E-mail alert
Rss
Fig.
1.
Research location in Kemuning district of Indragiri Hilir regency, Indonesia
| Citation: | Muhammad Juandi, Islami Nur. 2021: Prediction criteria for groundwater potential zones in Kemuning District, Indonesia using the integration of geoelectrical and physical parameters. Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 9(1): 12-19. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2021.01.002
|
Water scarcity has become a serious problem in many regions around the world. Currently, several regions in Africa and India are facing severe droughts which have triggered the water crisis in those re-gions (Silliman et al. 2010; Udmale et al. 2014). Water scarcity is one impact of climate change on our planet because of the overexploitation of natural resources, including water. Water sources, i.e. surface-water and groundwater, should be managed sustainably to avoid further water scarcity (Juandi et al. 2017).
Sustainable exploitation of groundwater must be based on the understanding of the geological and hydrological conditions of the aquifer, because the productivity of aquifer in different areas lar-gely depends on the layer of soil below the surface (Lenkey et al. 2005; Juandi and Syahril, 2017; Juandi, 2020). It is important to state that groundwater is usually stored in the aquifer for exploitation (Udmale et al. 2014). However, to analyze the aquifer conditions, there is a need to evaluate methods that are capable of investigating geological formations to determine water availa-bility (Juandi, 2019). These include geological, magnetic, gravity, seismic, and geoelectric meth-ods. The geoelectric method has been reported to have a high level of sensitivity in groundwater exploration (Lenkey et al. 2005).
Indragiri Hilir is a suitable region for re-search due to its complex conditions as well as swamps and tidal rivers often found in the area. Furthermore, Kemuning is a village located in this region with a population highly dependent on underground water and this made it necessary to research the presence of groundwater in the region (Heriyanto et al. 2019).
Groundwater occurs in the peatland region of Kemuning district. Therefore it should be properly managed to keep the balance between the water demand and the sustainability of this resource (Muhammad, 2020; Sheriff, 2002). Kemuning has several rock formations which have more dominant peat swamp deposits appearing on the surface and consist of peats, mud, clay, and sand. The thickness of the peat layer in the region reaches 5 m and at several locations peat appears in the clay layer with the thickness varying from 50 cm to 300 cm. The depth of the bedrock is estimated to be at a depth of more than 60 m (Heriyanto et al. 2019).
To reveal the groundwater profile in Kemuning soil, we conducted a geoelectric survey using Werner-Schlumberger's configuration and studied porosity and hydraulic conductivity of soil samples from 12 locations of the district. This survey produced an image of the vertical profile of geological formations below the surface where groundwater can be determined by the electrical properties of the rocks and the soil. The distances between the electrode potentials and also between the electrode currents have been made to change gradually in this method (Islami et al. 2011). Moreover, the efficiency of the geoelectric resistivity method to map the subsurface layer provides more precise information to characterize the aquifer layer, illustrate the depth of bedrock, and determine the resistivity values (Sultan and Santos, 2008). By interpreting resistivity, porosity, and hydraulic conductivity of the soil, groundwater can be qualitatively estimated.
This research was conducted in the rural areas of Kemuning, a district of Indragiri Hilir regency as shown in Fig. 1. This district was located at a latitude of 0°55'57.56'' S and longitude of 102°34' 36.18'' E in the south part of Riau Province, the mid-eastern of Sumatra. The district is commonly covered by peatland. The local climate is classified as tropical wet with moderately humid air. The highest rainfall was recorded in March of 2017 with 4 422 mm while the lowest was in July with 80 mm (Revil et al. 2012).
The research locations are distributed in 12 villages from where soil samples were collected, as depicted in Table 1. The soil resistivity was measured at two coordinates (00°52'2.59"S, 102°44'85"E, 00°54'8.59"S and 102°49'47.33"E) using Werner-Schlumberger's method. Soil samples were obtained from several coordinates to determine the porosity while hydraulic conduc-tivities were measured on samples from 12 village areas in Kemuning as shown in Table 1.
