Publication - Scientific Investigations Report
View or download the report: |
AbstractIn 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. |
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
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.
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: |
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. |