In-Channel Water Harvesting Structures For Artificial

In-Channel Water Harvesting Structures For Artificial

IN-CHANNEL WATER HARVESTING
STRUCTURES FOR ARTIFICIAL RECHARGE,
KHERAN ALLUVIAL AQUIFER IN THE
SOUTHWEST OF IRAN
N. KALANTARI
M. R. RAHIMI
M. SHEBANEH
GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT SHAHID CHAMRAN
UNIVERSITY
AHVAZ, IRAN
Artificial recharge
The increasing population growth and rapid
development in agriculture has resulted to increase
water demand for the above purposes in the area.
In this localities, where the water replenishment is
low as compare to water withdrawal, artificial
recharge of aquifer is accounted as a viable option
for groundwater management.
Methodology
Methodology
Geology
Litology
Physiography
Structural
geology
Well location
hydrogeology
Water table
Hydrograph
Water budget
hydrology
Infiltration
rate
measurement
Litho-logs
Flood
hydrograph
Depth to
groundwater
Hydrograph
Of piezometer
Deep well
Hydraulic
gradient
Unit
hydrograph
Pits
Water table
map
Annual
runoff
Quality
Groundwater
Runoff
Study area
Climatology
Climate
Semi-arid
Average annual temperature 32˚C
Average annual evaporation 1937.5 mm
Average annual rainfall
Wind direction
254.4 mm
NW>SE
Stratigrphy
Alluvial
Bakhtiari Fm.
Lahbari m.
Aghajari Fm.
Mishan Fm.
Gachsaran Fm.
Structural geology
Naft sefid
anticline
Koupal
anticline
Physiography
HB
ESS
WSS
unit
11 38
6 40
1 92
km2
Area
1 69
1 19
6 42
km
perimeter
79
66
60
m
Max elevation
38
35
35
m
Min Elevation
41
31
25
m
Elevation Range
55.24
50.79
47.20
m
Average elevation
1.22
1.22
1.80
%
Average slope
km
Length of major
drainage
hr
Concentration time
6.40
6.42
3.05
1.94
2.17
0.99
ESS
WSS
ESS*
HS
N
Bakhtyari Fm.
Lahbari Mbr.
Aghajari Fm.
45
Mishan Fm. 25
0 0.5 Km
300000
305000
310000
Watertable
Depth to to groundwater
0
315000
320000
325000
330000
5 Km
3490000 3495000 3500000 3505000 3510000 3515000 3520000
Suggested sites
ESS
HS
WSS
ESS*
Wells location
Depth to groundwater
Water table
Hydraulic gradient
Hydrograph of piezometers
Kr 23
Kr 21
Kr 24
Kr 22
Kr 20
Kr 1
Kr 19
Kr 3
Aj
Kr 4
Kr 5
Kr` 2
Kr 6
Z1
Kr 7
Bk
Kr 9
Kr 10
Kr`8
Mn
Kr 12
Bk
Kr 13
Kr 11
Kr 15
Z4
Kr 14
Kr 16
Z7
0
2
4
6
8
Kr 18
km
t ¡Ékº¬uy»ÞG
Kr 17
t ¡ÉkºÞi º¬uy»ÞG
Lbm
300000