| No. | Location | Latitude | Longitude |
| 1 | Kerintang | 00°51'35.81'' S | 102°39'21.29'' E |
| 2 | Sekara | 00°52'05.90'' S | 102°44'41.30'' E |
| 3 | Kemuning Tua | 00°54'14.23'' S | 102°47'19.03'' E |
| 4 | Air Balui | 00°53'46.67'' S | 102°45'47.70'' E |
| 5 | Batu Ampar | 00°58'20.49'' S | 102°42'40.49'' E |
| 6 | Selensen | 00°58'23.70'' S | 102°45'22.74'' E |
| 7 | Tuk Jimun | 00°54'52.46''S | 102°48'02.06'' E |
| 8 | Kemuning Muda | 00°53'48.90'' S | 102°49'27.67'' E |
| 9 | Lubuk Besar | 00°52'45.62'' S | 102°50'05.44'' E |
| 10 | Talang Jangkang | 00°51'20.83'' S | 102°49'24.84'' E |
| 11 | Limau Manis | 00°52'19.67'' S | 102°48'24.63'' E |
| 12 | Sekayan | 00°51'15.26'' S | 102°41'03.11'' E |
DownLoad:
CSV
In this research, a geoelectric measurement was applied to obtain the data (Wada et al. 2014) through the utilization of geoelectric sounding (vertical) Werner-Schlumberger's configurations. The number of sounding points includes 12 for porosity and hydraulic conductivity in Kemuning and another 48 for soil porosity in the district. Werner-Schlumberger's method was used to analyze the groundwater potential while the porosity and the conductivity were measured to analyze the quality and permeability of the soil and its effects on the presence of groundwater (Alley et al. 2002).
The electrode arrangement in Fig. 2 shows the distance L between the same current electrodes A and B and the distance a between the voltage electrodes of C and D. The parameters measured are the distance between the stations with the current electrodes (Ⅰ) and the potential difference (Ⅴ), while the calculated parameters include the geometry factor (Ks) and apparent resistivity (ρs). The resistivity method of Werner-Schlumberger's configuration was conducted by gradually changing the current while the distance between the electrodes remains constant). The Werner-Schlumberger's configuration equation is as follows:
|
Ks=π4(L2−a2)a |
(1) |
|
ρs=π4(L2−a2)aΔVl |
(2) |
Aquifer parameters are frequently used in predicting water storage capacity and estimating flow velocities within each layer (Loke et al. 2013). These parameters include resistivity, hydraulic conductivity, and porosity with dependence on each other and are correlated in the construction of a good model. The resistivity of rocks, minerals, soil, and chemical elements is generally obtained through several measurements that can be used as a reference for the conversion process (Telford et al. 1991).
Porosity is the proportion of total void space contained in a unit volume of soil allowing the passage and storage of water and air. It determines the amount of water content in the soil and is influenced by the size of the constituent materials. Moreover, soil with high porosity is preferable because it allows plant roots to penetrate the soil more easily while searching for organic matter. This process makes it possible for the soil to receive and hold rainwater. The porosity is calculated using the following equation.
|
ϕ=(1−ρbρp)×100% |
(3) |
Where: ρb is the Soil Density (gram/cm3); ρpis the density of Particles (gram/cm3); ɸ is the Soil Porosity (%).
Soil hydraulic conductivity is a parameter which denotes the slow speed of water infiltration or seepage into the soil through horizontal or vertical micropores. It depends on the granular nature of the soil as well as other factors like water bond to clay. Different types of soil have varying hydraulic conductivities (Wagner et al. 2001). The conductivity of saturated soil is determined by Darcy's law:
|
k=V×LA×h×t |
(4) |
Where: V is the volume of water collected (m3); L is the soil sample length (m); A is the Tube cross-sectional area (m2); t is the time (second); h is the constant water level in the tube (m); k is the permeability (m/s).
Porosity and resistivity are linearly related to the logarithm of hydraulic conductivity. In some conditions, the relationship between porosity and log(k) is weak. In addition to porosity and resistivity, hydraulic conductivity also depends on grain size, sorting and lithology e.g. sand against clay while the increased hydraulic conductivity and porosity are strongly influenced by the type of rock (LU Chuan et al. 2014). Empirical relationship of porosity (ϕ) and resistivity (ρ) to hydraulic conductivity (k) was obtained from several samples tested in the laboratory using linear relationship of log(k) = aXi + b (Bechte and Nico, 2017), where Xi indicates porosity and resistivity. Furthermore, the empirical relationship of resistivity (ρ) and porosity (ϕ) was obtained from ϕ = a.ρb relation. This equation used linear regression to calibrate the model.
