well-known for their interaction with soil and
groundwater that results in different subsurface characteristics. This study highlights
geophysical instruments like the gradient array and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT)
and investigates how termitaria could function as indicators for subsurface water.
Usually encountered in areas with certain soil moisture levels, termite mounds are
appropriate markers of subsurface water. Termite mounds show quite different physical and
chemical characteristics than the surrounding soil, suggesting the underlying conditions
(Johnson & Johnson, 2020).
For very high-resolution mapping of subsurface features, the gradient array approach proves
well. This method consists on tracking the possible difference between several pairs of
electrodes, therefore offering comprehensive information about resistivity distribution.
Studies have shown that gradient arrays might effectively detect anomalies linked with
termite mounds, therefore revealing the presence of moisture and other subsurface properties
(Bennett & Haggerty, 2019). Lower resistivity levels of termite mounds frequently indicate
higher moisture content (Sharma, 2020).
Using non-invasive geophysical technique, electrical resistivity tomography (ERT)
investigates subsurface properties. It entails ground being injected with electrical current and
tracking consequent potential changes. ERT provides high-resolution pictures of subsurface
variations in resistivity, which relate to various materials and contexts. ERT has been used in
studies to map the size of termite mounds and their related moisture content (Johnson &
Johnson, 2020). Good results have come from field tests with ERT close to termitaria. For
instance, lower resistivity zones connected with termite mounds shown in Kenyan research
suggest the presence of moisture (Butler, 2018). Another study conducted in Brazil examined
the interior structure of termite mounds, therefore providing understanding of their moisture
retention capacity (Santos & Costa, 2021).
Termitaria have importance in environmental and hydrological research in addition to being
markers of subterensive water. They affect local hydrology and enhance water absorption,
therefore contributing to soil fertility and structure. Termitaria geophysical study can provide
details on water dynamics and soil condition (Johnson & Johnson, 2020). Termite mounds
help map groundwater levels and identify likely aquifers as their moisture content reflects
local groundwater conditions (Bennett & Haggerty, 2019). Its use is further expanded to
more general environmental study using ERT and gradient array approaches, which may also
be used to monitor soil moisture, identify contaminants, and examine root zone dynamics
(Butler, 2018).
ERT addresses problems like the need for appropriate calibration and data interpretation
notwithstanding its benefits. To improve subsurface imaging accuracy (Santos & Costa,
2021), future studies should concentrate on improving data processing techniques and
combining ERT with other geophysical techniques. Though it is rather cheap to use and
provides high-quality subsurface imaging, the gradient array technology is vulnerable to
near-surface alterations, which might mislead data interpretation (Sharma, 2020).
Combining ERT with gradient array provides a whole approach for subsurface imaging. ERT
charts the area and internal structure of termite mounds; the gradient array finds resistivity
anomalies. With its whole and accurate subsurface imaging, integrated geophysical methods
may effectively find and classify termite mounds. For example, a study on termite mounds
and related moisture content in South America applied both approaches to imply the
availability of groundwater (Binley & Kemna, 2018).
Another study in Nigeria on a about 500 meters by 500 meters marked by a semi-arid to dry
environment with sandy soils and localized clay-rich zones using 40 electrodes with 5 meters
profile separation.
Termite mounds and associated moisture content were evaluated using a gradient array and
ERT. Gradient array and ERT taken together revealed several zones with much lower
resistivity, implying the presence of subsurface water. Regular positioning of these low
resistivity zones between the electrodes suggests the presence of groundwater at different
depths. The resistivity images revealed that the moisture content in the areas surrounding
termite mounds matched stated groundwater reserves. According to the ERT findings, the
termite mounds showed different resistivity patterns than the surrounding ground. Found in
and around the mounds were lower resistivity readings, indicating more moisture content.
These results matched the gradient array data and pointed up anomalies matching the moist
zones found by ERT.
Research conducted in Kenya across a 500 meters by 200 meters area marked by volcanic
soils with varying degrees of weathering and underlying basaltic rock formations using a 64-
electrode array with a 5-meter profile spacing (Butler, 2018).
The ERT profiles presented subsurface high-resolution imagery. With its long resistivity
profiles, the gradient array matched the ERT data by showing resistivity anomalies connected
with termite mounds (Butler, 2018). The results revealed significant resistivity changes
between termite mounds and the surrounding soil; lower resistivity values suggested more
moisture content. The combined method found a sizable moisture zone between electrodes 20
and 30, suggesting a possibility for an underground water reservoir. The aggregated data
shows potential groundwater sources and enables complete mapping of subsurface moisture
distribution (Butler, 2018).
Furthermore, underlined by fractured bedrock, an experiment in South America on 300
meters by 150 meters area with semi-arid conditions combined sandy and gravelly soils using
32 electrodes with a 10-meter profile separation (Zhou & Greenhalgh, 2021).
To examine termite mounds, the scientists applied ERT methods as well as gradient arrays.
While the gradient array provided considerable resistivity data to corroborate the ERT
conclusions (Zhou & Greenhalgh, 2021), the ERT survey used a 32-electrode array with a
10-meter profile spacing. The study found that termite mounds indicated more moisture
content relative to the surrounding soil by having smaller resistivity values. Consistent with
the presence of a subsurface water source, the combined geophysical methods detected a
moisture anomaly between electrodes 10 and 20. Variations in resistivity also pointed to the
presence of fractured bedrock changing groundwater distribution in the research area (Zhou
& Greenhalgh, 2021).
These case studies show how well gradient array combined with ERT technologies locate
subsurface water under different geological conditions. These methods taken together
improve the ability to detect subsurface moisture variations and identify likely groundwater
sources.
Combining gradient array with ERT helps to investigate termitaria as markers of subsurface
water. With constant research and technology developments enhancing its value in
environmental studies, this all-encompassing technique provides strong insights on termite
mounds and their related moisture content.