µÃen.b .³
305000
310000
315000
320000
325000
330000
335000
‫‪Hydrograph of piezometers‬‬
‫]‪[Kr 9‬‬
‫]‪[Kr 5‬‬
‫]‪[Kr 2‬‬
‫‪120‬‬
‫‪32.5‬‬
‫‪32‬‬
‫‪120‬‬
‫‪100‬‬
‫‪31.5‬‬
‫‪100‬‬
‫‪36‬‬
‫)‪Wt.(m‬‬
‫‪30.5‬‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫‪40‬‬
‫‪30‬‬
‫‪29.5‬‬
‫‪40‬‬
‫‪20‬‬
‫‪29‬‬
‫‪80‬‬
‫‪34‬‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫‪33‬‬
‫‪32‬‬
‫‪31‬‬
‫‪28.5‬‬
‫‪0‬‬
‫مهر‪82‬‬
‫مهر‪81‬‬
‫مهر‪80‬‬
‫مهر‪79‬‬
‫مهر‪82‬‬
‫مهر‪78‬‬
‫]‪[Z 7‬‬
‫‪28.5‬‬
‫‪28‬‬
‫‪80‬‬
‫‪27‬‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫‪26‬‬
‫‪40‬‬
‫‪20‬‬
‫‪25‬‬
‫‪20‬‬
‫‪0‬‬
‫‪24‬‬
‫‪0‬‬
‫مهر‪82‬‬
‫مهر‪78‬‬
‫‪160‬‬
‫‪28.5‬‬
‫‪140‬‬
‫‪28‬‬
‫‪140‬‬
‫‪120‬‬
‫‪27.5‬‬
‫‪120‬‬
‫)‪Wt.(m‬‬
‫)‪P.(mm‬‬
‫)‪Wt.(m‬‬
‫‪26.5‬‬
‫مهر‪80‬‬
‫‪26.5‬‬
‫‪80‬‬
‫‪26‬‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫‪25.5‬‬
‫‪40‬‬
‫‪25‬‬
‫‪40‬‬
‫‪20‬‬
‫‪24.5‬‬
‫‪20‬‬
‫‪0‬‬
‫مهر‪79‬‬
‫‪100‬‬
‫مهر‪78‬‬
‫‪24‬‬
‫‪0‬‬
‫مهر‪82‬‬
‫مهر‪81‬‬
‫مهر‪80‬‬
‫مهر‪79‬‬
‫مهر‪78‬‬
‫)‪P.(mm‬‬
‫‪27‬‬
‫‪27‬‬
‫)‪Wt.(m‬‬
‫‪27.5‬‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫مهر‪81‬‬
‫‪38.5‬‬
‫‪38‬‬
‫‪37.5‬‬
‫‪37‬‬
‫‪36.5‬‬
‫‪36‬‬
‫‪35.5‬‬
‫‪35‬‬
‫‪34.5‬‬
‫‪34‬‬
‫‪33.5‬‬
‫‪33‬‬
‫‪160‬‬
‫‪140‬‬
‫‪120‬‬
‫‪100‬‬
‫‪80‬‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫‪40‬‬
‫‪20‬‬
‫‪0‬‬
‫مهر‪82‬‬
‫مهر‪81‬‬
‫مهر‪80‬‬
‫مهر‪79‬‬
‫مهر‪78‬‬
‫)‪P.(mm‬‬
‫‪28‬‬
‫‪80‬‬
‫مهر‪80‬‬
‫مهر‪79‬‬
‫مهر‪78‬‬
‫]‪[Kr 10‬‬
‫‪160‬‬
‫‪100‬‬
‫مهر‪82‬‬
‫‪100‬‬
‫]‪[Z 4‬‬
‫‪29‬‬
‫مهر‪81‬‬
‫مهر‪81‬‬
‫مهر‪80‬‬
‫مهر‪79‬‬
‫)‪P.(mm‬‬
‫‪31‬‬
‫‪80‬‬
‫‪120‬‬
‫‪29‬‬
‫)‪Wt.(m‬‬
‫‪35‬‬
‫)‪P.(mm‬‬
‫‪30‬‬
‫)‪Wt.(m‬‬
‫‪37‬‬
‫‪140‬‬
‫‪33‬‬
‫‪140‬‬
‫‪140‬‬
‫)‪P.(mm‬‬
‫‪38‬‬
‫‪160‬‬
‫‪33.5‬‬
‫‪160‬‬
‫‪31‬‬
‫‪160‬‬
Unit Hydrograph
Water budget
Input
Rainfall recharge
Return recharge
Playa recharge
45
40
35
Output
Wells
Groundwater outflow
Evaporation
30
25
MCM
20
15
10
5
0
IN
OUT
IN-OUT
Reduction in
storage
Litho-logs of deep wells
P285
P238
P222
P235
P258
P201
P229
P233
P370
P256
-30
-20
-10
P291
-40
P377
-50
P374
-60
P300
Sand Silt Clay
-70
P372
‫ارا ض ي‬
0 m
‫س ن ي چه‬
Litho-logs of the hand excavated pits
Particle size
Measurement of infiltration
Infiltration tests results
Artificial recharge
sites
Double ring test
results
Pit test
results
Average Computed