The soil samples collected in this study are shown in Fig. 3. The peatland soil samples are characterized by brown-black color. In terms of geology, the locations where the measurements were made consist of many peatlands which are valuable environment but with fragile ecosystems, diverse bio-geochemical, and hydrological fun-ctions, which requirs non-destructive investigation for characterization (Krüger et al. 2017). Peatland soil plays an important role in conserving global carbon storage and contains a huge portion of organic materials. The conversion of peat land soil for any purpose should be minimized to avoid the loss of carbon from the soil to the atmosphere (Powlson et al. 2011).
The geoelectric measurements of two villages in Kemuning district, i.e. Sekara and Kemuning Muda are depicted in Fig. 4. Several soil layers were found according to the resistivity profile which shows different values for different lith-ologic types and water saturation. Furthermore, a high groundwater potential zone has been identified in the regolith layer at a depth of 110 m in Sekara and 96 m in Kemuning Muda.
The contour maps of porosity and hydraulic conductivity of the study area are shown in Fig. 5. According to the observation, the location has high porosity to store and conduct water which further influences the hydrology of the peatland as well as the interflow in the subsurface. The geoelectrical monitoring data, in combination with the precipitation and temperature data, indicate that several forces are driving the hydrogeological system of peatland (Sheriff, 2002). In this research, geoelectric measurements were implemented at two locations (Sekara and Kemuning Muda) as described in Fig. 3 to understand the distribution of groundwater.
The peatland was characterized by large varia-bility in the thickness of the deposit over a very small area in each layer. The thickness was further used as a reliable parameter to determine the com-position in a layer so that a thicker layer could have a greater potential for groundwater.
Based on the 1-dimensional data analysis, the depth and type of the groundwater were obtained at two measurement points. At the first point, sands and pebbles were found to have resistivity of 145.59 Ωm in the second layer and 112.47 Ωm in the fifth layer. At the second point of measurement in Kemuning Muda, groundwater was found in the second and fifth layers.
Furthermore, the groundwater potential is classified into three rankings with the first being the large potential which refers to an aquifer layer with thickness above 20 m. The second is the medium potential, referring to aquifer layers with thickness between 5~20 m. The third is the small potential while the thickness of aquifer layers are less than 5 m. This shows that the prediction of groundwater potential is depending on the thickness and depth of the layer.
Table 2 also shows the groundwater potential increases with depth and thickness of the land. The potential of the shallow aquifer in the district of Sekara and Kemuning Muda was found to be at a depth of over 6 m below the ground level with medium yield. An aquifer at a depth of over 60 m has a higher potential as shown in Fig. 4.
| Resistivity (Ωm) | Type of layer | Depth (m) | Thickness (m) | Location | Potential criteria |
| 145.59 | Sand and pebble with enough water | 6.88~14.29 | 7.41 | Sekara at Layer 2 | Medium |
| 112.47 | Sand and pebble with abundant water | 73.18~110 | 36.82 | Sekara at Layer 5 | Large |
| 70.79 | Sand and pebble with enough water | 6.20~17.31 | 11.11 | Kemuning Muda at Layer 2 | Medium |
| 153.79 | Sand and pebble with abundant water | 63.38~96 | 32.62 | Kemuning Muda at Layer 5 | Large |
DownLoad:
CSV
Ground resistivity is associated with several geological media and has been reported to be dependent on the moisture and its distribution pattern in the medium. For the case of peat land, the electrical resistivity depends on water conductivity in the peat pores, moisture content Electric con-ductivity of the peat matrix depends on the organic and mineral content, mineral composition, degree of peat decomposition, structure and porosity (Muhammad, 2020). Moreover, the variations in electrical resistivity (or conversely, conductivity) typically correlate with the changes in the lithology, water saturation, fluid conductivity, porosity, and hydraulic conductivity of the soil. The maximum depth was found to be sensitive to hydraulic conductivity are shown in Table 3, i.e. maximum depth is larger if the conductivity is larger. Thus, the ability of peatland to store water is larger due to the high value of porosity.
