Working Report 2004-60

Unification· of [lectrical Resistivity logging Oata

Eero Heikkinen

Pirjo Hella

Pauli Saksa

Jorma Palmen

Tiina Vaittinen

December 2004

TEKIJAORGANISAA TIO:

JP-Fintact Oy J aakonkatu 3 01620VANTAA

TILAAJA: Posiva Oy 27160 Olkiluoto

TILAUSNUMERO:

JP-Fintact Oy:

TILAAJAN YHDYSHENKILOT:

Sanna Riikonen

Turo Ahokas Posiva Oy

TEKIJAORGANISAA TION YHDYSHENKILO:

TEKIJAT:

Pauli Saksa JP-Fintact Oy

TYORAPORTTI 2004-60

UNIFICATION OF ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY LOGGING DATA

Eero Heikkinen, Pirjo Hella, Pauli Saksa, Jorma Palmen, Tiina Vaittinen

TARKASTAJA:

~ Pauli Saksa JP-Fintact Oy

Working Report 2004-60

Unification of flectrical Resistivity logging Oata

Eero Heikkinen

Pirjo Hella

Pauli Saksa

Jorma Palmen

Tiina Vaittinen

..JP-Fintact Oy

December 2004

Working Reports contain information on work in progress

or pending completion .

The conclusions and viewpoints presented in the report

are those of author(s) and do not necessarily

coincide w ith those of Posiva .

Heikkinen, E., Hella, P. Saksa, P., Palmen, J. & Vaittinen, T. 2004. Unification of electrical resistivity logging data. Working report 2004-60. Posiva Oy, Eurajoki. 129 p.

ABSTRACT

Posiva prepares for disposal of spent nuclear fuel deep into bedrock in Olkiluoto. Investigations have been carried out since 1988. Bedrock electrical resistivity has been measured systematically in nearly all of the boreholes. Differences between boreholes were observed in resistivity level and trends. This report describes analysis of the differences and a systematic procedure for unification of long normal resistivity data.

Bedrock bulk resistivity, as measurable in boreholes, is a combination of host rock resistivity, effective porosity and electrical resistivity of borehole fluid. Factors depen­ding on tool construction, measurement geometry, borehole diameter and bore hole conditions also affect the results. Borehole effects are typically removed with a standard leveling technique based on contrast between measured apparent resistivity and borehole fluid resistivity. In case of high contrasts the leveling has been evidently inadequate.

Significant differences still exist between various measurement runs. The reasons were found to be effect of the borehole fluid resistivity, which is combined with the effect of the applied tool technique (metal parts in probe, etc.) and borehole diameter, and the applied calibration procedure of the results.

A unification procedure was designed, based on measured fluid resistivity and bedrock resistivity. A specific calibration trend was defined for each applied tool technique, processing method, and borehole diameter (together five groups). The procedure supplements the traditional borehole effect corrections. Bedrock resistivity reference values were gathered from least fractured and homogeneous sections with high resistivity from each borehole and plotted against fluid resistivity. Resistivity differences between boreholes were leveled. The tool and borehole specific variations were set by removing the trend and setting the resistivity amplitude to same value for each borehole and tool type.

Unification was applied for long normal resistivity data of boreholes KR1-KR20, KR22-KR28 and short boreholes KR15B-KR20B, KR22B, KR23B, KR25B, KR27B and KR28B. Results were validated using petrophysical sample data and reviewing the borehole data after process. Significant part of the differences between boreholes has been removed. Data from some of the boreholes may not benefit of the process, e.g., due to possible failure in method performance (KR6, KR2 and KR4 extension, and short sections at alternating lithologies elsewhere). Similar unification can be applied for any new borehole when data becomes available, and also for short normal data.

Different tools can be used for logging, when properly calibrated. It is recommended that for validating different tool techniques and processing methods a calibration borehole should be available at the site. The borehole should have adequate variation in bedrock and fluid resistivity, and a good coverage of geophysical, geological and hydrological data. Borehole should be maintained available for a long period (e.g. KR19B).

Key words: Geophysical borehole logging, long normal resistivity, borehole effect, fluid correction, data unification, unification, trend removal

Heikkinen, E., Hella, P. Saksa, P., Palmen, J. & Vaittinen, T. 2004. Sahkoisen reikamittausdatan yhtenaistaminen. Tyoraportti 2004-60. Posiva Oy, Eurajoki. 129 p.

TIIVISTELMA

Posiva valmistautuu kaytetyn ydinpolttoaineen loppusijoitukseen syvalle Olkiluodon kallioperaan. Tutkimuksia on tehty vuodesta 1988 saakka. Eras jfujestelmallisesti kaytetyista tutkimusmenetelmista on ollut kallion sahkoisen ominaisvastuksen mittaus kairanrei 'issa. Mitatuissa ominaisvastuksen tasoissa on havaittu eri reikien valisia eroja. Tassa raportissa kuvataan erojen analysointi, seka jarjestelmallinen yhtenaistamis­menettely, jota sovellettiin pitka normaali --ominaisvastusdatalle.

Kallion kokonaisominaisvastus rei' ista mitattuna on yhdistelma isantakiven ominais­vastuksesta, tehollisesta huokoisuudesta, reikaveden ominaisvastuksesta seka tekijoista, jotka riippuvat mittauslaitteen teknisista ratkaisuista, reikahalkaisijasta, mittaus­geometriasta ja reikaolosuhteista. Kairanreian vaikutukset tuloksiin poistetaan tyypilli­sesti laskennallisella tasoitustekniikalla, joka perustuu mitatun kokonaisominais­vastuksen ja pohjaveden ominaisvastuksen valiseen kontrastiin. Korkeiden kontrastien tapauksessa tasoitukset ovat olleet ilmeisen riittamattomia.

Ominaisvastustuloksissa on ollut edelleen jaljella merkittavaa reikaveden ominais­vastuksen vaikutusta, joka aiheuttaa eroja eri mittauskertojen valilla kytkeytyessaan laitetekniikan (metalliosia laitteessa, ym) ja reikahalkaisijan kanssa. Lisaksi eroja aiheuttavat erilaiset kaytetyt tulosten kalibrointimenettelyt.

Tyossa laadittiin yhtenaistamismenettely, joka perustuu mitattuun veden ominais­vastukseen. Kalibrointitrendi maaritettiin erikseen kullekin reikaryhmalle (5), joissa reikahalkaisija, laitetekniikka ja prosessointimenetelma ovat olleet samat. Menettely taydentaa perinteista laskennallista reikaefektien tasoitusta. Eri mittausten tulosten yhtenaistaminen on tehty perustuen reikajaksoihin, joissa korkeimpien esiintyvien tasaisten ominaisvastusarvojen, vahimmin rakoilleiden ja homogeenisten jaksojen alueelta kerattiin vertailutiedoiksi ominaisvastustiedot ja tulostettiin ne reikaveden ominaisvastuksen suhteen. Yksittaisten kairanreikien valiset erot tasoitettiin. Sen jalkeen fluidiriippuvuudet asetettiin samoiksi poistaen laite- ja reikakohtaiset erot.

Kairanreikien KR1-KR20, KR22-KR28 seka KR15B-KR20B, KR22B, KR23B, KR25B, KR27B ja KR28B pitkanormaali --ominaisvastus yhtenaistettiin. Tulokset varmennettiin kayttaen petrofysikaalisia naytetietoja seka tarkastelemalla prosessoituja tuloksia kokonaisuutena. Vaikuttaa silta ettei joidenkin reikien data hyotyisi korjauksesta mahdollisen laitevirheen vuoksi (esim. KR2, KR4 ja KR6 jatko-osat, seka erillisia lyhyita jaksoja joissa ominaisuudet vaihtelevat voimakkaasti). Merkittava osa reikien valisista tasoeroista on poistettu. Vastaava yhtenaistaminen voidaan suorittaa myohemmin uusille kairanrei'ille datan valmistuessa, samoin lyhyt normaali -datalle.

Hyvin kalibroituna reikamittauksiin voidaan kayttaa erilaisia laitteita. On suositeltavaa kayttaa laitteiden ja tulosten validoinnissa alueella sijaitsevaa kalibrointireikaa, esim KR19B. Reiassa pitaisi olla riittava mittausparametrien vaihteluvali, erilaisten tutkimusmenetelmien hyva kattavuus, seka kaytettavyys pitkan ajanjakson yli.

Avainsanat: Geofysikaalinen reikamittaus, pitka normaali ominaisvastus, reian vaikutus, reikaveden korjaus, datan yhtenaistaminen, tasoitus

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

TIIVISTELMA

CONTENTS

PREFACE

1

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 3

2 RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES AND DATA ........................................ 5

2.1 Resistivity measurement techniques ................................................................. 5

2.1.1 Background .......................................................................................... 5

2. 1 .2 Geophysical logging techniques .......................................................... 7

2.1.3 Standard leveling of electrical logging data and sources of error ...... 13

2.1.4 Petrophysical measurements ............................................................. 16

2.2 Data sets involved to the work and required treatment.. ................................. 18

2.2.1 Electrical resistivity logging data ........................................................ 18

2.2.2 Supporting data .................................................................................. 19

3 UNIFICATION TECHNIQUE ........................................................................................ 23

3.1 Basic considerations ....................................................................................... 23

3.2 Reference levels .............................................................................................. 26

3.3 Final unification ............................................................................................... 30

4 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... 41

4.1 Single-hole results ........................................................................................... 41

4.2 Interpolated results in cross-sections .............................................................. 47

4.3 Other notices ................................................................................................... 49

5 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................... 53

6 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 55

2

PREFACE

This report presents the unification of borehole differences in electrical resistivity logging data acquired from Olkiluoto deep boreholes (KRl- KR28B) measured during 1988 - 2003. Report includes the analysis of the data, conclusions on the nature of the differences, design of unification method, and description of processed results for Long Normal resistivity logging data. Unification encountered borehole diameter and applied tool and previous processing techniques. Similar approach can be conducted for later boreholes to be surveyed, and analogously for Short Normal and Single Point resistivity methods.

Work was conducted by JP-Fintact, a consultancy company in Jaakko Poyry Infra. Work is a part of Posiva's programme for spent nuclear fuel disposal in Finnish bedrock. Contact persons from Posiva were Sanna Riikonen and Turo Ahokas, and from JP-Fintact Pauli Saksa and Pirjo Hella.

The authors wish to thank Mr. Turo Ahokas, Dr. Pekka Rouhiainen of PRG-Tee, Ms. Mari Lahti ofSuomen Malmi, Mr. Jalle Tammenmaa of Helsinki Technical University, and Mr. Arto Julkunen and Ms. Leena Kallio of Astrock, for their comments and suggestions, and valuable information on the field measurements, equipment and original calibration of the results. Mr. Jorma Nummela of JP-Fintact deserves thanks for assisting in data processing.

3

1 INTRODUCTION

Posiva prepares for disposal of spent nuclear fuel deep into bedrock in facilities to be constructed in Olkiluoto site, Finland. Bedrock investigations have continued since 1988. To date, 28 deep boreholes have been drilled and investigated, including geophysical logging. One of the geophysical methods has been logging of the bedrock electrical resistivity with several measurement arrays.

Electrical bulk resistivity of bedrock has a very large range of variation, typically 0.01 - 100000 nm in metamorphic rocks. Factors affecting to the values are mineralogical composition of bedrock- major silicate minerals forming the rock types are highly resistive and sulphide minerals typically very conductive - and porosity, alteration (clay content, silicification or carbonatization) and fracturing (apertures, fracture coating), as well as the salinity in the fluid residing in bedrock pores and fractures which decrease the bulk resistivity. Different properties are interconnected.

For site scale investigations, intensity of fracturing has been a major target for electrical logging methods. The data has been applied also to estimate host rock porosity, ground water salinity, and to localize zones of conductive minerals and alteration in the host rock. Until now, the consideration of data has been mainly a qualitative single-hole approach. Number of boreholes has increased and characterization of site will focus to a local scale of design and construction. Therefore a need for quantitative analysis has emerged.

Significant borehole specific differences have been encountered, which are not expected to originate from site properties, and have not been adequately treated with standard adjustment procedures. Differences have not hampered use of the results but would be possibly misleading when data is used in a more general quantitative manner or viewed and interpolated volumetrically.

The repeated overlapping measurements in one borehole need to be adjusted to a same level. The resistivity levels from different boreholes and in essentially similar rock type units with similar fracturing need to be comparable to each another before they will be saved into the Posiva' s database for wider use.

The aim of this work was to remove the differences in electrical Long Normal resistivity logging data. Work included the analysis (check) of data sets, design for unification technique, processing the data, and reporting of the results. The data was treated from boreholes KR1-KR20 and KR22-KR28, and short boreholes KR15B­KR20B, KR22B, KR23B, KR25B, KR27B and KR28B together with relevant supporting information. Unified Long Normal resistivity data has been delivered to Posiva's TUTKA data archive.

Posiva's contact persons were Ms. Sanna Riikonen and Mr. Turo Ahokas, who communicated the work and designed it in co-operation with JP-Fintact. Work was conducted as a team work in JP-Fintact. Ms. Pirjo Hella designed the analysis and processing of data (Chapter 3), Dr. Pauli Saksa guided the work throughout and provided theoretical guidelines, Mr. Eero Heikkinen provided expertise of applied logging methods, processing and applications (Chapter 2), analyzed the data (Chapter 4) and compiled this report. The above mentioned experts selected the sample data locations. Mr. Jorma Palmen provided comments on geological issues for the reference samples. Ms. Tiina Vaittinen provided the vertical cross section presentations.

4

5

2 RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES AND DATA

2.1 Resistivity measurement techniques

2.1.1 Background

Definition of resistivity

Resistivity (specific resistance) is a property of material describing how well the medium will resist electrical current flow. Units of electrical resistivity are expressed as resistance (in ohms,O) over a length unit (m) or on a surface area (square meter) in ohm*meters (Om), or as the inverse, electrical conductivity (Siemens/m).

The bulk resistivity of bedrock, containing contributions of host rock minerals, the fracturing of host rock, and porosity and fluid properties of pore space, can be measured by feeding a known current through the medium at known locations, then measuring the voltage over a known length. Resistivity can be measured from extracted core samples for specific material properties (petrophysical data), with a geophysical measurement array from ground surface for large area or volume characterization (soundings or mapping), or from boreholes for formation specific characterization (logging). The latter two provide an apparent resistivity, which is dependable on measurement array and is averaging the values over a larger volume. In logging and petrophysical sampling the geological sample properties are identifiable for correlations.

Resistivity as a subsurface property

Electrical resistivity is a property with a very high range of variation in soil and rock materials. In sedimentary terrains, resistivity is indicative for rock type mapping. The grain size, degree of consolidation, porosity, and pore size, are both affecting to the resistivity and are related to rock type definition (sand stone - clay stone, clay content, ... sedimentation conditions) (Hallenburg 1984).

In metamorphic crystalline rocks with low porosity, in addition to the primary rock type, the other properties like fracturing, and occurrence of conductive minerals, affect the resistivity. Alteration will influence to the resistivity by increasing or decreasing the porosity, and by accumulating highly resistive or highly conductive minerals. These properties can run over a rock type definition. For metamorphic rocks the resistivity cannot be considered directly as a rock type mapping tool, but rather a means to detect, localize and estimate brittle (fractures and faults) and ductile (shears) deformation and alteration of the bedrock. For both terrains, the salinity of the ground water residing in the pore space is an essential factor of bulk resistivity, interconnected with porosity (Schon 1996, Hallenburg 1984 ).

Resistivity is an anisotropic property. Layering and preferred orientation of the minerals in either sedimentary or metamorphic crystalline bedrock affect to the resistivity values. A common case is the transverse isotropy, where the resistivity of the rock forming minerals and the rock units is highest perpendicular to the layering, and lowest parallel to the layers. Features in the metamorphic bedrock, fractures, veins and banding, are often producing macroscopic anisotropy. Considering the medium consisted of parallel uniform layers, for current flowing perpendicular (normal) to the layering, the average transverse resistivity is defined as a sum of resistances over the

6

whole length section, divided by the length. For current flowing parallel to the layering, the average longitudinal resistivity is the length divided by the sum of conductances over the length section. These two average values are different for the same sequence of layers and varying resistivities (Zhdanov & Keller 1994).

Orientation of the measurement array (the current flow direction) relative to the layering will affect the observable resistivity values. The lowest (true) resistivity is observed perpendicular to layering, and the value measurable parallel to layering is a geometric mean of transverse and longitudinal resistivities. This is called as a "paradox of anisotropy" in electrical resistivity (Kunetz 1966). Pronounced geological anisotropy can cause notable differences in the electrical measurement data, which need to be at least recognized.

Some typical resistivity ranges measurable in pure minerals, crystalline bedrock, and conditions observed in Olkiluoto area specifically, are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Electrical resistivities of minerals forming rock types (modified from Peltoniemi 1988, Heikkinen et al. 2004), and ranges of variation for different classes of bedrock values in Olkiluoto.

Medium Bulk resistivity Comment ran2e, nm

Graphite 10-2- 10-6

Chalcopyrite 1 o-l - 104

Pyrite 1 - 1 o-:; Pure minerals are rarely met in quantities Magnetite 1 o-:;- 104 (layer thicknesses) where their resistivity

Hematite 104 - 104 could be directly measured using

Sphalerite 104 - 104 geophysical logging

Mica 103- 1014

Quartz 1010- 1014

Biotite 102- 106

Gravel, coarse sand 1.000-2.000 (saturated)

Tap water, typically 50-100 Borehole groundwater, 0.1-200 Can range from brines to very resistive

Olkiluoto rain waters Weathered/ Altered/ 100-500 Clay or sulphide containing fractures or

Fractured rock rock mass, increased porosity Weathered/ Altered/ 500-2.000-8.000 When sulphides are not encountered as Fractured rock mass fracture coating; increased porosity

Gabro 10.000-30.000 Granite 5.000-20.000 Granites and pegmatites in Olkiluoto

10.000-20.000 nm when non-broken. Depends on salinity.

Gneiss 5.000-20.000 Grey gneisses in Olkiluoto, 25.000-35.000 nm; quartzified or carbonatized

gneisses near 100.000 nm. Mica schist 5.000-20.000

Graphite gneiss 0.1 - 100 Sulphide ore 0.01 - 10

7

2.1.2 Geophysical logging techniques

In geophysical borehole logging a fixed array of investigation is used along a borehole for repeated sampling of subsurface physical properties such as density, electrical resistivity, magnetic susceptibility, elastic properties, or radiation. Variation in these values is often due to geological properties, and the results can be clustered into subclasses and then used in assisting the geological mapping. Data can be used as an equivalent source for petrophysical, petrological or deformational mapping. This would require tying the results into a known level. In this a geological reference data is essential to recognize the sample properties. Also it is necessary to take into account the differences and possible biases related to observation techniques.

Electrical resistivity logging is performed using as a source direct current or low frequency AC current with alternating polarity to avoid electrode polarization effects. The current fed (I, Amperes) and voltage difference measured (~U, Volts) are recorded, and adjusted to a value of apparent resistivity Pa (Qm) using a geometrical factor K, to normalize the decay of voltage over the distance (see Equation 1 ).

11U Pa = K. I [Qm] (1)

Measurement is performed using a high impedance voltage meter. Grounding resistance of electrodes has to be low and stable. Self potential voltage (a drift) is monitored during measurement and removed from the results.

The logging data can describe the high resistivities in the bedrock rather well. The range of measurement tools is adequate to cover simultaneously both the low and high resistivities at 1-100.000 nm, which is the reported range of WellMac tool (MaU'L GeoScience 1998). Range is limited by the lowest measurable voltage (e.g. one millivolt) compared to the standard current, e.g. 20 mA, and also restricted by the grounding resistance of any of the electrodes, including the current and voltage return.

Lower resistivities than 1 Qm cannot be usually measured and distinguished with direct current normal arrays, but would require usage of an electromagnetic inductive tool instead, which in turn has the highest measurable resistivities of order 100-200 nm.

There are numerous logging arrays applicable. Many of the arrays are designed and standardized for hydrocarbon research or mineral prospecting, and later adopted for, e.g., hydrogeological, geotechical and structural geological applications. Their properties, purposes and applicability are reviewed e.g. in Poikonen (1983) and Hallenburg (1984). Some comments on their properties and purposes are indicated in Table 2 below.

Grounding resistance has been measured using several different arrays. Sensitivity will depend greatly on the location of return current electrode and construction of the tool. Micro-arrays in focused logging are sensing very limited area. The methods can be adopted to provide nearly real resistivity values despite ofborehole effects.

8

Table 2. Examples of electrical resistivity logging arrays and their primary purposes. Current electrodes are denoted as A, B and voltage electrodes M, N Current is fed through A (source) and B (return). Voltage difference is measured between M, N Distances between AM, AN, BM and BN are encountered for geometrical factor.

Array Properties Geometrical Comments factor K

Resistance Resistance is measured None (usually). Data is sensitive, but difficult to between current electrodes. quantify. Water salinity, borehole One active electrode = diameter and other grounding single-hole array. conditions affect strongly the data.

Normal, Current flows "normal" to 47t*AM= 5.1 Largest depth of penetration of AM=16" a horizontal layer, when logging arrays. Fairly large features

borehole is vertical. can be seen. Tools use current Anomalies are symmetric return on ground surface, or on to the current source (a steel armored cable connected with spherical volume). an insulator bridle (e.g. 10 m). To Different AM lengths obtain true values, the layers in distinguish penetration of bedrock have to be thicker than the drilling mud into host rock. AM length, resistive layers thinner Nominal depth of than AM cannot be detected. Suits investigation is 1 ,5* AM poorly when the borehole effect is (50% of information large (very resistive bedrock, highly contributed), maximum conductive borehole fluid). There is information comes from a a difficulty to defme accurately the sphere of0.6*AM in radius location of the layers, so the single (Poikonen 1983). point resistance should always

Normal, accompany the Normal array data. AM=64" 47t* AM= 20.4 Wenner, Depth of investigation is 47t*a=4.0 A local array. A good resolving a=32 cm 0.82*a (50% contribution), power for local conductive zones of

and maximum information fairly good conductivity. Poor is obtained from a radius of resolution for single fractures when 0.57*a. fluid is highly conductive. Very

sensitive to fluid conductivity. Lateral, Anomaly form is 47t*(A0)2/MN Dipole array, current return is

asymmetric. A gradient = 644 grounded either to surface, or with AO= array has a good detection a bridle to the cable armor, and 1.65 m of upper boundary of For voltage difference is recorded at a MN= conductive layer. compensated short distance. There is a limit of 0.1 m arrays the highest observable resistivity,

geometrical depending of array size, borehole factor K diameter and host rock and fluid defmition is resistivities. Compensated dual experimental. lateral arrays can be used to provide

a nearly absolute resistivity level. Focused Multielectrode arrays, Geometrical Dipmeter as a microfocused

where guard electrodes factor K is logging used in Olkiluoto. guide the current to flow complex, perpendicularly to the defmition is formation from the experimental borehole, giving an opportunity to measure the host rock properties without a significant error from borehole effects.

9

Use of different logging arrays is aimed to provide optimal information on a specific target. Short spacing arrays provide data from the flushed zone near borehole wall in the bedrock. The long spacing arrays provide information from undisturbed zone. The differences of the short and long arrays provide information on borehole and host rock properties: porosity and formation fluid resistivity, and formation resistivity, as well as differences in fluid properties.

Measurements are used to provide information on bulk resistivity of formation material, degree of water saturation, resistivity of waters in the pore space, amount of conductive minerals, resistivity and the thickness of mud cake supporting borehole in sedimentary terrains, diameter of borehole resistivity, and geometry of fluids and solids in formation volume.

