Estimating active storage of groundwater quality zones in alluvial deposits of Faisalabad area, Rechna Doab, Pakistan

  • Perveiz KhalidEmail author
  • Muhammad Sanaullah
  • Muhammed Javaid Sardar
  • Sadaf Iman
Original Paper


The quantification and assessment of groundwater are of great significance for the urbanization and town planning in an area. The current study has been carried out for quantification and assessment of groundwater quality zones by using geo-electrical technique in Faisalabad area (73° 06′ 08″–73° 11′ 59″ E; 31° 35′ 00″–31° 40′ 39″ N) of Pakistan. Vertical electrical soundings (VES) at six locations were conducted by Schlumberger configuration up to 300-m depth of investigation. Modeling technique is used for the interpretation of apparent resistivity, and the true resistivities of various subsurface lithologies were recorded from 2.10 to 55 Ω m for the depth of investigation. Three sand-dominant aquifers were identified at depth intervals of 0–50 m, 50–100 m, and 100–300 m. The VES results are compared and calibrated with the available borehole data taken from the tube wells drilled in the vicinity of the study area. The GIS technique is applied for the preparation of water quality zonation maps. Some of the groundwater quantification parameters such as total volume of the alluvium, total volumes of the water content, and active storage are estimated through GIS applications. Top geo-electrical layer (0–50 m) is dominated by low resistivity zone (10–25 Ω m), having an active storage of 0.71 km3. Intermediate geo-electrical layer (50–100 m) comprised coarse sand with low-to-medium resistivity zone of 10–35 Ω m, showing a low active storage (1.01 km3). Deep geo-electrical layer (100–300 m) is dominant by very low resistivity zone (< 10 Ω m) in the whole area. This 200-m-thick zone is possibly an admixture of fine sand, clay, and silt, having a high active storage (4.06 km3). The quality of water deteriorates with depth, and aquifer zones saturated with marginal-to-saline groundwater are interpreted below the fresh water zone at all the probe sites. The active storage of the lower geo-electrical layer (100–300 m) indicates a huge water potential but it is trapped in medium sand and alternative layers of clay. The intermediate geo-electrical layer (50–100 m) is comparatively better in quality but has low ground water potential.


Vertical electrical soundings (VES) Groundwater quality zonation GIS Ground water quantum Groundwater Modeling System (GMS) 


  1. Archie GE (1942) The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir characteristics. Trans Am Inst Min Metal Petr Eng 146:54–62Google Scholar
  2. Ariyo SO, Banjo AA (2008) Application of electrical resistivity method for groundwater method for groundwater exploration in sedimentary terrain: a case study of Ilara – Remo, Southwest Nigeria. Continental J Earth Sci 3:53–58Google Scholar
  3. Emenike EA (2001) Geophysical exploration for groundwater in the sedimentary environment: a case study. Glob J Pure Appl Sci 7(1):97–102Google Scholar
  4. Farid A (2018) Geophysical Characterization of Late Quaternary Basin Deposits and Hydrogeophysical Modeling of Lakki Marwat and Domail Plains, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Ph.D. Thesis, University of the Punjab Lahore, PakistanGoogle Scholar
  5. Farid A, Khalid P, Jadoon KZ (2014) The depositional setting of the late Quaternary sedimentary fill in southern Bannu basin, northwest Himalayan fold and thrust belt, Pakistan. Environ Monit Assess 186:6587–6604. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Farid A, Khalid P, Jadoon KZ, Iqbal MA, Shafique M (2017) Applications of variogram modeling to electrical resistivity data for the occurrence and distribution of saline groundwater in Domail Plain, northwestern Himalayan fold and thrust belt, Pakistan. J Mt Sci 14:158–174. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Frohlich RK, Kelly WE (1985) The relation between hydraulic transmissivity and transverse resistance in a complicated aquifer of glacial outwash deposits. J Hydrol 79:215–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gnanasundar D, Elango L (1999) Groundwater quality assessment of a coastal aquifer using geoelectrical techniques. J Environ Hydrol 7(2):1–8Google Scholar
  9. Goodchild MF (2014) Twenty years of progress: GIS Science in 2010. J Spat Inf Sci 1:3–20Google Scholar
  10. Kelly WE (1977) Geoelectric sounding for estimating aquifer hydraulic conductivity. Ground Water 15:420–424. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Khalid P, Ullah S, Farid A (2018) Application of electrical resistivity inversion to delineate salt and freshwater interfaces in quaternary sediments of northwest Himalaya, Pakistan. Arab J Geosci 11:112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Khan AD, Hagras MA, Iqbal N (2014) Quality evaluation in Thal Doab of Indus Basin of Pakistan. Int J Mod Eng Res 4(1):36–47Google Scholar
  13. Kunetz G, Van Nostrand R (1966) Principles of direct current resistivity prospecting. Borntraeger, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  14. Muhammad S, Khalid P (2017) Hydrogeophysical investigations for assessing the groundwater potential in part of the Peshawar basin, Pakistan. Environmental Earth Sciences, 76: paper No. 494.
  15. Muthuraj D, Srinivas Y, Chandrasekar N (2010) Delineation of groundwater potential areas - a case study from Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu, India. Int J Appl Environ Sci 5:49–56Google Scholar
  16. Niwas S, Singhal D (1981) Estimation of aquifer transmissivity from Dar-Zarrouk parameters in porous media. J Hydrol 50:393–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ponzini G, Ostroman A, Molinari M (1984) Empirical relation between electrical transverse resistance and hydraulic transmissivity. Geoexploration 22(1):1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Qureshi AS, Hussain A, Makin I (2002) Integrated database development for river basin management: an example from Rechna Doab. Working Paper 53. Lahore, Pakistan”. International Water Management Institute. ISBN: 92-9090-500-XGoogle Scholar
  19. Salem HS (1999) Determination of fluid transmissivity and electric transverse resistance for shallow aquifers and deep reservoirs from surface and well-log electric measurements. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 3(3):421–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Selvam S, Sivasubramanian P (2012) Groundwater potential zone identification using geoelectrical survey: a case study from Medak district, Andhra Pradesh, India. Int J Geomatics Geosci 3(1):55–62Google Scholar
  21. Singh SB, Stephen J, Srinivas Y, Singh UK, singh KP (2002) An integrated geophysical approach for ground water prospecting: a case study from Tamil Nadu. J Geol Soc India 59:147–158Google Scholar
  22. Srinivasan K, Poongothai S, Chidambaram S (2013) Identification of groundwater potential zone by using GIS and electrical resistivity techniques in and around the Wellington reservoir, Cuddalore District, Tamil Nadu, India. Eur Sci J 9(17):312–331Google Scholar
  23. Telford WM (1976) Applied geophysics. Cambridge University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhou Y, Li W (2011) A review of regional groundwater flow modeling. Geosci Front 2:205–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zohdy AA, Eaton GP, Mabey DR (1980) Application of surface geophysics to ground-water investigations. U.S. Geological Survey, RestonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of GeologyUniversity of the PunjabLahorePakistan
  2. 2.College of Earth and Environmental SciencesUniversity of the PunjabLahorePakistan

Personalised recommendations