| Location | Porosity (%) | Description of soil porosity | Hydraulic conductivity (cm/h) | Ability to conduct water |
| Kerintang | 55.75 | Good | 4.91 | Medium |
| Sekara | 54.10 | Good | 4.21 | Medium |
| Kemuning Tua | 61.00 | Porosity | 6.76 | Fairly fast |
| Air Balui | 65.22 | Porosity | 7.63 | Fairly fast |
| Batu Ampar | 37.25 | Bad | 2.31 | Medium |
| Selensen | 33.51 | Bad | 2.10 | Medium |
| Tuk Jimun | 71.00 | Porosity | 9.95 | Fairly fast |
| Kemuning Muda | 51.19 | Good | 3.52 | Medium |
| Lubuk Besar | 76.25 | Porosity | 12.77 | Fairly fast |
| Talang Jangkang | 42.10 | Porosity | 2.70 | Medium |
| Limau Manis | 50.72 | Good | 3.34 | Medium |
| Sekayan | 35.75 | Bad | 2.12 | Medium |
DownLoad:
CSV
Soil samples from Sekara and Kemuning Muda were found to have good quality and medium permeability. The land is able to drain water from the surface to underground layers to recharge groundwater aquifers and also able to discharge water to rivers, ditches and other surface water bodies.
The criteria for groundwater potential of ea-ch layer were determined based on the rocks according to the geological map of the research area and the range of resistivity values which show the water saturation level of a layer. The hydraulic properties in this study are summarized from the soil's physical parameters including resistivity, porosity, and hydraulic conductivity. Moreover, the geoelectric measurements showed that the aquifers in Sekara and Kemuning Muda include a shallow aquifer in the second layer and a deep one in the fifth layer while the sand and pebble layers are of low resistivity to meet the criteria for groundwater potential. The information presented in Table 3 shows high water potential was influenced by surrounding rivers and streams of Indragiri Hilir.
Furthermore, porosity values are positively related to hydraulic conductivities in the soil, which could be explained by the effect of rainfall on the soil.
The empirical analysis was conducted to determine the relationship between each pair of physical soil parameters as shown in Fig. 6. The soil porosity and hydraulic conductivity are calculated using Equation (3) and Equation (4), while the resistivity was measured by Werner-Schlumberger's configuration. As mentioned in section 1.2, there are linear relationships among the three parameters. The plot of porosity and hydraulic conductivity to the conductivity log(k) shows a linear relationship with the correlation coefficients (R2) of 0.92 to 0.98. These findings revealed that the soil in Kemuning district is able to store water under subsurface where the presence of porous peatland soil is dominated.
In this study, groundwater potential is deter-mined using soil physical parameters such as resistivity, porosity, and hydraulic conductivity. The successful application of Werner-Schlumberger's geoelectric configuration method to determine the resistivity of each soil layer showed that water exists in the soil. The lithology of aquifer layers also showed sand and pebble layers contain fresh water. Moreover, the soils in Kemuning were found to have an average level of porosity and hy-draulic conductivity which allows the passage of water at medium speed. It was further discovered that porosity is the main parameter in exploring fresh groundwater in any area that a higher value of porosity generally increases the chances of finding water in the soil. Furthermore, each pair of physical parameters of soil was found to have a linear relationship with high correlation coefficient (R2) of 0.92 to 0.98.