There are several borehole and geometrical factors affecting to the correctness of recorded apparent resistivity, which need to be corrected for. These are (Hallenburg 1984):

1) Electrode spacing and system geometry (geometrical factor K) 2) Borehole resistivity and size (borehole effect leveling) 3) Bed (layer) thickness. The layer thickness corrections are designed for

hydrocarbon investigations.

In this report the two first factors are considered. The resistivity of narrow conductive zones is not corrected for layer thickness. Unification is concentrated to high resistivity range.

Apart of borehole effects, there are conditions influencing the measurements, and causing errors. A part of these are compensated with the approach advised in this report. The factors are (Hallenburg 1984):

1) Thin beds (layers), compared to the length ofNormal array (not compensated) 2) Exposed metal on the probe (considered in the leveling) 3) Casing (results are not available inside casing) 4) Return current electrode (the Fish) in the borehole (not applied in these results) 5) Insufficient distance to the return electrodes (in this case the electrodes have been

remote). 6) Inadequate or varying grounding properties in return electrodes (leveled out in

this approach). One can assume the anomalous conductivity regions near return electrodes may affect also to the level of the measurement, but this issue is not yet examined.

7) Tool decentralization (some arrays require side wall measurement, not considered)

8) Electrochemical polarization of electrodes (a need to let the chemical conditions to stabilize, not considered)

9) Apparent changes in results when the probe, and current return electrode, approach a highly resistive layer, and the return electrode grounding is poor (the Delaware effect, not considered).

1 0) Spontaneous potential drift (compensated by tool), or noisy circumstances (noise is not considered).

10

The short and long spaced normal arrays can be used to estimate also tool performance. In practice the short normal should always be on same or slightly lower resistivity level than long normal due to borehole fluid influence. Higher the fluid salinity, the greater is the difference between long and short normal data. Exception is a case, where a resistive layer is too thin to be detected with long spacing, but can be detected with a short array (LN is lower than SN). An example of data is presented in Figure 1 below.

100000

10000

e 1000

"' E .c

100 Q. ~ ·s: 10 ;::; f/)

·c;; !i.

0.1

0.01

Borehole length (m)

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 +-_ _.__ _ _.__ _ _._ _ _._ _ __._ _ __._ _ __,__ _ __,___-+ 16 --SN res

--LN res

14 --Fluid resistivity

--Susceptibility 12 - Rocktype

1 0 --Density

8 Coding of rock types

6 0 No sample 1 Granite pegmatite

4 2 Migm atitic mica gneiss

r""""""'"~~~~~~~~~~r::::::::::-~:::::-::::====t 2 3 Grey gneiss 4 Amphibolite

.__....-u __ __._ ____________ __.__ o 5 Diabase

Figure 1. An example of a good (65 - 80 m) and a disturbed (53 - 64 m) long normal resistivity section in KR20. Short normal is adequately short to observe single resistive layers between conductive zones. Long normal, being 1. 6 m in length, will always observe some conductivity, thus being unable to detect resistive layers.

When borehole effects in short normal data are negligible, and long normal data is of lower resistivity than short normal, there is a probable current leakage in the tool, cable head or connection to return electrodes, which should be insulated. On opposite case (short normal is clearly below the level of long normal) there is a significant amount of current guided along the borehole or armored cable. The latter situation can be helped with better return electrode grounding (Mount Sopris Instrument 2002). Proportion of the current flowing along a borehole increases with the increasing fluid conductivity.

Methods applied in Olkiluoto

In Olkiluoto, single point resistance (SPR), Wenner (32 cm) or Short Normal (SN, 16"), and Long Normal (LN, 64") logging arrays have been applied. Resistivity data has been acquired from two different borehole diameters (56 mm and 76 mm), using two different tool constructions: VTT Technical Research Centre design called later "VTT Tool" and a Mala Geoscience WellMac design called later "Mala Tool".

11

The SPR and Normal Arrays have been applied most systematically on the site. The Normal arrays have been selected due to their simple form of anomalies, a good depth of investigation compared to any other arrays, and capability of distinguishing extent of fracture zones in the volume near the borehole (the smallest fractures do not affect the results of the array). Wenner array was applied to boreholes KR2-KR5 instead of Short Normal due to better resolution for highly conductive thin layers. This study concentrates to Long Normal data processing. The results measured with this array are available from all boreholes surveyed with geophysical logging (except tunnel pilot borehole PHO 1 ), which make the site coverage best. Sub horizontal KR21 does not include geophysical logging.

There have been three field operators for the work: Swedish Geological AB (later Mala Geoscience), Suomen Malmi Oy (SMOY) and Astrock Oy, see Table 3.

Data characteristics

On a general view, the quality of data is good. The data contains clear differences between the boreholes. Resistivity ranges are at intense fracture zones with conductive minerals, thin conductors and regions of several thin conductive zones (fractures or conductive veins) 1 - 1.000 nm, regions of increased fracturing 1.000- 10.000 nm, and areas of weakly fractured and non-conductive bedrock 10.000 - 35.000 nm depending on local fracturing, and the rock type. At highest resistivity regions the values range at 35.000 - 60.000 nm, indicating very low porosity and non-fractured rock mass, probably joined with highly resistive minerals of host rock. At surface parts, resistivity is slightly lower than elsewhere due to higher fracture frequency. Increase in electrical conductivity of the ground water deeper down in bedrock causes a clear trend of decreasing resistivity according to depth, to values less than 10.000 nm in non-fractured, resistive rock mass. This phenomenon is a true property and it shall not be removed by the unification.

The borehole diameter and applied tool will affect the dependency of apparent resistivity on the fluid resistivity remaining after standard leveling. Smaller diameter displays stronger dependency on the fluid resistivity. Tools containing more metal objects or closer to the electrodes than in others are also more dependent on the fluid resistivity. Further to this, there are level differences between different boreholes.

There are some indications of decreased performance of the array ( spikey anomalies in KR2, KR4 and KR6 extension part, and some sections of frequently alternating low resistivity, like KR20 section 53-64 m and KR8 upper sections).

Tool construction

Design affects the results via the fluid resistivity, apart of the borehole effect. When the fluid resistivity decreases, so does also the measured apparent resistivity. The tool becomes charged while the current field is modified to flow along the borehole. This feature should be possible to adjust. The effect should be known for each tool type.

All field measurements have applied a Kevlar reinforced cable with polyurethane jacket. In VTT tool the electrodes have been mounted in a plastic tube. The cable head is a metal object in the probe. Mala tool is constructed of fiberglass tube where the electrodes reside, and a metal housing of 42 mm diameter, containing electronics and data communications units located 40 cm above the current electrode. An extension

12

part of 60 - 100 cm long fiberglass tube has been tested, and observed to affect to the results. Examples of used tool designs have been displayed in Figure 2.

Figure 2. An example of used resistivity measurement tools: extract of Mala Wel!Mac tool technical drawing, with a current source (A) and SPR electrode, and voltage electrodes Ml and M2 for 16" and 64 " Normal arrays, and M2 and M for lateral array, respectively. Electronics and data communication unit is between the cable head and the electrodes (Lahti & Heikkinen 2004).

Possible sources of error in measurement were analyzed, and discussed through with Dr. Pekka Rouhiainen of PRG-Tee. These are related to tool geometry, borehole geometry and fluid resistivity, short circuit currents through the borehole fluid and apparently also to geological circumstances. Conductive and resistive zones can affect the measured data to a relatively large distance. Occurrence of conductive groundwater in a fracture will cause the fracture (zone) to be seen to further distance than in presence of fresh water.

13

Field work performance

The use of Normal array is based on assumption that neither the location of current return electrode B nor voltage reference electrode N would affect to the data. Effectively infinite distance is in theory already at 10-20 times longer distances than the AM spacing. This can be achieved in borehole grounding already with adequately long insulator bridle. For the case for very resistive environment this term may not hold exactly, so the more resistive the terrain, the longer distance is required. On grounding to the surface, the distance of grounding from borehole casing has to be adequate.

The grounding resistances need to be adequately small and stable and there should not appear any polarization effect due to electrode materials, which need to be same in all electrodes to avoid el~ctrode polarization differences. Poor grounding resistance may cause a so called Delaware effect, where short normal apparent resistivity is clearly below the long normal, when measured below a thick highly resistive layer, and the resistivity receives erroneously high values, and slowly approaches the real level. This phenomenon is smallest when the current return is properly grounded on surface, and may not have encountered in Olkiluoto site. It appears, that the resistance of surface grounding location affects the level of the apparent resistivity data, e.g., a conductive location (ditch, mire; a conductive zone, especially one intersecting the borehole) or a highly resistive location may influence to the data level between boreholes, as tested during KR6 extension borehole (unreported comparison work).

The field measurements have been performed with grounding the return electrode onto ground surface, from several tens of meters to hundreds of meters, into a moist place, and the voltage reference electrode at a separate location on the ground, always few tens of meters away from borehole. For SGAB operated logging the return electrode has been 50 m from borehole for current, and 50 m to opposite direction for voltage electrode (Niva 1989). Current return electrode has been in a fixed location 200-400 m from borehole for SMOY logging of76 mm boreholes KR14, KR14, KR19-KR22 and KR19B-KR22B. For all other logging runs, current return electrode has been at various locations few tens of meters off the borehole.

For downhole run, the probe can be either centralized or placed side-wall, which may cause differences in the results. The long normal measurement has been performed with non-centralised (side-wall) tool in all cases in the inclined boreholes.

2.1.3 Standard leveling of electrical logging data and sources of error

In non-processed raw data, the borehole fluid resistivity and the borehole diameter will affect to the measured apparent resistivity. A short circuiting effect modifies the current field to flow in a non-spherical form. Leveling of borehole fluid influence compensates the effect to better define the true resistivity of host rock.

For Normal arrays the borehole fluid effect leveling has been published by Dakhnov (1962), and results further modified for Wenner array by Poikonen (1983). Procedure applies the contrast of measured apparent resistivity to the measured fluid resistivity. Leveling is specific to tool length (AM) and borehole diameter.

14

The contrast between bedrock resistivity and fluid resistivity defines the magnitude of leveling. Higher the contrast, the greater is the magnitude, being small, however. The borehole leveling is further compensated with a tool diameter compensation (for WellMac 42 mm) which reduces the magnitude (Vaittinen 1988). Compensation applies the ratio of surface areas of tool and borehole cross sections.

Leveling will act differently for different electrode spacing and borehole diameter. The larger the borehole diameter or longer the electrode spacing, the less the borehole will affect to the results. An example of borehole effect leveling nomogram (Poikonen 1983) is displayed in Figure 3.

18' lot.

-0,5-+-----+----+--

10 100 P, jf~

1000 10000

Figure 3. Conductive borehole fluid effect on resistivity according to Poikonen (1983) and Dakhnov (1962), 66 mm borehole diameter. Measured apparent resistivity p(b is computed with measured fluid resistivity p0 to leveled bulk resistivity of the host rock p J. The adjustment is further scaled with a ratio of borehole and tool cross section areas.

15

Leveling has a minor influence to the long normal data, and stronger to short normal. Short 16" normal array requires increasing the resistivity when contrast is more than 1000, and for smaller contrasts the apparent resistivity is higher than the true bulk resistivity. Long normal resistivity requires slight decrease of resistivity at the same conditions being higher than true until contrasts of 20.000. Then it requires increasing. In Olkiluoto the contrasts can exceed 30.000. Due to the tool effects, short circuiting along borehole and probably some surface conductivity phenomena, the standard leveling is inadequate for very high contrasts.

The processing and borehole effect compensation techniques were discussed with the logging operators. Borehole effects have been always compensated for according to Dakhnov (1962) and Poikonen (1983). Some of the boreholes do not encounter correction for the tool diameter (Vaittinen 1988), as the others do.

Long normal values for a same location are usually higher than short normal values. Short normal data is occasionally above the long normal values. As the observed differences in some of the raw data display fairly normal behaviour, the reason is apparently lacking of the tool diameter compensation, because the short normal leveling exaggerates and long normalleveling underestimates the resistivity when the tool diameter is not encountered. Another explanation is an electrical leakage in the cable head. Properly leveled short normal and long normal results are close to each another.

Essential for the borehole effect compensation is to use a borehole fluid resistivity, which is measured simultaneously or at very short time spacing with the resistivity logging. Data needs to be in situ (non-temperature corrected) and adequately well from same depth level. The series of fluid-logging in KR1 - KR5, which applied resistive ion-exchanged water into borehole and monitored the changes in resistivity, have modified the borehole conditions so that the bedrock resistivity data seems out slightly error-prone.

The fluid resistivity has been measured immediately before or after the resistivity logging. In limited cases, where time schedule has required so, the time interval between measurements has been 1-3 weeks maximum. There are some cases where the reported fluid resistivity has been measured separately, and the fluid resistivity used in corrections has been produced for purpose but not reported. In future, it seems necessary to require all data affecting to the final results to be delivered, though measured right before LN logging.

There may appear sources of error that are non-linear. Rapidly alternating sections where the long normal is clearly below the short normal, and the anomalies are asymmetric, may origin from several reasons. One reason is geological, the evident existence of frequent and thin conductive zones will accumulate into the long normal tool spacing (AM) so that only conductive results are obtained. The other is the tool design, where metal objects connect to a conductive zone, and so a non-standard long normal array is effective. Asymmetry may arise from case where the tool housing functions as a third electrode when the electrodes have passed the conductive layer.

16

2.1.4 Petrophysical measurements

Resistivity can be measured from core samples to define the formation specific values. For site investigations, samples have been measured at three frequencies, of which the lowest (1 0 second cycle length) has been applied for this work. Lowest frequency provides highest resistivity. Resistivity has been measured along the length axis from saw-cut samples with minimum length of 6 cm. Samples have been kept in 90°C bath of tap water (50 - 60 Qm) over 3 days before measurement. Analyses have been carried out by Geological Survey of Finland.

Values range from 188 to 2.000.000 nm in 1989- 1992 measurements from KR1 -KR6. Samples were selected from non-fractured areas of bedrock, at 10- 30 m sample interval (Lindberg & Paananen 1991 , 1992).

Boreholes KR7- KR12 did not contain petrophysical samples. Petrophysical samples in 2001-2002 (KR8 extension, KR13- KR20, KR22, Lahti et al. 2001 , 2003, Julkunen et al. 2002, 2003) did not include resistivity measurement.

Values from KR23 - KR28 in 2003 range from 20 to 380.000 nm (Julkunen et al. 2004a, b), and were selected from representative or anomalous locations of density and susceptibility logging (but selection did not consider resistivity variation). Major factor affecting to the petrophysical resistivities is porosity and its type of distribution in the samples. An example of resistivity variation in the petrophysical samples is displayed in Figure 4.

10

• I• Samples I • • • • •• • ···~ •• • •

~ • • • •• •• 0 • • • 1. ~ • • . · ... ~ -·u; 0 "' "'~ --~ ••• T ~ • . ·~ ... 0 • • ... ~~. ~·t a. • • •••

~ ... ....~ ..... • • •• • . ... --·~··--·· • •• • •• • I 0 .. , ............ ••• • • • •• • ....

0.1 ~· ! 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000

Resistivity, Ohm*m

Figure 4. Resistivity and porosity ofOlkiluoto petrophysical samples, N=421. Smallest measurable porosity value is 0.1 %, which is also the accuracy. Greatest measured porosity value is 6. 8%. Resistivity varies between 10 - 1. 000. 000 Om. There is a clear trend of resistivity according to porosity.

17

When petrophysical values are compared to logging data, the local minima and certain local levels of higher resistivities follow fairly well long normal and short normal data. Example ofpetrophysical data viewed together with logging data is shown in Figure 5.

Borehole length (m) --Wenner res

200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 --Single pnt res. 1000000 8 ~ Petrof. res.

<> --LNres 7

- Fluid res 100000

6 - Rocktype -E iC

E 10000 5 ..c:

Coding of rock Q. ~ 4 ~ ·:;;: 0 No sample .. 1000 1 Granite f/) 3 ·c;;

pegmatite ~

2 2 Migmatitic

100 mica gneiss 3 Grey gneiss 4 Amphibolite

10 0 5 Diabase

Figure 5. Petrophysical resistivity data (yellow diamonds) compared to original Long Normal resistivity logging data (red curve, KR2, 200-420 m).

There are however very high petrophysical resistivities which cannot be compared to logging data. Explanations may be found, like 30-40 cm Wenner and short normal and 1.6 m long normal rarely can find a compact section totally lacking all porosity, fracturing and mineral conductors or semiconductors, whereas the petrophysical sample is small enough to reveal occurrences of very highly resistive minerals. Also the fluid resistivity in logging (varying) and in laboratory measurements (constant) has been different.

Another possible reason for 10-fold variation in high range of petrophysical resistivities (30.000 - 300.000 Qm) may be anisotropy of resistivity due to foliation (gneissic banding). The normal logging can observe the longitudinal (lowest) resistivity, while most of boreholes have been drilled near perpendicular to layering, whereas the samples may reveal very high resistivity transverse to the layering, depending on sample orientation. Sample orientation has not been considered, nor measurement performed along different axis with respect to banding.

Resistivity values of petrophysical data can be applied to coarse check of logging data level, when both are at 20-500 Qm (conductive mineral layers and porous zones), 500-10.000 Qm (slightly fractured or weakly porous zones) or 10.000-50.000 nm (resistive, non-porous, non-fractured units). The values cannot be applied when the results differ strongly for any reason, or when the petrophysical resistivity ranges at 50.000 - 2.000.000 Qm exceeding any of measured Long Normal data.

18

2.2 Data sets involved to the work and required treatment

2.2.1 Electrical resistivity logging data

Used data have been listed in Appendix 1. An example of non-adjusted measurement data with supporting data is shown in Figure 6.

Electrical resistivity data was retrieved from all boreholes and sections. This consisted of long normal resistivity logging from KR1-KR20 and KR22-KR28, as well as KR15B-KR20B, KR22B, KR23B, KR25B, KR27B and KR28B. Single point resistance data and short normal or Wenner data, as well as PRG-Tee resistance data, were treated as a reference from the same boreholes. Data was printed on charts with relevant supporting data, see Figure 6. Technical details have been reported in Working reports of field work (see Appendix 1 for data references).

Borehole length (m) --SN res

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 --SNres

--Sing le pt. res

24 --Sing lept. res

- SP(flow) res

22 --LNres

--LNres 20 --Fiu dres

18 - SAL res

0 Fract. f luid res.

16 - SP(Fiow) ext res

- Suscept ibility 14 . Rocktype

12 - SUS res

- Series12

10 - Density

8 Coding of rock

~ 6 0 No sarrple

4 1 Granite pegmatite 2 Mgmatitic nica

2 gneiss

3 Grey gneiss 0 4 Arrphibolite

Figure 6. An example of resistivity data to be leveled and supporting material, borehole KR8. Red and magenta curves are long normal resistivity, blue and cyan short normal resistivity, and dark and light green are single point resistance data from upper and lower parts of extended borehole. Level variation between the parts can be clearly seen. Black curve is resistance measured during flow logging. Grey curves are fluid resistivity results. At the figure bottom, black lines denote rock type, lily curve magnetic susceptibility and dark green curve the gamma density.

The different variations of tool and processing techniques have been presented in Table 3. This division was used also in clustering the boreholes to subclasses in processing.

19

Table 3. Different tool and processing variations in the Olkiluoto investigations.

Tool Operator Diameter Processing stage Boreholes

VTT Field work 56 mm Borehole and tool KR2, KR3, KR4, KR5 SMOY, diameter considered

processing VTT

WellMac SGAB, 56 mm Borehole and tool KRI processing diameter considered.

VTT WellMac Astrock 56 mm Borehole diameter KR2ext, KR4ext, KR7, KR8

considered. WellMac Astrock 56 mm Borehole and tool KR7ext, KR9, KRll, KR12

diameter considered. WellMac SMOY 56 mm Borehole diameter KR8ext

considered. WellMac Astrock 76mm Borehole diameter KR6

considered. WellMac SMOY 76mm Borehole diameter KR13, KR14, KR19, KR20,

considered. KR22, KR19B, KR20B, KR22B VTT SMOY 76mm Borehole diameter KRIO

considered. WellMac Astrock 76mm Borehole and tool KR6ext, KR15-KR18, KR23-

diameter considered. KR28, KR15B-KR18B, KR23B, KR25B,KR27B,KR28B

2.2.2 Supporting data

Reference information was gathered up into Excel worksheets and plotted to charts from each borehole using a macro. The following data was included:

1) Grounding resistance measured during the flow logging. Result has been measured for localization (depth tie) of flow logging tool, and is very sensitive. Preference has been set to data measured without pumping, if several data sets have been available. Data was used for external confirmation of resistivity anomalies, for recognition of fractured sections, and to check the borehole conditions.

2) Gamma-gamma -density to control the variation of rock types and detect intense fracturing.

3) Magnetic susceptibility, to recognise any occurrences of magnetized and thus often conductive minerals. Correlation to electrical resistivity is good.

4) Resistivity ofpetrophysical samples, measured with 0.1 Hz frequency. 5) Rock type information (Bedrock model 2003/1, Vaittinen et al. 2003 from KR1-

KR23B, for KR24-KR28B SMOY definitions were reported) 6) Fluid resistivity and temperature, measured simultaneously with the resistivity 7) Other resistivity data than Long Normal was used as reference (Wenner, Single

Point resistance, Short Normal).

20

Each borehole was reviewed through for assessment of dependencies and checking for errors. It appeared fairly soon, that most of the level variation between boreholes becomes from changes in the fluid resistivity. Other possible factors affecting the resistivity levels were considered the rock type, fracturing and occurrence of conductive minerals.

The borehole fluid electrical resistivity measured along with normal resistivity logging was reviewed against possible errors and deviations from potential bedrock ground water properties. Resistivity of groundwater contained in fractures, according to flow logging, was used as reference data. The boreholes with most deviating results were assessed at first place. Comments on observations are presented in Table 4.

As a shortlist, borehole KR18 had an apparent processing error in the data (logarithm of values taken). For KR1 - KR5 fluid logging has introduced ion-exchanged water into the borehole, causing considerable interference.

In borehole KR15 the resistivity values in upper part, and at 250 m, are representative. Deeper down the bedrock groundwater is less resistive (1.7 Qm at 412 m) than the open borehole fluid during resistivity logging ( 4.4 Qm due to mixing). Boreholes KR16 and KR17 display a good match. This holds also to KR18, when the data is corrected.

Borehole KR20 displays mixing of groundwater from different depths to a fairly conductive water. Extension part of borehole KR08 indicates all the groundwater comes from a fracture zone at 556 m depth, where the groundwater resistivity is exceptionally low (0.4 Qm). At 250-350 m the water resistivity gradually decreases from 1.15 to 0.8 Qm, where borehole fluid resistivity is slightly lower (0.53 Qm). In the upper part, the resistivity of the water has been too high compared to natural one in open borehole.

In KR11 there are no flow logging fracture observations below 420 m. Above that level the borehole water is representative with 1-1.5 Qm values. Two fracture zones display slightly higher resistivity values (2.3-2.4 Qm). Grounding resistance displays similar behaviour as the borehole resistivity, thus confirming the correct level of low resistivity. For KR13, the resistivity of water is very high over whole borehole, which is not true for bedrock groundwater from fractures.

Most of the other boreholes were considered as fairly non-disturbed, and the open borehole and bedrock groundwater properties are well in line there. The reported fluid resistivity values (at 25°C) were computed back to the in situ temperature, using an inverse of the reported temperature conversion function, Equation (2):

Pwinsitu = (0.48 + 0.021· T) (2)

where T is the in situ temperature, P2soc the resistivity reported in 25°C and Pw in situ the fluid resistivity returned to the primary measurement value.

