pdf 2002 erwin ciremai malaysia

8/6/2019 PDF 2002 Erwin Ciremai Malaysia

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pdf-2002-erwin-ciremai-malaysia 1/19

International Conference on Urban Hydrology for the 21 st Century

14-18th October, Kuala Lumpur

1

Geological Mapping and Groundwater Physical-Chemical Properties Characterization

An Approach to Spring Recharge Area Conservation

D. Erwin IrawanDepartment of Geology, Institut Teknologi dan Sains Bandung

Jl. Ir. H. Juanda No. 215, 40135 Bandung, Indonesia

e-mail: [email protected]

Deny Juanda P.

Department of Geology, Institut Teknologi Bandung

Jl. Ganesha No. 10, 40132 Bandung, Indonesia

e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract The overall depletion of groundwater has escalated conservation issues by manygovermental and non govermental agencies. A hydrogeological study has been carried out on spring

belt of Ciremai Volcano, Kabupaten Kuningan, West Java Province, to determine the spring’s

recharge – discharge system. This study used 3 methods: surface geological mapping and spring

observations; interpretation of physical and chemical characteristic of water; and groundwater travel

time prediction.

The spring belt can be divided into 3 zones based on the aquifer: Zone 1 lahar pore space aquifer

system, Zone 2 lava flows fracture aquifer system, and Zone 3 pyroclastic breccias pore space aquifer

system. Field permeability test shows high permeability values. Lahar residual soil shows the largest

permeability value of 1.26 - 2.53 cm/min, followed by pyroclastic breccias soil 1.5 cm/min, and lava

soil 0.5 – 1.2 cm/min. The condition indicates the soil material is potential to infiltrate rain water into

the aquifer.

From chemical analysis, the rain water had low conductivity and bicarbonate type water, while most of

the groundwater samples were classified in to 3 types: Mesothermic, low conductivity, bicarbonate

type; Hypothermic, low conductivity, bicarbonate type (Cibulan spring), Hyperthermic water with

high conductivity, NaK-bicarbonate type (Sangkanurip spring). The type 1 and type 2 water were

likely similar to rain water characteristics. Both water types were included in meteoric water cycles.

While, type 3 is possibly influenced by high mineralization of Na and K from volcanic gas

enrichment.

Potentiometric map on the spring belt area shows a radial flow regionally, showed by 2 major flow

directions, SW-NE on Area 1 with 0.4 of hydraulic gradient and NW-SE on Area 2 with gradient of

0.3. The groundwater flow on both areas were controlled by undulating morphology.

Surface observations around Cibulan spring indicates heterogeneous geological conditions. Permeablelahar deposit serves as confined aquifer. While potentiometric analysis shows eastward groundwater

flow with 0.3 of gradient value. The flow is parallel to ridges and valleys orientation, proving that

morphology plays significant role to control groundwater movement. Moreover, rainfall and spring

discharge fluctuation data shows 3 months of average difference between rainfall’s peak and spring

discharge’s. The result inferred that the groundwater travel time is around 3 months.

All the indications prove a local recharge – discharge system and very dependent to rainfall.

Therefore, the recharge area is very limited and controlled by aquifer distributions, morphology, and

hydrogeologic boundary. The delineation can assist in contructing conservation program.

Key words: groundwater basin analysis, volcanic aquifer system





2

1. INTRODUCTION

As widely known, Indonesia is a part of ring of fire, consisting of almost 130 Quartenary volcanoes.

The unconsolidated quartenary volcanic deposit sets up a good volcanic aquifer shown by spring belt

in many cases. Mean while, due to the vast growth of population and industry, the groundwater

resources has been decreasing rapidly. The overall depletion has escalated conservation issues bymany govermental and non govermental agencies.

Concerning the conservation issues, identifying and delineating the groundwater basin should be the

first step in order to determine the suitable groundwater conservation plans. According to Mandel

(1981)1, the delineation of groundwater systems aims at the recognition of the hydrogeologic

boundaries enclosing the system, the mechanisms of recharge, and discharge, along with the flow

paths of groundwater from recharge areas to discharge areas.

