| تعداد نشریات | 285 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 83 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 3,094 |
| تعداد مقالات | 34,531 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 49,374,345 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 79,821,985 |
مقایسه روشهای تخمین هدایت هیدرولیکی سفره آب زیرزمینی به منظور استفاده در مدلهای شبیهسازی | ||
| تحقیقات مهندسی صنایع غذایی | ||
| مقاله 7، دوره 9، شماره 2، شهریور 1387، صفحه 95-112 اصل مقاله (454.53 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| علیرضا شکوهی؛ پیمان دانش کار آراسته* | ||
| استادیار دانشگاه بین المللی امام خمینی (ره) | ||
| چکیده | ||
| مقالة حاضر به بررسی و مقایسه روشهای تأمین اطلاعات برای مدلسازی آبهای زیرزمینی، در دو دسته زمینآماری و احتمالاتی پرداخته است. برای دادههای هدایت هیدرولیکی در سطح سفره، بعد از مقایسة روشهای زمین آماری با یکدیگر، بهترین روش بر اساس حفظ خصوصیات آماری اولیه و همچنین روش ارزیابی حذفی انتخاب و دادهها و برای منطقة مورد مطالعه بهصورت شبکهای از سلولها تولید شد. در این تحقیق با بررسی وضعیت همبستگی مکانیضعیف میان دادههای مشاهدهای امکان استفاده از روشهای احتمالاتی بررسی شده است. در این خصوص با توجه به توزیع فراوانی پارامترهای مورد مطالعه، با استفاده از روش مونتکارلو دادهسازی لازم تهیه شده است و سرانجام نتایج حاصل از روش زمینآماری منتخب با روش احتمالاتی مقایسه و توانایی روش احتمالاتی در شبیهسازی هدایت هیدرولیکی و ضریب ذخیرة سفره نشان شده است. مدل آب زیرزمینی مورد استفاده در این تحقیق PMWIN 5.3 (MODFLOW) است که با استفاده از اطلاعات مورد بحث و سری زمانی وقایع اقلیمی، وضعیت آینده سفرة آب زیرزمینی در مطالعة موردی را پیشبینی کند. برای پردازش اطلاعات ورودی موجود، تولید دادههای ورودی با روشهای زمین آمار و احتمالاتی و همچنین نمایش خروجی مدل، از نرمافزار ARC/INFOGRID و توابع موجود در آن استفاده شده است. | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Comparison of Aquifer Hydraulic Conductivity Estimation Methods for Use in Simulation Models | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| The current study investigated and compared data generation methods for groundwater modeling. These methods can be divided into two classes; geostatistic and probabilistic. By comparing geostatistic methods, the best method was chosen and the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer was generated for a study area in a grid (9-cell) format. After observing weak spatial correlation between the data, the probabilistic method was then considered. The Monte Carlo technique was used for data generation for the governing distribution function using the probabilistic method. Finally, the results of the two methods were compared. The ground water model used in this research was PMWIN 5.3 (MODFLOW). This model was used to predict the future state of an aquifer by using the generated data and time series of precipitation. Existing input data processing, data generation by geostatistic/stochastic methods and representation of model output were performed using ARC/INFO GRID. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Data Generation, Geostatistical Method, GIS, Groundwater Modeling, Probabilistic Methods | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Alcolea, A., Carreraa, J. and Medinaa, A. 2006. Pilot points method incorporating prior information for solving the groundwater flow inverse problem. J. Advances Water Res. 29(11): 1678-1689.
Anderson, M. P. and Woessner, W. W. 1992. Applied Groundwater Modeling: Simulation of Flow and Advective Transport. Academic Press. Anon. 2000. A research plan for management of AB-BARIK aquifer in BAM district. Research Report. SCWRM. (in Farsi) Avalos, B., Samani, Z. and Garcia, J. A. 1995. Use of a Particle Tracking Model and GIS in the Delination of Wellhead Protection Areas and Mapping of Potential Pollution Sources. In: Charbeneau, R. J. (Ed.). Groundwater Management. ASCE. N. Y. Cassiraga, E. F., Fernandez-Garcia, D. and Gomez-Hernandez, J. J. 2005. Performance assessment of solute transport upscaling methods in the context of nuclear waste disposal. Int. J. Rock Mechanics and Mining Sci. 42(5,6): 756-764. Chiang, W. H. and Kinzelbach, W. 2001. Processing MODFLOW: A simulation system for modeling groundwater flow and pollution. Maximal Engineering Softwares. Cinnirellaa, S., Buttafuocob, G. and Pirronea, N. 2005. Stochastic analysis to assess the spatial distribution of groundwater nitrate concentrations in the Po catchment (Italy). J. Environ. Pollution 133(3): 569-580. Deckers, F., and Te-Struet, C. B. M. 1996. Use of GIS and data base with distributed modeling. In: Abbott, M. B. and Refsgaard, J. C. (Eds.). Distributed hydrological modeling. Water Sci. Technol. Library 22, 215-232. Englund, E. J. 1990. GEO-EAS Version 1.2. US-EPA Monitoring System Laboratory. Las Vegas. Nevada. USA. Fabbri, P. and Trevisani, S. 2005. Spatial distribution of temperature in the low-temperature geothermal Euganean field (NE Italy): A simulated annealing approach. Geothermics. 34(5): 617-631. Fairleya, J. P. and Nicholsonb, K. N. 2006. Imaging lateral groundwater flow in the shallow subsurface using stochastic temperature fields. J. Hydrol. 