21

Table 4. Comments on fluid resistivity from different boreholes.

Bore- Depth Open Flow logging of Comment hole section borehole fracture groundwater

logging fluid resistivity resistivity

KR1 40-150 2.5-33 nrn 5-11.2 nrn "Fluid logging" has been measured with SN and LN. Values deviate from fracture groundwater data.

150-335 33 to 16 nrn Decreasing 3- 0.65 nrn Clear influence to resistivity. 335-525 Decreasing 16 No samples

- 1 nrn 525-627 1 to 0.8 nrn 0.45-0.93 nm Fairly good correspondence to

fracture groundwater 627-990 From 1 to 67 0.26 nm at 768 m Fresh water replaced fracture water

nm at the range. Too high resistivities. KR08 20-80 110 nrn, high 14-50 nm, a transition to Fresh waters mixing

resistivity less resistive 100-140 Transition Transition from 3 8 to 18 Fresh waters have been mixing to

from 4.1 to 1.5 nrn, too high resistivity borehole, drilling fluids residing in nm borehole

140-230 Transition No samples Probably too high resistivity. 6-180rn

230-315 6-6.5 nrn 1.15-1.2 nm Probably too high fluid resistivity 290-601 o.53 nrn 1.15- 0.4 nrn. No Fluid is from 556 m fractures.

samples at 350-540 m. Fairly representative in deeper part. KRll 120-430 1-1.4 nrn 1.15-1.50 nm Good match

430-710 1.4-1.0 nrn No samples Features match with flow log grounding resistance.

710-1100 1.o-0.12 nrn No samples Exceptionally low fluid resistivity. Features match with flow log

grounding resistance. KR13 0-460 25-35 nrn o.73- 14 nrn Fresh water replaced bedrock

water. Too high resistivities. 460-500 Values coherent

KR15 0-78 10 to 4 nrn 26to3 nm Fairly good representativity 80-230 4 to 2.3 nm No samples. Expected fair representativity

213-280 3.9-4.2 nrn 4.23 nrn at 242 m Good representativity. 280-520 4.2-4.4 nm No samples 240-400; Deeper down fluid is less resistive.

1.67 nrn at 412 m Otherwise good match. KR16 40-170 3.6 to I Om 23 to 2 nrn Good representativity KR17 40-156 5.6 to 2 nrn 12 to 1.75 nrn Good representativity KR18 40-125 Corrected 3 to 18 to 1.7 nm Good representativity. Highest

1.75 nm resistivities not seen in borehole fluid.

KR20 40-115 2.4-2 nrn, 6-12 nrn, lowest values Pumping in flow logging has decreasing at 56-63 m fracture zone. brought saline water to upper part

slowly ofborehole 115-180 2-1.94 nrn No sample data Bedrock transition not covered by

open borehole data 190 1.94 nrn 1.70m Reasonably good match

200-400 1.9 nrn No sample data Fairly good estimate. 400-490 I.9nrn 0.67-0.94 nrn Groundwater in fractures clearly

less resistive, mixing.

22

The rock type information was used in first place as a supporting data reference. When it became apparent, that the work would be based on selection and description of sample locations (see Chapter 3 ), the selected depth ranges were assessed in more detail with respect to geological properties. Results are displayed in Appendix 2 together with comments on resistivity values encountered.

The rock type information was gathered from original data files. Following simplifications were applied to the rock type presentations, while maintaining the original information in the data files:

1) Granite pegmatite

2) Migmatitic mica gneiss 3) Grey gneiss

<- Granite, Pegmatite, Granite _pegmatite, Pegmatite-granite

<- Migmatitic mica gneiss, Mica gneiss, Migmatite <-Grey gneiss, Gneiss, Tonalite.

The rock type information was supplemented from geological reports of Kivitieto ( Gehor et al. 1996, etc ), and analysed in more detail also from borehole images. Following properties of the rock type were gathered up: homogeneity, anisotropy, rock type (grey gneiss, pegmatite granite, migmatitic mica gneiss, and migmatitic granite gneiss). Also the fracturing intensity was evaluated from the drilling report. The properties gathered were intended to assist the selection and classification of samples.

Altogether 82 sample locations were analysed. On the basis of geological appearance, and the representativity of given rock type, there was 21 samples judged suitable for analysis (KR2, KR3, KR4, KR7, KR10, KR11, KR12, KR13, KR14, KR15, KR16, KR20, KR22, KR23, K24 and KR27). In practice also others had to be included. Two sample locations were not recommended due to their mixed appearance of migmatitic mica gneiss being mostly pegmatite granite (KR24 and KR25).

Samples are mostly anisotropic (73). Largest proportion of the samples was anisotropic migmatitic mica gneiss ( 4 7), of which homogeneous samples 21 and heterogeneous 26 (displaying pegmatite granite veins, etc ). Of grey gneisses were 17 samples, three of which isotropic, 8 homogeneously anisotropic and 6 heterogeneously anisotropic. Pegmatite granite was found 14 samples, of which homogeneous and isotropic are six, homogeneous and anisotropic four, and heterogeneous and anisotropic four, too. Migmatitic granite gneiss was found four homogeneously anisotropic samples altogether in KR15, KR22, KR24 and KR27.

Some observations on rock type affecting the resistivity were made. The completely non-fractured sections in migmatitic gneiss and grey gneiss are very resistive (35.000-50.000 Qm or more). In pegmatite granite there are often fractures, thus the occurrences of the rock type are often at lower resistivity level. The resistivity was judged appropriate in 42 cases. On the other hand, 18 were seen being on too high resistivity level (grey gneisses or migmatitic mica gneisses without any distint fracturing). Roughly 20 were on too low level, two-three specifically when comparing the usually high resistivity grey gneiss properties to the measured data. Analysed properties are presented in Appendix 2.

The different rock types, when being from least fractured sections and their different properties can help in selecting the level of resistivity in borehole sections, and in validation of unification process.

23

3 UNIFICATION TECHNIQUE

3.1 Basic considerations

A systematic unification procedure was designed and applied. The task was defined to remove the differences emerging from tools, borehole diameters and processing techniques, and to level out the remaining borehole fluid influence. The requirements for design were set for objectiveness, traceability, and a well-reasoned process. A schematic presentation of different corrections is displayed in Figure 7. Unification method was selected first from different alternatives, which were:

1) Scaling of resistivity amplitude differences between boreholes, 2) Stretch of ranges between minimum and maximum resistivity values or 3) Dependency reduction or removal based e.g. on fluid resistivity, and 4) A combination of methods 1) - 3) listed above.

100000 .---------------------------------------------------.

E iC

E -'= 0

Unification by 1) leveling alll>litude differences or 2) stretching scales

~10000 +-_.~--------------------~~~~----------------~ > :p .!!! UJ Cl)

0::

1000 +---------------------~------------------~----~~

300 350Depth, m 400 --LN res original --LN res leveled --LN res leveled + scaled

100000 -r-----------------------------r 100 Unification by 3) removing or reducing a dependency

.e 1 oooo +---"-:-;,-,..---------n-........ --.-E .c 0 ~1000 +-~~~--~~--------~~~~--------~--~ :~ u; ·u; ~ 100 t---r-----------~~~~----------~~~~~~~

A trend of fluid dependency

10

1 0 +------,-----,-----.------r-----r-----,-------,..--..,..-------r--"-----,r--- -+ 0.1 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Depth, m

--LN res original --Dependency _subtract+Level corr(LN)

--Dependency_Rernovai_(LN) --Fluid resistivity

Figure 7. Long normal resistivity of KR19 presented with fluid resistivity (blue curve non-leveled). Differences between tool units can be removed either with scaling or the results (upper figure) , or removing a dependency (lower figure) either completely (green curve) or reducing the difference between trends (magenta curve).

24

As a first step, the resistivity values at overlapping parts of extended boreholes KR2, KR4, KR6, KR7, KR8 and KR15 were assessed. It was initially estimated that the differences can be best corrected with using logarithm of the resistivity. Then the modifications of level are linear and adding or subtracting the anticipated ratio from the logarithm of data would be adequate. This would correspond to a multiplication or division by a ratio in linear scale.

Comparison to petrophysical data indicated that the lowest resistivity values are fairly correct when layers are adequately wide. No means was found to tie the lowest resistivities on the existing data level. Amount and distribution of petrophysical samples is inadequate. The remaining unification after already performed borehole effect correction would focus to the high resistivity areas (high contrast of bedrock resistivity to fluid resistivity). Recognising the correct reference depth sections and samples appeared critical for the work. The design was started from an assumption of corrections, which consist of linear leveling, and a removal or reduction of a dependency (Figure 7).

In the unification it is essential to disclose the factors affecting to the apparent resistivity. Tool effects relate mainly to the fluid resistivity, the influence of which has to be compensated for. Other properties do not need leveling, and shall be maintained in the data. Of these, merged together are:

1) Temperature affects to the electrical conductivity. When temperature increases from 5°C at the surface to 18°C at the bottom of deep boreholes, it has an increasing factor of 1 ,5 - 2,5 to the electrical conductivity.

2) The bedrock fluid resistivity change from 50-100 nm at upper parts to 0.2 nm in deep in the resistive bedrock (small porosity), will change bedrock resistivity from> 30.000 nm to level of 5.000-8.000 nm (Parkhomenko 1967).

3) After the correction, the bedrock fluid resistivity variation should not contribute to the Long Normal data dependency on fluid resistivity (bulk resistivity would be affected only by temperature, porosity and fluid salinity deeper down).

Data was checked and notices on data quality were gathered up before unification. The fluid resistivity of KR18 was erroneous. Elsewhere there occurred some non-linear errors. The resistivity data of KR6 extension, and KR8 upper part, as well as some sections in KR2, KR20 and KR22 are probably erroneous. Clearly erroneus data were advised to be let non-adjusted (rejected) and possibly re-logged at later instance. Also any zone where the long normal data alternates rapidly and is clearly below short normal data (at conductive zones) is considered unreliable and was not considered in design of processing. They were allowed to pass the correction procedure.

Computation was based on selecting reference sections on lithological basis, then calculating the statistical references. Reference sections were selected from the logging data and their depth ranges were delimited. Definition of level differences was decided to be best computed as a median of values over each section, then comparing the median levels. This is straightforward as the median will reject the highest extreme values. Data was collected from sections and median, maximum and minimum values of Long Normal resistivity and in situ fluid resistivity data were gathered (Figure 8).

25

It was decided to focus the unification for the resistive end of data range. The high resistivities would be required to satisfy similar level in all different boreholes on same groundwater resistivities. Reference sample depth intervals were selected from different, representative fluid resistivity levels, and of highest encountered bedrock apparent resistivity levels, at least few of each borehole. Reference sections were defined from fairly same depth levels and rock types, based on following criteria:

1) Sections were selected from highest and even resistivity levels in any borehole, minimum 5-20 m wide. Resistivity level was considered to have reached the local extrema on these sections.

2) Sections were displaying none or minor fracturing 3) Sections were displaying no significant anomalies, sulphide/graphite occurrences 4) Sections were being of a single reported rock type each 5) Sections did not display significant change in the fluid resistivity near the area 6) The results were on correct level, and did not display any suspected tool failure 7) Short and long normal data were on reasonable level compared to each another, 8) The section displayed no significant scatter of the results in any terms (Fig. 8).

Five groups were gathered on basis of tool type, borehole diameter and processing extent according to Table 3 to include the following sets (Table 5).

Table 5. Tool and borehole groups considered in the unification design.

Group Borehole Tool Processing extent Boreholes diameter desi2n

1 76 WellMac Borehole effect KR6ext, KR15, KR15B, KR16, corrected, tool diameter KR16B, KR17, KR17B, KR18,

compensated KR18B, KR23, KR23B, KR24, KR25, KR25B, KR26, KR27,

KR27B,KR28,KR28B 2 76 WellMac Borehole effect KR6, KRlO, KR13, KR14, KR19,

corrected, tool diameter KR19B, KR20, KR20B, KR22, not compensated KR22B

3 56 WellMac Borehole effect KRl, KR7ext, KR9, KRll, KR12 corrected, tool diameter

compensated 4 56 WellMac Borehole effect KR2ext, KR4ext, KR 7, KR8, KR8ext

corrected, tool diameter not compensated

5 56 VTTTool Borehole effect KR2, KR3, KR4, KR5 corrected, tool diameter

compensated

The median electrical resistivity of the reference sections were plotted on Log-Log scale for each tool group and their distribution was reviewed. Figure 8 displays median, minimum and maximum of LN resistivity and fluid resistivity over the depth sections together with their ranges of variation over the interval, for each borehole KR15-KR18B, KR23-KR28B in Group 1 (Tables 5 and 6). For other groups the data and ranges have been shown in Figures 11, 14, 17 and 20.

26

j

~ -)~ ~ ... . . -.r I 'W" ·;1ft .... T ~

r

0 10

Log (Fluid Resistivity (Ohm m))

..

100

6.0

5.5 -5.o E'

E 4.5 Q. 4.0 ~

·:; 3.5 ~

·u; 3.0 ~

z 2.5 :::::!.

2.0 8 1.5

1.0

1000

..J

I• KR15 • KR15ext • KR16 • KR17 • KR18 KR23 KR24 • KR25 • KR26 • KR27 <> KR28 1

Figure 8. Bore holes of 7 6 mm, M alii tool, original observations by bore holes. The tool diameter was considered The group represents the used reference level.

The resistivity of reference sections has a very clear dependency on the fluid resistivity. Therefore the observations can be used for unification. There is a slight power function correlation of resistivities at the lowest fluid resistivity values, but it was considered adequate to apply a linear correlation.

3.2 Reference levels

Observation data on reference sections (Fig. 8) was used for analyzing the fluid dependency for each group. Decided unification steps were:

1) Unification of each borehole to a specific reference level, inside a group of boreholes

2) Removal or reduction of borehole fluid dependency of resistivity, to an acceptable reference level

3) Setting level differences between groups ofboreholes.

For removal of fluid dependency, fit lines were set to the data displayed in Figure 8 for Group 1 (Table 5), and similar fit lines were created to all other groups. Figure 9 displays for boreholes KR15-KR18B, KR23-KR28B on original levels all samples (disregarding boreholes ), together with the initial fit lines.

6

5.5

E "'e 5 .c: 0 ~ 4.5 Ci e 4 0 z C)

~ 3.5 ...J

~ 3 ·:;:

~ 2.5 G)

a::: o; 2 0

...J

1.5

-1

27

Initial fit line, Group 1 KR15-KR188, KR23-KR288 y = 0.2066x + 4.0205 R:t- 0.7574

·-·' ·- -.. ....

...... T -""'

• • • • •• -• •

-0.5 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3

Log(Fiuid Resistivity), Ohm*m

• LN Selected Satll'les • LN Rejected Satll'les --Linear (LN Selected Satll'les)

Figure 9. Boreholes of 7 6 mm, Mala tool, all observations and initial fit line. The tool diameter was considered. The group represents the reference level.

After the fit lines were created, it was observed that each borehole diameter, tool variant, and processing variant has a characteristic trend with respect to logarithmic fluid resistivity. Each borehole has also a specific level, requiring a constant adjustment, as well as the main tool and borehole diameter group their own specific levels.

The outlier points were recognized on basis of deviation from the initial line, and removed from the match. Outliers were judged on basis of resistivity level, rock type and fracturing. The differences of sample points of each borehole were computed as distances from the group fit line. Resistivity level for each borehole was adjusted with the average distance. The fit lines were recalculated.

The tool group fit line analysis proceeded interactively. After the borehole specific unification steps were performed, a second reference line for higher resistivities was created for the groups, and used for fitting the rest of boreholes.

Recalculated fit line for boreholes KR15-KR18B, KR23-KR28B with borehole leveled sample data are displayed in Figure 10.

6

5.5 E ... E 5 .r::. 0 ~ 45 cu . E 0 4 z C) s 3.5

...J I ~ 3 ·;:

~ 2.5 C1)

~ 2

.9 1.5

28

Resisti\€ fit line, Group 1 KR15-KR18B, KR23-KR28B y= 0.2742x+ 4.1813

R2 = 0.9997

• ..... • ~ -..... ~ .... ......... ..... ..... ....

~ ,... •

,... ,...,... ,... " ,...,...'"7,... y u .L..v 1 L..ll. .::> . ;;,;;, 1 L..

R2 = 0.9483

Main le\€1 fit line, Group 1 KR15-KR18B, KR23-KR28B

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5

Log(Auid Resistivity), Ohm*m • LN Selected Sarrples BH_Adj • LN Rejected Sai'TlJies BH_adj • LN Rejected Resistive Sai'TlJies BH_adj -- Linear (LN Selected Sai'TlJies BH_Adj) --Linear (LN Rejected Resistive Sai'TlJies BH_adj)

3

Figure 10. Boreholes of 76 mm, Mala tool. all observations and fit line with borehole differences adjusted. The tool diameter was considered. The group fit line represents the reference level.

The rock type and texture data was applied to correlation of results (Appendix 2). A lithological control was examined using bedrock model 2003/1 rock type definitions. The different boreholes in the same tool group were viewed by selecting non-broken area with similar porosity, of same bedrock unit, where the measurement data is evenly distributed.

The observations were divided into five resistivity classes: common level of pegmatite granites and gneisses, high resistivity levels of grey gneisses and gneisses (two of them), and lower levels of fractured or sulphide bearing units and zones. Often there were few samples for individual boreholes available. In some cases all selected or available samples of borehole had to be rejected from analysis, being on too low or high level of resistivity to match to the trends of dependency.

Resistivity values of grey gneiss and non-fractured mica gneiss sections can exceed the set trend. Typically, after the borehole specific leveling was carried out, there was observed a second, higher resistivity level, consisting of grey gneiss or non-fractured,

29

very resistive mica gneiss sections (see above). Level is about Log(LN_Res) = +0.25 higher than the typical samples (e.g., Figure 1 0).

After corrections, when gathering up all reference areas, part of the rejected high resistivities were matching to a third, still higher resistivity level above the two others.

For a similar rock type and resistivity level in different depth sections and boreholes were decided:

1) Non-fractured rock sections (Migmatitic Mica Gneiss or Grey Gneiss) display highest resistivity, possibly also anisotropy has a role in highest resistivities. Not used in line fitting. Can be used for fitting the highest level of resistivities.

2) Slightly fractured (0-1 pes/m) Grey Gneiss has the next highest resistivity. Not used in the line fitting, except for boreholes where the results display the general level. Can be used for Grey Gneiss level fitting. Grey Gneiss at northern part of the area is of highest resistivity, and in southern part of more typical resistivity level. Central part of the area does not exhibit Grey Gneiss in reported data.

3) Typical, slightly fractured Migmatitic Mica Gneiss displays the most common and thus level of resistivity was selected for initial fit lines

4) Pegmatite Granite is typically slightly to moderately fractured and displays lower resistivity than the Grey Gneiss and Migmatitic Mica Gneiss sections. When clearly fractured, and on low resistivity level, was not used in line fitting, otherwise accepted.

5) All anomalous sections (fracture zones, sulphide rich areas, foliated regions) are of considerably lower resistivity level than others, and were not applied in the ranges. By definition these were not included into the reference points, but some occurrences remained, and were rejected.

Comparing the fit lines for each tool group revealed the differences in the data between groups. The tool group of 76 mm borehole diameter, Mala tool, and borehole diameter with tool diameter adjusted, displayed the gentlest dependency on the fluid resistivity.

The group was selected as a reference group, onto which all the others were fit. The tool specific fit line is steepest for 56 mm boreholes. For a same borehole diameter, the logging runs with Mala tool where the tool diameter has not been covered in correction, and metal objects were close to the current electrode, displayed greatest influence. Fit lines for each group were applied to level out the tool-related differences from the data sets.

Major concern was to distinguish the disturbed borehole fluid effect to be leveled from the saline groundwater influence in the bedrock and the normallithological variation. Cases where a correction was unnecessary were to be recognized.

The whole borehole logs were to be adjusted at a time, i.e. no partial corrections for specific sections were to be performed. This maintains the significance of the mutual differences in the results.

30

3.3 Final unification

An algorithm was compiled for unification. The algorithm is based on different correlations of bulk LN resistivity to fluid resistivity for different borehole diameter, and tool and processing extent group. Correction functions used to adjust the differences between the groups are unique. The differences in trends and levels between these groups were decided to be removed. No scaling between anomaly highs and lows was decided to be done.

For each of the groups (see Table 5) the dependency between electrical resistivity and the borehole fluid resistivity was found to be of the form:

log(LN _res )i = ai log(Fluid _res )i +bi (3)

The Set 1 (Mala tool, 76 mm borehole, borehole effect corrected, tool dimension corrected) was selected to be used as a reference to which other results were to be adjusted. For Set 1 the parameters ai and bi according to Equation (3) were found to be a1 = 0.2314 and bt = 3.9972.

Therefore the unification is of the form:

~log(LN_res) =A log(Fluid_res) + B (4)

Where A = a 1-aj,

The values ai and bi are listed for each group in Table 6 below.

In addition, a constant borehole specific correction bsH is used to adjust the results of the single borehole to the group trend line (see Appendix 3).

Table 6. Linear functions for each tool group, and the correction coefficients.

Tool Function ai(Log(Res))+bi Dependency Leveling B reduction A

Mala, 76 mm, tool diameter Log(LN _Res) = 0 0 compensated. 0.2314 Log(FluidRes) + 3.9972

Reference group Fig. 8-10. Mala, 76 mm, tool diameter Log(LN_Res) = -0.0194 0.1377 not compensated. Fig 11-13. 0.2508 Log(FluidRes) + 3.8597 Mala, 56 mm, tool diameter Log(LN_Res = -0.1282 0.0092

compensated. Fig 14-16. 0.3596 Log(FluidRes) + 3.9882 Mala, 56 mm, tool diameter Log(LN_Res) = -0.097 0.2734 not compensated. Fig 17-19. 0.3284 Log(FluidRes) + 3.724 VTT, 56 mm, tool diameter Log(LN _Res) = -0.0695 -0.0647

compensated. Fig 20-22. 0.3009 Log(FluidRes) + 4.0621

The observations and fit lines for adjustable groups are displayed in Figures 8 - 10 above and 11 - 22 below.

31

Unification was run according to Equation ( 4) and Table 6 using Excel files where the functions were documented, and can be modified if found necessary. The Dependency Reduction A and Leveling Value B were applied for each group.

Borehole Leveling Value bsH was added to B for each borehole (Appendix 3). The Borehole Leveling was first based on average distance between the fit line of the group and the sample points of borehole, then on differences between original and extension parts of boreholes. Finally for the sample sections of higher resistivity, the sample values were fit to level of Grey Gneiss or the highest resistivities using distances to these fit lines in the group.

For Mala tool of 7 6 mm boreholes with tool diameter considered, no Dependency Reduction or Leveling except the borehole specific level checks were performed. This was considered as the least disturbed group, because the visible influence of borehole fluid was smallest in the data.

All boreholes with differences on the level to the fit line were adjusted (Leveling value B+ bsH). All the other groups were applied a Dependency Reduction "A" depending on fluid resistivity (Table 6). The reduction modified the trend similar to that of the reference Group 1.

Finally the different boreholes were checked for the level with respect to the others, see Chapter 4 below.

Exceptions on the general procedure formed the boreholes which did not include sample data. All B-boreholes were adjusted using the same process as for the main borehole. This is appropriate as the measurement has been run with same tool and on same time, using same return groundings.