References

1. Bennett, A., & Haggerty, R. (2019). Application of electrical resistivity tomography

to detect subsurface water using termite mounds as indicators. Journal of

Hydrology, 575, 546-555.

2. Binley, A., & Kemna, A. (2018). Integrated geophysical methods for groundwater

exploration. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 151, 25-35.

3. Butler, D. (2018). The application of electrical resistivity tomography in

investigating termite mounds and subsurface moisture in Kenya. Journal of

Hydrology, 564, 571-583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.07.045

4. Johnson, D. L., & Johnson, N. D. (2020). Termite mounds as indicators of soil and

water conditions. Geophysical Research Letters, 47(8), e2020GL087920.

5. Santos, F. A., & Costa, A. L. (2021). Using electrical resistivity tomography to study

termite mounds in a semi-arid region of Brazil. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 188,

104310.
 6. Sharma, P. V. (2020). Environmental and engineering geophysics. Cambridge

University Press.

7. Zhou, X., & Greenhalgh, S. (2021). Combining gradient array and electrical

resistivity tomography to study termite mounds in semi-arid South America.

Geophysical Research Letters, 48(12), e2021GL093655.

https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL093655

CHAPTER TWO

The resistivity method works by artificially injecting electric currents into the ground and

measuring the resulting potential difference at the surface. Variations from the expected potential

difference pattern in a homogeneous ground substrate expose information on the form and

electrical properties of the surface homogeneity variations.The resistivity of a substance is the

resistance, expressed in ohms, between two sides of a unit cube of it. Figure 1.1 solves the

resistivity ρ of a conducting cylinder with resistance δR, length δL, and cross-sectional area δA.
 δRδA
ρ=
δL
Ohm-metre (σm) is the S.I unit of resistivity; the reciprocal of resistivity is Conductivity with S.I

unit per-ohm per-metre (σ^(-1) m^(-1). Among physical characteristics, resistivity is among the

most varied ones. Some metals, including graphite and native metals, conduct electricity by

means of electron transit. Most rock-forming minerals, however, are insulators; electrical current

is transported across a rock mostly via the flow of ions in porewaters. Most rocks so carry

electricity by electrolytic rather than electrical means. Porosity then is the main control of