|
Alley WM, Healy RW, LaBaugh JW, et al. 2002. Flow and storage in groundwater systems. Science, 296: 1985-1990. doi: 10.1126/science.1067123
|
|
Bechte TD, Nico G. 2017. Geoelectrical finger-printing of two contrasting ecohydrological peatland types in the Alps. Wetlands, 37: 875-884. doi: 10.1007/s13157-017-0921-5
|
|
Heriyanto H, Karya D, Choanji T, et al. 2019. Regression model in transitional geological environment for calculation farming and production of oil palm dominant factor in Indragiri Hilir Riau Province. Journal of Geoscience, Engineering, Environment and Technology, 4(1): 56-65. doi: 10.25299/jgeet.2019.4.1.2600
|
|
Islami N, Taib S, Yusoff I, et al. 2011. Time lapse chemical fertilizer monitoring in agri-culture sandy soil. International Journal of Environmental Scince Technology, 8: 765-780. doi: 10.1007/BF03326260
|
|
Juandi M, Syahril S. 2017. Empirical relationship between soil permeability and resistivity, and its application for determining the ground-water gross recharge in Marpoyan Damai, Pekanbaru, Indonesia. Water Practice and Technology, 12(3): 660-666. doi: 10.2166/wpt.2017.069
|
|
Juandi M, Surbakti A, Syech R, et al. 2017. Poten-tial of aquifers for groundwater exploitation using Cooper-Jacob Equation. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 10: 215-219. doi: 10.3923/jest.2017.215.219
|
|
Juandi M. 2019. Study of groundwater in the rock area using geoelectric survey. Journal of Ph-ysics Conference Series, 1351: 012010. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1351/1/012010
|
|
Juandi M. 2020. Water sustainability model for estimation of groundwater availability in Kemuning district, Riau-Indonesia. Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 8(1): 20-29. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2020.01.003
|
|
Krüger JP, Dotterweich M, Kopf C, et al. 2017. Carbon balance of rewetted peatland forests in low mountain range areas, Germany. Pro-ceedings of EGU General Assembly Vienna, Austria, 3212, April 23-28.
|
|
Lenkey L, Hámori Z, Mihálffy P. 2005. Investiga-ting the hydrogeology of a water-supply area using direct-current vertical electrical sound-ings. Geophysics, 70(4): 11-19. http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=GPYSA7000070000004000H11000001&idtype=cvips&prog=normal
|
|
Loke MH, Chambers JE, Rucker DF, et al. 2013. Recent developments in the direct-current geoelectrical imaging method. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 95: 135-156. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2013.02.017
|
|
LU Chuan, LI Long, LIU Yan-guang, et al. 2014. Capillary pressure and relative permeability model uncertainties in simulations of geological CO2 sequestration. Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 2(2): 1-17. http://gwse.iheg.org.cn/en/article/id/120
|
|
Muhammad J. 2020. Peat water purification by hybrid of slow sand filtration and coagulant treatment. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 13(1): 22-28. http://www.researchgate.net/publication/338647775_Peat_Water_Purification_by_Hybrid_of_Slow_Sand_Filtration_and_Coagulant_Treatment
|
|
Powlson DS, Whitmore AP, Goulding KW. 2011. Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change: A critical reexamination to identify the true and the false. European Journal of Soil Science, 62(1): 42-55. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01342.x
|
|
Revil A, Karaoulis M, Johnson T, et al. 2012. Review: Some low-frequency electrical me-thods for subsurface characterization and monitoring in hydrogeology. Hydrogeology Journal, 20: 617-658. doi: 10.1007/s10040-011-0819-x
|
|
Sheriff RE. 2002. Encyclopedic dictionary of applied geophysics, 4th edition. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA: 30-34.
|
|
Silliman SE, Borum BI, Boukari M, et al. 2010. Issues of sustainability of coastal groundwater resources: Benin, West Africa. Sustainability, 2(8): 2652-2675. doi: 10.3390/su2082652
|
|
Sultan SA, Santos FAM. 2008. Evaluating sub-surface structures and stratigraphic units using 2D electrical and magnetic data at the area North Greater Cairo, Egypt, International Journal Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 10: 56-67.
|
|
Telford WM, Geldart LP, Sheriff RE. 1991. Aplied Geophysic, 2nd Edition. New York: Cambridge University Press: 283-290.