The borehole KR2 upper part (VTT tool) is on a very high resistivity level. Level of petrophysical data needs to be higher than that of logging. After unification the logging data in KR2 still remains on higher level than petrophysical data on the same depth range. Closely located KR13 received very high resistivity values, too, which exceeds even the KR2 leveled values. There may well occurr natural variation in Grey Gneiss resistivity. Also the variation in borehole fluid properties may affect to the data. Probably the highly resistive water in borehole, higher than natural water at the same region, increases the resistivity level in logging in these boreholes.

Borehole KR8 did not include normally resistive reference area, so the resistivity was fit to the Grey Gneiss level. The same applied for KR13, KR14 and KR20. Boreholes KR 7 extension and KR8 extension required a matching to the level of adjacent borehole data. Borehole KR3 remained lacking proper samples, so it was corrected with the same procedure as the other boreholes in the same group, but without borehole leveling.

The KR15 extension part displayed a Grey Gneiss occurrence where the reference sections located. The borehole was fit to that level. As the upper part of KR15 had no correct reference points, the level was adjusted according to overlapping part of KR15ext. Because the KR16, KR17 and KR18, and corresponding B-boreholes were measured using the same groundings on surface, and tools, the boreholes were adjusted

32

according to same constant as for KR 15 upper part. Boreholes are very close to each another, and the variation of electrical properties in the near volume is high.

All the groups and single boreholes were adjusted fairly well. The trend removal was greatest for 56 mm borehole measurements with Mala tool. For smaller borehole diameter, the error is greater. Differences between tool generations may affect to the trend between groups with (greatest) and without tool diameter compensation. For VTT tool the trend removal is slightly less (KR2, KR3, KR4, KR5), and smallest it is for 76 mm Mala tool, where tool diameter has not been considered (KR13, KR14, KR19, KR20, KR22).

The unification influence is generally greater for the tool groups where the tool diameter has not been compensated. This is because the Dakhnov (1962) correction lowers the long normal resistivity at high contrasts, causing possible over correction, which the unification of this report now compensates.

The VTT tool with less metal objects and with tool diameter compensated, displays higher resistivites than the others, and the group values are moved to lower level. The borehole fluid has also been replaced with ion-exchanged water prior to the logging, so being very resistive (50-200 nm) the resistivity level is higher than for e.g. petrophysical data from same depth interval. The correction compensates for the error to some extent. From this group, two levels of resistivities can be observed directly.

It seems apparent, that for KR2 and KR4 extension part there is a difference in tool function, or inadequate tool diameter compensation (boreholes are at lower level than the others). For KR6 extension part, the data is spurious compared to short normal data, on low level, and apparently erroneous. For the measurements performed at same time, KR7 extension part and KR12 are probably partly erroneous as well. For KR7 it was required to increase the resistivity level to match the extension part. For KR12 the reference data fits to general level, but reported rock type, Grey Gneiss, would require setting the data to Log(LN_Res)=+0.25 higher level than now adjusted.

Results were validated with comparisons between extension boreholes and petrophysical data ofKR1-KR6 and KR23-KR28, and with review of the achieved data levels. First check before running whole process was to review, how the modifications influence to the reference data. Figure 23 displays that the unification applies well. All results are presented as printouts on figures 24 and 25, and Appendix 4.

33

.... + ~ ~4 *! ~ .... -• T .. i

•

0 10 100

Log(Fiuid Resistivity (Ohnm))

I· KR13 • KR14 • KR19 • KR20 • KR22 • KR06 + KR10 I

6.0

5.5

5.0 'E

4.5 _§ 0

4.0 ;: ;t=

.<:!: 3.5 ]i

(/) Q)

3.0 i ~

2.5 (.!) 0

2.0

1.5

1.0

1000

...J

Figure 11. The Mala tool in 76 mm boreholes, original observations by boreholes. No tool diameter correction.

6

E 5.5 iCE ~ 5 0

~ 4.5

g 4 z g' 3.5 0 ..J

>o! 3 .... ·:;: ~ 2.5 ·c;; ~ 2 Ci .3 1.5

-1

Initial f it line, group 2 (KR6, KR10, KR13-KR14, KR19-KR22 y = 0.2173x + 3.8803

R2 = 0.9063

-• • _. -· _. . ..... ... • .... ... .... •

•

-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Log(Fiuid_Resistivity), Ohm*m

• Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted reference values

• Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Rejected reference values --Linear (Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted reference values)

3

Figure 12. The Mala tool in 76 mm boreholes, reference observations and initial fit line, no tool diameter correction.

6

E 5.5

"'e .r::. 5 0 :g 4.5

~ 4 z ~ 3.5 0 ..J

~ 3 ... ·:;: ~ 2.5 ·c;; Q)

0:: 2 c; .3 1.5

34

Resistive fit line, Group 2, KR6, KR10, KR13-KR14, KR19-KR22 y = 0.2411x + 4.0993

R2 = 0.9528

.. • -• - • -.-- ..... • .... ~

....

• rvlain fit line y = 0.2525x + 3.8568 R2 = 0.9965

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5

Log(Fiuid_Resistivity), Ohm*m

• Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted reference values , BH_Adj • Log(Res_LongNormal), Section Median, Rejected reference values , BH_Adjusted • Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Rejected resistive, BH_Adjusted --Linear (Log(Res_LongNormal} , Section Median, Accepted reference values , BH_Adj) -- Linear (Log(Res_LongNormal}, Section Median, Rejected resistive, BH_Adjusted)

3

Figure 13. The Mala tool in 7 6 mm boreholes, reference observations and fit lines, borehole differences adjusted, no tool diameter correction.

~

T __, ~ .l"" ifd ~ tf t+t ...... ...... ..

""

0 10 100

Log(Fiuid Resistivity (Ohm m))

I• KR01 • KR07ext • KR09 • KR11 • KR12 1

6.0

5.5

so E' . E 4.5 Q. 4.0 .?;­

·:;: 3.5 ~

"ii.i 3.0 ~

2.5 z d

2.0 (!) 0

1.5 ....I

1.0

1000

Figure 14. The Mala tool in 56 mm boreholes, original observations by boreholes. Tool diameter effect has been corrected.

6.000

E 5.500 ·e J: 5.000 0 c;; 4.500 E 0 z en c 0 ..J

~ ·:; :;::; Cl)

'iii Q)

0::: C) 0 ..J

4.000

3.500

3.000

2.500

2.000

1.500

1.000 -1

35

Group 3 KR 1, KR7ext, KR9, KR11 , KR121nitial fit line y = 0.3337x + 3.997

•

R2 = 0.802

•

• . ·-- ... -,.....--

-0.5 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5

Log(Fiuid Resistivity) Ohm*m

• Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted Reference Sarrples

• Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Rejected Reference Sarrples

--Linear (Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted Reference Sarrples)

3

Figure 15. The Mala tool in 56 mm boreholes, reference observations and initial fit line. Tool diameter has been corrected. ·

6

E 5.5 i<

E

Group 3 resistive f it line, KR1 , KR7ext, KR9, KR11 , KR12 y = 0.4096x + 4.1205 R2 = 0.9981

J: 5 0 c;; 4.5 E

4 0 z en c 3.5 0

_________. ~ ~ n ,.,,.,...,.. ,., nnn..,

~ ........-- y v . vvvv V . VVV4

• ___.

R2 = 0.9881

..J I 3 >-

r-~- ·-,., ~ :- ~ :• I' .- vn~ vn'7- ... V[')('\ vn~ ~ 11'01 ') - ~~,... I I I " , _ .... ·:; 2.5 :;::;

Cl)

·~ 2 0:::

c; 1.5 0

..J

1

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3 Log(Fiuid_Res istivity) Ohm *m

• Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted Reference Sarrples , BH_Adj • Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Rejected Reference Sarrples, BH_Adj • Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Rejected, Resistive, BH_Adj --Linear (Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted Reference Sarll>les , BH_Adj) --Linear (Log(Res_LongNormal) , Section Median, Rejected, Resistive, BH_Adj)

Figure 16. The Mala tool in 56 mm bore holes, reference observations and fit line with borehole differences adjusted. Tool diameter has been corrected.

36

• 11 • • _.-+

0 10 100

LOG(Fiuid Resistivity (Ohrrrn))

I• KR02ext + KR04ext • KR07 • KROB • KROBext I

.

6.0

5.5

5.o E E

4.5 Q. 4.0 ~

.2: 3.5 ]2

1/) Q)

3.0 ~ ...J

2.5;

2.0 g 1.5

1.0

1000

Figure 17. The Mala tool in 56 mm bore holes, reference observations by bore holes. No tool diameter correction.

6

E 5.5 ·e ..c: 5 0

~ 4.5

§ 4 z C) g 3.5

"j 3 .... ·::; ~ 2.5 ·c;; ~ 2 c; .3 1.5

-1

y = 0.3208x + 3.7211 K..: - 0 .9652

• ________. • ~ • .-

-0.5 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3

Log(Fiuid_Resistivity), Ohm*m

• Log(Res_Long Norrral) , Section median, Accepted reference values • Log(Res_Long norrral) , Section median, Rejected values --Linear (Log(Res_Long Norrral), Section median, Accepted reference values)

Figure 18. The Mala tool in 56 mm boreholes, reference observations and initial fit line. No tool diameter correction.

37

6 ~------------------------------------------------------------~ Group 4 borehole corrected f it line, KR2ext, KR4ext, KR7, KR8, KRBext y = o.3284x + 3.724

E 5- 5 +-------------------------------------------------=R~=~o.=ga=6=5--~ •E ~ 5 +-------------------------------------------------------------~ 0 ~ 4.5 T-------------------------------------------~~--~--------~

~ 4 +-----------------------==----~-----------------.r-------~ z C'l g 3 .5 +-----------------------------------------------------------~

~ 3 +-----------------------------------------------------------~ ·:;: ~ 2 . 5 +-----------------------------------------------------------~ ·~ ~ 2 +-----------------------------------------------------------~ c; ~ 1.5 +-----------------------------------------------------------~

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3

Log(Fiuid_Res istivity), Ohm *m

• Log(Res_Long Normal) , Section median, Accepted reference values , BH_adjusted • Log(Res_Long normal), Section median, Rejected values , BH_adjusted

--Linear (Log(Res_Long Normal) , Section median, Accepted reference values , BH_adjusted)

Figure 19. The Mali1 tool in 56 mm bore holes, no tool diameter correction. Reference observations and fit line with borehole differences adjusted.

~ -

-!: • ~ T

~ ..X T L i -2 -,...

0.1 10 100

LOG(Fiuid Resistivity (Ohmn))

I• KR02 • KR03 • KR04 • KR05 ::.:: KR1 O_SAL xrred I

6

5.5

5 'E 45 ~ " Q.

4 ~ .2:

3.5 ]2 IIJ

~ 3 z

_J

2.5 ;; 0

2 .....J

1.5

1000

Figure 20. Bore holes of 56 mm, VTT tool. Original observations by boreholes.

6

5.5 -cu 5 e

4.5 0 z tn

4 c: o E ...J "" lE ~.c:

3.5

·s: 0 3 :;:;

Cl) ·c;;

2.5 Q)

0::: c; 2 0 ...J

1.5

-1

38

GreyGneiss (Rejected) y - 0.3455x + 4.2754

• R2- n aa~~; _...

------- ~ -----..-.--------- A • ,... '"'"'''t''"'"'

y = 0.3477x + 4.0098

R2 = 0.919

-0.5 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5

Log(Fiuid_Resistivity), Ohm*m

A Log(Resistivity_LongNormal). Section Median, Accepted salll'les • Log(Resistivity_LongNormal) , Section Median, GreyGneiss (Rejected sa!ll'les) • Log(Resistivity_LongNormal) , Section Median, Rejected salll'les --Linear (Log(Resistivity_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted salll'les) --Linear (Log(Resistivity_LongNormal) , Section Median, GreyGneiss (Rejected sa!ll'les))

Figure 21. Bore holes of 56 mm, VTT tool. All observations and initial fit line.

6

5.5

Cii 5 e 0 4.5 z ~ 4 .3 .e >o! E 3.5 -.s::. :~ 0 3 -Cl)

-~ 2.5 0::: c; 2 0

...J 1.5

Group 5, VTT tool, KR2, KR3, KR4, KR5, bore hole leveled fit lines y = 0.2843x + 4.3345

R2 = 0.9994 • --- ___.. - - • .......

1\Jt::lin fit linP Y = 0.3009x + 4.0621 R2 = 0.9582

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5

Log(Fiuid_Resistivity), Ohm*m

A Log(Resistivity_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted sa!ll'leS , BH_adj • Log(Resistivity_LongNormal) , Section Median, GreyGneiss (Rejected sa!ll'les), BH_adj • Log(Resistivity_LongNormal), Section Median, Rejected sa!ll'les --Linear (Log(Resistivity_LongNormal) , Section Median, Accepted sa!ll'les, BH_adj)

3

3

--Linear (Log(Resistivity_LongNormal) , Section Median, GreyGneiss (Rejected sa!ll'les) , BH_adj)

Figure 22. Bore holes of 56 mm, VTT tool. All observations and fit line with bore hole differences adjusted.

>; -·:;: :;:: Ill ·c;; Cl)

0::: I z

...J c; 0

...J

39

6 ~----------------------------------------------------------~ Increased level (GGN, MMG) y = 0.2758x + 4.1675

R2 = 0.9678 5 . 5 +-----------------------------------------------------------~

Highest level (GGN , MMG) y = 0.33x + 4.3693

R2 = 0.9448 Si------------------------------------------------------------~

8 3.5

0

3

2.5

2

1.5

-1 -0.5

Main level (MMG, GRPG)

0 0.5 1.5

Log(Fiuid Resistivity, Ohm*m)

• corrLN_all(after_adjustrrent)

• corrLN_all(after_adjustrrent_ TON)

o corrLN_all{ after _adjustrrent_reject)

• corrLN_all(after_adjustrrent_highest resistivity)

--Linear ( corrLN_all( after _adjustrrent))

--Linear ( corrLN_all( after _adjustrrent_ TON))

y = 0.2396x + 3.9871 R2 = 0.9548

2 2.5

--Linear (corrLN_all(after_adjustrrent_highest resistivity))

3

Figure 23. Reference samples of all boreholes and tool groups after levelling, and remaining trends according to fluid resistivity (considered to be caused due to bedrock groundwater effect rather than bore hole water). Rejected samples are not used in fitting of the lines. Accepted samples cluster in three categories: typical level, Grey Gneiss level and highest resistivities (non-fractured, probably quartzified or carbonatized regions).

40

41

4 RESULTS

Processing data files (Excel) for all boreholes were joined with the correction function which can be modified also later. Unifications were run and the results plotted with original and modified data shown. Examples of results are displayed for boreholes KR8 and KR15 in Figures 24 and 25 below.

On a general view, the highest resistivity values are now on the same level between boreholes and their extended parts. Also the tool dependent differences between boreholes and groups have been removed.

The clear influence of borehole fluid into the apparent resistivity has been decreased. In practice the bedrock resistivity at the locations of lowest fluid resistivity have been increased. There is probably some influence of the tool connected to the borehole fluid, but nevertheless smaller than those originally encountered. The highest resistivities at resistive fluid occurrences have been decreased and differences have been leveled off.

The anomaly peaks between original and extended parts of borehole have remained at different levels after unification. This may emerge from changing borehole conditions, so the correction of final differences may not be possible. Other explanation for differences is the character of borehole effect correction, considering the contrast between fluid and host rock, which is not taken into account in this linear unification approach.

When the resistivity is low, the influence of errors and the unification is smallest. Depending on various geological factors (porosity, fractures, salinity, sulphides, graphite), the resistivity of the low resistivity zones is unique, and it must not be corrected for any assumed level. Some of the lowest values have occasionally saturated, indicating the lowest values are not measured. The lowest values of the range have not been considered, but are allowed to be modified slightly during the process. As the level adjustment is logarithmic, the modifications are very small in the conductive end of range.

4.1 Single-hole results

Highest resistivity levels are met in few of the boreholes, KR3, KR20, KR13, KR2 and KR8 to mention. Rock types are migmatitic mica gneiss and grey gneisses. These locations are practically free of fractures over several meters, of very low porosity, and either linked to this property, or directly, altered with quartzification or carbonatization. Resistivities range over 35.000 Om, up to >60.000 Om values (KR3). In Table 7 are listed the most resistive sections in the processed boreholes.

The typical highest resistivity ranges from 10.000-35.000 Om, encountering mostly non-fractured or slightly fractured grey gneisses and migmatitic mica gneisses. These are the typical reference sample areas. Granites or pegmatites, when only slightly fractured, belong to this category. Further to sample data, there are narrow sections of this class met at all over the site. The values are clearly lower deeper down in the bedrock, due to increasing salinity of the bedrock groundwater.

42

log (fluid resistivitiy, ohm-m)

100 10 1 0.1 r---------~---------+----------+0

100

200

300

400

500

100000 10000 1000 100

log (resistivity, ohm-m)

-E -..c ...... 0> c ~ Q)

0 ..c ~ 0

..0

Figure 24. Results of KR8. Black bars on the left are the sample intervals.

_J

<( Cl)

:::::> t:: Cl)

~

_J

<( Cl)

:::::> t:: Cl)

~

z d. ,_ ,_ 0 (.)

I en Q) ,_ z _J

I z ~ ,_ 0 (.)

I en ~ z _J

I

43

100 0.1 1-------+--- ---t------+- 0

log (fluid resistivity , ohm-m)

10

100

200

E ..c: 0, c:

300 ~ (])

0 ..c: (]) ..... 0

..0

400

500

1-------+-----+-----+ 600

100000 10000 1000 100

log (resistivitiy , ohm-m)

_J

-< en ~ en ~

_J

-< en

~ en ~

z _J -..... 0 u

I (/)

~ z _J

I z _J

..... ..... 0 u

I (/)

~ z _J

I

Figure 25. Results of KR15. Black bars on left are the sample intervals.

44

Bedrock sections with increased fracturing in migmatitic mica gneisses, granites and pegmatites, and grey gneisses, as well as the schistose parts of mica gneisses, represent resistivity levels of 1.000-10.000 nm. This is due to increased host rock porosity or fractured porosity. Ground water salinity has a clear decreasing influence to the values.

Strongly altered, frequently fractured, strongly schistose and/or sulphide and graphite bearing zones in the bedrock resistivity range from 10 to 1.000 Qm.

Table 7. Highly resistive sections in processed bore hole data.

Borehole Depth sections Resistivity range Comment KR1 410,438, 724-740m 15.000-40.000 nm Highly alternating. Borehole has a good

match with lowest petrophysical values. KR2 181,200,298,343- 4o.ooo-5o.ooo nm Petrophysical data is at grey gneiss slightly

395,740 m below the long normal (fluid more resistive, 70 nm, than tap water bath 50-60 Om). Real water much more conductive. The logging data is anomalous at extension part.

KR3 232, 287, 326-331 m 5o.ooo-8o.ooo nm Narrow, exceptionally high values. KR5 176-191,237-252, 2o.ooo-32.ooo nm

309-386 m KR7 120-137, 155-162m 27.000-33.000 nm KR8 215-246,365,387, 20.000-27.000 nm

404-415,427-441 m KR9 160-171,366-413 m 14.ooo-2o.ooo nm KR10 386-400,448-457 m 25.000-30.000 nm KR13 131, 150, 181,270- 30.000-50.000 nm Level has been lifted. Fresh water of25-40

276, 295-407 m ohm*m has penetrated to 458 m, which would have affected the correction. True fracture water is 1-10 ohm*m. Grey Gneiss sample values are perhaps to be set to common level? Fits well to KR2 and KR20.

KR14 355-441 m 17.000-31.000 nm Same formation as in KR 13 is 40% less in resistivity, still being high.

KR15 153-160,361-397 m 21.000-37.000 nm KR17B 22-35 m 19.000-42.000 nm High resistivity of water KR19 268-293 m 15.000-19.000 nm KR19B 25-29, 34-38 m 1o.ooo-32.ooo nm KR20 250-275,291-363 m 23.000-32.ooo nm Practically no adjustment. Resistivity for

same formation lower than for KR2 and KR13, water more conductive!

KR22 209, 401, 250-262, 10.000-18.000 nm Rapidly alternating 276-294 m

KR23 89, 191,216-244 m 15.ooo nm Typical resistive section, with no fractures. KR25 223-232 m 2o.ooo nm KR26 40-41 m 21.ooo nm AFB vein

KR27 123, 146, 188, 312, 2o.ooo-3o.ooo nm Highly alternating, resistive sections are 322m narrow

KR28 193-208 ( ... 228), 35.000-40.000 nm High, though not significantly adjusted. 264-275, 345-349, 623-635 m

45

Achieved quality of the unification is displayed on borehole path presentation, with col or coded logarithmic resistivity. In Figure 26 are presented some of the involved boreholes from above. In Figure 27 the same boreholes are presented on the north­south line on view from the east and in Figure 28 on west-east line on view from the south. The yellow-red colors are high resistivities and green-blue colors low. Some of the boreholes (KR3) are very far from the vertical section, so care must be taken when viewing the results.

North LogOhm*m

KR13

KR2

0~ ~ KR14-KR18 oro

KR3 KR25

KR7 KR22 East

West A KR24

KR26 ~-'

KR27

KR23 'r

:< B South

Figure 26. Some of the boreholes presented from above. These are presented in Fig.29-31 on vertical sections. Red values are resistive, green conductive. Projection lines of Figures 27-31 are displayed with lines.

After unification, the results can be used as a site scale estimate of resistivity distribution. To confirm and validate the results, few tentative notices on the results are stated.

The largest resistivities reside in the northern and northwest part of the borehole covered area. Apparently the grey gneiss formation is a continuous unit in the northern area of the site. The unit is met in boreholes KR5, KR20, KR13, KR2, KR14 and KR15 at nearly same depth level of 150- 400 m, displaying a gentle dip towards the south or south-east. The high resistivity volume though not mapped as grey gneiss is also continuing to KRlO, but not further to the east to KR12, or to the west to KRl and KR7, or to the south to KR4. Above and below the grey gneiss unit, the resistivity is more heterogeneous.

LogOhm*m

A West

KR3 KR7

46

KR2 ... KR18

Figure 27. View from south, a west-east section A (Figure 26).

East

To the east from the grey gneiss mass, the KRll and KR12, and to the north, KR6 and KR19 are displaying more heterogeneous character and lower resistivities. To the west, the same holds for KRl and KR3, which is specifically heterogeneous. To the southwest, and deeper down, the high resistivities decrease and vanish to a more heterogeneous rock mass towards KR4 and KR22- KR28. Some of these boreholes, especially the upper parts, are very heterogeneous and on low resistivity level. There are few rather compact blocks of resistive bedrock encountered in KR22 and KR23. Borehole KR27 is very heterogeneous in character.

Boreholes KR8 and KR9 further to the south and east display very resistive parts in bedrock again.

To assess the results in a detailed scale, the boreholes KR15-KR18B are of their upper part in an area of only 30 m in diameter. One can observe that the low and high resistivity areas are very heterogeneous, forming thin alternating layers of different orientations between the boreholes.

47

Log Ohm *m South B

r

Figure 28. S-N line B, a view from the east (Figure 26)

4.2 Interpolated results in cross-sections

The level was checked also with interpolating the data on logarithmic resistivity scale between the boreholes, and rendering it onto color map. North-south line is presented on Figure 28, and West-East line on Figure 29. This gives a good idea on the success of the unification. Boreholes change their general resistivity level fairly gently. The resistivity is highest in the north part of the site. The gridded presentation needs to be used with care, because due to interpolation method the far apart located boreholes tend to display the resistivity as perpendicular connections from borehole to borehole, which definitely is not true. A closer view of data is presented in Figure 31, where boreholes KR15-KR18 are shown on N-S section. There was no modifications between these boreholes. One can see the heterogeneity of the results.