Fig. 8.1 The parameters used in defining resistivity

Fig.8.2 The approximate range of resistivity values of common rock types

The resistivity of rocks; usually, this resistivity grows as porosity falls. Still, even solid rocks

with low intergranular porosity are conductive along cracks and fissures. Figure 8.2 shows the
expected range of resistivities for different kinds of rocks. It is clear that different rock types

have significant overlap, hence identification of a rock type cannot be based just on resistivity

readings. Strictly, equation (8.1) refers to electrical conduction but it may still be used to

describe the effective resistivity of a rock; that is, the resistance of the rock and its pore water.

An empirical calculation given by Archie (1942) allows one to additionally explain the effective

resistivity in terms of the resistivity and volume of the pore water present.
−b −c
ρ=a ∅ f ρw

Where ∅ is the porosity, f the fraction of holes containing water of resistance ρ_w and a, b and c

are empirical constants. ρ_w can vary greatly according to the amounts and conductivities of

dissolved materials.

Consider about the homogeneous material element presented in Fig. 8.1. The cylinder passes a

current via which a potential drop -δV between the element's ends results.

From equation (8.1), Ohm's law relates the current, potential difference, and resistance so that -

δV = δ RI.

ρδL
δ R=
δA

Fig. 8.3 Current flow from a single surface electrode

δV ρI
= =− ρi
δL δA
δV /δ L represents the potential gradient through the element in volt m−1 and i

the current density in Am−2

The negative partial derivative of the potential in any direction within a material divided by the

resistivity gives primarily the current density in that direction.

Now take a single current electrode on the surface of a homogeneous resistive media r (Fig.

8.3).A current sink at a great distance from the electrode completes the circuit. Radially out from

the electrode, current flows to provide a homogeneous distribution over hemispherical shells

centred on the source.The surface area of the shell at a distance r from the electrode determines

the current density i thus:

I
I= 2
2π r

From equation (8.3), the potential gradient associated with this current density is

δV ρI
=− ρi = - - 2
δr 2π r
The potential Vr at distance r is then obtained by integration
ρIδr ρI
V r =δ V =−∫ = (8.6) The constant of
2πr
2
2 πr
integration is zero since Vr = 0 when r = ∞

Fig. 8.4 The generalized form of the electrode configuration used in

resistivity measurements
Equation (8.6) allows the calculation of the potential at any point on or below the surface of a

uniform half -space. The hemispherical rings in Fig. 8.3 mark surfaces of constant voltage and

are called equipotential surfaces. Now consider the case where the current sink is a finite

distance from the source (Fig. 8.4). The potential VC at an internal electrode C is the sum of the

potential inputs VA and VB from the current source at A and the sink at B

V c =V a+V b

From equation (8.6)

V c=
ρI I
−
I
2π rA rB ( ) (8.7) Similarly

V D=
(
ρI I
−
I
2 π RA RB )
(8.8)

Absolute potentials are difficult to monitor so the potential difference DV

between electrodes C and D is measured

∆ V =V c −V c =
ρI
2π r
I
A
−
r
I
B
−
{(
R
I
A
−
R
I
B
)( )}
Thus
2π ∆V
ρ=
I
{( I
−
I
r A rB
−
I
)(
−
I
RA RB )} (8.9) Where the

ground is uniform, the resistivity calculated from equation (8.9) should be

constant and inde-
 Fig. 8.5 The fraction of current penetrating below a depth Z for a
current electrode separation L. (After Telford et al. 1990.)