|
|
Udmale P, Shrestha S, Ichikawa Y, et al. 2014. Assessing groundwater resource and its sus-tainability in drought prone area of India. Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Ser. B1 (Hydraulic Engineering), 58: 235-240. http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jscejhe/70/4/70_40/_article
|
|
Wada Y, Wisser D, Bierkens MFP. 2014. Global modeling of withdrawal, allocation and con-sumptive use of surface water and ground-water resources. Earth System Dynamics, 5: 15-40. doi: 10.5194/esd-5-15-2014
|
|
Wagner B, Tarnawski VR, Hennings V, et al. 2001. Evaluation of pedo-transfer functions for unsaturated soil hydraulic conductivity using an independent data set. Geoderma, 102(3-4): 275-297. doi: 10.1016/S0016-7061(01)00037-4
|
| [1] | Li-qiang Ge, Xin Yuan, Liu Yang, 2025: Application of metagenomics in the study of groundwater microorganisms, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 13, 90-100. doi: 10.26599/JGSE.2025.9280041 |
| [2] | Jin-xing Guo, Zhi-ping Li, Catalin Stefan, 2022: Managed aquifer recharge (MAR) applications in China–achievements and challenges, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 10, 57-69. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2022.01.006 |
| [3] | Vinay Kumar Gautam, Mahesh Kothari, P.K. Singh, S.R. Bhakar, K.K. Yadav, 2022: Analysis of groundwater level trend in Jakham River Basin of Southern Rajasthan, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 10, 1-9. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2022.01.001 |
| [4] | KHELFAOUI Hakim, DAJBRI Larbi, LAKHAL Fatima Zohra, CHAFFAI Hicham, HANI Azzedine, SAYAD Lamine, 2020: Determination of the origin of mineralization and groundwater salinity in the Adrar region in the southwest of Algeria, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 8, 158-171. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2020.02.007 |
| [5] | Muhammad Nauman Malik, Mehdi Murtuza, Iqbal Asif, Bakar Muhammad Saifullah Abu, Brahim Aissa, Dk Nur Afiqah Jalwati Puteri, Amer Farhan Rafique, 2019: Adaptive state estimation of groundwater contaminant boundary input flux in a 2-dimensional aquifer, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 7, 373-382. doi: DOI: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2019.04.008 |
| [6] | LI Bo, LI Xue-mei, 2018: Characteristics of karst groundwater system in the northern basin of Laiyuan Spring area, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 6, 261-269. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2018.04.002 |
| [7] | LI Xiao-hang, WANG Rui, LI Jian-feng, 2018: Study on hydrochemical characteristics and formation mechanism of shallow groundwater in eastern Songnen Plain, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 6, 161-170. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2018.03.001 |
| [8] | ZHOU Xun, 2017: Arsenic distribution and source in groundwater of Yangtze River Delta economic region, China, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 5, 343-353. |
| [9] | Eunhee Lee, Kyoochul Ha, Nguyen Thi Minh Ngoc, Adichat Surinkum, Ramasamy Jayakumar, Yongje Kim, Kamaludin Bin Hassan, 2017: Groundwater status and associated issues in the Mekong-Lancang River Basin: International collaborations to achieve sustainable groundwater resources, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 5, 1-13. |
| [10] | Pezhman ROUDGARMI, Ebrahim FARAHANI, 2017: Investigation of groundwater quantitative change, Tehran Province, Iran, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 5, 278-285. |
| [11] | Khongsab Somphone, OunakoneKone Xayviliya, 2017: Climate change and groundwater resources in Lao PDR, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 5, 53-58. |
| [12] | BAI Bing, CHENG Yan-pei, JIANG Zhong-cheng, ZHANG Cheng, 2017: Climate change and groundwater resources in China, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 5, 44-52. |
| [13] | Chamroeun SOK, Sokuntheara CHOUP, 2017: Climate change and groundwater resources in Cambodia, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 5, 31-43. |
