Aquifer Characterization And Identification Of Groundwater–Surface Water Interaction In Hard Rock Region Using Electrical Resistivity Method

IJEP 41(10): 1103-1111 : Vol. 41 Issue. 10 (October 2021)

S. Mahenthiran1*, Madhavi Ganesan2, M. Mathiazhagan3, N. Sridhar4 and L. Vignesh Rajkumar1

1. Vellore Institute of Technology, Department of Environmental and Water Resources Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, Vellore – 632 014, Tamil Nadu, India
2. Anna University, Centre for Water Resources, College of Engineering, Chennai – 600 025, Tamil Nadu, India
3. Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Centre for Geotechnology, Tirunelveli – 627 012, Tamil Nadu, India
4. Rise Krishna Sai Prakasam Group of Institutions, Department of Civil Engineering, Ongole – 523 272, Andhra Pradesh, India


Extensive pumping of groundwater resources in an agricultural field leads to groundwater depletion in terms of both quantity and quality. In this study, electrical resistivity investigations were carried out to identify the groundwater potential zones, assess the impact of agricultural practices on groundwater quality and evaluate the interaction between pond and aquifer. A total of 13 vertical electrical sounding (VES) were carried out near wells and ponds in the agricultural field. Based on the rock resistivity variations, characteristics of the sub-surface layer and its thickness were determined. The parameters, such as longitudinal unit conductance, transverse unit resistance, average longitudinal resistivity, average transverse resistivity and anisotropy were also calculated. Results reveal that lithology exists in the study area comprised of clay, highly weathered granitic gneiss, weathered granitic gneiss, jointed granitic gneiss, fractured granitic gneiss and highly compacted rock. Highly weathered/weathered granitic gneiss in unconfined conditions serve as shallow aquifer zones and supply water for agricultural activities. It was observed that groundwater quality deteriorates due to intensive agricultural practices. The existence of weathered granitic gneiss along the pond shore possesses high permeability and hence the interaction exists in these zones between pond and aquifer. Measured electrical conductivity was low in the northern region of the study area also implies the existence of an interaction between pond and wells in these zones. The identification of groundwater potential zones through electrical resistivity method suggest the importance of implementation of emerging agricultural management systems to avoid the groundwater quality deterioration of the study area.


Vertical electrical sounding, Electrical resistivity, Surface water and groundwater interaction, Groundwater delineation, Hard rock region


