GIS based lineament Delineation using geophysical resistivity data ... · Osella A, Favetto A, Martinelli, P, Cernadas D., (1999), Electrical imaging of an alluvial aquifer at Antinaco-Los

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMATICS AND GEOSCIENCES

Volume 3, No 1, 2012

© Copyright by the authors - Licensee IPA- Under Creative Commons license 3.0

Research article ISSN 0976 – 4380

Submitted on May 2012 published on July 2012 167

GIS based lineament Delineation using geophysical resistivity data, Karur

district, Tamil Nadu, India Muralitharan. J, Palanivel. K

1- Research Scholar, Centre for Remote Sensing, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli

2- Assistant Professor, Centre for Remote Sensing, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli

[email protected]

ABSTRACT

The paper shows that geophysical resistivity values Digital Elevation Model (DEM) for

different depths, can indicate the location of depth persistence lineaments. The depth

persistence lineaments allow large scale migration of groundwater and can be used as sites

for the artificial recharging of aquifers. It is concluded that the lineament maps prepared from

geophysical resistivity values can give a better picture of the depth persistence.

Keywords: Lineament, Geophysical resistivity, DEM, GIS.

1. Introduction

Geophysical resistivity is one of the most effective methods for investigating the presence of

groundwater and for artificial recharge (Ramanujachary and Balakrishna 1985; Raju et al.

1996; Anbazhagan and Ramasamy, 1997; Singhal et al. 1998; Osella et al. 1999). In

crystalline terrain, even within small areas the nature and extent of weathering may vary

considerably, depending mostly on the presence of fractures at depth and the morphological

features at the surface. Hence, with groundwater studies, identification and analysis of depth

persistence lineaments are crucial in hard rock terrain. Geophysical resistivity values are used

to detect depth persistence lineaments (Verma et al. 1980; Aswathanarayan and Srinivas

1991; Raviprakash and Krishna Rao 1991; Suresh et al. 1992; Anbazhagan 1993;

Muralidharan, 1996; Kunze 1998).

1.1 Location of the study area

The study area, Karur district, is located in the Central part of Tamil Nadu state, India (Figure

1.1). The study area is bounded in the North and by Namakkal district, in the West by

Coimbatore district, in the South by Dindugal district and in the East by Trichy district. The

study area is located in between North latitudes 10.52 in decimal degree and 11.09 in decimal

degree and East longitudes 77.74 in decimal degree and 78.58 in decimal degree.

2. Methods and materials

2.1 Geophysical resistivity survey

Geophysical resistivity surveys were conducted in over 42 locations (Figure 2) up to a depth

of 100 m using Schlumberger configuration array and the apparent resistivity values (in ohm

meters) were measured for 25, 50, 75 and 100 m depths (Table 2).

GIS based lineament Delineation using geophysical resistivity data, Karur district, Tamil Nadu, India

Muralitharan. J, Palanivel. K

International Journal of Geomatics and Geosciences

Volume 3 Issue 1, 2012 168

Figure 1: Location map of the study area





Figure 2: Geophysical resistivity survey locations

2.2 Resistivity lineaments – 25 Meters

Such geographical locations of the resistivity probe points (X, Y) and the resistivity values at

25 m (Z1), 50 m (Z2), 75 m (Z3) and 100 m (Z4) were entered into Surfer software and Iso

Resistivity contours were drawn for 25 m depth first . These contours were imported to

ArcGIS software and by using the spatial analyst model DEM was generated for such Iso

resistivity values (Figure 3).

Such digital elevation models of resistivity data of 25 m depth obviously showed the

1. Resistivity maximas as peaks

2. Long and linear resistivity highs as ridges

3. Resistivity minimas as valleys and

4. Long and Linear resistivity minimas as rectilinear valleys





Table 1: Geophysical resistivity survey results

Apparent Resistivity Value

(Ohm.m) Sl.