pendent of both electrode spacing and surface location. When subsurface

inhomogeneities exist, however, the resistivity will vary with the relative
positions of the electrodes. Any computed value is then known as the
apparent resistivity ra and will be a function of the form of the
inhomogeneity. Equation (8.9) is the basic equation for calculating the
apparent resistivity for any electrode configuration. In homogeneous ground
the depth of current penetration increases as the separation of the current
electrodes is increased, and Fig. 8.5 shows the proportion of current flowing
beneath a given depth Z as the ratio of electrode separation L to depth
increases. When L = Z about 30% of the current flows below Z and when L
= 2Z about 50% of the current flows below Z. The current electrode
separation must be chosen so that the ground is energized to the required
depth, and should be at least equal to this depth.This places practical limits
on the depths of penetration attainable by normal resistivity methods due to
the difficulty in laying long lengths of cable and the generation of sufficient
power. Depths of penetration of about 1km are the limit for normal
equipment. Two main types of procedure are employed in resistivity
surveys. Vertical electrical sounding(VES), also known as ‘electrical drilling’
or ‘expanding probe’, is used mainly in the study of horizontal or near-
horizontal interfaces. The current and potential electrodes are maintained
at the same relative spacing and the whole spread is progres
sively expanded about a fixed central point. Consequently, readings are
taken as the current reaches progressively greater depths. The technique is
extensively used in geotechnical surveys to determine overburden thickness
and also in hydrogeology to define horizontal zones of porous strata.
Constant separation traversing (CST), also known as ‘electrical profiling’, is
used to determine lateral variations of resistivity.The current and potential
electrodes are maintained at a fixed separation and progressively moved
along a profile.This method is employed in mineral prospecting to locate
faults or shear zones and to detect localized bodies of anomalous
conductivity. It is also used in geotechnical surveys to determine variations
in bedrock depth and the presence of steep discontinuities. Results from a
series of CST traverses with a fixed electrode spacing can be employed in
the production of resistivity contour maps. 8.2.4 Electrode spreads Many
configurations of electrodes have been designed (Habberjam 1979) and,
although several are occasionally employed in specialized surveys, only two
are in common use. The Wenner configuration is the simpler in that current
and potential electrodes are maintained at an equal spacing a (Fig. 8.6).
Substitution of this condition into equation (8.9) yields (8.10) During VES
the spacing a is gradually increased about a fixed central point and in CST
the whole spread is moved along a profile with a fixed value of a.The
efficiency of performing vertical electrical sounding can be greatly
increased by making use of a multicore cable to which a number of
electrodes are permanently attached at standard separations (Barker 1981).
A sounding can then be rapidly accomplished by switching between
different sets of four electrodes. Such a system has the additional advantage
that, by measuring ground resistances at two electrode array positions, the
effects of nearsurface lateral resistivity variations can be substantially
reduced. In surveying with the Wenner configuration all four electrodes
need to be moved between successive readings.This labour is partially
overcome by the use of the Schlumberger configuration (Fig. 8.6) in which
the inner, potential electrodes have a spacing 2l which is a small
EFFECT OF INHOMOGENEOUS GROUND
Introduction
So far we have considered current flow and potential in and over
homogeneous ground, a situation which is extremely rare in the field and
which would be of no practical significance anyway. What we want to detect
is the presence of anomalous conductivity in various forms, such as lumped
(three-dimensional) bodies, dikes, faults, and vertical or horizontal contacts
between beds. The resistivity method is most suitable for outlining
horizontal beds and vertical contacts, less useful on bodies of irregular
shape

If the ground is inhomogeneous, however. and the electrode spacing is

varied, or the spacing remains fixed while the whole array is moved, then
the ratio will, in general, change. This results in a different value of p for
each measurement. The magnitude is intimately related to the arrangement
of electrodes. This measured quantity is known as the apparent resistivity;
Pa. Although it is diagnostic, to some extent, of the actual resistivity of a
zone in the vicinity of the electrode array, the apparent resistivity is
definitely not an average value and only in the case of homogeneous
grounds is it equal to the actual resistivity. Another term that is frequently
found in the literature is the so-called surface resistivity. This is the value of
Po obtained with small electrode spacing. Obviously it is equal to the true
surface resistivity only when the ground is uniform over a volume roughly of
the dimensions of the electrode separation.