Boreholes are aside of the projection line, so the location on the section is not completely true. For this reason any deductions are not directly possible. Reviewing the levels (the purpose) and the continuity of properties over larger volumes is possible. There would be recommendable to perform a 3-D gridding and presentation of results as true cross-sections to obtain more realistic geometrical concept of the results.

U!D t

oro

SOUTH

B

48

NORTH

KR14

Figure 29. A north-south view (B). Highest resitivity is encountered at the north part of the area. South of KRJ 0 the character is more heterogeneous.

O!O t

0~ ~--------------------------------------------------------~

Figure 30. A west-east view. Boreholes are far from each other. At KR7-KR4-KR8-KR23 area the idea on partly continuous resistive and conductive layers gets support.

SOUTH

LogOhril*m I

OX! t

000

49

40m NORTH

KR17

15

Figure 31. Boreholes KR15-KR18 at north-south view from the east. The boreholes are close enough each another, that the resistive and conductive layers and their apparent dips can be estimated. Layers are very heterogeneous in their properties and local orientations.

4.3 Other notices

Two different tool design categories and two different processing extents have been applied in two borehole diameter classes. It is quite possible that tools are individually designed, and there are differences also inside the tool type categories.

The VTT Tool has been the same unit over the measurements in KR2 and KR4 upper parts, and KR3 and KR4, as well as KRlO (a different diameter). For Mala tool, the run in KRl has been operated by Swedish Geological AB. Astrock Oy has operated different unit versions of the Mala resistivity logging tool during 1994-2003, of which the latest version has been applied for the reference borehole category KR15-KR18B and KR23-KR28B. The earliest versions used for KR6-KR8 upper parts, KR2 and KR4 extensions, KR9 and KRll, and KR6ext and KR7ext together with KR12 may display differences due to distances of electrodes to the metal housing, etc.

50

SMOY has operated a single tool unit in the KR8ext, KR13-KR14 and KR19-KR22, which may be different to the others again. This way each different tool would need to be considered separately in unification, and the sample locations selected thoroughly.

A reliable way to define a tool specific levelling is to select a short resistive part of bedrock near surface, and to change fluid of different resistivities several times for each tool type with repeated measurements of Long Normal. This will provide actual dependency on fluid resistivity. An undisturbed reference tool might appear useful. Future data would need to be unified for same tool types in a similar way, taking care of any possible modifications.

Tools may be necessary to modify in future, however. Fluid effect due to metal housing can be reduced by isolating the metal parts from fluid e.g., with a rubber sleeve pulled over the tool. Or other tool types can be used (e.g., Poly Electric of Mount Sopris, or ELog of Geovista) where housing has been properly isolated. Because groundings may have been arranged differently they cause other kinds of inaccuracies.

For other tools than used until now, a test measurement and processing with now described procedure would be essential, not the least to compare tool performance and to ensure the comparability of results.

To verify tool properties, a short test borehole can be applied, containing adequately variation in fluid and bedrock resistivities. Such a borehole could be maintained for further checking and testing of different tools. Borehole should remain longer time available, and not modified or destroyed by construction activities, nor dried due to tunnel excavation.

On the accuracy of the levelling one can assess, that the correct and representative properties of measured fluid resistivity is essential for the levelling. Firstly, the borehole fluid flow in open borehole (and pumping during flow logging) can severely change the conditions different to those prevailing in bedrock. This may lead to correct the resistivity unnecessarily or to wrong direction.

Secondly, the correct levelling of the fluid resistivity used in the process is also essential, as any disturbed values will lead to an erroneous levelling for bedrock resistivity data, too. Finally, on the basis of levelling, lacking of proper reference samples may affect to the results too, as well as selecting a disturbed sample for levelling.

The other resistivity measurements can be treated with the adviced levelling, too. For simultaneously measured Short normal data, with the same tool variations, it would be adequate to compute the own fit lines for same reference locations, and apply the levelling in the same manner as for Long Normal data. Processing differences between short normal and long normal would level out in the process.

The Single Point Resistance data, which has not been treated with borehole effect correction, is strongly dependable on fluid resistivity. This information is useful to maintain. In case a new version, with the fluid influence removed, is anticipated, the similar dependency trends can be created and removed. The Wenner data is very sensitive to the fluid resistivity and for KR2-KR5 where the fluid has been replaced

51

with resistive water, and there occur sharp variations in the resistivity, a careful processing would be needed to recognise the actual trend.

For later resistivity measurements, either a tool disturbed by the fluid (other than described borehole effect) as little as possible should be applied or run a levelling in a similar manner as now. Then the levelling can be applied for raw data, thus replacing the processing scheme of Dakhnov (1962) entirely, or applying the levelling after the borehole effect removal, just like in this report.

52

53

5 DISCUSSION

This report presents the unification of differences in electrical Long Normal resistivity logging data acquired from Olkiluoto deep boreholes (KRl - KR28B) during 1988 -2003. Report includes an analysis of the data, conclusions on the nature of the differences, design of unification method, and description of processed results for Long Normal resistivity logging data.

The results could not be brought back to non-corrected status and then design a new, comprehensive processing, but the existing processing needs to be preserved, and the process supplemented with a new unification.

Unification covered indirectly all borehole diameter and applied tool effects for different processing techniques. The borehole and tool specific differences were successfully removed. Most of the dependency between fluid in the open borehole and long normal resistivity was removed. Now the trend in logarithmic of resistivity is ea. 0.23 *Log(FluidResistivity ).

Probably some of the coupling effect between borehole fluid and measured apparent resistivity is still present, but removing it would require an independent measurement device, free of coupling effects, to be run in several bedrock resistivity and fluid resistivity values. Easiest way to remove the tool effect is to cover the metal parts with insulating material during the measurement. This would be recommendable.

Also, as the tool differences are rather large, it is concluded that there would be occupied for a permanent availability a short test borehole, with a good range of fluid and bedrock resistivities available. Borehole should be containing groundwater also in future (located further away from ONKALO), and easily accessible. An example of such borehole is KR19B.

The unification approach was successful, and provided valuable information on resistivity measurements in general and specifically on the borehole effect removal in case of the high resistivity contrast between borehole fluid and bedrock. Similar approach can be conducted for later boreholes to be surveyed, and analogously for Short Normal and Single Point resistivity methods.

After the unification, the absolute bedrock bulk resistivities are still not available which would fully coincide with the petrophysical values. Different boreholes were set to comparable levels at similar conditions of rock type, fracturing and salinity. While the minimum levels were not tied onto known value (i.e. no stretch was applied), the lowest resistivities lose some of their absolute accuracy, but the relative variation and range are maintained.

Long and short normal arrays, although being good tools to locate sulphides and fracture zones, have limitations to provide accurate information on absolute resistivity level and host rock porosity and bedrock fluid resistivity. The tools can be used to obtain a tentative estimate of the parameters. Further opportunity would be to use a focused dual lateral array, like Laterolog-7 style tool, to provide near absolute bulk resistivity data, porosity and formation factor from the bedrock (Lofgren & Neretnieks 2002). This would be specifically helpful for estimate of radionuclide absorption properties of rock mass.

54

Some of the boreholes have suffered of decreased tool performance. These should be run with a new logging when possible. These are the complete boreholes KR2, KR4, KR6 and KR7 (not only the extension parts). The quality ofKR12 data could be useful to be tested as well.

The experiences presented in this report can be used for later measurements to set their properties commensurable to the existing data, taking into account possible changes in tool techniques, which probably would require a new analysis for tool specific differences. The initiated systematic unification method is proposed to be continued.

55

6 REFERENCES

Dakhnov, V. N. 1962. Geophysical well logging. Originally published in Moscow 1959. Translated by Keller, V. 1962. In Quarterly of the Colorado School of Mines, Vol. 57, no. 2.

Gehor, S., Karki, A., Maatta, T., Suopera, S. & Taikina-aho, 0. 1996. Eurajoki, Olkiluoto: Petrology and low temperature fracture minerals in drill core samples (in Finnish with an English abstract). Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 96-42, 300 p.

Hallenburg, J. K. 1984. Geophysical logging for mineral and engineering applications. Tulsa, Oklahoma: Penwell. 254 p.

Heikkinen, E., Ahokas, T. & Saksa, P. 2004. Interpretation of Olkiluoto electromagnetic Gefinex 400S soundings and pole-pole electrical soundings. Eurajoki: Posiva, Working Report 2004-16, 180 p.

Julkunen, A. & Kallio, L. & Has sin en, P. 2000a. Geophysical bore hole logging in Eurajoki, Olkiluoto, borehole KR11 (in Finnish with English abstract). Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 39 p. Site investigations, Work Report 2000-02.

Julkunen, A., Kallio, L. & Hassinen, P. 1995. Geophysical borehole logging in Olkiluoto, Eurajoki, boreholes KR2, KR3, KR4, KR6, KR7 and KR8 (in Finnish with an English abstract). Helsinki, Finland: Teollisuuden Voima Oy. 16 p. Work report PATU-95-71.

Julkunen, A., Kallio, L. & Hassinen, P. 1996. Geophysical borehole logging in Olkiluoto, Eurajoki, 1996, borehole KR9 (in Finnish with an English abstract). Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 11 p. Work report PATU-96-41.

Julkunen, A., Kallio, L. & Hassinen, P. 2000b. Geophysical borehole logging in Olkiluoto, Eurajoki 2000, the boreholes OL-KR6, OL-KR7 and OL-KR12 (in Finnish with an English abstract). Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 54 p. Working report 2000-37.

Julkunen, A., Kallio, L. & Hassinen, P. 2002. Geophysical borehole logging in Olkiluoto, Eurajoki 2002, the boreholes OL-KR15 - OL-KR18 and OL-KR15B - OL­KR18B (in Finnish with an English abstract). Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 72 p. Working report 2002-32.

Julkunen, A., Kallio, L. & Hassinen, P. 2003. Geophysical borehole logging in Olkiluoto, Eurajoki 2002, the borehole OL-KR15 extended part. Eurajoki, Posiva. Posiva Working report 2003-10, 31 p.

Julkunen, A., Kallio, L. & Hassinen, P. 2004a. Geophysical borehole logging in Boreholes OL-KR23, OL-KR23B, OL-KR24, OL-KR25 and OL-KR25B at Olkiluoto, in Eurajoki, 2003. Eurajoki, Posiva Oy. Working report 2004-17. 67 p.

Julkunen, A., Kallio, L. & Hassinen, P. 2004b. Geophysical borehole logging in Boreholes OL-KR26, OL-KR27, OL-KR27B, OL-KR28 and OL-KR28B at Olkiluoto, in Eurajoki, 2003. Eurajoki, Posiva Oy. Working report 2004-18. 69 p.

56

Kunetz, G. 1966. Principles of direct current resistivity prospecting. Geoexploration monographs. Series 1 - N .o 1. Berlin: Borntraeger, 103 p.

Lahti, M. & Heikkinen, E. 2004. Geophysical borehole logging of the borehole PHI in Olkiluoto, Eurajoki 2004. Eurajoki, Posiva Oy. Working report 2004-43. 30 p.

Lahti, M., Tammenmaa, J. & Hassinen, P. 2001. Geophysical logging of boreholes OL-KR13 and OL-KR14 at Olkiluoto, Eurajoki 2001 (in Finnish with an English abstract). Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 139 p. Working report 2001-30.

Lahti, M., Tammenmaa, J. & Hassinen, P. 2003. Geophysical logging of bore holes OL-KR19, OL-KR19b, OL-K20, OL-KR20b, OL-KR22, OL-KR22b and OL-KR8 continuation at Olkiluoto, Eurajoki 2002. Posiva Oy. 176 p. Working report 2003-05.

Laurila, T. & Tammenmaa, J. 1996. Geophysical borehole logging at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki 1996, borehole KR10. Posiva Working report PATU-96-14, 8 p.

Lindberg, A. & Paananen, M. 1991. Petrography, lithogeochemistry and petrophysics of rock samples from Olkiluoto study site, Eurajoki, western Finland. Drill holes OL­KR1 - OL-KR5. TVO Site Investigation project, work report 90-10, 65 p (in Finnish with an English abstract).

Lindberg, A. & Paananen, M. 1992. Petrography, lithogeochemistry and petrophysics of rock samples from Konginkangas, Sievi and Eurajoki study sites, southern and western Finland. Drill holes KI-KR7, SY-KR7 and OL-KR6. TVO Site Investigation project, Work report 92-34, 40 p. (in Finnish with an English abstract).

Lofgren, M. & Neretnieks, I. 2002. Formation factor logging in-situ by electrical methods. Background and methodology. Stockholm: SKB, Technical Report TR-02-27, 113 p.

Mala Geoscience 1998. System description and technical specifications.

Mount Sopris Instrument, 2002. 2PEA-1000 and 2PEA-1000/F PolyElectric Probes. Operations manual. Golden, USA: Mount Sopris Instrument Co, 16 p.

Niinimaki, R. 2003a. Core Drilling of Deep Borehole OL-KR24 at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki 2003. Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 153 p. Working report 2003-52.

Niinimaki, R. 2003b. Core Drilling of Deep Borehole OL-KR25 at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki 2003. Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 197 p. Working report 2003-44.

Niinimaki, R. 2003c. Core drilling of deep borehole OL-KR27 at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki 2003. Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 209 p. Working report 2003-61.

Niva, B., 1989. Geophysical Borehole Logging at Olkiluoto, Borehole OL-KRl. Helsinki, Finland: Teollisuuden Voima Oy. 10 p. TVO/Site investigations Work Report 89-58.

57

Okko, 0., Front, K., Hassinen, P. & Vaittinen, T. 1990a. Interpretation of geophysical borehole logging in Olkiluoto site, Eurajoki, southwest Finland: boreholes KR1, KR2 and KR3. TVO Site investigations, Work report 90-08, 54 p.

Okko, 0., Hassinen, P. & Front, K. 1990b. Interpretation of geophysical borehole logging in Olkiluoto site, Eurajoki, southwest Finland: boreholes KR4 and KR5. TVO Site investigations, Work report 90-47, 32 p.

Parkhomenko, E. 1967. Electrical properties of rocks. New York, Plenum Press, 314 p.

Peltoniemi, M. 1988. Maa- ja kallioperan geofysikaaliset tutkimusmenetelmat. Espoo, Otakustantamo 515, 411 p. (Geophysical investigation methods of soil and bedrock).

Poikonen, A. 1983. Application of electrical and thermal borehole logging to structural and hydrogeological investigations of crystalline bedrock. VTT Technical Research Centre, Research Reports 212, 80 p.

Pollanen, J. & Rouhiainen, P. 2000a. Difference flow measurements at the Olkiluoto site in Eurajoki, borehole KR11. Helsinki, Posiva Oy. Working report 2000-38. 68 p.

Pollanen, J. & Rouhiainen, P. 2000b. Difference flow and electric conductivity measurements at the Olkiluoto site in Eurajoki, boreholes KR6, KR7 and KR12. Helsinki, Posiva Oy. Working report 2000-51. 150 p.

Pollanen, J. & Rouhiainen, P. 2001 a. Difference flow and electric conductivity measurements at the Olkiluoto site in Eurajoki, boreholes KR13 - KR14. Helsinki, Posiva Oy. Working report 2001-42. 100 p.

Pollanen, J. & Rouhiainen, P. 2001 b. Flow and electric conductivity measurements during long term pumping of borehole KR6 at the Olkiluoto. Helsinki, Posiva Oy. Working report 2001-43.

PolHinen, J. & Rouhiainen, P. 2002a. Difference flow measurements at chosen depths in boreholes KR1, KR2, KR4 and KR11 at the Olkiluoto site in Eurajoki. Posiva Oy. Working report 2002-42. 31 p.

Pollanen, J. & Rouhiainen, P. 2002b. Difference flow and electric conductivity measurements at the Olkiluoto site in Eurajoki, boreholes KR15 - KR18 and KR15B -KR18B. Posiva Oy. Working report 2002-29. 134 p.

Pollanen, J. & Rouhiainen, P. 2002c. Difference flow and electric conductivity measurements at the Olkiluoto site in Eurajoki, extended part of borehole KR15. Posiva Oy. Working report 2002-43. 57 p.

Rautio, T. 2003a. Core drilling of deep borehole OL-KR26 at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki 2003. Eurajoki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 89 p. Working report 2003-41.

Rautio, T. 2003b. Core Drilling of Deep Borehole OL-KR28 at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki 2003. Eurajoki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 186 p. Working report 2003-57.

58

Rouhiainen, P. 1999. Electrical conductivity and detailed flow logging at the Olkiluoto site, in Eurajoki, boreholes KR1-KR11. Volume 1: Report and Appendices 1 - 5. Volume 2: Appendices 5- 13. Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 387 p. Site Investigations, Working Report 99-72.

Schon, J. H. 1996. Physical properties of rocks: Fundamentals and principles of petrophysics. Handbook of geophysical exploration, Section 1, Seismic exploration, volume 18. Pergamon, 583 p.

Suomen Malmi Oy 1989. Geophysical Borehole Logging in Olkiluoto, Eurajoki, Boreholes KR2 and KR3 (in Finnish with an English abstract). Helsinki, Finland: Teollisuuden Voima Oy. 9 p. TVO/Site investigations Work Report 89-88.

Suomen Malmi Oy 1990. Geophysical Borehole Logging at Olkiluoto Investigation Site, Boreholes KR4 and KR5 (in Finnish with an English abstract). Helsinki, Finland: Teollisuuden Voima Oy. 9 p. TVO/Site investigations Work Report 90-44.

Vaittinen, T. 1988. Kallioreikatutkimusten tulosten kasittely- ja tulkintaohjelma LOG. Espoo: VTT Technical Research Centre, Research Notes 922, 19 p. (Bedrock borehole processing and interpretation software LOG, in Finnish).

Vaittinen, T., Ahokas, H., Heikkinen, E., Hella, P., Nummela, J., Saksa, P., Tammisto, E., Paulamaki, S., Paananen, M., Front, K. & Karki, A. 2003. Bedrock model of the Olkiluoto site, version 2003/1. Eurajoki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 266 p. Working Report 2003-43.

Zhdanov, M. S. & Keller, G. V. 1994. The Geoelectrical Methods in Geophysical Exploration. Methods in Geochemistry and Geophysics, 31. The Netherlands, Elsevier, 873 p.

59

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1. Applied data

APPENDIX 2. Reference sections

APPENDIX 3. Defmed borehole specific leveling values

APPENDIX 4. Plotted results of unification

60

APPENDIX 1. Applied data. Unified long normal data and used fluid resistivity.

Bore- Data Filename Report Nr. Report Ref. Key Status Project Comments hole

KR1 Resistivity, long normal LNFKR01A.OL1 90-08 Okko et al. J95 KAS SITU 1990a

KR1 Groundwater resistivity FRDKR01A.OL5 90-08 785 KAS SITU

KR2 Resistivity. Long normal LNFKR02A.OL1 90-08 K06 KAs SITU Depth matched KR2 Fluid resistivity FRDKR02A.OL6 90-08 693 KAS SITU I

KR2ext Resistivity, long normal OL-KR2LN.DAT 95-71 Julkunen et al. J72 KAS PATU Depth matched KR2ext Fluid resistivity OL-KR2FL.DAT 95-71 1995 J74 KAS PATU Depth matched

!

KR3 Resistivity, long normal LNFKR03A.OL1 90-08 Okko et al. K10 KAs SITU Depth matched KR3 Fluid resistivity FRDKR03A.OL5 90-08 1990a 714 KAs SITU KR4 Resistivity, Long normal Lnfkr04a.ol1 90-47 Okko et al. J83 KAs SITU KR4 Fluid resistivity FRDKR04A.OL5 90-47 1990b 738 KAs SITU KR4ext Resistivity, long normal OL-KR4LN.DAT 95-71 J ulkunen et al. 701 KAS PATU 0\

.........

KR4ext Fluid resistivity OL-KR4FL.DAT 95-71 1995 699 KAs PATU KR5 Resistivity, long normal LNFKR05A.OL 1 90-47 Okko et al. 767 KAS SITU KR5 Fluid resistivity FRDKR05A.OL5 90-47 1990b 760 KAS SITU KR6 Resistivity. long normal OL-KR6LN.DAT 95-71 Julkunen et al. JOB KAS PATU Depth matched KR6 Fluid resistivity OL-KR6FL.DAT 95-71 1995 J10 KAS PATU Depth matched KR6ext Resistivity. long normal ol61nr.dat 2000-37 Julkunen et al. C59 KAS PARVI KR6ext Fluid resistivity ol6flr.dat 2000-37 2000b C58 KAS PARVI KR7 Resistivity. long normal OL-KR7LN.DAT 95-71 Julkunen et al. J52 KAS PATU Depth matched KR7 Fluid resistivity OL-KR7FL.DAT 95-71 1995 719 KAS PATU KR7ext Resistivity. long normal ol71nr.dat 2000-37 Julkunen et al. C68 KAS PARVI KR7ext Fluid resistivity ol7flr.dat 2000-37 2000b C67 KAS PARVI KR8 Resistivity. long normal OL-KR8LN.DAT 95-71 Julkunen et al. J58 KAS PATU Depth matched KR8 Fluid resistivity OL-KR8FL.DAT 95-71 1995 729 KAS PATU KR8ext Resistivity. long normal R8RLN.txt 2003-05 Lahti et al. 738 MIT OIVA KR8ext Fluid resistivity R8FFLD.txt 2003-05 2003 736 MIT OIVA KR8 jatko ~

~

~ 0 ~

APPENDIX 1. Applied data. Unified long normal data and used fluid resistivity (continued).

Bore- Data Filename Report Report Key hole Nr. Ref.

KR9 Resistivity. long normal OL9LNR.DAT 96-41 Julkunen et J37 KR9 Fluid resistivity OL9FLR.DAT 96-41 al. 1996 J38 KR10 Resistivity. long normal OLPN.RMV 96-14 Laurila& 179 KR10 Tammen-

Fluid resistivity OLFL.RMV 96-14 maa 1996 A2.5 KR11 Resistivity. long normal 01111nr.dat 2000-02 Julkunen et 815 KR11 Fluid resistivity 0111flr.dat 2000-02 al. 2000a 814 KR12 Resistivity. long normal ol121nr.dat 2000-37 Julkunen et C77 KR12 Fluid resistivity ol12flr.dat 2000-37 al. 2000b C76 KR13 Resistivity. long normal OL-KR13LN.TXT 2001-30 E93 KR13 Fluid resistivity OL-KR13FLD.TXT 2001-30 E87 KR14 Resistivity. long normal ol-kr141n.txt 2001-30 Lahti et al. F03 KR14 Fluid resistivity ol-kr14 fld. txt 2001-30 2001 E97 KR15 Resistivity. long normal ol151nr.dat 2002-32 Julkunen et H13 KR15 Fluid resistivity ol15flr.dat 2002-32 al. 2002 H11 KR15ext Resistivity. long normal OL 15LNR.DAT 2003-10 Julkunen et 664 KR15ext Fluid resistivity OL 15FLR.DAT 2003-10 al2003 661 KR15B Resistivity. long normal ol15blnr.dat 2002-32 H22 KR15B Fluid resistivity ol15bflr.dat 2002-32 H20 KR16 Resistivity. long normal ol161nr.dat 2002-32 H31 KR16 Fluid resistivity OL 16FLR.DAT 2002-32 H29 KR16B Resistivity. long normal ol16blnr.dat 2002-32 H41 KR16B Fluid resistivity OL 168FLR.DAT 2002-32 H39 KR17 Resistivity. long normal ol171nr.dat 2002-32 H51 KR17 Fluid resistivity ol17flr.dat 2002-32 H49 KR17B Resistivity. long normal ol17blnr.dat 2002-32 Julkunen et H60 KR17B Fluid resistivity ol17bflr.dat

--L_~002-_3__g_ ~1._2002 H58

Status Project

KAS PATU KAS PATU KAS PATU

MIT PATU KAS PARVI KAS PARVI KAS PARVI KAS PARVI MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA

Comments

Depth matched Depth matched

KR15 ext KR15 ext

8 8

- - -

0\ N

?; ~

~ 0 ~

APPENDIX 1. Applied data. Unified long normal data and used fluid resistivity (continued).

