What is an electromagnetic survey?
A electromagnetic survey in the field typically involves the generation of an electromagnetic field into the earth to measure the response of the induced secondary field signal.
There are two main types of EM survey methods: time domain electromagnetics (TDEM) and frequency domain electromagnetics (FDEM).
📞 Call Us Today at +1 (480) 382 2240 for a free consultation and secure your water source for years to come!
What are the different types of electromagnetic surveys?
There are two types of electromagnetic (EM) survey:
the first one, based on frequency domain, measures the amplitude and phase of an EM induced field (FDEM), the second one, based on the time domain, measures the decay time of an electromagnetic pulse induced by a transmitter (TDEM).
Resistivity Methods
Introduction Surface electrical resistivity surveying is based on the principle that the distribution of electrical potential in the ground around a current-carrying electrode depends on the electrical resistivities and distribution of the surrounding soils and rocks.
The usual practice in the field is to apply an electrical direct current (DC) between two electrodes implanted in the ground and to measure the difference of potential between two additional electrodes that do not carry current. Usually, the potential electrodes are in line between the current electrodes, but in principle, they can be located anywhere.
The current used is either direct current, commutated direct current (i.e., a square-wave alternating current), or AC of low frequency (typically about 20 Hz). All analysis and interpretation are done on the basis of direct currents.
The distribution of potential can be related theoretically to ground resistivities and their distribution for some simple cases, notably, the case of a horizontally stratified ground and the case of homogeneous masses separated by vertical planes (e.g., a vertical fault with a large throw or a vertical dike).
For other kinds of resistivity distributions, interpretation is usually done by qualitative comparison of observed response with that of idealized hypothetical models or on the basis of empirical methods.
Mineral grains comprised of soils and rocks are essentially nonconductive, except in some exotic materials such as metallic ores, so the resistivity of soils and rocks is governed primarily by the amount of pore water, its resistivity, and the arrangement of the pores.
To the extent that differences of lithology are accompanied by differences of resistivity, resistivity surveys can be useful in detecting bodies of anomalous materials or in estimating the depths of bedrock surfaces. In coarse, granular soils, the groundwater surface is generally marked by an abrupt change in water saturation
and thus by a change of resistivity. In fine-grained soils, however, there may be no such resistivity change coinciding with a piezometric surface.
Generally, since the resistivity of a soil or rock is controlled primarily by the pore water conditions,
there are wide ranges in resistivity for any particular soil or rock type, and resistivity values cannot be directly interpreted in terms of soil type or lithology.
Commonly, however, zones of distinctive resistivity can be associated with specific soil or rock units on the basis of local field or drill hole information, and resistivity surveys can be used profitably to extend field investigations into areas with very limited or nonexistent data.
Also, resistivity surveys may be used as a reconnaissance method, to detect anomalies that can be further investigated by complementary geophysical methods and/or drill holes.
The electrical resistivity method has some inherent limitations that affect the resolution and accuracy that may be expected from it.
Like all methods using measurements of a potential field, the value of a measurement obtained at any location represents a weighted average of the effects produced over a large volume of material, with the nearby portions contributing most heavily.
This tends to produce smooth curves, which do not lend themselves to high resolution for interpretations.
Another feature common to all potential field geophysical methods is that a particular distribution of potential at the ground surface does not generally have a unique interpretation.
Although these limitations should be recognized, the non-uniqueness or ambiguity of the resistivity method is scarcely less than with the other geophysical methods.
For these reasons, it is always advisable to use several complementary geophysical methods in an integrated exploration program rather than relying on a single exploration method.
How to Get Your Well Drilled Without Getting a "LEMON"
What do we mean by a "lemon"?
Imagine spending $30,000 or more on a well drilling project only to end up with a dry hole—no water!
That’s like buying a car that turns out to be a total lemon.
Don’t let your dream of owning your own well turn into a costly mistake.
With as Seismic Testl, we take the guesswork out of well drilling to ensure you get a productive water source without unnecessary risks.
The Risk of Guesswork in Well Drilling
"Why Conduct a Seismic Test Before Drilling?"
Don't Gamble with Your Well—Drill Smarter
Our approach ensures you make an informed decision, not a costly mistake.
Let us help you find the best location for your well and drill with confidence!
📞 Call Us Today at +1 (480) 382 2240 for a free consultation and secure your water source for years to come!
© Copyright. All rights reserved.
We need your consent to load the translations
We use a third-party service to translate the website content that may collect data about your activity. Please review the details in the privacy policy and accept the service to view the translations.