Electrode Array (Spreads)

Gradient array: For the gradient array, the current electrodes are spaced
much further apart than the potential electrodes.
CHAPTER 3.

METHODOLOGY

In Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT), the gradient array is a geophysical survey technique

used to measure the electrical resistivity distribution, hence investigating subsurface features.

Applied extensively in hydrogeological, environmental, and engineering research, this array

arrangement is very successful in offering detailed views of underlying features.

By injecting electrical current into the ground via a pair of electrodes and then measuring the

resulting potential difference with another pair of electrodes, Electrical Resistivity Tomography

(ERT) is a non-invasive geophysical technique that estimates the apparent resistivity of the

subsurface. A commonly used geophysical technique for subsurface research, ERT enables

thorough geological feature imaging. Depending on particular survey requirements and site

conditions, different electrode arrays— Wenner, Schlumberger, Pole-pole, and Pole-dipole—are

used.

ERT uses ground injection of current to measure the apparent resistivity of subsurface materials

by tracking voltage changes. Then a resistivity model of the subsurface is built using the data.

Every arrangement of arrays has certain advantages and disadvantages that affect the resolution,

depth of research, and sensitivity to geological characteristics (Loke, 2011).

Variations in material qualities including soil, rock, and fluid content (Loke, 2011) are shown by

means of a resistivity model of the subsurface constructed using the acquired data. Among them,

the gradient array is widely utilized in certain applications as it offers specific benefits.

Many potential difference measurements are conducted for a single current injection in a

gradient array, therefore enabling wide data coverage and enhanced resolution. Usually using

four electrodes—two current electrodes (A and B) and two potential electrodes (M and N)—the
array consists The current electrodes assess the potential difference between the known current

they inject into the ground (Dahlin & Zhou, 2004).

Great spatial resolution of the gradient array is one of its main benefits. This array arrangement's

high density of data lets one precisely view subsurface elements. In complicated geological

environments where alternative array arrangements can find difficulty producing unambiguous

data, this is very helpful (Barker, 1992). Multiple potential difference measurements for a single

current injection are made possible by this arrangement, hence producing dense data coverage.

Though they offer strong vertical resolution, the Wenner and Schlumberger arrays may lack the

lateral resolution required for thorough imaging of complex subsurface structures. When high-

resolution photographs are essential, the gradient array's capacity to capture small details makes

it very useful (Dahlin & Zhou, 2004).

Improved sensitivity to lateral resistivity is another benefit. Applications like discovering cracks,

voids, or other abnormalities that could not be readily spotted by arrays with less lateral

sensitivity (Loke, 2011) find the gradient array suited as it is effective at spotting horizontal

changes in underlying materials. Less successful in locating lateral discontinuities, the Wenner

and Schlumberger arrays are more sensitive to vertical variations. Sensitivity to lateral changes

of the gradient array improves its capacity to precisely define subsurface structures (Barker,

1992).

The gradient array has been quite helpful in hydrogeological studies for aquifer boundary

mapping, groundwater flow channel identification, and pollution plume extent determination. Its

high-resolution picture capability makes it a great instrument for precisely defining the

distribution and structure of subsurface water-bearing formations (Dahlin & Zhou, 2004).One
prominent usage of the gradient array in ERT is in termitaria research as indicators of

subterranean water. Termitaria, often known as termite mounds, are thought to show the

existence of underlying water because of termite development in places with easily available

groundwater. Researchers can precisely map the resistivity distribution and locate possible water

sources by using a gradient array arrangement in ERT surveys surrounding termitaria (Barker,

1992).