No Village

Latitude

in decimal

degree

Longitude

in

decimal

degree

25m 50m 75m 100m

1 Alamarathupatti 10.67 77.92 966 1159 1250 980

2 Archampatti 10.77 78..52 180 231 291 496

3 Ariyur 10.80 77.93 201 276 418 510

4 Arumalkaranpudur 11.03 78.05 274 527 712 809

5 Attippalaiyam 11.01 77.86 184 277 393 468

6 Chinnadharapuram 10.84 77.85 448 652 757 854

7 Inungur 10.85 78.48 58 76 77 76

8 Irumbuduppatti 10.85 78.38 100 222 319 396

9 Jellippatti 10.81 78.10 182 282 406 521

10 Kadavur 10.59 78.19 143 242 315 518

11 Kalugur Udaiyappatti 10.76 78.39 124 185 274 366

12 Karudaiyampalayam 10.96 77.95 272 454 606 622

13 Karunallivalasu 10.91 77.81 510 681 784 829

14 Kollampatti 10.72 77.99 243 385 491 457

15 Kovakulam 10.92 78.27 78 140 205 258

16 Kullampatti 10.81 78.33 453 584 511 721

17 Mailaippatti 10.69 78.19 311 502 688 879

18 Malapatti 10.73 77.86 105 184 209 388

19 Mamarattuppatti 10.75 78.25 160 247 420 444

20 Manalmedu 10.89 78.02 109 201 304 387

21 Melveliyur 10.74 78.45 124 247 391 535

22 Mudalaippatti 10.63 787.31 678 681 704 780

23 Nadoor 10.71 77.99 238 598 878 1112

24 Nagampalli 10.83 77.93 295 422 487 510

25 Pallamarudapatti 10.93 77.98 153 292 435 551

26 Panjappatti 10.82 78.30 302 705 971 1271

27 Paramathi 10.95 77.91 590 628 728 834

28 Periyamanjuvali 10.66 77.95 615 785 887 1012

29 Pidaripatti 10.70 78.44 109 151 285 254

30 Puduppatti 10.92 78.37 410 719 805 900

31 Pugalur 11.04 77.98 195 296 348 350

32 Puttur 10.76 78.49 166 308 466 605

33 Rajapuram 10.79 77.89 737 873 906 909

34 Salaippatti 10.88 78.21 184 320 480 586

35 Sallippatti 10.90 77.88 231 361 448 529





36 Sandamadai 10.75 77.81 472 525 526 526

37 Satyamangalam 10.89 78.39 97 180 241 305

38 Sukkampatti 10.74 78.32 183 322 428 586

39 Talayarippatti 10.82 78.42 251 431 656 728

40 Vadacheri 10.73 78.52 95 183 231 325

41 Vadugappatti 10.86 78.01 313 463 608 735

42 Valayappatti 10.85 78.46 196 328 434 568

Figure 3.a: Geophysical resistivity DEM at 25 M depth, b. Lineaments at 25 M depth






From the similar isoresistivity values of 50 m depth, DEM was generated and from the linear

resistivity lows and break in slopes, the resistivity lineaments were similarly interpreted for

50 m depth (Figure 4 a & b).







The isoresistivity contours were similarly drawn for 75 m depth and from the corresponding

resistivity DEM generated so for 75m depth (Figure 5a), the lineaments were derived from

such resistivity lows and breaks (Figure 5b).

Figure 5.a: Geophysical resistivity DEM at725 M depth, b. Lineaments at 75 M

depth





2.5 Lineaments – 100 meters

The isoresistivity contours were similarly drawn for 100 m depth and from the corresponding

resistivity DEM generated so for 100 m depth (Figure 6a), the lineaments were derived from

such resistivity lows and breaks (Figure 6b).






Figure 7: Multi depth resistivity Lineaments

2.6 Multi depth resistivity lineaments

The resistivity lineaments thus drawn from resistivity DEMs of 25 m, 50 m, 75 m and 100 m

were integrated using GIS overlay function analysis are shown in (Figure 7).

3. Results and discussion

The geophysical resistivity DEM maps have been prepared at 25, 50, 75 and 100 m depth It

can be seen from figure 3 to 6. The various depth persistence (25m, 50, 75, 100m) integrated

lineament map is shown in Figure 7.