Infiltration rate ( mm/h )
WSS
124
133
118
123
62.5
ESS
45
60
48
50
25
ESS*
80
80
Very low
5
4
HS
124
188
150
150
75
Flood hydrograph
16
HB, Tr:50year
14
HB, Tr:25year
HB, Tr:10year
12
HB, Tr:5year
ESS, Tr:50 year
Q(cms)
10
ESS, Tr:25 year
8
ESS, Tr:10 year
ESS, Tr:5 year
6
WSS, Tr:50 year
4
WSS, Tr:25 year
WSS, Tr:10 year
2
WSS, Tr:5 year
0
0
5
10
15
20
T(hr)
25
30
35
Maximum discharge and
Volume of maximum flood
T(year)
50
25
10
5
Unite
Hydrograph
Site
2.218
1.245
0.251
Qp m3/s
83.101 66.191
46.493
14.06
1.954
V 1000 m3
8.095
4.250
2.385
0.482
Qp m3/s
276.64 220.35
156.31
47.28
6.506
V 1000 m3
15.598 12.111
8.188
4.596
0.928
Qp m3/s
491.59 391.56
275.03
83.20
11.561
V 1000 m3
4.226
3.281
6.286
WSS
ESS
HB
Annual runoff
Jastin
M3
Site
247,168
WSS
774,996
ESS
1,375,488
HB
HS view in rainy days
Physico-chemical characteristics
of surface and groundwater
SO4
Number of samples
Cl
HCO
3
K
Na
Mg
Ca
TDS
Sampling stations
pH
Mg/l
3
EC
μmoho/c
m
Mg/l
11.8
2.8
62.0
0.8
0.7
0.5
26.8
77
7.7
140
ESS*
16.1
3.8
84.1
1.1
0.9
0.6
36.4
104
7.7
190
4
HS
51.8
6.7
103.8
2.7
1.7
5.0
49.8
185
7.7
300
23
Mean
552.7
884.2
270.5
8.1
502.2
131.0
166.5
2547
7.7
3951
WSS ESS
746.0
623.3
209.7
4.4
382.1
131.6
184.8
2269
7.8
3620
HS
440.6
861.9
254.5
4.1
464.4
131.9
135.4
2381
7.7
3698
2
6
Groundwater
5
Run off
WSS
Hydrochemical facies
Particle size and volume of
annual sediment load
WSS=150
ESS=150 Ton per year
HS=2100
Design parameters of
the suggested sites
Design parameters
Unit
HS
ESS
WSS
Capacity
m3
225 103
80 103
45 103
Evaporation
Deposited sedimentation
load
Actual infiltration
m3
538
573
129
m3
1098
91
11
m/day
1.8
0.6
1.5
Discharge time
Day
1.39
3.33
1
Depth to static water level
M
11
11
11
Vadose zone volume
m3
990 103
440 103
330 103
Specific retention
%
10
10
10
Required water for specific
retention
m3
99 103
44 103
33 103
Transmissivity
m2/day
600
700
700
Groundwater mound
M
6.624
1.44
5.1
Specific yield
%
25
25
25
Storageable water volume
m3
241 103
130 103
243 103
Conclusion
At the end it was concluded that
artificial recharge could not meet the
required water.
Therefore withdrawal of water by
pipeline from nearby Gargar river can
be used for cultivation as wells as
artificial recharge of the area.
WSS – February, 3 2007
THE END