Some previous research by the author in identifying the recharge-discharge system on volcanic aquifer

system has been carried out, as follows: Asseggaf and Puradimaja (1998)2; Irawan et.al (2000)

3;

Irawan (2001)4, and Irawan et.al. (2001)

5All the research were using physical-chemical properties

analysis, combined with surface and subsurface geological observations. The general result is that theradial groundwater flow in volcanic area is controlled by the spreading of volcanic aquifer, the

hydrogeologic boundary, and the morphological feature in the area.

Another case study has been carried out on east slope of Mt. Ciremai. It is a strato-type volcano with

elevation of 3072 masl, situated 20 km south of Cirebon, Kecamatan Cilimus – Jalaksana, Kabupaten

Kuningan, West Java Province (Figure 1). Its diameter from the peak to the foot slope is about 10 km.

The location was selected because of the large amount of groundwater which are forming spring belt

with no less than 300 springs; discharged over 1500 l/sec of water (IWACO-WASECO, 19896). The

scientific interest is to determine the hydrogeological conditions and the recharge – discharge system,

which controlled such large amount of spring discharge.

2. THE METHODS

The technique used in this study was a combination of the aquifer characteristic study and

groundwater behaviour study (see Figure 2). The two techniques are: (1). Surface mapping of

volcanic aquifer system on 1 : 25.000 map scale and, (2). Interpretation of physical and chemical

characteristic of water.

The first technique was carried out in order to recognize the geometry of the aquifer and the

hydraulic properties of soil (unconfined aquifer) from 10 field permeability measurements. The

observations were taken on volcanic rock exposures and spring locations.

The second technique was performed with the aim to identify the origin of groundwater and its

movement. This technique consisted of interpretation of physical and chemical properties of

groundwater samples. The samples was taken from 24 springs sites, 1 river sampling site, and 1 rain

water sample. The physical properties measurements included: temperature (oC), conductivity

(S/cm), pH; while the chemical properties measurements consisted of major elements concentration

(Ca2+

, Na+, Mg

2+, Cl

-, K

-, HCO3

-).

More detailed analysis was applied to a spesific spring, which was selected according to the high

amount of its discharges and its contribution to public water supply. In such area, the analysis was also

supported with groundwater travel time prediction as one of the basic consideration to delineate the

recharge area. Basically, the prediction is based on comparison of rainfall gauge fluctuation and the

spring discharge fluctuation. More over, the recharge area delineation also considered themorphological feature as one of the primary feature controlling the unconfined groundwater.





3

3. THE RESULTS

3.1 Hydrogeological conditions

A. Aquifer and Spring Characteristics

Based on the aquifer and spring observation, the springs at East slope of Mt. Ciremai (Cilimus-

Jalaksana area) can be divided into 3 spring belts based on elevation: Zone 1 100-250 masl; Zone 2

250-650 masl (largest frequency); and Zone 3 650-1250 masl. Each spring belt corresponded to

volcanic aquifers distribution:

Lahar pore space aquifer system (< 750 masl). The aquifer discharged depression and contact

springs with total spring discharge of 1063 l/sec.

Lava flows fracture aquifer system (750-1250 masl). The aquifer discharged fracture spring

with total spring discharge of 80 l/sec

Pyroclastic breccias pore space aquifer system (1250 – 3100 masl). The aquifer discharged

depression springs with total spring discharge of 18.2 l/sec of total discharge.

The overall spring discharge potential is presented in Table 1, while the 3D geological condition and

the spring types are presented in Figure 3.

B. Field permeability test

From field permeability test (Chow et.al., 19647; Miyazaki, 1993

8), it can be concluded that all types

of soil can functioned as potential recharge materials. The conclusion is confirmed by the permeable

soils that varies upon rock type. Soil derived from lahar shows the largest permeability values of 1.26 -

2.53 cm/min, followed by pyroclastic breccias soil 1.5 cm/min, and soil of lava flow 0.5 – 1.2 cm/min(see Table 2). The high field permeability value (Linsley & Franzini, 19789) indicates that the soil

material is very potential to infiltrate rain water into the aquifer.

