Reservoir Siltation and Quaternary Stratigraphy Beneath the Mactaquac Headpond As Revealed by Acoustic and Ground Penetrating Radar Sub-Bottom Imaging
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RESERVOIR SILTATION AND QUATERNARY STRATIGRAPHY BENEATH THE MACTAQUAC HEADPOND AS REVEALED BY ACOUSTIC AND GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SUB-BOTTOM IMAGING By Mitch Grace B.Sc. Dalhousie University, 2014 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of The Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science In the Graduate Academic Unit of Earth Sciences Supervisor: Karl E. Butler, PhD., Department of Earth Science Examining Board: Ken Burke, PhD, Department of Earth Science Ian Church, PhD., Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering This thesis is accepted by the Dean of Graduate Studies THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK April 2017 ©Mitch Grace, 2017 Abstract The Mactaquac Hydroelectric Generating Station, located on the Saint John River in New Brunswick, Canada, is approaching the end of its life due to deterioration of the concrete structures. As part of an aquatic ecosystem study, designed to support a decision on the future of the dam, physical and chemical characteristics of sediments beneath the headpond, extending 80 km upriver, are being examined. The focus of this sub-study lies in (i) mapping the thickness of sediments that have accumulated since inundation in 1968, and (ii) imaging the deeper glacial and post-glacial stratigraphy. Acoustic sub-bottom profiling surveys were completed during 2014 and 2015. An initial 3.5 kHz chirp sonar survey proved ineffective, lacking in both resolution and depth of the penetration. A follow-up survey employing a boomer-based "Seistec" sediment profiler provided better results, resolving sediment layers as thin as 12 cm beneath up to 40 m of water, and yielding coherent reflections from the deeper Quaternary sediments. Post-inundation sediments in the lowermost 25 km of the headpond, between the dam and Bear Island, are interpreted to average 20 cm in thickness, corresponding to an average reservoir sediment accumulation rate of 4.3 mm/year. The thickest deposits (up to 60 cm, corresponding to a sedimentation rate of 13 mm/year) are found in deep water areas overlying the pre-inundation riverbed west of Snowshoe Island, and south and east of Bear Island. A coring program confirmed the presence of silty sediment and showed good correlation with the Seistec thickness estimates. In the ~15 km stretch upriver of Bear Island to Nackawic, the presence of gas in the ii uppermost sediments severely limits sub-bottom penetration and our ability to interpret sediment thicknesses. Profiles acquired in the uppermost ~40 km reach of the headpond, extending from a few km upriver of Nackawic to Woodstock, show a strong, positive water bottom reflection and little to no sub-bottom penetration, indicating the soft post-inundation sediment in this region is either absent, or thinner than the 12 cm resolution of the Seistec profiler. Deeper reflections observed within 5 km of the dam reveal a buried channel cut into glacial till, extending up to 20 m below the water bottom. Channel fill includes a finely laminated unit interpreted to be glaciolacustrine clay-silt and a possible esker – similar to stratigraphy found 20 - 30 km downriver at Fredericton. A small scale survey was conducted near Nackawic to evaluate the suitability of waterborne ground penetrating radar (GPR) profiling as an alternative to acoustic profiling in areas of gas-charged sediment. The GPR was able to image thin sediments in the area, showing sediment thicknesses of less than a meter. However due to rapid attenuation of the GPR signal in the water column, this survey method was only viable in the relatively shallow areas near the shoreline, less than 15 meters water depth. iii Dedication This thesis is dedicated to my parents, Michele and Stephen Grace, For their love, endless support, and encouragement during my studies. iv Acknowledgements I would like to express my utmost gratitude to the following individuals and organizations that have made this project possible: Dr. Karl Butler, my supervisor, for his faith, help and guidance; Dr. Peter Simpkin from Sempro Associates Ltd., for providing the Seistec equipment and his technical expertise during surveying; Dr. Katy Haralampides, who reviewed my thesis, and provided valuable insight throughout the project; Gordon Yamazaki, for his field expertise, and advice during this research; and Jody Chessie, for his assistance in the fabrication of the outrigger arm used in the Seistec survey. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ii Dedication iv Acknowledgements v TABLE OF CONTENTS vi LIST OF TABLES viii LIST OF FIGURES viii LIST OF EQUATIONS xi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Project Overview 1 1.2 Thesis Objectives 2 1.3 Study Location 3 1.4 Regional Surficial Geology 5 1.5 Methodology 8 1.5.1 Continuous Wave and Chirp Sonar 11 1.5.2 Boomer System 16 1.5.3 Ground Penetrating Radar 18 CHAPTER 2: DATA ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING 21 2.1 Knudsen Sonar Survey (2014 – 2015) 22 2.1.1 Knudsen Data Acquisition 22 2.1.2 Knudsen Data Processing 23 2.2 Seistec Sub-Bottom Profiler Survey (2015) 26 2.2.1 Seistec Data Acquisition 26 2.2.2 Seistec Data Processing and Map Production 32 2.3 Ground Penetrating Radar Survey (2016) 35 2.3.1 GPR Data Acquisition 35 2.3.2 GPR Data Processing 37 2.4 Acoustic System Comparisons 41 2.5 Coring Program (2015 – 2016) 43 CHAPTER 3: RESULTS – SOFT SEDIMENT THICKNESS 46 3.1 Acoustic Character of Post-Inundation Sediment 49 3.2 Soft Sediment Thickness and Reservoir Siltation Map 50 3.3 Result Comparison with Core Data 60 3.4 Limitations of the Reservoir Siltation Map 63 3.5 Nackawic Soft Sediment (GPR) 66 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS – QUATERNARY STRATIGRAPHY 72 CHAPTER 5: Conclusions 79 vi REFERENCES 82 APPENDIX A: Data Sheet for Sempro Seistec 3 Sub-bottom Profiler 86 APPENDIX B: Chirp Sonar Field Tests 88 APPENDIX C: Picking Soft Sediment Horizons in the Knudsen Data 90 APPENDIX D: Outrigger Design 96 APPENDIX E: Picking Soft Sediment Horizons in the Seistec Data 99 APPENDIX F: Determining GPR Waveform and Vertical Resolution 103 Curriculum Vitae vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Seistec data acquisition parameters 21 Table 2 Surveys conducted and their dates 32 Table 3 Core results compared to Seistec results 61 LIST OF FIGURES 1.3.1 Map of study area 4 1.3.2 Geologic map of study area 5 1.5.1 Klauder wavelet 13 1.5.2 Chirped signal (untapered vs. tapered) 14 1.5.3 Klauder wavelets (from untapered and tapered sweeps) 15 1.5.4 Picking arrival time of Klauder wavelet 15 1.5.5 Comparison of seismic and GPR profiles 20 2.0.1 The Sea Truck 21 2.1.1 Transducer boom used for Knudsen system 22 2.1.2 Klauder wavelet in the 3.5 kHz chirp data 24 2.2.1 Seistec line locations over bathymetry map 28 2.2.2 Seistec components (out of water) 30 2.2.3 Seistec components (in water) 30 2.2.4 Seistec towing arrangement 31 2.2.5 Outrigger used for towing Seistec 31 2.2.6 Seistec wavelet (recorded by internal channel) 33 2.3.1 GPR data being acquired 36 viii 2.3.2 GPR line locations over bathymetry map 37 2.3.3 GPR wavelet produced by 100 MHz antenna 39 2.3.4 Diffraction hyperbola fitting for velocity analysis 40 2.4.1 Knudsen vs. Seistec wavelets 42 2.4.2 Knudsen vs. Seistec profiles 42 2.5.1 Vibracore system diagram 43 2.5.2 Vibracore system in use 45 3.0.1 Headpond divisions 47 3.0.2 Seistec representative profiles from each headpond region 48 3.1.1 Distinguishing post-inundation sediment in Seistec profiles 50 3.2.1 Headpond bathymetry map with Seistec lines and GSC boreholes shown 53 3.2.2 Bathymetry map of lower region (with Seistec lines and cores) 55 3.2.3 Sediment thickness map with Seistec lines and cores (Bear Island to Mactaquac) 56 3.2.4 Sediment thickness map (Bear Island to Mactaquac) 57 3.2.5 Sediment thickness map (Bear Island to Long’s Creek) 58 3.2.6 Sediment thickness map (Long’s Creek to Mactaquac) 59 3.2.7 Seistec profile showing variability in sediment thickness 60 3.2.8 Gas bubbles in sediment core from Nackawic 60 3.3.1 Transition from negative to positive polarity sub-bottom reflection 64 3.4.1 GPR vs. Seistec profile comparisons in Nackawic gas charged sediments 67 ix 3.4.2 Comparison of dominant wavelength of GPR and Seistec 67 3.4.3 Time series of Saint John River water conductivities near Nackawic 68 3.4.4 GPR profile showing thin sediments 71 3.4.5 GPR profile showing transition to a single bottom reflection 71 3.4.6 GPR profile showing thin sediment packages and deeper reflections 71 4.1.1 Cross section along the axis of the Mactaquac Dam 75 4.1.2 Seistec profile showing deeper Quaternary stratigraphy 76 4.1.3 Seistec profile showing deeper Quaternary stratigraphy 77 4.1.4 Map showing the extents of the channel and esker-like features 78 C-1 Klauder wavelet in the 3.5 kHz data 92 C-2 Estimated Klauder wavelet from autocorrelation of recorded chirp 92 C-3 Horizon picking on the 3.5 kHz data 93 C-4 Picking bottom horizon on the 28 kHz data 94 C-5 Picking sub-bottom horizon on the 3.5 kHz data 94 C-6 Knudsen profile used to compare timing offsets 95 C-7 Graph showing timing offset between 3.5 and 28 kHz sonar systems 95 D-1 Plan and section view of outrigger 97 D-2 Outrigger hinge design 98 E-1 Seistec wavelet 101 E-2 Picking horizons on Seistec profile 101 x E-3 Seistec wavelet tuning effects 102 F-1 Recorded GPR wavelet (100 MHz antenna) 104 F-2 GPR synthetic section assessing minimum vertical resolution 104 LIST OF EQUATIONS Equation 1 Acoustic impedance 10 Equation 2 Reflection coefficient 10 Equation 3 Chirp source signature 12 Equation 4 Interval velocity (from a known RMS velocity) 40 Equation 5a Topp Equation for water content based on relative dielectric