Boundless Electrical Resistivity Tomography 2 Open

Access Software for Advanced and Flexible Imaging

1 2
Thomas Gunther & Carsten Rucker
1
Leibniz Institute for Applied Geophysics, Hannover (Germany)
2
Department of Applied Geophysics, Berlin Institute of Technology (Germany)

Boundless Electrical Resistivity Tomography Advances of BERT 2 over 1 The GIMLi region technique
I ERT (G. et al., 2006) on arbitrary geometry I different electrodes types: nodes, faces & free I subdivision of subsurface into different regions
(2D/3D, open/closed, flat/topography, . . . ) I unstructured/structured or mixed meshes I types: constrained, single, fixed, background

I based on general C++/Python library GIMLi I data filtering using min/max keywords I individual region settings: regularisation

I free&platform-independent, efficient numerics I improved speed and accuracy type/strength/anisotropy, transformation,

I controlled by config file & command line, GUI I enhanced time-lapse schemes and IP handling upper/lower resistivity bound, starting value
I scripting and batch mode, web inversion service I flexible treatment of different model parts I arbitrary inter-region coupling or decoupling

Generalized minimization approach Accounting for borehole fluid conductivity

1 2 2
= ||Cd (d f (m))||2 + ||Cm h||2 min Crosshole experiment (Doetsch et al., 2010)
data d, forward operator f , model m, data covariance Cd = diag(2j ) with errors j augmented Without borehole Independent borehole
constraint matrix C = wsC1wm (C1 typically smoothness constraints) treatment regions
I crosshole ERT data
structural weight ws = diag(wjs ), model weight wm = diag(wjm)
using 4 boreholes
Example C1 for mixed triangle/quadrangle 2d mesh I conducting fluid

I treated independently

Section of the mesh

1 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 0

0 1 1 0 0 0

C1 =
0 0 1 0 1 0

0 0 0 1 0

1
0 0 0 0 1 1

Regions - types, ranges and coupling Improved time-lapse behaviour

Resistivity survey across Feldungel lake Study of near surface infiltration processes in slopes
I Long-time experiment by TU Dresden (Hubner et al., in prep.)
I Wenner + using 46 electrodes in&outside
I Difference/ratio after heavy rainfall event for saturation change
I known lake bottom topography
Inversion result before rainfall Definition of geological regions
Model building using PLC input for mesh generator
0
545
0 10 20 30 x/m 50

1
a piece-wise linear 5 z/m
Depth [m]

10
complex (PLC) with 15 2
535

region markers: 20

25
3
530

0 20 40 60 80 100 525

x [m]

2D topography model using electrodes (o) main region (2)

520

I local refinement at electrodes & forward calculation box (3) I after cluster analysis of result
I vadose zone, aquifer & bedrock
I connection of shore points and region marker I only changes in toplayer allowed

lake as independent region (1) to be controlled Ratio after classic timelapse inversion Ratio after improved timelapse inversion
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 x/m 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 x/m 50

540 540

Lake single-parameter region of unknown resistivity z/m

536
z/m

536

0 534

too low (equivalent)

534

532

5
532
Depth [m]

530 530

10 resistivity 528

526
528

526

15 524 524

522 522

20
0 20 40 60 80 0.708 0.794 0.891 1 1.12 1.26 1.41 0.708 0.794 0.891 1 1.12 1.26 1.41

Normal region (20 m< <30 m) I timelapse artifacts I only shallow infiltration
0
5
resistivity structures
Depth [m]

10 in water realistic? Incorporating a-priori information

15
20
0 20 40 60 80
Bedrock-sediment classification (Gunther & Rucker, in prep.)
Lake as fixed region with known =22.5 m I Wenner-Schlumberger surface data I about layering (structural)
0
more realistic con- I resistivity probe reveals layering I about detected resistivity range
5
Depth [m]

10 ductive mud I Problem: thin conducting layer I 4 blocks: clay, sand, till & bedrock
15
20
appears too deep & thick I clay, till & bedrock as single layers
0 20 40 60 80
I Solution: incorporation as a-priori I strong coupling to main region
Coupling of fixed water and lake-bottom information (structure+material)
0
seamless transition
5 Standard inversion result Borehole Result with a-priori data
Depth [m]

10 from water into 0 0

5
1
True
Normal
Region
0
10 10
bottom
10

15
2

15

20 20
3
Depth [m]

20
Depth [m]

Depth [m]

25

30 30
4

30

20
35

40 40
5

101 102

0 20 40 60 80
Resistivity [m]

50 50
60 60
x [m] 70 70
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
x [m] x [m]
10.0 23.4 54.8 128.2 300.0
Resistivity [m] 15 34 77 176 400
Resistivity [m]

References Conclusions
I increased flexibility of ERT regularization by using region approach
Doetsch, Coscia, Greenhalgh, Linde, Green & Gunther (2010): The borehole-fluid effect in
electrical resistivity imaging, Geophysics 74(4), F107-117. I incorporation of both structural and material a-priori knowledge is able to
Gunther, Rucker & Spitzer (2006): Three-dimensional modelling and inversion of dc improve results significantly
resistivity data incorporating topography - II. Inversion, Geoph. J. Int. 166, 506-517.
I problem-dependent temporal behaviour prevents inversion artifacts
Gunther & Rucker (in prep.): Advanced Electrical Resistivity Tomography using a
region-based regularization approach. I techniques ready for any method or combination (GIMLi@sourceforge)

Hubner et al. (in prep.): Electrical resistivity monitoring of hillslope hydrological processes. I release available upon request (resistivity.net) or via svn

LIAG, Stilleweg 2, 30655 Hannover, Germany http://www.resistivity.net Thomas.Guenther@liag-hannover.de