Publication - Scientific Investigations Report

Prepared in cooperation with the North Platte Natural Resources District

Determination of Canal Leakage Potential Using Continuous Resistivity Profiling Techniques, Interstate and Tri-State Canals, Western Nebraska and Eastern Wyoming, 2004

Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5032

By Lyndsay B. Ball, Wade H. Kress, Gregory V. Steele, James C. Cannia, and Michael J. Andersen

Report cover

View or download the report:
PDF (7.62 mb)

Abstract

In the North Platte River Basin, a ground-water model is being developed to evaluate the effectiveness of using water leakage from selected irrigation canal systems to enhance ground-water recharge. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the North Platte Natural Resources District, used land-based capacitively coupled and water-borne direct-current continuous resistivity profiling techniques to map the lithology of the upper 8 meters and to interpret the relative canal leakage potential of 110 kilometers of the Interstate and Tri-State Canals in western Nebraska and eastern Wyoming. Lithologic descriptions from 25 test holes were used to evaluate the effectiveness of both techniques for indicating relative grain size. An interpretive color scale was developed that symbolizes contrasting resistivity features indicative of different grain-size categories. The color scale was applied to the vertically averaged resistivity and used to classify areas of the canals as having either high, moderate, or low canal leakage potential.

When results were compared with the lithologic descriptions, both land-based and water-borne continuous resistivity profiling techniques were determined to be effective at differentiating coarse-grained from fine-grained sediment. Both techniques were useful for producing independent, similar interpretations of canal leakage potential.


Contents

Abstract

Introduction

Purpose and Scope

Description of Study Area

Hydrogeology

Acknowledgments

Methods

Resistivity Method

Capacitively Coupled Continuous Resistivity Profiling

Direct-Current Continuous Resistivity Profiling

Two-Dimensional Inverse Modeling

Georeferencing of Resistivity Data

Interpretation of Canal Leakage Potential

Canal Leakage Potential

Interstate Canal

Highway 71 to Spottedtail Creek

Dry Spottedtail Creek to Lateral No. 14

Lateral No. 14 to Lateral No. 8

Lateral No. 8 to Highway 79a

Highway 79a to Lateral No. 2

West of Lateral No. 2

Tri-State Canal

Durham Andrews Drain to Sunflower Drain

Sunflower Drain to Spottedtail Creek

Spottedtail Creek to U.S. Highway 26

Assessment of Continuous Resistivity Profiling Techniques

Effectiveness at Mapping Lithology

Technical Obstacles to Continuous Resistivity Profiling

Summary

Cited References

Supplemental Data Section

Figures

1a–1b. Maps showing:

1a. Location of the capacitively coupled resistivity survey.

1b. Location of the direct-current resistivity survey.

2–3. Illustrations showing:

2. Capacitively coupled continuous resistivity profiling survey layout.

3. Direct-current continuous resistivity profiling survey layout.

28. Diagram showing legal description numbering system for test holes listed in table 3.

29. Map showing potential for canal leakage from the Interstate and Tri-State Canals based on results from capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity surveys.

30. Graph showing co-located water-borne direct-current resistivity sections collected in A, June and August 2004 in the Interstate Canal, and B, July and August in the Tri-State Canal.

4–27. Diagrams showing:

4. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 18 (TH18) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

5. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 25 (TH25) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

6. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 9 (TH9) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

7. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test holes 22 and 22A (TH22 and TH22A)drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

8. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 4 (TH4) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

9. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 20A (TH20A) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

10. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 26 (TH26) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

11. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 0 (TH0) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

12. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 15 (TH15) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

13. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 12 (TH12) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

14. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 16A (TH16A) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

15. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 11A (TH11A) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

16. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 1 (TH1) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

17. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 19 (TH19) drilled in the bed of the Interstate Canal, to B, the inverted capacitively coupled section and direct-current resistivity curve.

18. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 5 (TH5) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

19. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 17A (TH17A) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

20. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 3 (TH3) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

21. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 24 (TH24) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

22. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 13 (TH13) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

23. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 14 (TH14) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

24. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 21 (TH21) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

25. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 23 (TH23) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

26. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 8 (TH8) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

27. Comparison of A, lithologic data from test hole 7 (TH7) drilled in the bed of the Tri-State Canal, to B, inverted capacitively coupled and direct-current resistivity sections and average resistivity curves.

Tables

1. Principal hydrogeologic units in the study area, western Nebraska.

2. Field parameters used during continuous resistivity profiling.

3. Lithologic descriptions for test holes.


For additional information contact:
Director, Nebraska Water Science Center
5231 South 19th Street
Lincoln, Nebraska 68512
(402) 328-4100
http://ne.water.usgs.gov/

Document Accessibility: Adobe Systems Incorporated has information about PDFs and the visually impaired. This information provides tools to help make PDF files accessible. These tools convert Adobe PDF documents into HTML or ASCII text, which then can be read by a number of common screen-reading programs that synthesize text as audible speech. In addition, an accessible version of Acrobat Reader 7.0 for Windows (English only), which contains support for screen readers, is available. These tools and the accessible reader may be obtained free from Adobe at Adobe Access.

Accessibility FOIA Privacy Policies and Notices

Take Pride in America home page. FirstGov button U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey
URL: https://pubs.water.usgs.gov/sir20065032
Page Contact Information:Publications Team
Page Last Modified: Thursday, 01-Dec-2016 19:04:39 EST