Bore- Data Filename Report Report Key hole Nr. Ref.

KR18 Resistivity. long normal ol181nr.dat 2002-32 H69 KR18 Fluid resistivity ol18flr.dat 2002-32 Julkunen H67 KR18B Resistivity. long normal ol18blnr.dat 2002-32 et al. H79 KR18B Fluid resistivity ol18bflr.dat 2002-32 2002 H77 KR19 Resistivity. long normal R19RLN real.txt 2003-05 684 KR19 Fluid resistivity R19FFLO.txt 2003-05 682 KR19B Resistivity. long normal R19bRLN.txt 2003-05 693 KR19B Fluid resistivity R19bFFLO.txt 2003-05 691 KR20 Resistivity. long normal R20RLN.txt 2003-05 702 KR20 Fluid resistivity R20FFL.txt 2003-05 700 KR20B Resistivity. long normal R20bRLN.txt 2003-05 711 KR20B Fluid resistivity R20bFFLO.txt 2003-05 709 KR22 Resistivity. long normal R22RLN.txt 2003-05 720 KR22 Fluid resistivity R22FFLO.txt 2003-05 718 KR22B Resistivity. long normal R22bRLN.txt 2003-05 Lahti et 729 KR22B Fluid resistivity R22bFFLO.txt 2003-05 al. 2003 727 KR23 Resistivity. long normal kr231nr.dat 2004-17 050 KR23 Fluid resistivity kr23flu.dat 2004-17 053 KR23B Resistivity. long normal KR23BLNR.OAT 2004-17 059 KR23B Fluid resistivity kr23bflu.dat 2004-17 062 KR24 Resistivity. long normal kr241nr.dat 2004-17 068 KR24 Fluid resistivity kr24flu.dat 2004-17 071 KR25 Resistivity. long normal kr251nr.dat 2004-17 077 KR25 Fluid resistivity kr25flc.dat 2004-17 Julkunen 080 KR25B Resistivity. long normal KR25BLN R. OAT 2004-17 et al. 084 KR25B Fluid resistivity kr25bflu.dat 2004-17 2004a 087

Status Project

KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

Comments

draft draft draft draft draft draft draft draft draft draft

0\ w

~ ~

~ 0

><

APPENDIX 1. Applied data. Unified long normal data and used fluid resistivity (continued).

Bore- Data File name Report Report Key hole Nr. Ref.

KR26 Resistivity. long normal KR26LNR.DAT 2004-18 093 KR26 Fluid resistivity KR26FLR.OAT 2004-18 096 KR27 Resistivity. long normal kr271nr.dat 2004-18 E01 KR27 Fluid resistivity kr27flu.dat 2004-18 E04 KR27B Resistivity. long normal KR27BLNR.OAT 2004-18 143 KR27B Fluid resistivity kr27bflu.dat 2004-18 146 KR28 Resistivity. long normal kr281nr.dat 2004-18 151 KR28 Fluid resistivity kr28flu.dat 2004-18 Julkunen 154 KR28B Resistivity. long normal KR28BLNR.DAT 2004-18 et al. 159 KR28B Fluid resistivity kr28bflu.dat 2004-18 2004b 162

Status Project

MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

Comments

draft draft draft draft draft draft draft draft draft draft 0'\

~

?; ~

~ tj :;< ..........

APPENDIX 1. Applied data. Supporting data.

Bore- Data File name Report Nr. hole

KR1 Gamma-gamma density DENSITY.001 89-58, 2001-30

KR1 Resistance, single point SGDKR01A.OL 1 90-08 KR1 Resistivity, short normal SNFKR01A.OL 1 90-08 KR1 Petrophysical sample OLKR1.PET 90-10

data

KR1 Susceptibility SUDKR01A.OL 1 90-08

KR1 Flow logging OL01 Cond.dat_1 99-72

KR1 Rock type KR01.wxt 2003-43

-

Report Ref. Key

Niva 1989. G51 Lahti et al. 2001 Okko et al. K01 1990a KOO Lindberg & F91 Paananen 1990 Okko et al. K02 1990a Rouhiainen 849 1999 Vaittinen et al. 2003

Status Project

KAS SITU

KAS SITU KAS SITU MIT SITU

KAS SITU

TUL PARVI

Comments

Depth adjusted Depth adjusted

Depth adjusted and borehole leveled Detailed flow logging and EC measurement

- - - - --------- ------- - - -

0'\ Vl

?; ~

~ 0 ~ ......

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name Report hole Nr.

KR2 Gamma-gamma density GDDKR02A.OL1 90-08 KR2 Resistivity, Wenner WEFKR02A.OL1 90-08 KR2 Resistance, Single Point SGDKR02A.OL1 90-08 KR2

Petrophysical sample data OLKR2.PET 90-10 KR2

Susceptibility SUDKR02A.OL1 90-08 KR2, KR2ext Flow logging OL02Cond.dat 99-72 KR2ext Gamma-gamma density OL-KR2DE.DAT 95-71 KR2ext Resistance, single point OL-KR2SG.DAT 95-71 KR2ext Resistivity, short normal OL-KR2SN.DAT 95-71 KR2ext Susceptibility OL-KR2SU.DAT 95-71 KR2

Rock type KR02.wxt 2003-43 KR2 Flow logging OLKR02SP15E010D1.CSV 2002-42 KR2 Flow logging OLKR02SP27E010D3.CSV 2002-42 KR2 Flow loggin.g OLKR02SP27E010D4.CSV 2002-42

,KR2 Flow logging OLKR02SP27E010D5.CSV 2002-42

Report Key reference

Okko et al. K08 1990a K09

K03 Lindberg & Paananen 1990 F92 Okko et al. 1990a K12 Rouhiainen 1999 \jn Julkunen et J79 al. 1995 163

J67 J80

Vaittinen et al. 2003 PolHinen& \jn Rouhiainen \jn 2002c \jn

\jn

Status Project

KAS SITU KAS SITU KAS SITU

MIT SITU

KAS SITU

TUL PARVI KAS PATU KAS PATU KAS PATU KAS PATU

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA

Comments

Depth matched and leveled

Depth matched and leveled Flow logging and EC measurement Depth adjusted and leveled

Depth matched and leveled

0'\ 0'\

?; ""0

~ tJ ~ ""-"

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name Report hole Nr.

KR3 Gamma-gamma density GDDKR03A.OL1 89-88 KR3

Resistivity, Wenner WEFKR03A.OL1 90-08 KR3 Resistance, single point SGDKR03A.OL1 89-88 KR3

Petrophysical sample data OLKR3.PET 90-10 KR3 Susceptibility SUDKR03A.OL1 89-88 KR3

Flow logging OL03Cond.dat 99-72 KR3

Rock type KR03.wxt 2003-43 KR4 Gamma-gamma density GDDKR04A.OL1 90-47 KR4 Resistivity, Wenner WEFKR04A.OL1 90-47 KR4 Resistance, single point SGDKR04A.OL1 90-47 KR4

Petrophysical sample data OLKR4.PET 90-10 KR4

Susceptibility SUDKR04A.OL1 90-47 KR4

Flow logging OL04Cond.dat 99-72 KR4ext Gamma-gamma density OL-KR4DE.DAT 95-71 KR4ext Resistivity, short normal OL-KR4SN.DAT 95-71 KR4ext Susceptibility OL-KR4SU.DAT 95-71 KR4

Rock type KR04.wxt 2003-43

Report Key reference

SMOY 1989 J81 Okko et al. 1990a Kll SMOY 1989 J78 Lindberg& Paananen 1990 F93 SMOY 1990 J91 Rouhiainen 1999 B53 Vaittinen et al. 2003 /jn Okko et al. J87 1990b J88

J85 Lindberg & Paananen 1990 F94 Okko et al. 1990b J92 Rouhiainen 1999 \jn Julkunen et al I98 1995 703

J45 Vaittinen et al. 2003

Status Project

KAs SITU

KAS SITU KAS SITU

MIT SITU KAS SITU

TUL PARVI

KAS SITU KAS SITU KAS SITU

MIT SITU

KAS SITU

TUL PARVI KAS PATU KAS PATU KAS PATU

Comments

Depth matched

Depth matched

Depth matched and leveled Flow logging and EC measurement

Depth matched

Depth matched and leveled Detailed flow logging and EC measurement Depth matched

Depth matched and leveled

0\ -.....)

?; '"d

~ tJ ~ .........

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name Report hole Nr.

KR5 Gamma-gamma density GDDKR05A.OL 1 90-47 KR5 Resistance, single point SGDKR05A.OL 1 90-47 KR5 Resistivity, Wenner WEFKR05A.OL 1 90-47 KR5

Petrophysical samples OLKR5.PET 90-10 KR5

Susceptibility SUDKR05A.OL 1 90-47 KR5

Flow logging OLR5Cond .dat 99-72 KR5

Rock type KR05.wxt 2003-43 KR6

Gamma-gamma density OL-KR6DE.DAT 95-71 KR6 Resistance, single point OL-KR6SG.DAT 95-71 KR6 Resistivity, short normal OL-KR6SN.DAT 95-71 KR6

Petrophysical samples OLKR6.PET 92-34 KR6ext

Susceptibility ol6sus.dat 2000-37 KR6

Flow logging OL06Cond .dat 99-72 KR6ext

Gamma-gamma density ol6den.dat 2000-37 KR6ext Resistance, single point ol6spr.dat 2000-37 KR6ext Resistivity, short normal ol6snr.dat 2000-37 KR6

Rock type KR06.wxt 2003-43

Report Key reference

Okko et al. J90 1990b 769

777 Lindberg & Paananen 1990 F95 Okko et al. 1990b J93 Rouhiainen 1999 ~n Vaittinen et al. 2003 Julkunen et al1995 J11

199 J06

Lindberg & Paananen 1992 F96 Julkunen et a12000b H39 Rouhiainen 1999 859 Julkunen et al2000b H40

C62 C61

Vaittinen et al2003

Status Project

KAS SITU MIT SITU MIT SITU

MIT SITU

KAS SITU

TUL PARVI

KAS PATU KAS PATU KAS PATU

MIT SITU

KAS PARVI

TUL PARVI

KAS PARVI KAS PARVI KAS PARVI

Comments

Depth matched

Depth mathed and leveled

Flow logging and EC

Depth matched and leveled

Depth matched and leveled Detailed flow logging and EC measurement Depth matched and leveled

0"1 00

~ ""0

~ tJ -><

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data Filename . Report hole Nr.

KR7 Gamma-gamma density OL-KR7DE.DAT 95-71 KR7 Resistance, single point OL-KR7SG.DAT 95-71 KR7 Resistivity, short normal OL-KR7SN.DAT 95-71 KR7

Susceptibility suskis.txt 95-71 KR7

Flow logging OL07Cond.dat 99-72 KR7ext Gamma-gamma density ol7den.dat 2000-37 KR7ext Resistance, single point ol7spr.dat 2000-37 KR7ext Resistivity, short normal ol7snr.dat 2000-37 KR7ext

Susceptibility ol7sus.dat 2000-37 KR7

Rock type KR07.wxt 2003-43

Report Key ref.

Julkunen et J17 al. 1995 J48

J50

J53 Rouhiainen 1999

\jn Julkunen et H31 al. 2000b C71

C70

H38 Vaittinen et al2003

Status Project

KAS PATU KAS PATU KAS PATU

KAS PATU

TUL PARVI KAS PARVI KAS PARVI KAS PARVI

KAS PARVI

Comments

Depth matched

Depth matched Depth matched and

leveled Detailed flow logging and

EC measurement+ resistance Depth matched

Depth matched and leveled 0\

""

~ ~

~ d -~ .......

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name Report hole Nr.

KR8 Gamma-gamma density OL-KR8DE.DAT 95-71 KR8 Resistance, single point OL-KR8SG.DAT 95-71 KR8 Resistivity, short normal OL-KR8SN.DAT 95-71 KR8

Susceptibility OL-KR8SU.DAT 95-71 KR8

Flow logging OL08Cond.dat 99-72 KR8ext Gamma-gamma density R8DE.txt 2003-05 KR8ext Resistance, single point R8RSPR.txt 2003-05 KR8ext Resistivity, short normal R8RSN.txt 2003-05 KR8ext Susceptibility KR8susc. txt 2003-05 KR8

Rock type KR08.wxt 2003-43 KR8 OLKR08SP22E020D20

Flow logging 5.CSV draft KR8 OLKR08SP22G005D10

Flow logging 5.CSV draft KR9 Gamma-gamma density OL9DEN.DAT 96-41 KR9 Resistance, single point OL9SPR.DAT 96-41 KR9 Resistivity, short normal OL9SNR.DAT 96-41 KR9

Susceptibility OL9SUS.DAT 96-41 KR9

Flow logging OL09Cond.dat 99-72 KR9

Rock type KR09.wxt 2003-43

Report Key Status ref.

Julkunen et J25 KAS al1995 J54 KAS

J56 KAS

J59 KAS Rouhiainen 1999 ~n TUL Lahti et al 735 MIT 2003 741 MIT

740 MIT J01 KAS

Vaittinen et al PRG-Tec

~n TUL PRG-Tec

~n TUL Julkunen et J42 KAS al1996 J40 KAS

J39 KAS

J61 KAS Rouhiainen 1999 ~n TUL Vaittinen et al. 2003

Project

PATU PATU PATU

PATU

PARVI OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA

OIVA PATU PATU PATU

PATU

PARVI

Comments

Depth matched

Depth matched Depth matched and leveled Detailed flow logging and

EC measurement KR8 jatko KR8 jatko

Leveled to 1 E-5 SI

KR8 ext

KR8 ext Depth matched Depth matched

Depth matched and leveled Detailed flow logging and EC measurement

- -

-.J 0

~ ""'d

~ tJ ~

~ .......

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data Filename Report Report Key Status Project Comments hole Nr. reference

KR10 Gamma-gamma density OLDE.RMV 96-14 Laurila& 177 KAS PATU Depth matched KR10 Ominaisvastus, Wenner OLWE.RMV 96-14 Tammenmaa 180 KAS PATU Depth matched KR10 Resistance, single point OLYP.RMV 96-14 1996 178 KAS PATU KR10 Susceptibility OLSU.RMV 96-14 J44 KAS PATU KR10 Rouhiainen Corrected versions. Error

1999 explained in Archive Protocol according to

Flow logging OL 1 OCond .dat 99-72 \jn TUL PARVI [18.01.2001] KR10 Vaittinen et al

Rock type KR10.wxt 2003-43 2003 KR11 Pollanen &

Rouhiainen Depth set to measurement Flow logging OL 11 Cond.dat 2000-38 2000a \jn TUL PARVI interval center. -..l

KR11 Gamma-gamma density 0111 den.dat 2000-02 H32 KAS PARVI Leveled ........

KR11 Resistance, single point 0111spr.dat 2000-02 818 KAS PARVI KR11 Resistivity, short normal 0111snr.dat 2000-02 Julkunen et 817 KAS PARVI KR11 Susceptibility 0111 sus.dat 2000-02 al2000a H35 KAS PARVI Leveled KR11 Rouhiainen Detailed flow logging and EC

Flow logging OL 11 Cond.dat 99-72 1999 \jn TUL PARVI measurement KR11 Vaittinen et

Rock type KR11.wxt 2003-43 al2003 -- ----

?; ~

~ 0 ~ ........

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data Filename hole

KR12 Gamma-gamma density ol12den.dat KR12 Resistance, single point ol12spr.dat KR12 Resistivity, short normal ol12snr.dat KR12 Susceptibility ol12sus.dat KR12

Flow logging OG12Cond.dat KR12

Rock type KR12.wxt KR13 Gamma-gamma density OL-KR13DE.TXT KR13 Resistance, single point OL-KR13SP.TXT KR13 Resistivity, short normal OL-KR13SN.TXT KR13 Susceptibility OL-KR13SU.txt KR13

Rock type KR13.wxt KR13 Flow logging OLKR 13SP03B020D 1.DAT KR13 Flow logging OLKR13SP10E020D1.DAT KR13 Flow logging OLKR 13SP1 OG005D 1. DA T KR14 Gamma-gamma density ol-kr14de. txt KR14 Resistance, single point OL-KR14SP.rmv KR14 Resistivity, short normal ol-kr14sn.txt KR14 Susceptibility ol-kr14su. txt KR14

Rock type KR14.wxt KR14 Flow logging OLKR14SP04B020D1.DAT KR14

Flow logging OLKR 14SP09E020D 1.DAT

L_I<.R14 ...... --Flow logging OLKR14SP09G005D1.DAT

Report Report Nr. reference

2000-37 2000-37 2000-37 Julkunen et 2000-37 al2000b

Pollanen & Rouhiainen

2000-51 2000b Vaittinen et

2003-43 al2003 2001-30 2001-30 2001-30 Lahti et al 2001-30 2001

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2001-42 Pollanen & 2001-42 Rouhiainen 2001-42 2001a 2001-30 2001-30 2001-30 Lahti et al 2001-30 2001

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2001-42 Pollanen &

Rouhiainen 2001-42 2001a 2001-42

Key Status

H33 KAS C80 KAS C79 KAS H36 KAS

\jn TUL

E95 MIT E96 MIT E91 MIT E94 MIT

\jn TUL \jn TUL \jn TUL F05 MIT F06 MIT F01 MIT F04 MIT

\jn TUL

\jn TUL \jn TUL

Project

PARVI PARVI PARVI PARVI

PARVI

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA

OIVA OIVA

Comments

Leveled

-.....l N

~ ""0

~ Cl

><

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name hole

KR15 Gamma-gamma density ol15den.dat KR15 Resistance, single point ol15spr.dat KR15 Resistivity, short normal ol15snr .dat KR15 Susceptibility ol15sus.dat KR15ext Gamma-gamma density OL 15DEN.DAT KR15ext Resistance, single point OL 15SPR.DAT KR15ext Resistivity, short normal OL15SNR.DAT KR15ext Susceptibility ol15sus.dat KR15

Rock type KR15.wxt KR15 Flow logging OL 15KRSP03B020D1.CSV KR15 Flow logging OL 15KRSP12E020D1.CSV KR15 Flow logging OL 15KRSP12G005D1.CSV KR15 Flow logging OL 15KRSP03B020D2.txt KR15 Flow logging OL 15KRSP12E020D2.txt KR15 Flow logging OL 15KRSP12G005D2.txt KR15B Gamma-gamma density ol15bden.dat KR15B Resistance, single point OL 15BSPR.DAT KR15B Resistivity, short normal OL 15BSNR.DAT KR15B Susceptibility ol15bsus.dat KR15B

Rock type KR15B.wxt KR15B Flow logging OLKR15SP03B020D1.CSV KR15B Flow logging OLKR15SP05E020D1.CSV KR15B Flow logging OLKR15SP05G005D1.CSV

Report Report Nr. ref.

2002-32 2002-32 2002-32 Julkunen et 2002-32 al2002 2003-10 2003-10 2003-10 Julkunen et 2003-10 al2003

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2002-29 Pollanen & 2002-29 Rouhiainen 2002-29 2002b 2002-43 Pollanen & 2002-43 Rouhiainen 2002-43 2002c 2002-32 2002-32 2002-32 Julkunen et 2002-32 al2003

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2002-29 Pollanen & 2002-29 Rouhiainen 2002-29 2002b

Key Status

H10 KAS H15 KAS H14 KAS H16 KAS 660 KAS 666 KAS 665 KAS 667 KAS

~n TUL \jn TUL \jn TUL ~n TUL \jn TUL \jn TUL H19 KAS H24 KAs H23 KAS H25 KAS

442 TUL 442 TUL 442 TUL

Project

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA OIVA OIVA

Comments

KR15 ext KR15 ext KR15 ext KR15 ext

KR15 ext KR15 ext KR15 ext

B B B B

B B B

.......:J V)

?; '"0

~ tJ >< .........

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name hole

KR16 Gamma-gamma density OL 16DEN.DAT KR16 Resistance, single point OL 16SPR.DAT KR16 Resistivity, short normal OL 16SNR.DAT KR16 Susceptibility ol16sus.dat KR16

Rock type KR16B.wxt KR16 Flow logging OL 16KRSP038020D1.CSV KR16 Flow logging OL 16KRSP13E020D1.CSV KR16 Flow logging OL 16KRSP13G005D1.CSV KR16B Gamma-gamma density OL 16BDEN.DAT KR16B Resistance, single point OL 16BSPR.DAT KR16B Resistivity, short normal OL 16BSNR.DAT KR16B Susceptibility ol16bsus.dat KR16B

Rock type KR16B.wxt KR16B Flow logging OL 16KRSP038020D1.CSV KR16B Flow logging OL 16KRSP05E020D1.CSV KR16B Flow logging OL 16KRSP05G005D1.CSV

Report Report Nr. ref.

2002-32 2002-32 2002-32 Julkunen et 2002-32 al2002

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2002-29 Pollanen & 2002-29 Rouhiainen 2002-29 2002b 2002-32 2002-32 2002-32 Julkunen et 2002-32 al2002

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2002-29 Pollanen & 2002-29 Rouhiainen 2002-29 2002b

Key Status

H28 KAS H34 KAS H33 KAS H35 KAS

~n TUL \jn TUL \jn TUL H38 KAS H44 KAS H43 KAS H45 KAS

\jn TUL ~n TUL \jn TUL

Project Comments

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA OIVA OIVA

-.)

..&:::.

~ ~

~ 0 ~ ..........

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data Filename hole

KR17 Gamma-gamma density OL 17DEN.DAT KR17 Resistance, single point OL 17SPR.DAT KR17 Resistivity, short normal OL 17SNR.DAT KR17 Susceptibility ol17sus.dat KR17

Rock type KR17.wxt KR17 Flow logging OL 17KRSP03B020D1.CSV KR17 Flow logging OL 17KRSP13E020D1.CSV KR17 Flow logging OL 17KRSP13G005D1.CSV KR17B Gamma-gamma density OL 17BDEN .DAT KR17B Resistance, single point OL 17BSPR.DAT KR17B Resistivity, short normal OL 17BSNR.DAT KR17B Susceptibility ol17bsus.dat KR17B

Rock type KR17B.wxt KR17B Flow logging OL 17KRSP03B020D1.CSV KR17B Flow logging OL 17KRSP03E020D1.CSV KR17B Flow logging OL 17KRSP03G005D1.CSV

Report Report Nr. ref.

