地下水脆弱性评价方法的比较研究

T. Khlif, A. Al-Aboodi, H. Ibrahim
{"title":"地下水脆弱性评价方法的比较研究","authors":"T. Khlif, A. Al-Aboodi, H. Ibrahim","doi":"10.33971/bjes.22.1.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, methods have emerged to assess the vulnerability of groundwater to pollution, which has been adopted by many countries that depend on groundwater as an important and supportive resource for surface water to protect groundwater and monitor and control its pollution. Assessment methods adopt vulnerability maps and compare them with the real-life pollution map of the region. The study was conducted in Al-Teeb area, which is located in the northeast of Missan province, south of Iraq. This area is about 2450 km2. This study applied four models DRASTIC, GOD, SINTACS and Modified DRASTIC of vulnerability maps are analyzed using GIS technique and compared with the reality map which represent the nitrate concentration map as a basic comparison map; in order to choose the closest one with respect to the realistic acting. The results showed that 80.29 % of study area is classified under low vulnerability in DRASTIC method and moderate vulnerability in GOD, SINTACS and MD-DRASTIC which are covered 54.12 %, 83.18 % and 72.35 % of study area respectively. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to compare the four methods with the nitrate concentration map, where the correlation value for DRASTIC, GOD, SINTACS and MD-DRASTIC was 73.05, 49.79, 83.23 and 87.94 %, respectively. So, the MD-DRASTIC is represented the best technique for evaluating vulnerability map in the study area which can be recommended.","PeriodicalId":150774,"journal":{"name":"Basrah journal for engineering science","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Study of Groundwater Vulnerability Assessment Methods\",\"authors\":\"T. Khlif, A. Al-Aboodi, H. Ibrahim\",\"doi\":\"10.33971/bjes.22.1.15\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recently, methods have emerged to assess the vulnerability of groundwater to pollution, which has been adopted by many countries that depend on groundwater as an important and supportive resource for surface water to protect groundwater and monitor and control its pollution. Assessment methods adopt vulnerability maps and compare them with the real-life pollution map of the region. The study was conducted in Al-Teeb area, which is located in the northeast of Missan province, south of Iraq. This area is about 2450 km2. This study applied four models DRASTIC, GOD, SINTACS and Modified DRASTIC of vulnerability maps are analyzed using GIS technique and compared with the reality map which represent the nitrate concentration map as a basic comparison map; in order to choose the closest one with respect to the realistic acting. The results showed that 80.29 % of study area is classified under low vulnerability in DRASTIC method and moderate vulnerability in GOD, SINTACS and MD-DRASTIC which are covered 54.12 %, 83.18 % and 72.35 % of study area respectively. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to compare the four methods with the nitrate concentration map, where the correlation value for DRASTIC, GOD, SINTACS and MD-DRASTIC was 73.05, 49.79, 83.23 and 87.94 %, respectively. So, the MD-DRASTIC is represented the best technique for evaluating vulnerability map in the study area which can be recommended.\",\"PeriodicalId\":150774,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Basrah journal for engineering science\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Basrah journal for engineering science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33971/bjes.22.1.15\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Basrah journal for engineering science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33971/bjes.22.1.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

近年来,许多依赖地下水作为地表水重要支持资源的国家采用了评价地下水污染脆弱性的方法来保护地下水并监测和控制其污染。评估方法采用脆弱性图,并与该地区的真实污染图进行比较。该研究是在伊拉克南部米桑省东北部的Al-Teeb地区进行的。面积约2450平方公里。本研究采用GIS技术对脆弱性地图的DRASTIC、GOD、SINTACS和Modified DRASTIC四种模型进行了分析,并与以硝酸盐浓度图为基本对比图的现实地图进行了对比;为了选择最接近真实的表演。结果表明:80.29%的研究区在DRASTIC方法中属于低脆弱性,在GOD、SINTACS和MD-DRASTIC方法中属于中等脆弱性,分别占研究区的54.12%、83.18%和72.35%;采用Pearson相关系数对4种方法与硝酸盐浓度图进行比较,其中DRASTIC、GOD、SINTACS和MD-DRASTIC的相关值分别为73.05、49.79、83.23和87.94%。因此,MD-DRASTIC方法是研究区域内评价脆弱性图的最佳方法,值得推荐。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparative Study of Groundwater Vulnerability Assessment Methods
Recently, methods have emerged to assess the vulnerability of groundwater to pollution, which has been adopted by many countries that depend on groundwater as an important and supportive resource for surface water to protect groundwater and monitor and control its pollution. Assessment methods adopt vulnerability maps and compare them with the real-life pollution map of the region. The study was conducted in Al-Teeb area, which is located in the northeast of Missan province, south of Iraq. This area is about 2450 km2. This study applied four models DRASTIC, GOD, SINTACS and Modified DRASTIC of vulnerability maps are analyzed using GIS technique and compared with the reality map which represent the nitrate concentration map as a basic comparison map; in order to choose the closest one with respect to the realistic acting. The results showed that 80.29 % of study area is classified under low vulnerability in DRASTIC method and moderate vulnerability in GOD, SINTACS and MD-DRASTIC which are covered 54.12 %, 83.18 % and 72.35 % of study area respectively. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to compare the four methods with the nitrate concentration map, where the correlation value for DRASTIC, GOD, SINTACS and MD-DRASTIC was 73.05, 49.79, 83.23 and 87.94 %, respectively. So, the MD-DRASTIC is represented the best technique for evaluating vulnerability map in the study area which can be recommended.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信