| [14] | ZHANG Xiang-yang, CHEN Zong-yu, YANG Guo-min, TU Le-yi, HU Shui-ming, 2016: Krypton-85 dating of shallow aquifer in Hebei Plain, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 4, 328-332. |
| [15] | ZHANG Chun-chao, WANG Wen-Ke, SUN Yi-bo, LI Xiang-quan，HOU Xin-wei, 2015: Processes of hydrogeochemical evolution of groundwater in the Guanzhong Basin, China, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 3, 136-146. |
| [16] | Liang ZHU, Wei-dong KANG, Ji-chao SUN, Jing-tao LIU, 2014: Quantitative Calculation of Groundwater Vulnerability Assessment Based on Quantification Theory III, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 2, 78-85. |
| [17] | MA Shao-bing, ZHOU Jun, LIANG Peng, SU Yao-ming, 2014: Characteristics-based classification research on typical petroleum contaminants of groundwater, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 2, 41-47. |
| [18] | Song Bo, Liu Changli, Zhang Yun, Hou Hongbing, Pei Lixin, Yang Liu, 2013: Urban Waste Disposal and Its Impact on Groundwater Pollution in China, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 1, 88-95. |
| [19] | Jingli Shao, Yali Cui, Yunzhang Zhao, 2013: A Study on Infiltration and Groundwater Development in the Influent Zone of the Perched Lower Yellow River, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 1, 46-53. |
| [20] | Jiansheng Shi, Hongtao Liu, Zhiyuan Liu, Tieliu Chen, 2013: Application of the “Accurate Control Groundwater Resources” Theory in Containment of Groundwater Resource Exhaustion Trend, Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 1, 1-10. |
| 1. | Islami, N., Azhar, Irianti, M., Yusoff, I. A preliminary groundwater investigation using geoelectrical resistivity survey in the Bengkalis Island, Indonesia. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2023, 2582(1): 012003. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2582/1/012003 | |
| 2. | Islami, N., Irianti, M. A Quantitative interpretation of salt water mixture in the shallow aquifer through the geoelectrical resistivity data. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2023, 2582(1): 012001. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2582/1/012001 | |
| 3. | Juandi, M., Santoso, S.A. Analysis of groundwater infiltration using the Schlumberger Geoelectric Method. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2021, 2049(1): 012070. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2049/1/012070 | |
| 4. | Islami, N., Irianti, M. Integrated very low frequency and geoelectrical resistivity methods to study possibility shallow groundwater pathway in Bedrock Area. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2021, 2049(1): 012056. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2049/1/012056 | |
| 5. | Islami, N., Irianti, M. Resistivity characteristics of soil saturated with variation of salt water-fresh water mixture. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2021, 2049(1): 012029. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2049/1/012029 | |
| 6. | Rahmalia, A., Juandi, M. Schlumberger's rules of geolistric resistivity survey for the study of ground water in agricultural land Palawija. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2021, 2049(1): 012016. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2049/1/012016 | |
| 7. | Juandi, M., Ginting, E.N. The groundwater analysis using geoelectric method wenner rules in Rejosari Village, Tenayan Raya Pekanbaru. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2021, 2049(1): 012064. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2049/1/012064 |
Figures(6) / Tables(3)
Supported by:
Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co. Ltd
JGSE-ScholarOne Manuscript Launched on June 1, 2024.
Muhammad Juandi, Islami Nur. 2021: Prediction criteria for groundwater potential zones in Kemuning District, Indonesia using the integration of geoelectrical and physical parameters. Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 9(1): 12-19. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2021.01.002