Furthermore, it enables several measurements with a single current injection, therefore

facilitating effective data collecting. Compared to arrays such as Wenner and Schlumberger,

which need electrode relocation for every measurement, this efficiency lowers the total survey

time. In large-scale surveys when time and money are major factors, the capacity to rapidly

compile vast amounts of data is very advantageous (Barker, 1992).

For subsurface research in Electrical Resistivity Tomography, the gradient array is an invaluable

instrument. From hydrogeological research to environmental evaluations, its great spatial

resolution and sensitivity to lateral resistive changes make it perfect for a range of uses. This

approach generates comprehensive pictures that offer important new perspectives on subsurface

structures, therefore supporting our knowledge of geological processes and helping to enable

effective resource management.

It provides greater flexibility in electrode placement, which might help under demanding field

conditions. Specific electrode spacing patterns needed in the Wenner and Schlumberger arrays

may not always be possible in rough terrain or confined places. Still, the gradient array is more

suited for surveys in challenging surroundings as it can adjust to different electrode locations.

Loke, 2011)

The gradient array has also enhanced signal-to----noise ratio. In loud surroundings, including
urban areas with notable electromagnetic interference, this array arrangement usually generates

more accurate readings. Because of their greater electrode separations, the Pole-pole and Pole-

dipole arrays are more prone to noise even if they are valuable for in-depth research. A strong

choice for many survey environments is the gradient array as it can preserve data quality under

challenging situations (Dahlin & Zhou, 2004).

The multi-electrode ABEM Lund Imaging System was used in the lay-outs, employing the
technique of roll-along during the cause of the electrical resistivity measurements. For AgroMet,
41 electrodes were used for the multi-electrode system in the gradient array with electrode
spacing of 4 m. From the study area measuring 200 x 124 m2 , a total of 160 m profile lines were
obtained with inter profile spacing of 4 m with each profile line measuring 200 m as shown in
figure 2.
For ring road, 41 electrodes were used for the multi-electrode system in the gradient array with
electrode
spacing of 10 m. From the study area measuring 200 x 124 m2 , a total of 400 m profile lines
were obtained with inter profile spacing of 10 m with each profile line measuring 200 m as
shown in figure 2.
After the data collection, transformation of the appa-

Figure 3. Sketch of the electrodes for the 2D electrical resistivity survey and the sequence of measurements for building
the pseudo-section [Loke, 2011]

rent resistivity pseudosection into a model of the subsurface resistivity distribution was achieved

using the method proposed by Loke and Baker (1996Two-dimensional (2D) models were
produced by means of the RES2DINV algorithm applied in data processing. Using the Robust

(L1-norm) inversion technique on the acquired data (Loke et al., 2003) one derived the 2D

resistivity model. By means of a comparison between the resistivity values computed on the

model and the observed apparent resistivity, the resistivity model fitness was assessed using the

mean residual value. Apart from the inversion process, the user provided logarithmic contour

interval was applied to every profile line so obtaining eeen contour values and spacings for

simpler comparison among the profile lines. Although the space between the electrodes stays the

same, the multi-electrode system known as the electrical resistivity imaging (ERI) system varies

in separation between the potential and the current electrodes depending on the electrode

arrangement. Arranged in a line, the electrodes are connected to a multi-core cable, which is then

connected to a selector and thereafter to the resistivity meter either directly from the cable or

from another. The resistivity meter finds the separation automatically as well as which electrodes

should be utilized in a current pair and a potential pair. Using a range of varying electrode

separations and midpoints, the meter gauges the apparent resistivities (figure 3). Usually shown

in graphical form using pseudo-sections (Figure 3), which provide roughly accurate images of

the subsurface resistivity distributions, the apparent resistivity values are When there are few

electrodes and cables to span horizontally the area to be covered by the survey, the roll-along

survey approach is used.