Originally from East Yorkshire (and I cannot wait to get back home) I have heard mention of Mudstone which is said to be very common in East Yorkshireor Mercia Mudstone although I have no experience of it or its shortcomings. I am led to believe that it is a very difficult stone to find a water supply in - is there anyone who can give me any information on this from a point of view of water dowsing - are we talikng about similar attributes to clay and shale where a percentage needs to be added to the dowsed depth.
Any ideas/infor anyone??
These would be gratefully received here or to my email address (email address removed to prevent spambots)
Ron Kirby
Mudstone
-
Pauline Roberts
- Newbie
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 6:49 am
- Location: Australia
Hi Ron
You've probably forgotten you've asked this....but....in my experience mudstone is very poor for finding water in, unless we can tap into water-conducting faults, cracks or joints caused by external geological activity. Such will have to have occured after the mud (a mix of clay and silt sized particles) has been turned into rock (lithified). Lithified mud has such low porosity and permeability that it is not aquifer material (unlike lithified sand in sandstone). Water may also be found in laminated mudstone (shale), but only between the water-conducting laminated sheets, not within them. Generally, mudstone and shale strata act as a natural boundary layer for water conduction rather than any supply of it.
In terms of affecting depthing, my old friend and phenomenal water dowser, Edwin Taylor, was of the belief that mudstone could be invisible to a dowser when calculating depth, just like clay and that whatever depth of the material was discovered on drilling should be added to calculations regarding the water's depth. So, 30ft of mudstone, add 30ft to the depth at which you expect to find water. However, I have met other dowsers in the US who do not find this is the case, so it may be a personal matter and a result of one's belief system. Me? I tend to work in volcanics these days (I'm in Australia) but so far wherever I have met shale at least it hasn't seemed to mess up depth over and above the normal 10% error I allow myself.
I trust this has been of some assistance.
Kind regards
Pauline
You've probably forgotten you've asked this....but....in my experience mudstone is very poor for finding water in, unless we can tap into water-conducting faults, cracks or joints caused by external geological activity. Such will have to have occured after the mud (a mix of clay and silt sized particles) has been turned into rock (lithified). Lithified mud has such low porosity and permeability that it is not aquifer material (unlike lithified sand in sandstone). Water may also be found in laminated mudstone (shale), but only between the water-conducting laminated sheets, not within them. Generally, mudstone and shale strata act as a natural boundary layer for water conduction rather than any supply of it.
In terms of affecting depthing, my old friend and phenomenal water dowser, Edwin Taylor, was of the belief that mudstone could be invisible to a dowser when calculating depth, just like clay and that whatever depth of the material was discovered on drilling should be added to calculations regarding the water's depth. So, 30ft of mudstone, add 30ft to the depth at which you expect to find water. However, I have met other dowsers in the US who do not find this is the case, so it may be a personal matter and a result of one's belief system. Me? I tend to work in volcanics these days (I'm in Australia) but so far wherever I have met shale at least it hasn't seemed to mess up depth over and above the normal 10% error I allow myself.
I trust this has been of some assistance.
Kind regards
Pauline