| No. | Location | Latitude | Longitude |
| 1 | Kerintang | 00°51'35.81'' S | 102°39'21.29'' E |
| 2 | Sekara | 00°52'05.90'' S | 102°44'41.30'' E |
| 3 | Kemuning Tua | 00°54'14.23'' S | 102°47'19.03'' E |
| 4 | Air Balui | 00°53'46.67'' S | 102°45'47.70'' E |
| 5 | Batu Ampar | 00°58'20.49'' S | 102°42'40.49'' E |
| 6 | Selensen | 00°58'23.70'' S | 102°45'22.74'' E |
| 7 | Tuk Jimun | 00°54'52.46''S | 102°48'02.06'' E |
| 8 | Kemuning Muda | 00°53'48.90'' S | 102°49'27.67'' E |
| 9 | Lubuk Besar | 00°52'45.62'' S | 102°50'05.44'' E |
| 10 | Talang Jangkang | 00°51'20.83'' S | 102°49'24.84'' E |
| 11 | Limau Manis | 00°52'19.67'' S | 102°48'24.63'' E |
| 12 | Sekayan | 00°51'15.26'' S | 102°41'03.11'' E |
DownLoad:
CSV
| Resistivity (Ωm) | Type of layer | Depth (m) | Thickness (m) | Location | Potential criteria |
| 145.59 | Sand and pebble with enough water | 6.88~14.29 | 7.41 | Sekara at Layer 2 | Medium |
| 112.47 | Sand and pebble with abundant water | 73.18~110 | 36.82 | Sekara at Layer 5 | Large |
| 70.79 | Sand and pebble with enough water | 6.20~17.31 | 11.11 | Kemuning Muda at Layer 2 | Medium |
| 153.79 | Sand and pebble with abundant water | 63.38~96 | 32.62 | Kemuning Muda at Layer 5 | Large |
DownLoad:
CSV
| Location | Porosity (%) | Description of soil porosity | Hydraulic conductivity (cm/h) | Ability to conduct water |
| Kerintang | 55.75 | Good | 4.91 | Medium |
| Sekara | 54.10 | Good | 4.21 | Medium |
| Kemuning Tua | 61.00 | Porosity | 6.76 | Fairly fast |
| Air Balui | 65.22 | Porosity | 7.63 | Fairly fast |
| Batu Ampar | 37.25 | Bad | 2.31 | Medium |
| Selensen | 33.51 | Bad | 2.10 | Medium |
| Tuk Jimun | 71.00 | Porosity | 9.95 | Fairly fast |
| Kemuning Muda | 51.19 | Good | 3.52 | Medium |
| Lubuk Besar | 76.25 | Porosity | 12.77 | Fairly fast |
| Talang Jangkang | 42.10 | Porosity | 2.70 | Medium |
| Limau Manis | 50.72 | Good | 3.34 | Medium |
| Sekayan | 35.75 | Bad | 2.12 | Medium |
DownLoad:
CSV
| No. | Location | Latitude | Longitude |
| 1 | Kerintang | 00°51'35.81'' S | 102°39'21.29'' E |
| 2 | Sekara | 00°52'05.90'' S | 102°44'41.30'' E |
| 3 | Kemuning Tua | 00°54'14.23'' S | 102°47'19.03'' E |
| 4 | Air Balui | 00°53'46.67'' S | 102°45'47.70'' E |
| 5 | Batu Ampar | 00°58'20.49'' S | 102°42'40.49'' E |
| 6 | Selensen | 00°58'23.70'' S | 102°45'22.74'' E |
| 7 | Tuk Jimun | 00°54'52.46''S | 102°48'02.06'' E |
| 8 | Kemuning Muda | 00°53'48.90'' S | 102°49'27.67'' E |
| 9 | Lubuk Besar | 00°52'45.62'' S | 102°50'05.44'' E |
| 10 | Talang Jangkang | 00°51'20.83'' S | 102°49'24.84'' E |
| 11 | Limau Manis | 00°52'19.67'' S | 102°48'24.63'' E |
| 12 | Sekayan | 00°51'15.26'' S | 102°41'03.11'' E |
| Resistivity (Ωm) | Type of layer | Depth (m) | Thickness (m) | Location | Potential criteria |
| 145.59 | Sand and pebble with enough water | 6.88~14.29 | 7.41 | Sekara at Layer 2 | Medium |
| 112.47 | Sand and pebble with abundant water | 73.18~110 | 36.82 | Sekara at Layer 5 | Large |
| 70.79 | Sand and pebble with enough water | 6.20~17.31 | 11.11 | Kemuning Muda at Layer 2 | Medium |
| 153.79 | Sand and pebble with abundant water | 63.38~96 | 32.62 | Kemuning Muda at Layer 5 | Large |
| Location | Porosity (%) | Description of soil porosity | Hydraulic conductivity (cm/h) | Ability to conduct water |
| Kerintang | 55.75 | Good | 4.91 | Medium |
| Sekara | 54.10 | Good | 4.21 | Medium |
| Kemuning Tua | 61.00 | Porosity | 6.76 | Fairly fast |
| Air Balui | 65.22 | Porosity | 7.63 | Fairly fast |
| Batu Ampar | 37.25 | Bad | 2.31 | Medium |
| Selensen | 33.51 | Bad | 2.10 | Medium |
| Tuk Jimun | 71.00 | Porosity | 9.95 | Fairly fast |
| Kemuning Muda | 51.19 | Good | 3.52 | Medium |
| Lubuk Besar | 76.25 | Porosity | 12.77 | Fairly fast |
| Talang Jangkang | 42.10 | Porosity | 2.70 | Medium |
| Limau Manis | 50.72 | Good | 3.34 | Medium |
| Sekayan | 35.75 | Bad | 2.12 | Medium |
DownLoad:
