Abstract
Parameters like aquifer depth, aquifer replenishment rate, aquifer medium, soil medium, percolation medium, and the coefficient of permeability are considered during the preparation of a groundwater vulnerability diagram. The analytic hierarchy process is used for evaluation, and expert scoring is used to analyze and establish the judgment matrix, and then new weights have been computed for each DRASTIC parameter, such that some subjectivity can be reduced to some extent and the weight value tends to be reasonable. Various spatially referenced digital data layers are overlaid to analyse with the partition diagram in GIS spatial analysis and a comprehensive simple and straight diagram is drawn. The study area is a plain of Naiman Banner, Inner Mongolia China, and covers an area of approximately 10,700km2. The areas of lower vulnerability are mainly located in the south. Slightly higher vulnerability areas are mainly located in the north, and the others have medium vulnerability.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Al-Ismaily, M., Wijmans, J.G., Kruczek, B. (2012) A shortcut method for faster determination of permeability coefficient from time lag experiments. Jour. Membrane Sci., v.423–424, pp.165–174.
Baki, S., Hilali, M., Kacimi, I., Kassou, N., Nouiyti, N., Bahassi, A. (2017) Assessment of groundwater intrinsic vulnerability to pollution in the pre-Saharan areas—the case of the Tafilalet plain (Southeast Morocco). Proc. Earth Planet. Sci., v.17:590–593.
Collin, M.L., Melloul, A.J. (2001) Combined land-use and environmental factors for sustainable groundwater management. Urban Water, v.3(3), pp.229–237.
Daly, D., Dassargues, A., Drew, D. (2002) Main concepts of the European approach to karst-groundwater-vulnerability assessment and mapping. Hydrogeol. Jour., v.10, pp.340–345.
Elias Dimitriou, Ierotheos Zacharias (2006) Groundwater vulnerability and risk mapping in a geologically complex area by using stable isotopes, remote sensing and GIS techniques. Environ. Geol., v.51(2), pp.309–323.
Ewa Krogulec, Joanna Trzeciak (2017) DRASTIC assessment of groundwater vulnerability to pollution in the Vistula floodplain in central Poland. Hydrology Res., v.48(4), pp.1088–1099.
Gholami, V., Khaleghi, M.R., Sebghati, M. (2017) A method of groundwater quality assessment based on fuzzy network-CANFIS and geographic information system (GIS). Appl. Water Sci., v.7, pp.3633–3647.
Gogu, R.C., Dassargues, A. (2000) Current trends and future challenges in groundwater vulnerability assessment using Overlay and Index methods. Environ. Geol., v.39(6), pp.549–559.
Hansa Rajput, Rohit Goyal, Urmila Brighu (2020) Modification and optimization of DRASTIC model for groundwater vulnerability and contamination risk assessment for Bhiwadi region of Rajasthan, India. Environ. Earth Sci., v.79(7), pp.89–101.
Hassan, T., Khrisat Jawad Al-Bakri (2019) Assessment of Groundwater Vulnerability in Azraq Catchment in Fuhais-Jordan Using DRASTIC Model. Open Jour. Geol., v.7, pp.364–377.
Iain, R., Lake, Andrew A, Lovett, Kevin M, Hiscock, Mark Betson, Aidan Foley, Gisela Sünnenberg, Sarah Evers, Steve Fletcher (2003) Evaluating factors influencing groundwater vulnerability to nitrate pollution: developing the potential of GIS. Jour. Environ. Managmt, v.68(3), pp.315–328.
Kimura, Y. (1997) Evaluating migration potential of contaminants through unsaturated subsurface in Texas. The University of Texas at Austin, http://www.ce.ustexas.edu/stu/kimuray/gis/progress.html, 2006-05-02.
Luong Duy, Thanh, Rudolf Sprik (2016). Permeability dependence of streaming potential coefficient in porous media. Geophys. Prospect., v.64(3), pp.714–725.
Ma, S., Li, X., Zhe, Y. (2017). Water environment carrying evaluation in Naiman banner Inner Mongolia. Geol. Res., v.26(6), pp.604–607.
Mendoza, J.A., Barmen, G. (2006) Assessment of groundwater vulnerability in the Rio Artiguas basin Nicaragua. Environ. Geol., v.50, pp.569–580.
Miguel Moreno-Gómez, Julia Pacheco, Rudolf Liedl, Catalin Stefan (2018) Evaluating the applicability of European karst vulnerability assessment methods to the Yucatan karst, Mexico. Environ. Earth Sci., v.77(19), pp.714–725.
Pedro Martínez-Santos M, Ramón Llamas Pedro E. Martínez-Alfaro (2007) Vulnerability assessment of groundwater resources: A modelling-based approach to the Mancha Occidental aquifer, Spain. Environ. Modelling and Software, v.23(9), pp.1145–1162.
Rida Al-Adamat, Abdel Al-Rahman Al-Shabeeb (2017) A Simplified Method for the Assessment of Groundwater Vulnerability to Contamination. Jour. Water Resource and Protection, v.9, pp.305–321.
Rosen, L. (1994) A study of the DRASTIC methodology with emphasis on Swedish conditions. Groundwater, v.32(2), pp.278–285.
Secunda, S., Collin, M.L., Melloul, A.J. (1998) Groundwater vulnerability assessment using a composite model combining DRASTIC with extensive agricultural land use in Israel’s Sharon region. Environ. Managmt, v.54(1): 39–57.
Singh, A.K., Raj, B., Tiwari, A.K., Mahato, M.K. (2013) Evaluation of hydrogeochemical processes and groundwater quality in the Jhansi district of Bundelkhand region, India. Environ. Earth Sci., v.70, 1225–1247.
Stanley Raj, A., Hudson Oliver, D., Srinivas, Y. (2016) Forecasting groundwater vulnerability in the coastal region of southern Tamil Nadu, India—a fuzzy-based approach. Arabian Jour. Geosci., v.9, pp.351–364.
Vrba, J. and Zaporozec, A. (1994) Guidebook on mapping groundwater vulnerability. Int. Contrib. Hydrogeol., v.16, pp.129.
Water Science and Technology Board, National Research Council. Ground water vulnerability assessment-contamination potential under conditions of uncertainty. Washington, D C: National Academy Press, 1993.
Wei Deng (2010) The status and key problems on resource environment carrying capacity in mountainous area. Geog. Res., v.29(06), pp.959–969.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ma, S., Xu, X., Chui, J. et al. A New Model to Evaluate Groundwater Vulnerability that Uses a Hybrid AHP-GIS Approach. J Geol Soc India 97, 94–103 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-021-1630-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-021-1630-5