2002-32 2002-32 2002-32 Julkunen et 2002-32 al2002

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2002-29 Pollanen & 2002-29 Rouhiainen 2002-29 2002b 2002-32 2002-32 2002-32 Julkunen et 2002-32 al2002

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2002-29 Pollanen & 2002-29 Rouhiainen 2002-29 2002b

Key Status

H48 KAS H53 KAs H52 KAS H54 KAS

452 TUL 452 TUL 452 TUL H57 KAS H62 KAS H61 KAS H63 KAS

450 TUL 450 TUL 450 TUL

Project

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA OIVA OIVA

Comments

-.J Vl

~ ~

~ tJ ><

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name hole

KR18 Gamma-gamma density OL 18DEN.DAT KR18 Resistance, single point OL 18SPR.DAT KR18 Resistivity, short normal OL 18SNR.DAT KR18 Susceptibility ol18sus.dat KR18

Rock type KR18.wxt KR18 Flow logging OL 18KRSP038020D1.CSV KR18 Flow logging OL 18KRSP13E020D1.CSV KR18 Flow logging OL 18KRSP13G005D1.CSV KR18B Gamma-gamma density OL 18BDEN.DAT KR18B Resistance, single point OL 18BSPR.DAT KR18B Resistivity, short normal ol18bsnr.dat KR18B Susceptibility ol18bsus.dat KR18B

Rock type KR18B.wxt KR18B Flow logging OL 18KRSP038020D1.CSV KR18B Flow logging OL 18KRSP05E020D1.CSV KR18B Flow logging OL 18KRSP05G005D1.CSV

Report Report ref. Key Nr.

2002-32 H66 2002-32 H72 2002-32 Julkunen et H71 2002-32 al2002 H73

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2002-29 Pollanen & 456 2002-29 Rouhiainen 456 2002-29 2002b 456 2002-32 H76 2002-32 H82 2002-32 Julkunen et H81 2002-32 al2002 H83

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 2002-29 Pollanen & 454 2002-29 Rouhiainen 454 2002-29 2002b 454

Status Proje et

KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA KAS OIVA

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA

Comments

-..] 0"1

?; ""0

~ 0 ~ -

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name Report Report Key Status Project Comments hole Nr. ref.

KR19 Gamma-gamma density R19DE.txt 2003-05 681 MIT OIVA KR19 Resistance, single point R19RSPR real.txt 2003-05 687 MIT OIVA KR19 Resistivity, short normal R19RSN real.txt 2003-05 Lahti et al 686 MIT OIVA KR19 Susceptibility R19SU.txt 2003-05 2003 688 MIT OIVA KR19 Vaittinen

Rock type KR19.wxt 2003-43 etal2003 KR19 Flow logging OLKR 19SP19G005D1 04.CSV draft \jn TUL OIVA KR19 Flow logging OLKR19SP19G020D104.CSV draft PRG-Tec \jn TUL OIVA KR19B Gamma-gamma density R19bDE.txt 2003-05 690 MIT OIVA -...l

-...l KR19B Resistance, single point R19bRSPR.txt 2003-05 696 MIT OIVA KR19B Resistivity, short normal R19bRSN.txt 2003-05 Lahti et al 695 MIT OIVA KR19B Susceptibility R19bSU.txt 2003-05 2003 697 MIT OIVA KR19B Vaittinen

Rock type KR19B.wxt 2003-43 etal2003 KR19B Flow logging OLK19BSP04G005D1 04.CSV draft \jn TUL OIVA KR19B Flow logging OLK19BSP04G020D1 04.CSV draft PRG-Tec \jn TUL OIVA

- ---------

2; ~

~ 0 -~ """""'

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data Filename hole

KR20 Gamma-gamma density R20DE.txt KR20 Resistance, single point R20RSPR.txt KR20 Resistivity, short normal R20RSN.txt KR20 Susceptibility R20SU.txt KR20

Rock type KR20.wxt KR20 Flow logging OLKR20SP20G005D1 04.CSV KR20 Flow logging OLKR20SP20G020D1 04.CSV KR20B Gamma-gamma density R20bDE.txt KR20B Resistance, single point R20bRSPR.txt KR20B Resistivity, short normal R20bRSN.txt KR20B Susceptibility R20bSU.txt KR20B

Rock type KR20B.wxt KR20B Flow logging OLK20BSP07G005D1 04.CSV KR20B Flow logging OLK20BSP07G020D1 04.CSV

Report Report ref. Key Nr.

2003-05 699 2003-05 705 2003-05 Lahti et al 704 2003-05 2003 706

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 draft ~n draft PRG-Tec ~n 2003-05 708 2003-05 714 2003-05 Lahti et al 713 2003-05 2003 715

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 draft ~n draft PRG-Tec ~n

Status Project

MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA

Comments

--------

-......) 00

~ ~

~ tJ ~ ........

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name hole

KR22 Gamma-gamma density R22DE.txt KR22 Resistance, single point R22RSPR.txt KR22 Resistivity, short normal R22RSN.txt KR22 Susceptibility R22SU.txt KR22

Rock type KR22.wxt KR22 Flow logging OLKR22SP05G020D 1 04.CSV KR22 Flow logging OLKR22SP 12G005D 1 04.CSV KR22B Gamma-gamma density R22bDE.txt KR22B Resistance, single point R22bRSPR.txt KR22B Resistivity, short normal R22bRSN.txt KR22B Susceptibility R22bSU.txt KR22B

Rock type KR22B.wxt KR22B Flow logging OLKB22SP05E020D1 02.CSV KR22B Flow logging OLKB22SP05G005D1 02.CSV KR22B Flow logging OLKB22SP09G005D202.CSV

Report Report Nr. ref.

2003-05 2003-05 2003-05 Lahti et al 2003-05 2003

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 draft draft PRG-Tec 2003-05 2003-05 2003-05 Lahti et al 2003-05 2003

Vaittinen et 2003-43 al2003 draft draft draft PRG-Tec

Key Status

717 MIT 723 MIT 722 MIT 724 MIT

~n TUL \jn TUL 726 MIT 732 MIT 731 MIT 733 MIT

\jn TUL \jn TUL ~n TUL

Project

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA OIVA OIVA

Comments

.......:J \Cl

~ ~

~ 0

>< .......

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name Report hole Nr.

KR23 Gamma-gamma density kr23den.dat 2004-17 KR23 Resistance, single point kr23spr.dat 2004-17 KR23 Resistivity, short normal kr23snr.dat 2004-17 KR23 Susceptibility kr23sus.dat 2004-17 KR23

Rock type KR23.wxt 2003-43 KR23 Flow logging OLKR23SP18E02001 05.CSV draft KR23 Flow logging OLKR23SP06B02001 02.CSV draft KR23 Flow logging OLKR23SP20E02001 02.CSV draft KR23 Flow logging OLKR23SP20G00501 02.CSV draft KR23 Flow logging OLKR23SP20G0050202.CSV draft KR23B Gamma-gamma density KR23BOEN.OAT 2004-17 KR23B Resistance, single point KR23BSPR.OAT 2004-17 KR23B Resistivi!}', short normal KR23BSNR.OAT 2004-17 KR23B Susceptibility kr23bsus.dat 2004-17 KR23B

Rock type KR23B.wxt 2003-43 KR23B Flow logging OLKB23SP04E02001 02.CSV draft KR23B Flow logging OLKB23SP04G0050 1 02.CSV draft

Report Key ref.

047 051

Julkunen et 049 al2004a 054 Vaittinen et al2003

\jn ~n ~n \jn

PRG-Tec ~n 056 060

Julkunen et 058 al2004a 063 Vaittinen et al2003

~n PRG-Tec \jn

Status Project

MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA

Comments

draft draft draft draft draft draft draft draft draft

draft draft

I

00 0

?d ~

~ 0 ~ .......

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data File name Report hole Nr.

KR24 Gamma-gamma density kr24den2.dat 2004-17 KR24 Resistance, single point kr24spr.dat 2004-17 KR24 Resistivity, short normal kr24snr.dat 2004-17 KR24 Susceptibility kr24sus.dat 2004-17 KR24

Rock type KR24 Rock typet.txt 2003-52 KR24 Flow logging OLKR24SP15E0200403.CSV draft KR24 Flow logging OLKR24SP15E0200503.CSV draft KR24 Flow logging OLKR24SP17E02001 03.CSV draft KR24 Flow logging OLKR24SP17E0200203.CSV draft KR24 Flow logging OLKR24SP 17E0200303.CSV draft

Report Key ref.

168 Julkunen 069 et al 067 2004a 072 Niinimaki 2003a

~n \jn \jn ~n

PRG-Tec .... -~n

Status Project

MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL ___QIVA ------- --- - ---

Comments

draft draft draft draft draft 00 -

?; ~

~ 0 ~ -

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data Filename Report hole Nr.

KR25 Gamma-gamma density kr25den.dat 2004-18 KR25 Resistance, single point kr25spr.dat 2004-18 KR25 Resistivity, short normal kr25snr.dat 2004-18 KR25 Susceptibility kr25sus.dat 2004-18 KR25

Rock type KR25 Rock typet. txt 2003-44 KR25 Flow logging OLKR25SP15E02001 03.CSV draft KR25 Flow logging OLKR25SP15E0200203.CSV draft KR25 Flow logging OLKR25SP15E0200303.CSV draft KR25B Gamma-gamma density KR25BOEN.OAT 2004-18 KR25B Resistance, single point KR25BSPR.OAT 2004-18 KR25B Resistivity, short normal KR25BSNR.DAT 2004-18 KR25B Susceptibility kr25bsus.dat 2004-18 KR25B

Rock type KR258 Rock typet.txt 2003-44 KR26 Gamma-gamma density KR26DEN.DAT 2004-18 KR26 Resistance, single point KR26SPR.DAT 2004-18 KR26 Resistivity, short normal KR26SNR.OAT 2004-18 KR26 Susceptibility kr26sus.dat 2004-18 KR26

Rock type KR26 Rock typet. txt 2003-41 KR26 Flow logging OLKR26SP24E02001 02.CSV draft KR26 Flow logging OLKR26SP24E02001 02 28.CSV draft

Report Key ref.

074 Julkunen 078 et al 076 2004b 170 Niinimaki 2003b

\jn \jn

PRG-Tec \jn 081

Julkunen 085 etal 083 2004b 088 Niinimaki 2003b

090 Julkunen 094 et al. 092 2004b 172 Rautio 2003

\jn PRG-Tec \jn

Status Project

MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA TUL OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA MIT OIVA

TUL OIVA TUL OIVA

Comments

draft draft draft

draft draft

00 N

2; ~

~ d ~ ..........

i

APPENDIX 1. Applied supporting data (continued).

Bore- Data Filename hole

KR27 Gamma-gamma density kr27den.dat KR27 Resistance, single point kr27spr.dat KR27 Resistivity, short normal kr27snr.dat KR27 Susceptibility kr27sus.dat KR27 Flow logging OLKR27SP 14E02001 02.CSV KR27

Rock type KR27 Rock typet. txt KR27B Gamma-gamma density KR27BDEN.DAT KR27B Resistance, single point KR27BSPR.DAT KR27B Resistivity, short normal KR27BSNR.DAT KR27B Susceptibility kr23bsus.dat KR27B

Rock ty2_e KR27B Rock typet.txt KR28 Gamma-gamma density kr28den.dat KR28 Resistance, single point kr28spr.dat KR28 Resistivity, short normal kr28snr.dat KR28 Susceptibility kr28sus2.dat KR28

Rock type KR28 Rock typet. txt KR28 Flow logging OLKR28SP23E020D202.CSV KR28 Flow logging OLKR28SP23E020D302.CSV KR28B Gamma-gamma density kr28bden.dat KR28B Resistance, single point KR28BSPR.DAT KR28B Resistivity, short normal KR28BSNR.OAT KR28B Susceptibility kr28bsus.dat KR28B

Rock type KR28B Rock typet.txt --·-

Report Report Nr. ref.

2004-18 2004-18 2004-18 Julkunen et 2004-18 al. 2004b draft PRG-Tec

Niinimaki 2003-61 2003c 2004-18 2004-18 2004-18 Julkunen et 2004-18 al. 2004b

Niinimaki 2003-61 2003c 2004-18 2004-18 2004-18 Julkunen et 2004-18 al. 2004b

Rautio 2003-57 2003b draft draft PRG-Tec

2004-18 2004-18 2004-18 Julkunen et 2004-18 al. 2004b

Rautio 2003-57 2003b

~ - --

Key Stat us

098 MIT E02 MIT EOO MIT E05 MIT \jn TUL

140 MIT 144 MIT 142 MIT 063 MIT

148 MIT 152 MIT 150 MIT 173 MIT

072 167 TUL 167 TUL 156 MIT 160 MIT 158 MIT 163 MIT

072

Project Comments

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA draft

OIVA OIVA OIVA OIVA

OIVA draft OIVA draft OIVA draft OIVA draft

OIVA draft OIVA draft OIVA draft OIVA draft OIVA draft OIVA draft

00 V-)

~ ~

~ 0 ~ 1--'

I

84

85

APPENDIX 2. Reference sections. Calor coding refers to markup used in Figures 8-22.

Diameter, Resistivity level, Borehole Start End Lithology, anisotropy tool and fracturing estimate, and

ID Depth depth and homogeneity processing use in unification model (m) (m) eroup

3, Mala tool, Reasonable resistivity 56 mm level. Low porosity

homogeneously borehole, tool (0.2%). Some fractures. KR01 548 564 anisotropic MMG diameter Used in model.

considered Very high resistivity level. No fractures. Low

homogeneously porosity (0.2%). Not used KR01 733 739 anisotropic MMG in model.

heterogeneously 1, VTT tool, Reasonable resistivity anisotropic MMG, GR at 56 mm level. Used in model.

KR02 191 200 195 and 196-197 borehole, tool homogenously anisotropic diameter High resistivity, very few GGN, GR veins 357 and considered fractures. Will fit to GGN

KR02 344 362 360 level, not used for model. homogenously anisotropic High resistivity, very few GGN, preferable reference fractures. Will fit to GGN

KR02 370 388 section level, not used for model. 2, Mala tool, Reasonable level of

56 mm resistivity. No fractures. heterogeneously borehole, tool Can be used.

anisotropic MMG, GR at diameter not KR02 734 741 734 and 736-737 considered

1, VTT tool, Resistivity lower than 56 mm general. Slight fracturing

heterogeneously borehole, tool 1-3 pes/m. Too high fluid anisotropic MMG, GR at diameter resistivity. Not used in

KR03 87 97 89 and 94 encountered model. homogenously anisotropic Very high resistivity level.

MMG, preferable No fractures. Not used in KR03 324 331 reference section model.

heterogeneously 1, VTT tool, Reasonable resistivity anisotropic MMG, 56 mm level. Used in model.

KR04 225 235 suitable reference section borehole, tool homogenously anisotropic diameter Reasonable resistivity

KR04 445 448 MMG, thin GR at 446 encountered level. Used in model. 2, Mala tool, Reasonable level of

heterogeneously 56 mm reststivity/slightly above anisotropic MMG, GR at borehole, tool general level. GR is

KR04 535 549 537-538 and 543-545 diameter not fractured. Can be used. considered Reasonable resistivity

homogenously anisotropic level. Only few fractures. KR04 715 736 MMG, thin GR at 716 Used in model.

Resistivity slightly below homogenously isotropic general level. Only few

GRP, MMG layers at 830 fractures. As GRP, used KR04 825 847 and 846 with precaution.

86

APPENDIX 2. Reference sections (continued)

Diameter, Resistivity level, Borehole Start End Lithology, anisotropy tool and fracturing estimate, and

ID Depth depth and homogeneity processing use in unification model (m) (m) group

heterogeneously 1, VTT tool, High resistivity, very few anisotropic GGN, 56 mm fractures . Will fit to GGN

(possible GR veins at 180, borehole, tool level, not used for model. KR05 177 189 185) diameter

encountered High resistivity, very few very heterogeneously fractures. Will fit to GGN

KR05 336 351 anisotropic GGN level. Not used for model. Reasonable resistivity

homogenously anisotropic level. No fractures though. KR05 516 521 MMG, GR/GGN at 518 Used in model.

4, Mala tool, Reasonable re i tivity. homogenously anisotropic 76 mm, tool Fractures 1-3 pc /m.

KR06 29 31 MMG, thin GR at 30 diameter not Narrow section. Accepted. considered Resistivity slightly below

homogenously anisotropic general level. Fractures 1-KR06 35 39 MMG, GR veins at 38 3. Not used.

Resistivity clearly below homogenously anisotropic level. Fractures 1-2 pes/m.

KR06 264 268 GRP Not used in model. 2, Mala tool, GRP at low level. Slightly

heterogeneously 56 mm fractured. Not used in KR07 93 100 anisotropic GRP borehole, tool model.

diameter not Res1 t1v it) at slightly low homogenously anisotropic considered level. Moderately

MMG, GR veins at fractured. Used in model KR07 119 135 119,120,127,129 with precaution.

3, Mala too 1, Rea onable resistivity 56 mm level. Used in the model.

homogenously anisotropic borehole, tool MMG, preferable diameter

KR07 497 501 reference section considered 2, Mala tool , Level slightly high

56 mm compared to general trend. borehole, tool Fit to GGN level. No or

heterogeneously diameter not little fractures. Can be KR08 220 241 anisotropic GGN considered used with precaution.

Too high resistivity. No fractures. Borehole fluid

heterogeneously too conductive (shortcut anisotropic MMG, MYL flow due to pumping). Not

KR08 429 440 at 438 used in model. Rea onable level of

resistivity. Slightly, 0-2 Heterogeneously isotropic pes/m, fractured, correct GRP, dark GRP/GGN at gw-rcsistivity. Used in

KR08 570 578 572-573, 574 model.

87

APPENDIX 2. Reference sections (continued)

Diameter, Resistivity level, Borehole Start End Lithology, anisotropy tool and fracturing estimate, and

ID Depth depth and homogeneity processing use in unification model (m) (m) group

homogenously anisotropic 3, Mala tool, Reasonable resistivity GGN 53-63, dark GGN at 56 mm level. Used in model.

KR09 50 63 50-53 borehole, tool heterogeneously diameter Reasonable resistivity

anisotropic MMG, GR considered level. Used in model. KR09 161 170 veins at 163,164,166

very heterogeneously Reasonable resistivity anisotropic MMG, GR level. Used in model.

KR09 371 412 380,385,388,395,410 very heterogeneously Reasonable resistivity anisotropic MMG or level. Used in model.

KR09 515 517 GGN, GR at 516 4 (115), VTT Resistivity level near the

heterogeneously tool, 76 mm one in models. or slightly anisotropic GRP, MMG at borehole, tool lower. Some fracturing.

KRlO 220 236 223,230,235 diameter not May be used in models. homogenously anisotropic encountered. Resistivity level resembles

MMG, preferable that ofGGN. No fractures. KR10 388 399 reference section Not used in models.

3, Mala tool, Reasonable resistivity 56 mm level. Slightly below

heterogeneously borehole, tool general level. Only few anisotropic GRP, MMG at diameter fractures, so used in

KR11 189 203 192,194,195-198 considered model. Reasonable resistivity

heterogeneously level , slightly above anisotropic MMG, GR general level. Only few

KR11 235 254 veins 241,247,251 fractures . Used in model. Reasonable resistivity

heterogeneously leveL slightly above anisotropic MMG, GR general level. Only few

KRll 385 400 veins at 388,392,397 fractures . Used in model. Reasonable resistivity

homogenously anisotropic slightly above general KR11 675 686 MMG level. No fractures. Used.

Reasonable resistivity homogenously anisotropic level. Slightly fractured.

KRll 800 814 MMG, GR 810-812 Used in model. heterogeneously isotropic Reasonable. slightly low

GRP,MMGat resistivity level. GRP used KRll 860 875 862,864,868,872,874 in model with precaution.

Low resistivity. Moderate homogenously anisotropic fracturing. Groundwater GRP, preferable reference salinity lowers from linear

KR11 962 972 section trend. Not used in model. Low resistivity. Moderate

heterogeneously fracturing. Groundwater anisotropic GGN, dark salinity lowers from linear

KRll 978 988 GGN 986-988 trend. Not used in model.

88

APPENDIX 2. Reference sections (continued)

Diameter, Resistivity level, Borehole Start End Lithology, anisotropy tool and fracturing estimate, and

ID Depth depth and homogeneity processing use in unification model (m) (m) group

homogenously anisotropic 3, Mala tool, Reasonable resistivity. No KR12 192 197 GRP, MMG at 193-194 56 mm fractures, G RP accepted.

homogenously isotropic borehole, tool Slightly fractured, GRP, preferable reference diameter reasonable resistivity.

KR12 214 220 section considered Accepted. homogenously isotropic Slightly fractured. Being

GGN, preferable reference GGN, not used in model KR12 443 455 section for general level.

homogenously isotropic Moderately fractured. KR12 607 616 GRP, MMG at 612 Higher than general level.

heterogeneously Moderately fractured. At anisotropic MMG, GR at general level. Accepted.

KR12 678 683 678-679 4, Mala tool, Resistivity fits to general

homogenously isotropic 76 mm, tool level. No fractures. As GGN, preferable reference diameter not GGN, not used in model!

KR13 297 318 section considered Fitted to GGN level. Resistivity fits to general

homogenously isotropic level. No fractures. As GGN, preferable reference GGN, not used in model!

KR13 380 391 section Fitted to GGN level. heterogeneously Slightly fractured MMG

anisotropic MMG, GRP at ( 1-5 pes/m). Fitted to KR13 475 486 476,481 MMG level.

homogenously anisotropic 4, Mala tool, Non-fractured. On good KR14 272 280 MMG 76 mm, tool level, or slightly below?

homogenously isotropic diameter not Non-fractured. Should be GRP, preferable reference considered on higher level.

KR14 354 368 section heterogeneously One fractured section,

anisotropic MMG,GRP at otherwise high. Rejected. KR14 368 377 372-377

homogenously isotropic Practically non-fractured KR14 412 421 GGN, GRP 414-415 except GRP. Rejected.

heterogeneously Non-fractured. Slightly anisotropic MMG,GRP at below general level.

KR14 481 486 481-482 Accepted. 5, Mala tool, Fractured, below general

homogenously anisotropic 76 mm, tool level. Rejected. Adjusted GGN, preferable reference diameter to KR 15ext at overlapping

KR15 100 105 section considered section. High level. No fractures.

heterogeneously Rejected (referred to GGN KR15 365 395 anisotropic GGN level).

homogenously anisotropic Reasonable level. Few KR15 480 495 MGG, MMG 490, 494 fractures. Accepted.

89

APPENDIX 2. Reference sections (continued)

Diameter, Resistivity level, Borehole Start End Lithology, an isotropy and tool and fracturing estimate, and

ID Depth depth homogeneity processing use in unification model (m) (m) group

homogenously isotropic 5, Mala tool, Fractured, below level, GRP, preferable reference 76 mm, tool rejected.

KR16 61 65 section diameter homogenously isotropic considered Fractured, below level,

GRP, preferable reference rejected. KR16 105 115 section

5, Mala tool, Few fractures. OK. 76 mm, tool

heterogeneously anisotropic diameter KR17 91 101 MMG, GRP at 93-97 considered

5, Mala tool, Fractures 0-2 pes/m. 76 mm, tool Below level. Rejected.

homogenously anisotropic diameter KR18 107 109 GRP considered

homogenously anisotropic 4, Mala tool, Fractures 1-5 pes/m. KR19 267 275 MMG, GRP at 268-269 76mm, no Preserved in data set.

homogenously anisotropic tool Fractures 1-5 pes/m. KR19 363 370 MMG, GRP at 363 diameter Preserved in data set.

heterogeneously anisotropic encountered. No fractures. Very low KR19 500 506 MMG resistivity, rejected.

homogenously anisotropic 4, Mala tool, Few fractures. Fitted on GGN, preferable reference 76mm, no Grey Gneiss level.

KR20 251 273 section tool Rejected from trend. homogenously anisotropic diameter No fractures. Very high GGN, preferable reference encountered. resistivity. Rejected.

KR20 296 302 section heterogeneously anisotropic Some fractures below 339 GGN, preferable reference m. Very high resistivity,

KR20 312 350 section rejected. 4, Mala tool, Fractured, 1-6 pes/m. 76 mm, no Accepted.

homogenously anisotropic tool MGG, preferable reference diameter

KR22 248 260 section encountered. 5, Mala tool, Few fractures. Reasonable

homogenously anisotropic 76 mm, tool level. Accepted. Adjusted MMG, preferable reference diameter to GGN level!

