1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 3, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 3 Number 3
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

In the Sahelian region of Burkina Faso (Western Africa), groundwater resources are scarce. The hydrogeological context is mainly crystalline basement aquifers that often present a challenge to hydrogeologists when investigating their exploration and management. A magnetic resonance sounding (MRS) survey was conducted to evaluate the ability of the method to answer the following main questions encountered by hydrogeologists in this hard‐rock context:

  • Where is the groundwater?
  • How deep and how thick are the water‐bearing formations?
  • What are the reserves of groundwater?
  • What is the productivity of the aquifer?

MRS measurements were implemented around recent boreholes drilled both in the weathered and in the fissured‐fractured units of the reservoirs. In order to evaluate the MRS method, MRS results are compared with borehole and pumping test data. The depths and thicknesses of the saturated aquifers encountered by the boreholes are compared with those estimated by MRS. The decay‐time constant of the magnetic resonance signal is used for calculating the storativity and transmissivity estimators from geophysical data. These MRS hydrogeological estimators are compared with the local transmissivity and storativity of the aquifer, estimated from pumping test results.

The main conclusions of the comparison between the 13 MRS results and the borehole data are:

  • The depths and thicknesses of the saturated alterites are accurately described by the MRS results, and the mean differences with the borehole data are ±12% and ±17%, respectively.
  • The storativity estimated from MRS data is not reliable. The proposed estimators need to be confirmed with larger data sets, and further research needs to be conducted on this matter.
  • The transmissivity can be accurately estimated from MRS data after calibration with pumping test results. The mean difference between MRS and pumping test results is ±41%.
  • The main limiting factors of MRS applied in hard‐rock areas are the 1D approximation in a highly heterogeneous context, the screen effect that causes deep weathered‐fissured reservoirs to be poorly resolved when topped by shallow alterites reservoirs, and the suppression principle that causes deep narrow fractures to be undetectable.

MRS is a useful tool to characterize the saturated alterites and the weathered‐fissured zones of aquifers in a crystalline rock context. With knowledge of its limitations, its use within the framework of hydrogeological strategy is promising, both for borehole implementation and for groundwater reserve evaluation.

© European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers © 2005 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2005015
2005-05-01
2024-04-26

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2005015
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. CompaoreG.1997. Evaluation de la fonction capacitive des altérites. Site expérimental de Sanon (Burkina Faso): socle granito gneissique sous climat de type soudano‐sahélien. Thesis, Université d’Avignon et des Pays de Vaucluse.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. DunnK.J., BergmanD.J. and LatorracaG.A.2002. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance: Petrophysical and Logging Applications. Elsevier Science Publishing Co.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. FetterC.W.1994. Applied Hydrogeology. Prentice–Hall, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. KenyonW.E.1997. Petrophysical principles of applications of NMR logging. The Log Analyst, March–April, 21–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. KrusemanG.P. and de RidderN.A.2000. Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test Data. ILRI, Wageningen.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. LachassagneP., WynsR., BérardP., BruelT., ChéryL., CoutandT., DespratsJ.F. and Le StratP.2001. Exploitation of high‐yields in hard‐rock aquifers: downscaling methodology combining GIS and multicriteria analysis to delineate field prospecting zones. Groundwater39(4), 568–582.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. LegchenkoA.2004. Magnetic resonance sounding: enhanced modeling of a phase shift. Applied Magnetic Resonance25, 621–636.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. LegchenkoA., BaltassatJ.M., BeauceA. and BernardJ.2002. Nuclear magnetic resonance as a geophysical tool for hydrogeologists. Journal of Applied Geophysics50, 21–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. LegchenkoA., BaltassatJ.M., BobachevA., MartinC., RobainH. and Vouillamoz, J.M.2004. Magnetic resonance soundings applied to characterization of aquifers. Groundwater42(3), 436–473.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. LegchenkoA. and ShushakovO.A.1998. Inversion of surface NMR data.Geophysics63, 75–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. LegchenkoA. and VallaP.2002. A review of the basic principles for proton magnetic resonance sounding measurements. Journal of Applied Geophysics50, 3–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. LubczynskiM. and RoyJ.2003. MRS contribution to hydrogeological parametrization. Deuxième séminaire international sur la méthode de Résonance Magnétique des Protons appliquée à la recherche non invasive d’eau souterraine. Orléans.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. de MarsilyG.1986. Quantitative Hydrogeology. Academic Press, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. SchirovM., LegchenkoA. and CreerG.1991. New direct non‐invasive ground water detection technology for Australia.Exploration Geophysics22, 333–338.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. VouillamozJ.M.2003. La caracterisation des aquifères par une méthode non invasive: les sondages par Resonance Magnétique Protonique. Thesis, Orsay, Paris XI.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. VouillamozJ.M., DescloitresM., BernardJ., FourcassieP. and RomagnyL.2002. Application of integrated magnetic resonance sounding and resistivity methods for borehole implementation. A case study in Cambodia. Journal of Applied Geophysics50, 67–81.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. VouillamozJ.M., LegchenkoA., AlbouyY., BakalowiczM., BaltassatJ.M. and Al‐FaresW.2003. Localization of saturated karst with magnetic resonance sounding and resistivity imagery. Groundwater41(5), 578–587.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. WrightE.P. and BurgessW.G.1992. The Hydrogeology of Crystalline Basement Aquifers in Africa. The Geological Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. WynsR., BaltassatJ.M., LachassagneP., LegchenkoA. and VaironJ.2004. Application of SNMR soundings for groundwater reserves mapping in weathered basement rocks (Brittany, France). Bull. Soc. Géol. Fr. 1 (175), 21–34.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2005015
Loading
Characterization of crystalline basement aquifers with MRS: comparison with boreholes and pumping tests data in Burkina Faso
Near Surface Geophysics 3, 205 (2005); https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2005015
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2005015
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2005015
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error