Detection of subterranean water

ion

Water divining is the common method used to detect an underground source of water. This has no scientific basis.
Are there purely scientific methods for detecting subterranean water?

hypatia

A mobile NMR geophysical tomograph was constructed that allows to discover underground water and to measure the characteristics of water layer (depth, amount of mobile water). The device allows to estimate and to map the resources of underground water deposits thus providing supplement for traditional hydrogeological methods. The depth of exploration is down to 120 m. The depth of water-bearing layer detection is down to 200 m.
Also new, devoloped by the Ari Force, EarthRadar uses low power Radio Frequency (RF) energy to interrogate subsurface geology with a high degree of accuracy at depths of hundreds of feet. The sensor with its integrated global positioning system can be operated from any ground-based moving platform, such as a tractor. An airborne platform can also be developed to negotiate rough terrain.

AntonVrba

Science just does not accept what some can sense and most animals can sense, but cannot be measured with available instruments.

If water, or geological disturbances disturb say a field of some sort to which some are senstive to, what is un-scientific about it. Further the depth of water can also be determined by finding secondary distarbances and the distance these are away from the main disturbance gives the depth. Reminds me very much of a wave function and slit experiment - sound very scietific to me.

Why do animals sense an earthquake before it strikes. It is a fact that in Sri Lanka national parks the animals fled the low lying areas before the Tsunami struck.

praveenbala

i would like to know more about that .is it available in the market. I would like to contact you to discuss about this .if you can contact me at 09894541937.mail id :bl_praveen@yahoo.com

with regards
-praveen

DrClapeyron

Drilling, detection of natural springs, GPR, resistivity surveys, etc. GPR may be good only to a few tens of meters depth and resistivity surveys may only detect water with significant salinity in a rock of moderate to large porosity.

saimahesh

Please give me the details to contact the company its e-mail or web-site. I have visited the site and mailed to them but there is no response from them. Please help me in this regards.
Saimahesh from INDIA

billiards

Electromagnetic resistivity methods are perhaps the most widely applicable methods in groundwater detection. The relationship between electric conductivity (the reciprocal of resistivity) and hydraulic conductivity is by no means simple and will vary from region to region depending on the geology. Of course, if you're looking for water, a high hydraulic conductivity is key, in fact it is more important than porosity in an aquifer system in terms of yielding water. (Clay for example is an extremely porous rock and yet has very low hydraulic conductivity and is thus an unsuitable aquifer -- aka an "aquitard".) Some local, region specific knowledge of geology and geophysics is essential for the application of geophysical techniques to successful groundwater detection.

Incidentally, a good eye for reading than landscape can be of great use in choosing a suitable well site. Where, for example, plants grow greenest may well be along a transmissive fault line; and commonsense suggests you'd probably have more luck with a well at the base of a valley than at the top of a ridge. Indeed, it has been said that good water divining is done moreso by experienced readers of the landscape than by their mystical wooden trembling stick.

GPR (ground penetrating radar) is limited as a tool for detecting water, really. It can give a nice image of the water table if you have a very sharp water table to completely unsaturated zone transition in the rock, but this is a rare occurance, normally there is a very smooth transition from fully unsaturated ground to fully saturated ground so that a water table does not create a distinct interface. (Incidentally, the definition of the water table is the level at which water is at atmospheric pressure -- below the water table the rock will be fully saturated (unless you have a perched water table where the water rests on a heterogeneity) and slightly above you can get a zone of full saturation where water is below atmospheric pressure but held up by capillary forces -- contrary to common misperception you can and do get water above the "water table"!.) To appreciate that the interface you see in the GPR image actually is the water table you'd probably need to know to expect it in advance, in which case you're not really making an interesting discovery when you see it other than how deep you have to dig to reach the water.