KR23 222 240 section considered heterogeneously anisotropic 5, Mala tool, On reasonable level.

KR24 142 146 MMG, GR veins at 143,144 76 mm, tool Accepted. No fractures. homogenously anisotropic diameter Reasonable level. MGG, preferable reference considered Accepted. Slight

KR24 227 235 section fracturing 1-5 pes/m. heterogeneously anisotropic Reasonable level. No

MMG, mostly GRP fractures. Accepted. KR24 413 418 (unsuitable for ref.)

homogenously anisotropic High level. No fractures. KR24 475 485 MMG Rejected.

90

APPENDIX 2. Reference sections (continued)

Diameter, Resistivity level, Borehole Start End Lithology, anisotropy and tool and fracturing estimate, and

ID Depth depth homogeneity processing use in unification model (m) (m) group

heterogeneously anisotropic 5, MaUi tool, Fractures in middle. Still MMG, mostly GRP 76 mm, tool resistive. Kept in model.

KR25 225 230 (unsuitable for ref.) diameter heterogeneously anisotropic considered Practically no fractures.

KR25 296 301 MMG, GRP at296-297 Accepted. No fractures. SI ightly

heterogeneously anisotropic below level (narrow). KR25 419 426 MMG Kept in model.

Slight fracturing 1-3 heterogeneously anisotropic pes/m. Below level.

KR25 528 538 MMG, GRP at 536-537 Rejected. 5, Mala tool, Reasonable level of 76 mm, tool resistivity. One fracture.

homogenously anisotropic diameter KR26 40 41 MMG considered

5, Mala tool, Fractures 1-2 pes/m. homogenously anisotropic 76 mm, tool Being GGN, rejected from

KR27 141 146 GGN, dark GGN 141-142 diameter general level. considered Slightly fractured, 0-4

homogenously anisotropic pes/m. Level should be on KR27 404 410 MGG, MMG at 408-410 the typical I ine, but is not.

homogenously anisotropic Moderately fractured 0-4 MMG, preferable reference pes/m. Below level ,

KR27 465 470 section rejected. No fractures. Below level ,

heterogeneously anisotropic rejected. Whole KR27 KR27 528 533 MMG should be lifted.

heterogeneously anisotropic 5, Mala tool, Very high resistivity. No KR28 196 206 MMG, GR at 200 76 mm, tool fractures. Rejected.

diameter Slightly below level. Homogenously anisotropic considered Slightly 1-4 pes/m

KR28 505 514 MMG fractures. Accepted.

MMG, no borehole image Very high resistivity. No KR28 625 630 available from this section fractures. Rejected.

91

APPENDIX 3. Borehole specific leveling. All boreholes were applied a value.

Borehole Leveling Comments KR1 -0.09043 KR2 -0.06261

KR2ext 0.02509 KR3 0 KR4 0.020156

KR4ext -0.00523 KR5 0.022256 KR6 0.081041

KR6ext 0.5 Levels are completely different. With no reference samples, a 0.5 added to KR6ext logarithm of LN resistivity levels the overlap section

KR7 0.155009

KR7ext 0.2845593 The computed value was 0.0415593314. The overlap section does not fit. The upper section was selected more reliable, and overlap section fits well when

0.243 is added. Resulting correction 0.284559. KR8 0.179167 The sample from upper section was fit to Grey Gneiss level.

KR8ext -0.16761 Originally a distance of 0.014759 from fit line was calculated. Overlap sections do not fit correctly, a distance at overlap section -0.1823 71 was

subtracted from extension part. Borehole water too conductive. KR9 0.065239

KR10 -0.02461 KR11 0.017724 KR12 0.053427 Compared to nearby boreholes and Grey Gneiss section, probably too low

values encountered. KR13 0.218174 Leveled to Grey Gneiss level ofKR20 and KR2. Too high fluid resistivity

may exaggerate the resistivity. KR14 0.054672 KR15 -0.0629 KR 15 leveled to match overlapping part of KR 15ext

KR15ext -0.0629 Leveling value decided from KR15ext Grey Gneiss sample 365-395 m KR15B -0.0629 Leveled to same level as KR15, using same value KR16 -0.0629 Leveled to same level as KR15, using same value

KR16B -0.0629 Leveled to same level as KR15, using same value KR17 -0.0629 Leveled to same level as KR15, using same value

KR17B -0.0629 Leveled to same level as KR15, using same value KR18 -0.0629 Leveled to same level as KR15, using same value

KR18B -0.0629 Leveled to same level as KR15, using same value KR19 0.003868

KR19B 0.003868 Leveled to same level as KR 19 KR20 -0.14915 Fit to level of Grey Gneiss at same water resistivity. Water may be too

conductive. KR20B -0.14915 Leveled to same level as KR20 KR22 -0.08438

KR22B -0.08438 Leveled to same level as KR22 KR23 0.069191

KR23B 0.069191 Leveled to same level as KR23 KR24 0.019846 KR25 0.042839

KR25B 0.042839 Leveled to same level as KR25 KR26 0.055712 KR27 0.265971 High level selected due to Grey Gneiss sample. Can be considered a general

level of Migmatitic Mica Gneiss, too. Reference sections are narrow. KR27B 0.265971 Leveled to same level as KR27 KR28 0.089102

KR28B 0.089102 Leveled to same level as KR28

92

93

APPENDIX4.

APPENDIX 4. Legend for resistivity charts, KRl- KR28 and KR15B- KR28B

Original Long Normal Resistivity (LN res)

Levelled Long Normal Resistivity ( corr)

In situ Fluid Resistivity (INSITU SAL)

KR1 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E' E' E:

~ E: 0

>. ~ 0

:;:: >. ·:; ~

:;:: ·:; \.0 ·u; ~ .,J:::. e ·u;

"C ~ ·:; !E.. C>

0

~ -

1 1000

1--------------~------------~------------,-------------~~--~------~~----------~ 100 0.1 1200 600 800 1000 0 200 400 ~ borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

""C

~ 0 >< .,J:::.

'E E: .r. 0 :>;

:;:::; ·s: ~ "iii ~

"U ·:; !E.

~

KR2 Long normal

100 i I lil h lilllilliOIIIIf l . 11 Ill N I 100000

10 I n llfl-1 1 111• b I Ul I I 'I ~"b. J~ ~ Ill IUW Wdlll'l niiJ -.o Alii n I ..,

' I

r

r~ I ' ~ ' r v 1' v1

1

0.1 ' I ,1111 I 1• I I I I I 1• ~ 11

0 200 400 600 800 1000 borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - LN . r~s -==~~~~(L-N) - INSITU SAL -·-· INSITU SAL I

I 10000

1000

~----~ 100

1200

E' E: .r. 0 :>;

:;:::; ·s: ~ "iii

~ 0)

.Q

"" Vl

> ""0 ""0

~ 0 ~ ~

KR3 Long normal

1 00 1 :;> a c:;oc:, 11 H 1 1 00000

10 10000

E' E: ..c 0

~ :;::::; ·:;:

11

=fA ·oo ~ "0 ·:; !!::.. Q)

.Q

1 I 1• 1• Ri .l Ill I •• 1 I Ull All IU !UIJ I ~ I 1000

l--------------r-------------~----1-------~------------~~----------~=-----------~1100 0.1 600

0 200 300 400 500 100 borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - - · #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

E' E: ..c 0

~ :;::::; ·:;: :m ·oo ~ Q)

.Q

\.0 0\

> ~ ~

~ 0 ~ .,J::..

KR4 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E E E

.J::. E 0

:>. .J::. 0 ,., :>. ·:;

:;; ,., ·:; \0 ·u; :;;

~ ·u; -......)

"0 ~ ·s !!::. C>

~ .Q

1 I 1111 I I Ill I I I 1111 1111 Il l 11 I IU ll ~J I 1000

0

1--_j~ __ r-_JL_ __ ~------~-------l~----_j~------~-------:~----~==~----~:------::, 100 0.1 1000 100 200 300 500 600 700 800 400 900 ~

'"0

~ t::j

~

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - LN res - corr(LN) - INSITU SAL - INSITU SAL I

~

KRS Long normal

100 1.00E+05

10 ! A A I 'Q I \\ C:-'1 \1 I 11 v-~ V I. ~..t II A. I I I l J I 1.00E+04

E

~ ' E .r. 0

>. ,., ·;;; ~ ·u; ~

"C ·:; !!::.

~

1 1.00E+03

0.1 1.00E+02

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

E E .r. 0

>. ,., ·;;; ~ ·u;

~ Cl

.Q

\0 00

> ~ ~

~ 0 ~

>< ~

KR6 Long normal

1 00 1 IM "' 1 "= H 1 1 00000

10 10000

'E 'E E

E .J::. 0

.J::. 0 >. >.

=5 '-0

+='

~ '-0

·::;

·u;

:;; ·u; ~

~ "C ·s Cl

.Q !!::.

~

1000

0.1 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 ?;

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - LN res - corr(LN) - INSITU SAL - INSITU SAL I

~

~ 0 ~

>< ~

KR7 Long normal

100 100000

~

10 10000

E' E:

.r:::. 0

>: '"" ·s: :;; ·u; ~

"C ·:; 5

~

1 t1tlll I I I 1000

I .. ..

0.1 u..u.. 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

borehole length (m)

[ --- - LN res - corr(LN) ---=L.N res - corr(LN)_-=-- INSITU SAL - INSITU SAL I

E E:

.r:::. 0

>:

~ I ~ -~ 0 l 0

~

>­"'"t:j "'"t:j

fi 0 ~ ~

n; E

.... 0 t: 0

)

t: 0

...J 0

')

~ ~

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

101

0 0 0 0 0 T

"" AP

PE

ND

IX4

0 0 1'--

0 0 <0

0 0 L()

0 0 ~

0 0 ("')

0 0 N

0 0 0

I ~ .i! .i! .2 ~

en Q

) 1...

_J

<(

en I _J

<(

en :::> 1

-Ci5 z ~

:::> z :;!:

I I -z d 1... 1...

0 ()

I en ~

z _J

I

KR1 0 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E E: E

.s:::. E: 0

>. .s:::. 0

:;::> >. ·:;;

:;; :;::> ·:;; ......... ·u; :;; 0 ~ ·u; N "C

I ~ ·s 5 g> ~ -

1 I nu 11 UI-I-HH- 1000

0.1 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 ~

borehole length (m)

1- LN res --corr(LN) -- --#NUM! - INSITU SAL --SAL res I

~

~ 0 ~ ..

KR11 Long normal

1 00 1 &illil w w liili lilil w aa ' 1 00000

10 10000

E' E: E' ..c. 0

~ :~ iii ·u; £!:! .. fl "C "5

E:

!E.

..c.

Cl

0

~

~ iii

.........

·u; 0

~ (j.)

Cl .2

0 -

1 1111--U--11 11 11 I W l I I. 11 I I I 1000

0.1 +-------~----~~----------~------------~~~----~~--~--~ ~--~------------~ 100

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 ?; ~

~ 0 ~

borehole length (m)

j - LN res - corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

>< ~

100

10

E' E:

J- ---;:-...._

.s:::. 0 >; ., ·s: ~ "iii ~ "0 ·:; !E. Cl

_Q

1

1.1

~ 0.1

0 100

KR12 Long normal

H H F1 H H

ft ~ n ~ d ~ ~ • ~ 1\ ~ 1{~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ,

' ' ~ 1

~

A ~

,..,._

200 300 400 500 600 700 borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

(\

h

r- .....

800

100000

10000

1000

100 900

E' E:

.s:::. 0 >; ., ·s: ~ "iii

~ Cl

_Q

....... 0 ..j:::..

> ""0 ""0

~ 0 ~

>< ..j:::..

KR13 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E' E:

.s::::.

~J. 0

>. ""' ·s:: ~ "iij

~ "0 ·:; !E. Cl .Q

1 11 ' PI 11'1. • 11111 I WJ Ill IV I 1000

0.1 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

borehole length (m)

1- LNres --· corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - USAL res I

E E:

.s::::. 0

>. ""' ·s:: ~ "iij

~ Cl

.Q

....... 0 Vl

>­~ ~

~ 0 >< .,J::..

KR14 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E E .r::. 0

>: ,.,. ·;:;: =;; ·u;

J ~ ~

"C ·:; !E. Cl .Q

1 1 n PI 11 llll IJIIII 1111 1111 11 11 I 1000

0.1 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL -· - SAL res I

E E .r::. 0

>: ~ ~ ·u;

~ Cl .Q

1--'

0 0\

> ""t:j ""t:j

~ 0 ~

>< ~

KR15B Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E' E: E ..c:: E: 0

..c:: i- 0 ·::; >; ~

:;::; ·::; ......... "ii) ~ 0 ~ "iii -.) "0 ~ ·s

!E. ~ Cl ..Q

1 1000

0.1 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 ?;

~

~ ~

><

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - ··· corr(LN) - - - INSITU SAL - I

+::-.

KR16 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E' E E:

.s:::. E: 0 .s:::.

>. 0 :0::0 >. "5 ~ ~ ~ "iij ~ 0 e "iij 00 "C ~ "5 5 ~ ~

1 1000

0.1 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 ~

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - ._. - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL resj

"""d

~ t::J ~

~ ~

KR16B Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

'E E: .r:. 0

:>. :;::1 ·:;:

A ~ "iii ~ "0 "5 5

~

1 1000

0.1 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - - - INSITU SAL - I

'E E:

.r:. 0

:>. :;::1 ·:;: :;; "iii ~ -~

-0 1.0

> "'"0 "'"0

~ tj ~

:>< ~

KR17 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E E E

.J::. E 0

>. .J::. 0 ,., >. "5

=;; ~ ......... ·u; :;; ~

......... ·u; 0 "C

I ~ ·::; !!::. ~ ~

1 I I ' ' ' I ' J ' ""' R I I I I 1000

i~ \tJ !':)

0.1 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 ~

1-0

~ t:l ~

borehole length (m)

1- LN res -c~rr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

.,J:::..

KR17B Long normal

100 100000

10 I 10000

'E 'I'

f E: .r::. E 0 .s:::. >; 0 !;::::l >. ·s;: :;; .. ·s;:

I ..__.

"(ij ~ ..__. ~ "(ij ..__.

""C ~ ·s !E. ~ ~

1 1000

0.1 +-------~------~--------~------~------~--------~------~------~~------~-------4 100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 ?; ~

~ d

><

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - .. _. - --INSITU SAL - I ~

KR18 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E' E E:

..r::. E: 0 ..r::. >; 0 :;::::; >; ·::; ~ ~ 1--' "iij :;; 1--' ~ "iij N "0 ~ ·:; !!::- ~ Cl

..Q

1 1000

0.1 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 ~

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - - - INSITU SAL - I

"'"d

~ 0 ~

>< ~

KR18B Long normal

100 100000

~ 10 10000

E' E E:

E: .J::. 0

.J::. 0 >. >. ~

=5 ·:;;: ....... ~ .......

~

~~}\ -~ "iii VJ

"iii

~ ~

-"0

g> ·:;

~ -!E. Cl

.Q

1000

0.1 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 2;

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - - - INSITU SAL - I ~

~ tJ ~ ~

KR19 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E E:

.s:::. 0

>. :;:> "5 ~ ·u; ~

"C ·:; !E.

~

1 1000

l ____ _j ________ ~------------~--------------~------------~--------~--~=-_.~------~: 100 0.1 600 300 400 500 0 100 200

borehole length (m)

1-=--LN res --corr(LN) -- --#NUM! --INSITU SAL --SAL res I

E E:

.s:::. 0

>. :;::> "5 :;; "iii

~ C) 0 -

1--' 1--'

~

> ""0 ""0

~ 0 ~

~ ~

KR19B Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E' E: E

..r::. E: 0

>. ..r::. 0

+' >. ·s; ~ +' ·s;

"""""' .fii ~ e """""' .fii

VI "C e ·:; -!E. ~ Cl .Q

1 1000

0.1 -;----:;-----::--~--..........,..---r----..,..------r-----.,----_j 25 35

100 40 45 >

'""0 0 10 15 30 20 5 '""0 t'I1

borehole length (m)

z 0 ~

1- LN res - ··· corr(LN.) - - - INSITU SAL - I :>< +:>.

KR20 Long normal

100 "· . 100000

h {"\-~ ...., ..... ~

10

'E E: .s::. 0 >;

:;::::; ·::; ~ "(ij

~ "0 ·::; 5 Cl .Q

1

,A

I ,) l ~ ~ V w ~ ~ I ~ r ~ ~i ~ ~

~ ILl,

¥ • 1'1

10000

'E E: .s::. 0 >;

=5 ~

~ ~ ·u; 0\ ~ ~

1000

• 0.1 l.t li 100

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 ?; borehole length (m)

[ - LN res - corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL-resl

1-0

~ tj

>< ~

KR20B Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E' E E:

.s::::. E: 0

>. .s::::. 0

:;::> >. ·;:;; =;; .,

·;:;; 1--' ·u; :;; 1--'

~ ·u; -..) "C ~ "5 !E.. C)

0

~ -

1 1000

0.1 100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 ?; borehole length (m)

1- LNres - corr(LN) - ·· - - INSITUSAL - I ~

~ tJ ~ .,J:::..

KR22 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E E:

.s::. 0

>. ., ·s: ~ "iii ~

"C ·:; !E..-Cl

.Q

1 1000

0.1 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

borehole length (m)

\ - LN res - corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res \

'E E:

.s::. 0

>. ., ·:;: ~ "iii

~ Cl 0 -

........

........ 00

> ""0 ""0

~ 0 ~

>< ~

KR22B Long normal

100 100000

~ -10 10000

E E: E

..r:: 0 E: ~

:;::; ·s; ii ·u; e -c ·:;

..r:: 0

~ :;::; ·s; ......... :;; ......... ·u; 1..0 g

!!::-Q) ~

_Q

1 1000

0.1 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 2;

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - ·· - - INSITU SAL - I ~

~ tJ ~

~ +:>.

KR23 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

'E E

.s:::. 0 >;

~ ""'

~l ·:;; ~ • Cij

~ :!2

J 11 :J I ~ !E. Cl

_Q

1 I 1\ R ~I f) Ill I 11 11 1 1" . 1 11 vr 11 I I P 11 "'-= -"1 11 I 1000

l--------~~------------~----------~----------~----------~~---------=:---------~ 100 0.1 350

200 250 300 0 50 100 150 borehole length (m)

F LN res -~orr(LN) ___:: - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

'E E

.s:::. 0 >; ~ ~ .Cij

~ Cl 0 -

........ N 0

> ~ ~

~ 0 ~

>< ~

KR23B Long normal

100 100000

~

10 10000

E E: E

J::. E: 0

>: J::. ;; 0 ·;:;; >: ~

;; ·;:;;

~ ·u; :;; ~ N

~ ·u;

~ "C ,g_ ·::;

~ !!::. C> C> .Q

.Q

1 I L~?-- ,. !I \'l . . --v-- - w \A"w~Jl, I f ' ,v, ...... ?\ lA\ I / .J'-11" ) ' ... I 1000

0.1 ~--------r-~----~--------~--------~--------~--------~--------~------~--------~ 100 40 45 >

~ 0 10 25 5 15 20 30 35 ~ t"'1

borehole length (m)

z 0 ~

1- LN res - corr(LN) - - - INSITU SAL - ]

~ +:-.-

KR24 Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E E: E

.s:::. E: 0

M~ >. .s:::.

:;::> 0 ·:;; >. =;; ~ 1--' ·u;

~ ~ N ·u; N "C ~ ·:; !!::.

• Cl

Cl .Q .Q

1 I I 11 111 11 Ill I 11 u ~ 11 11 I I 1111 ~~ I 1000

0.1 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 ~

~

~ 0 ~

borehole length (m)

j - LN res - corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL re;l

~

KR25 Long normal

100 100000

10 ' 10000

'E E 'E

.r::. E 0

~ .r::. ,., 0

·s:

J

~ ~

,., ·s: ......... "fij ~ ~

. ~ 11

N "fij VJ "C ~ ·s I -!!::.. C)

C) .Q .Q

1 I IJY I I I 11 I I 11\ 1 11 I I ll I IIL I IIII I \ IJ I 1000

0.1 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 ~

borehole length (m)

1- LN res - ----- corr(LN) - - #NUM! -- - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

~

~ 0 ~ .,J:::.

KR25B Long normal

100 100000

---10 10000

E' E: ~ .r:. 0 E >. .r:.

0 == >. ·s: ~ == ·s: 1--' ·u; :;; N ~ ·u; +::>. "0 ~ ·:; -!!::- ~ ~

1 1000

0.1 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 ?;

borehole length (m)

1- LN r~~ - corr(LN) - - - INSITU SAL - I ~

~ ~ +::>.

KR26 Long normal

100 --~------------~------~--------------------------------------~--------------~ 100000

10 I - 10000

E E E

.s::; E 0

>. .s::; 0

~ >. ·:;: ~

~ ·:;: .......... "iii ~ N ~ "iii Ul "C ~ ·:; !!::. ~ ~

1 1000

0.1 100

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 ~ borehole length (m)

1- LN res - corr(LN) - --·· - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

~

~ tj ~

~ ~

KR27 Long normal

100 " 1""1 "

10

E E:

s::. 0

>: :;::::; ·:;; ~ ·u; ~ "0 ·:; 5

~

1

~ M " n 11

~ --. ~J ) At\ " ~n ~ ~ (\ ~~ ~ " ~~ ~.V1 ~~ I•

J ~ V u ~l ~ \ ~ - ~-- :\. I

~ l;t

I' ~ -

V ~:~~~~ ~M

I ~ ~

~ h ~

~ k f-.

~ ~ I

'Ill

~ ~ ~

0.1 ---·--~-···-·---

0 100 200 300 400 borehole length (m)

1- LN res -~orr(LN) - --_- - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res I

" 100000

" Vt J1 r'\ 10000

'(M J1 1 11

r 1000

' I

100 500 600

E E:

s::. 0

>: :;::::; ·:;; :;; ·u;

~ ~

......... N 0'\

> ~ ~

~ tj

~ .,J:::..

KR27B Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

E ~ E:

.J::. E 0

~ .J::. 0

""' ~ ·:;: =t3 ~ ,....... ·u; :;; N e ·u; -.......) "0 ~ ·:; !E. g> ~ -

1 ~ 1000

0.1 +---------~--------~~--------------~~------~--------~--------~------~~---------+ 100 35 40 45 >

~ 25 10 20 30 0 15 5 ~ ti1

borehole length (m)

z 0 ~

j - LN res - corr(LN) - - - JNSITU SAL - j

>< ~

KR28 Long normal

100

10

E E .r:. 0 >; ,., ·s: ~ "iij

~ ""0 ·s !!::.

~

1

0.1 0 100 200 300 400 500

borehole length (m)

1--~ - LN res - corr(LN) - - #NUM! - INSITU SAL - SAL res J

100000

10000

1000

100 600 700

'E E .r:. 0 >; ,., ·s: :;; "iij

~ ~

"""""' N 00

> ~ ~

~ 0 ~

~ ..a:::.

KR28B Long normal

100 100000

10 10000

'E E: 'E

.s::. E: 0

~ .s::. 0 ., ~ ·s;

~ :;::; ·s;

t--' ·u; :;; N ~ "iii \0 "C ~ ·:; -!5- ~ ~

1 1000

0.1 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 ?;

"'"0

~ 0 ~

borehole length (m)

1- LN res -~-corr(LN) - - - INSITU SAL - I

~