3.2 Groundwater movement

3.2.1 Interpretation on physical and chemical properties of water

The interpretation is based on comparison between physical and chemical properties of groundwater,

rain water, and river water. This technique is supported by assumption, that naturally, the

characteristics of meteoric type groundwater is similar to rain water’s. While, the anomalous

characteristics of groundwater indicates that the water does not follow the meteoric water cycles andinterpreted to be undergo a distinct circulation as well as chemical processes.

From Table 3.1-3.3 and Piper Diagram Plot (Piper, 194410

), it can be seen that the rain water had low

conductivity and bicarbonate type water, while most of the groundwater samples were classified in to

3 types (see Figure 4):

1. Mesothermic, low conductivity, and bicarbonate type water (Dominant type)

2. Hypothermic, low conductivity, and bicarbonate type water (Cibulan spring)

3. Hyperthermic water with high conductivity, and NaK-bicarbonate type water (Sangkanurip

spring)

Based on that data and assumption, the type 1 and type 2 water is likely similar to rain water

characteristics. Both water types are included in meteoric water cycles, which the rain water directlyinfiltrate and served as the spring recharge.





4

Significant difference is showed by the high amount of Na-K ions on type 3 water. The condition is

supposed to be caused by different kind of cycle and is influenced by high mineralization of Na and K.

The high mineralization of Na and K ions are commonly resulted from volcanic gas enrichment.

3.2.2 Isophreatic reconstruction

Regional isophreatic map based on spring elevation and water table measurements on 2 areas shows 2

groundwater flow directions, SW-NE and NW-SE. Based on the condition, the overall groundwater

flow is appeared to be radial (see Figure 5). The results of groundwater flow reconstruction in Area 1

and Area 2 is shown in Figure 5.

Result on Area 1 shows SW-NE major flow direction with 0.4 of hydraulic gradient, while result on

Area 2 presents NW-SE flow with gradient of 0.3. The groundwater flow on both areas were

controlled by undulating morphology of strato volcano. This condition was found especially on the

slope of river streams which consisted of many small depression springs or seepage zone.

4. DETERMINING THE CIBULAN SPRING RECHARGE SYSTEM

4.1 Detailed aquifer system

Based on surface observations around Cibulan spring, the geological conditions is appeared to be

heterogeneous. The aquifer consists of permeable lahar deposit served as aquifer. In some section, the

aquifer is confined by impermeable layers of lavas (see Figure 6). The impermeable layer of lava

formed a small ridge which covers limited surface of lahar aquifer unit. The confined condition is

confirmed by the artesian condition on Cibulan Spring area.

Furthermore, the isophreatic analysis shows eastward groundwater flow with hydraulic gradient value

of 0.3. The flow seemed to be parallel to eastward orientation of ridges and valleys. This fact were also

the prove that in volcanic area morphology plays significant role to control the groundwater

movement, especially the unconfined groundwater.

4.2 Prediction of groundwater travel time

This technique analysis the behaviour of rainfall gauge and spring discharge at a given time period

(see Figure 7). The time series data, preferably a year data, of rainfall and spring discharge plotted at

the same scale. The peaks and the valleys of plotted data are then being compared. During the

comparison, it can be noticed that the peaks and the valleys of both data series are not exactly

coincides one to another. The difference can be noted as the time travel of groundwater; as the rain

water infiltrate to the aquifer, circulate, then emerge as springs (Freeze & Cherry, 1979

11

; Hem,197012

, Matthess, 198213

). The monthly average rainfall data was taken continuously from 1991-2000

periode, while the spring discharge observation was taken un-continuously on January 1988, March

1988, July 1989, and January-July 2001.

The plotted data illustrated that the rain season occur on January until May, while the dry season occur

on June until December. On the other hand, the maximum of spring discharge was on April, and the

predicted minimum discharge on September until October. The average difference of the peaks and

valleys between both data series were around 3 months. The result inferred that the groundwater travel

time, since the infiltration process begin until emerge to surface as springs, were around 3 months.





5

4.3 Delineation of recharge area

The recharge area delineation are based on 2 approaches: theoretical and field (surface-subsurface)

observation. The theoritical approach was based on correlation of rainfall and spring discharge graph

after Todd (1984)14

. According to Todd (1984), from the correlation between rainfall and springdischarge can be obtained recharge area extent.

Based on Todd’s graph, the springs on the area are grouped in to 5 and analyzed using the graph. The

result shows range of spring recharge area extent of 50 to 1000 km2. Regarding the graph, Todd’s

theoritical approach must be supported with more field observation approach, considering that the

graph was constructed based on subtropical climate with dominant sedimentary rock.

The high amount of rain in the area (maximum of 4000 mm) are giving significant influence to spring

discharge as well to recharge area extent. Additionally, undulating morphological control has an

important control to unconfined groundwater. Moreover, the spring is fed from the layer of volcanic

breccia aquifer which is overlain by lava flow ridge. The lava flow is giving an artesian condition on

Cibulan Spring Area. The ridge geometry also controls the groundwater flow path. Furthermore, thephysical and chemical properties of water shows a local circulation, with predicted travel time is 3

months.

Based on above facts, the recharge area is delineated. The delineation is elongate following the

volcanic breccia ridge as the aquifer. The area extent is at least 3 km2

covering the laharic breccia

(Figure 9). The result is more limited if compared to Todd’s graph result because of the various

volcanic geological condition which control the hydrogeologic boundary and distinct morphological

feature.

5. CONCLUSIONS

1. The volcanic aquifer system around Ciremai Mt. can be divided in to: pore space system of

pyroclastic breccia and lahar, fracture system of lava. Each unit consists of residual soil

aquifer and fresh rock aquifer.

2. All of the aquifer units show high heterogenity of permeable and impermeable layers in detail

scale; it is indicated by limited area extent of artesian condition on Cibulan Spring.

3. Based on detailed isophreatic analysis in 2 areas, the groundwater system shows a radial flow.

Such flow is controlled by volcanic deposit geometry and volcanic deposit flow pattern.

4. Geological mapping and groundwater characterization can be used as an approach to

determine spring recharge system and to delineate spring recharge area.

5. Based on the volcanic aquifer mapping and high rainfall measurement, the spring recharge

area extent results is more limited compared to spring recharge area from Todd’s graph.6. More detailed subsurface investigation can give more support in detailing the spring recharge

area delineation.

7. The spring recharge area identification is the first step of groundwater basin management to

plan the groundwater conservation program.





6

References

1Mandel S. (1981). “Groundwater Resources: Investigation and Development”. Academic Press,

pp. 217

2Asseggaf, A. & Puradimaja, D.J. (1998). “Identifikasi Kawasan G. Salak – G. Gede sebagai Zona

Resapan dan Luahan Daerah Ciawi – Bogor Kabupaten Bogor – Jawa Barat”. Prosiding PIT

IAGI XXVII, pp. 4-136 - 4-142

3Irawan, D.E., Puradimaja, D.E., Yuwono, S. & Syaifullah, T.A. (2000)., “Pemetaan Endapan

Bahan Volkanik dalam Upaya Identifikasi Akifer pada Sistem Gunungapi. Studi Kasus:

Daerah Pasir Jambu-Situwangi Soreang, Kabupaten Bandung, Jawa Barat”, Jurnal Buletin

Geologi, Vol 3, Tahun 2000

4Irawan, D.E. (2001). “Karakterisasi Sistem Akifer dan Pola Aliran Airtanah pada Endapan

Gunungapi Strato. Studi Kasus: Zona Mataair pada Lereng Timur Gunungapi Ciremai,Kecamatan Cilimus-Jalaksana, Kabupaten Kuningan, Jawa Barat”. Tesis Magister

5 Irawan, D.E., Syaifullah, T.A., Puradimaja, D.J. (2001). “Volcanic Aquifer

Characterization and Groundwater Flow Study. Case Study: Volcanic Region with Six

Strato eruption Centers in Pasir Jambu – Situwangi, Soreang – Bandung (West Java)”.

Prosiding PIT IAGI XXX

6IWACO-WASECO. (1989). “West Java Provincial Water Sources Master Plan for Water

Supply: Kabupaten Kuningan”. Vol A, Directorate of Water Supply, Ministry of Public Works

7Chow, VT (ed). (1964). “Handbook of Applied Hydrology”. McGraw-Hill, pp. 12.1-12.30

8 Miyazaki, T. (1993). “Water Flow in Soils”. Dekker, pp. 29 – 45

9Linsley, R.K. & Franzini, J.B. (1978). Water Resources Engineering. McGraw Hill

10 Piper, A.M. (1944). “A Graphic Procedure in The Geochemical Interpretation of Water-

Analysis”. American Geophysical Union Trans., Vol 25, pp. 914-923

11 Freeze & Cherry. (1979). “Groundwater”. Prentice-Hall, pp. 192-301

12 Hem, J.D. (1970). “Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Characteristics of Natural

Water”. USGS Water Supply Paper, pp. 10-20113

Matthess, G. (1982). “Properties of Groundwater”. John Wiley & Sons

14 Todd, DK. (1984). “Groundwater Hydrology”. John Wiley & Sons, pp. 49



Skala 1 : 1.500.000

Daerah penelitian

A B

C D

Figure 1 Location of study area

Figure 2 Flow chart of the study



Q U A R T E N A R Y

Volcanic Units Absolutage

Relativeage

13.350Lahar

Lava

Pyroclastic flowbreccia

Pyroclastic fallbreccia

STRATIGRAPHIC OF VOLCANIC DEPOSIT UNITS

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

2000

2250

2500

2750

3000

3250

500 m

3 0 0 0

m

2 7 5 0

m

2 5 0 0

m

2 2 5 0

m

2 0 0 0

m

1 7 5 0

m

1 5 0 0

m

1 2 5 0

m

1 0 0 0 m

7 5 0 m

5 0 0 m

5 0 0 m

5 0 0 m

2 5 0 m

S p r i n g z o n e I I I ( 6 5 0 - 12 5 0 m d p l ) Sp r i ng Z o ne II ( 2 50 - 650 md p l )

S p r i ng Z o ne I( 10 0 - 2 5 0 md p l )

Quartenaryvolcanic rockaquifer units

Tertiary foldedsedimentary rock

aquifer units

Figure 3 Summary of geological conditions and spring types



Table 1 Spring discharge based on aquifer type

AquiferElevation

(mdpl)

Number

of spring

Discharge

(l/sec)

Fresh rock

Pyroclastic breccia 1250 2 18

Lava 850 1 80

Lahar 325-825 13 1062

Soil

Pyroclastic breccia 1225 2 0.2

Lava 660 0 0

Lahar 480-550 5 1

TOTAL 23 1161.2

Table 2 Field permeability measurement results

No Soil (derived from) .k (cm/minute)

1 Pyroclastic breccia 1.5509

2 Pyroclastic breccia 1.5426

3 Lava 1.2858

4 Lava 0.5991

5 Lahar 2.5295

6 Lahar 1.78657 Lahar 1.5818

8 Lahar 1.2576

9 Lahar 1.7858

10 Lahar 1.5615

Average 1.5481

F1 = measurement result F2 = calculation result



Table 3.1 Physical characteristic of groundwater

(observation on springs and dug wells)

Code Springs/Dugwells Elv(mdpl) Ta(oC) Tu(

oC) EC(µS/cm) pH

Aquifer unit: Lahar

43 Cikacu 2 800 21 23 83 6

53 Ciwaruling 825 21.5 23 131 6.3

63 Sinang Pangsiraman 475 22 23 132 6.2

73 Silinggonom 475 22 24 135 7.1

83 Ragasakti-1 475 18 20.5 180 6.8

93 Ragasakti-2 500 19 20.5 175 6.5

123 Cibulan 500 22 22.5 207 6

143 Cimanceng 700 22 22 129 6.5

153 Balong Dalem-1 560 20 23 178 6.6

163 Balong Dalem-2 560 21 23 180 6.6

173 Balong Dalem-3 560 21 23 185 6.6

183 Kebon Balong 325 21 23 170 6

193 Sangkanurip 325 40.5 23 3800 5.8

203 Singkup 325 21 23 215 5.9

103 Ck 1 825 20.5 22 110 6.2

113 Ck 2 825 21 22 109 6

233 Cbl 1 500 21 23 151 6

243 Cbl 2 500 20.5 23 126 6

253 Rgs 450 20.5 23 125 6

Aquifer unit: Lava

32 Cikacu 1 850 20 21 80 6.5

Aquifer unit: Pyroclastic breccia

11 Cibunar 1 1250 20 20.5 190 6.5

21 Cibunar 2 1250 20 21 190 6.5

211 Cb 1 1225 20 21.8 110 6

221 Cb 2 1225 20 22.2 115 6

Ta = Temperature of groundwater, Tu = Temperature of environment

Table 3.2 Physical characteristic of groundwater from spring

(IWACO-WASECO, 1989)

No Spring T (oC) EC (µS/cm) pH

1 Cibinuang 23.1 157 6

2 Leles 24.5 190 6.5

3 Cisengir 26.4 440 -

4 Cikawadanan 27.6 257 6

5 Cipari 21.8 188 5.9

6 Cigimpur 22.6 92 -

7 Cisamaya 23.3 158 -

8 Ciluwuk 26.5 400 7.1



Tabel 3.3 Chemical properties of the groundwater

Jenis Airtanah Air sungai Air hujanMesotermal Hipertermal

Lokasi SM-Cibulan Ma Sangkanurip S. Cimanis Kec. Cilimus

Sifat kimia mg/l meq/l mg/l meq/l mg/l meq/l mg/l Meq/l

Ca2+

12.90 0.64 265.21 13.23 21.00 1.05 0.97 0.05

Mg2+

8.20 0.67 195.94 16.12 15.30 1.26 0.36 0.03

Na+ 11.30 0.49 1437.15 62.52 16.20 0.70 1.10 0.05

K+ 3.50 0.09 221.74 5.67 10.30 0.26 0.26 0.01

SO42-

10.20 0.21 2.00 0.04 21.40 0.45 4.20 0.09

Cl- 3.90 0.11 2753.39 77.67 15.60 0.44 1.10 0.03

HCO3- 98.40 1.61 230.18 3.77 121.40 1.99 1.20 0.02

Balance ionic 0.94 8.97 6.49 2.08DHL (µS/cm) 207 3800 120 14

T air (oC) 22 40.5 29.5 19

pH 6 5.8 5.8 6.3

Tabel 3.4 Summary of groundwater chemical fasies

Sample

NoTaken from (spring)

Chemical facies

Anion Cation

1 Cibinuang HCO3 Non-dominant2 Leles HCO3 Non-dominant

4 Cikawadanan HCO3 Non-dominant

6 Cipari HCO3 Non-dominant

7 Cigimpur HCO3 Ca

8 Cisamaya HCO3 Non-dominant

9 Telaga Nilem HCO3 Non-dominant

Cibulan (153) HCO3 Non-dominant

Sangkanurip (193) Cl Na+K

River water HCO3 Non-dominant

Rain water HCO3 Non-dominant



M g

Ca

1 0 0

0

0

1 0 0

Cl

S O 4

0

1 0 0

100

0

S O

+ C

l

4

C a + M g

N a

+ K

1 0 0

1 0 0

0

100

0

C O

+ H C O

3

3

1 0 0

0

0

2

46

7

89

2

4

4

6

6

7

7

8

8

9

9

1

1

2

1

Figure 4 Piper diagram of major elements



Figure 5.1 Map of regional groundwater flow and detailed study area. The detailed groundwater flow

for area 1 and area 2 were presented on Figure 4.1 and 4.2

0 1 km

Study area

Regionalgroundwater flow

Detailed studyarea 1 & 2

1

2



0 500 m

173

163

153

143

243

253123

A

B

PETA ISOFREATIK DAN ALIRAN AIRTANAHDI KAWASAN SUMUR ARTESIS CIBULAN

Keterangan:

Batuan lava

Batuan breksilahar

Kontur topografi

Kontur isofreatik

Mataair

Sumur artesis Cibulan

Arah aliranairtanah

8 0 0

8 0 0

7 7 5

7 5 0

7 2 5

7 0 0 6

7 5

6 5 0 6

2 5

6 0 0

5 7 5

5 5 0

5 6 0

5 2 5

5 0 0

7 5 0

7 0 0

7 0 0

7 0 0

6 5 0

6 0 0

5 5 0

5 0 0

C

D

?

A B

Sumur artesisCibulan

750 750

500 500

375 375

? ? ?

LAPISAN IMPERMEABEL

SUMUR ARTESISCIBULAN

Figure 5.2 Detailed groundwater flow in Area 1



0 500 m

173

163

153

143

243

253123

A

B

PETA ISOFREATIK DAN ALIRAN AIRTANAHDI KAWASAN SUMUR ARTESIS CIBULAN

Keterangan:

Batuan lava

Batuan breksilahar

Kontur topografi

Kontur isofreatik

Mataair

Sumur artesis Cibulan

Arah aliranairtanah

8 0 0

8 0 0

7 7 5

7 5 0

7 2 5

7 0 0 6

7 5

6 5 0 6

2 5

6 0 0

5 7 5

5 5 0

5 6 0

5 2 5

5 0 0

7 5 0

7 0 0

7 0 0

7 0 0

6 5 0

6 0 0

5 5 0

5 0 0

C

D

?

A B

Sumur artesisCibulan

750 750

500 500

375 375

? ? ?

LAPISAN IMPERMEABEL

SUMUR ARTESISCIBULAN

Figure 5.3 Detailed groundwater flow in Area 2



Figure 6 Detailed groundwater flow in Cibulan Spring



Figure 7 Prediction of groundwater travel time

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Jan Feb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Dec

Bulan

R a i n f a l l ( m m )

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

S p r i n g d i s c h a r g e ( l / s e c )

RainfallSpring discharge 1989Spring discharge 2001Spring discharge 1988

Notes:

* Rainfall data periode 1991-2000

* Spring discharge data: taken January 1988,

March 1988, April 1988; July 1989; and January-July 2001

3 months time difference



Isohyet line2000 mm/year 2 0 0 0

0.1 1 10 100 1 10

10

100

10

100

1000

10000

A n n u

a l R a i n f a l l

0 . 1 m m

1 m m

1 0 m m

1 0 0 m m

1 0 0 0

m m

1 0 0 0

0 m m

Spring Discharge

(m /sec)3(l/sec)

H e k t a r

K m

2

C a t c h m e n t A r e a

1 1 2

3

4

5

0 2 km

Study area

1 0 8

2 4 ’ 3 6 ” B T

o

1 0 8

3 2 ’ 0 0 ” B T

o

6 54’40”LSo

6 52’06”LSo

1

23

4

6

1 Cibunar 4 18.2 3500 50

2 Cikacu 5 175.5 3750

3 Ragasakti 3 21.1 3250 50

4 Sangkanurip 3 66 2750 100

5 Balong Dalem 4 607 2750

4 0 0 0

3 5 0 0 3

0 0 0

2 5 0 0

1000

500

SampleNo

Springgroup

Number of spring

Total

discharge

Rainfall(mm/year)

Springrecharge area(km )

2

‘

Figure 8 Prediction of the spring recharge area



Figure 9 The result of spring recharge area delineation

pdf 2002 erwin ciremai malaysia

Documents