  1. Deshpande, S. M., et al. 2018. Electrical resistivity method for groundwater exploration: A case study of Ganori village area, Aurangabad district, Maharashtra, India. Bulletin Pure Appl. Sci., (Geol.). 37 F(2): 125-137.
  2. Amaya, A.G., et al. 2018. Hydrogeophysical methods and hydrogeological models : basis for groundwater sustainable management in Valle Alto (Bolivia). Sustainable Water Resour. Manage., 5: 1179-1188.
  3. Saldias, C., et al. 2012. Losing the watershed focus/ a look at complex community-managed irrigation systems in Bolivia. Water Int., 37(7): 744–759.
  4. Bello, H. I., et al. 2019. Geoelectrical investigation of groundwater potential at Nigerian Union of Teachers Housing estate, Paggo, Minna, Nigeria. Appl. Water Sci., 9(3): 1-12.
  5. Ravindran, A.A., et al. 2015. Aquifer assessment for agriculture through geophysical, hydrochemical and hydrogeological approaches around Perumattunallur lake, Southern India. Sustainable Water Resour. Manage., 1: 137-154.
  6. Sarwade, D. V., et al. 2007. Comparative study of analytical and numerical methods for estimation of aquifer parameters : A case study in Basaltic Terrain. J. Geol. Soc. India. 70(6): 1039-1046.
  7. Winter, T. 1999. Relation of streams, lakes and wetlands to groundwater flow systems. Hydrogeol. J.,7: 28–45.
  8. Barthel, R. and S. Banzhaf. 2016. Groundwater and surface water interaction at the regional-scale – A review with focus on regional integrated models. Water Resour. Manage., 30:1-32.
  9. Baalousha, H. M. 2012. Characterisation of groundwater–surface water interaction using field measurements and numerical modelling: a case study from the Ruataniwha basin, Hawke’s bay, New Zealand. Appl. Water Sci., 2: 109-118.
  10. Vasantrao, B. M., et al. 2017. Comparative study of Wenner and Schlumberger electrical resistivity method for groundwater investigation: a case study from Dhule district (M.S.), India. Appl. Water Sci., 7: 4321-4340.
  11. Beltran, J. M. 1999. Irrigation with saline water: benefits and environmental impact. Agric. Water Manage., 40(2-3): 183-194.
  12. Galazoulas, E. C., et al. 2015. Large scale electrical resistivity tomography survey correlated to hydrogeological data for mapping groundwater salinization: A case study from a multilayered coastal aquifer in rhodope, northeastern Greece, Env. Processes. 2:19-35.
  13. Agoubi, B., et al. 2013. Hydrochemical and geoelectrical investigation of Marine Jeffara aquifer, southeastern Tunisia. Appl. Water Sci., 3: 415-429.
  14. Ramesh, R., G. R. Purvaja and R. V. Ika. 1995. The problem of groundwater pollution: a case study from Madras city, India : Man’s influence on freshwater ecosystems and water use. Boulder Symposium. IAHS Publication no. 230. Proceedings, pp 147-157.
  15. Mendoza, J. A. and G. Barmen. 2006. Assessment of groundwater vulnerability in the Rio Artiguas basin, Nicaragua. Env. Geol., 50(4): 569–580.
  16. Tagma, T., et al. 2009. Groundwater nitrate pollution in Souss-Massa basin (southwest Morocco). African J. Env. Sci. Tech., 3(10): 301-309.
  17. Brindha, K., K.V. N. Vaman and K. Srinivasan. 2014. Identification of surface water-groundwater interaction by hydrogeochemical indicators and assessing its suitability for drinking and irrigational purposes in Chennai, southern India. Appl. Water Sci., 4,159–174.
  18. Ebong, E. D., et al. 2017. Groundwater quality assessment using geoelectrical and geochemical approaches: case study of Abi area, southeastern Nigeria. Appl. Water Sci., 7: 2463–2478.
  19. Befus, K., et al. 2012. Classification and delineation of groundwater–lake interactions in the Nebraska Sand Hills (USA) using electrical resistivity patterns. Hydrogeol. J., 20(8): 1483-1495.
  20. Samui, P. and D. Kim. 2016. Determination of electrical resistivity of soil based on thermal resistivity using RVM and MPMR. Periodica Polytechnica Civil Eng., 60(4): 511-515.
  21. Ogungbemi, O. S., et al. 2013. Geoelectric inves tigation of aquifer vulnerability within Afe Babalola University, Ado–Ekiti, southwestern Nigeria. IOSR J. Appl. Geol. Geophysics. 1(5): 28–34.
  22. Leitao, T. E., et al. 2014. Combined use of electrical resistivity tomography and hydrochemical data to assess anthropogenic impacts on water quality of a Karstic region: A case study from Querença-Silves, south Portugal. Env. Processes. 1: 43–57.
  23. Mondal, N. C. and V. S. Singh. 2005. Modelling for pollutant migration in the tannery belt, Dindigul, Tamil Nadu, India. Current Sci., 89(9): 1600-1606.
  24. Benson, A. K., K. L. Payne and M. A. Stubben. 1997. Mapping groundwater contamination using dc resistivity and VLF geophysical methods – A case study. Geophysics. 62(1): 80–86.
  25. CGWB. 2007. District groundwater brochure Kancheepuram district, Tamil Nadu. Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India.
  26. CCC and AR. TNSCCC. 2015. Climate change projection (rainfall) for Kanchipuram. In District climate change information for the state of Tamil Nadu. Centre for climate change and Adaptation Research and Tamil Nadu State Climate Change Cell, Department of Environment, Government of Tamil Nadu, Tamil Nadu, India.
  27. Kumar, D., V.A. Rao and V.S. Sarma. 2014. Hydrogeological and geophysical study for deeper groundwater resource in quartzitic hard rock ridge region from 2D resistivity data. J. Earth System Sci., 123(3): 531–543.
  28. Maillet, R. 1947. The fundamental equation of electrical prospecting. Geophysics. 12(4): 529-556.
  29. Mondal, N. C., V. P. Singh and S. Ahmed. 2013. Delineating shallow saline groundwater zones from Southern India using geophysical indicators. Env. Monit. Assess., 185(6): 4869–4886.
  30. Gupta, G., S. Maiti and V. C. Erram. 2014. Analysis of electrical resistivity data in resolving the saline and freshwater aquifers in west coast Maharashtra. J. geol. Soc. India. 84(5): 555–568.
  31. Shevnin, V., et al. 2006. Estimation of soil hydraulic conductivity on clay content determined from resistivity data. Geofisica Int., 45(3): 195-207.
  32. Flathe, H. 1955. Possibilities and limitations in applying geoelectrical methods to hydrogeological problems in the coastal areas of northwest Germany. Geophysical Prospecting. 3(2): 95–109.
  33. Keller, G. V. and F. C. Frischknecht. 1966. Electrical methods in geophysical prospecting. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
  34. Singh, C.L. and S.N. Singh. 1970. Some geoelectrical investigations for potential groundwater zones in part of Azamgarh area of U.P. Pure Appl. Geophysics. 82: 270–285.
  35. Sridharan, M. and D. S. Nathan. 2017. Groundwater quality assessment for domestic and agriculture purposes in Puducherry region. Appl. Water Sci., 7: 4037–4053.