321(1,4): 276-285. Feyena, L. and Caersd, J. 2006. Quantifying geological uncertainty for flow and transport modeling in multi-modal heterogeneous formations. J. Advances Water Resour. 29(6): 912-929. Finke, P. A., Brus, D. J., Bierkens, M. F. P., Hooglandb, T., Knotters, M. and de Vries, F. 2004. Mapping groundwater dynamics using multiple sources of exhaustive high resolution data. Geoderma. 123(1,2): 23-39. Franssen, H. J. H., Gomez-Hernandez, J. and Sahuquillo, A. 2003. Coupled inverse modeling of groundwater flow and mass transport and the worth of concentration data. J. Hydrol. 281(4): 281-295. Galichand, J., Marcotte, D. and Prasher, S. O. 1992. Including uncertainty of hydraulic conductivity into drainage Design. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 118(5): 744-756. Galichand, J., Prasher, S. O., Broughton, R. S. and Marcotte, D. 1991. Kriging of hydraulic conductivity for subsurface drainage design. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 117(5): 667-681. Hargrove, W. W. 2001. Interpolation of rainfall in Switzerland using a regularized splines with tension. Geographical Information and Spatial Technologies Group. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Hill, B. M., Putman, F. G. and Swanson, J. E. 1994. Integration of a GIS system and MODFLOW to help Arizona’s under utilization of central Arizona project canal water. Proceeding. of Groundwater Modeling Conference. Hosseini, E., Gallichand, J. and Caron, J. 1993. Comparison of several interpolators for smoothing hydraulic conductivity data in south western Iran. Trans. ASAE. 36(6):1687-1693. Hosseini, E., Gallichand, J. and Marcotte, D. 1994. Theoretical and experimental performance of spatial interpolation methods for soil salinity analysis. Trans. ASAE. 37(6): 1799-1807
Isaaks, E. H. and Sirvastava, R. M. 1989. Applied Geostatistics. Oxford University Press. Journel, A. G. and Huijbregts, C. J. 1978. Mining Geostatistics. Academic press Inc. London, UK. Karamouz, M., Szidarovzky, F. and Zahraie, B. 2003. Water Resources System Analysis. Lewis Pub. USA. Leterme, B., Vanclooster, M., Rounsevell, M. D. A. and Bogaert, P. 2006. Discriminating between point and non-point sources of atrazine contamination of a sandy aquifer. J. Sci. Total Environ. 362(1,3): 124-142. Ling, M., Rifai, H. S., Aziz, J. J., Newell, C. J., Gonzales, J. R. and Santillan, J. M. 2004. Strategies and decision-support tools for optimizing long-term groundwater monitoring plans-MAROS 2.0. Bioremediation J. 8(3, 4): 109-128. Loague, K., and Gander, G. A. 1990. Spatial variability of infiltration on a small rangeland catchment. J. Water Resour. Res. 26(5): 957-971. Mahdian, M. H. and Gallichand, J. 1997. Regional estimation of water deficit and potato yield in Quebec. J. Can. Agric. Eng. 39(3): 65-175. McDonald, M. G. and Harbaugh, A. W. 1988. A modular three-dimensional finite-difference ground-water flow model. Techniques of Water-Resources Investigation 06-A1. USGS. Reston. Virginia . USA. Nooraee, B., Taleb Bidokhti, N., Abedini, M. J. and Rakhshandehroo, G. 2005. Estimation of suspended load using geostatistics: Case study; Talkheh rood, Tabriz. J. Iran-Water Resour. Res. 1(2): 50-42. (in Farsi) Price, D. T., Mckinny, D. W., Nelder, I. A., Hutchinson, M. F. and Kestven, J. L. 2000. A comparison of two statistical methods for interpolationl; Canadian monthly mean climate data. J. Agric. Forest. 101(2,3): 81-94. Regli, C., Rosenthaler, L. and Huggenberger, P. 2004. GEOSSAV: A simulation tool for subsurface applications. J. Computers Geosciences. 30(3): 221-238. Robinson, J. W. and de Podesta, K. R. 1994. Hydrogeological data management utilizing GIS. Geological Association of Canada. Rubinstein, R. Y. 1981. Simulation and the Monte Carlo Method. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. USA. Saghafian, B. and Rahimi Bondarabadi, S. 2005. Comparison of interpolation and extrapolation methods for estimating spatial distribution of annual rainfall. J. Iran-Water Resour. Res. 1(2): 74-84. (in Farsi) Smith, D. M. and Hornberger, T. A. 1995. Utilizing of a GIS for Wellhead Protection. In: Charbeneau, R. J. (Ed.). Groundwater Management. ASCE. N. Y. Varshney, P., Tim, U. S. and Anderson, C. E. 1992. Linked GIS with groundwater modeling: A tool for evaluating of aquifer vulnerability. ASCE Paper No. 92-3614. Vrankar, L., Turk, G. and Runovc, F. 2004. Combining the radial basis function eulerian and Lagrangian schemes with geostatistics for modeling of radionuclide migration through the geosphere. J. Computers Math. Applications. 48(10,11): 1517-1529. Weber, D. and Englund, E. 1992. Evaluation and comparison of spatial interpolators. J. Math. Geology. 24(4): 381-391. Weissmann, G. S. and Foggb, G. E. 1999. Multi-scale alluvial fan heterogeneity modeled with transition probability geostatistics in a sequence stratigraphic framework. J. Hydrol. 226 (1,2): 48-65. Wurb, R. A. 1995. Water Management Models: A Guide to Software. Prentice Hall. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,319 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 719 |
||