Lineament directions of the study area classified based Ramasamy (1989). He has classified

the lineament architecture of Tamil Nadu into four groups such as NE-SW (Dextaral strike

slip faults) NW-SE to WNW-ESE (Sinistral strike slip faults) E-W to ENE-WSW (extension

fractures) and NNW-SSE (release fractures). In the study area the following directions are

predominately found.





1. NNW-SSE direction Figure (7 A).

2. NE–SW direction Figure (7 B).

3. N-S and E-W lineaments (7 C).

4. Conclusion

Geophysical resistivity DEM for different depths prepared can indicate the location of depth

persistence lineaments at different depths. Such areas can be classified as high groundwater

potential zones and are also suitable sites for artificial aquifer recharging as they allow large-

scale migration of groundwater. Geophysical resistivity data is demonstrated as one of the

most easier and produces more accurate, results by the present study.

5. References

1. Anbazhagan S., (1993), Fracture pattern study for groundwater exploration in part

of Dharmapuri district. Bhu-Jal News, Tamilnadu, pp 8–12.

2. Anbazhagan S, Ramasamy SM., (1997), Geophysical resistivity survey and

potential site selection for artificial recharge in central Tamil Nadu. India.

3. Aswathanarayana LG and Srinivas G., (1991), Resistivity survey of Ghataprabha

river basin in parts of Karnataka and Maharashtra, South India. In: Proceedings of

the first international seminar and exhibition on exploration geophysics in nineteen

nineties. Association of exploration geophysicists, Hyderabad, 1, pp 262– 269.

4. Kunze AWG., (1998), Implications of electrical resistivity data regarding

groundwater lenses on San Salvador island. Bahamas Environ Enginner Geosci, 4,

pp 55–76.

5. Marinis PG, Koukis GC Tsiambaos GC, Stournaras GC., (eds) Engineering

geology and the environment. Brookfield, 2, pp 1169–1173.

6. Muralidharan D (1996), A semi-quantitative approach to detect aquifers in hard

rocks from apparent resistivity data. J Geol Soc India, 47, pp 237–242.

7. Osella A, Favetto A, Martinelli, P, Cernadas D., (1999), Electrical imaging of an

alluvial aquifer at Antinaco-Los Colorados tectonic valley in the Sierras

Pampeanas. Argentina Appl Geophys, 4, pp 359–368.

8. Raju NJ, Reddy TVK, Nayudu PT., (1996), Electrical resistivity surveys for

groundwater in the upper Gunjanaeru catchment. Cuddapah district Andhra

Pradesh 47, pp 705–716.

9. Ramanujachary KR, Balakrishna S., (1985), Resistivity investigations in different

geological terrains. Groundwater News, pp 1–14.

10. Ramasamy, S.M., (1989), Morphotectonic evolution of east and west coasts of

Indian peninsula. Geological Survey of India, Special Publication, 24, pp 333-339.





11. Ravi Prakash S, Krishna Rao G., (1991), Geo-electrical resistivity studies of

Paravada area, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh, Hydrology J IAH, XIV,

pp 1–15.

12. Singhal DC, Sri Niwas, Shakeel M, Adam EM., (1998), Estimation of hydraulic

characteristics of alluvial aquifers from electrical resistivity data. J Geol Soc India

51, pp 461–470

13. Suresh TS, Naganna C, Srinivas G., (1992), Exploration for groundwater in

Hemavathy river basin, Karnataka: Using resistivity techniques. J Indian Acad

Geosci, 35, pp 25–30.

14. Verma RK, Rao MK, Rao CV., (1980), Resistivity investigations for groundwater

in metamorphic areas near Dhanbad, India, Ground water, 18, pp 46– 55.

Documents

GIS based lineament Delineation using geophysical resistivity data ... · Osella A, Favetto A, Martinelli, P, Cernadas D., (1999), Electrical imaging of an alluvial aquifer at Antinaco-Los