نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1
استادیار، گروه مهندسی عمران، واحد دزفول، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دزفول، ایران
2
گروه مهندسی عمران، واحد دزفول، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دزفول، ایران
3
گروه فیزیک، واحد دزفول، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دزفول، ایران
10.22077/jaaq.2025.10113.1127
چکیده
هدف از این مطالعه، بررسی انتقادی ضابطه ۷۴۷ به عنوان دستورالعمل تعیین حریم کمی چاههای آب در ایران و بیان نقاط ضعف آن است. این ضابطه شعاع تأثیر را معادل حریم کمی در نظر گرفته است، در حالی که این دو مفهوم کاملاً متمایز هستند. برای ارزیابی روشهای پیشنهادی در ضابطه مذکور، چاهی در آبخوان آزاد با استفاده از مدل مادفلو در دو سناریو شبیهسازی شد: ۱) یک سناریوی سادهشده منطبق بر فرضیات سادهانگارانه ضابطه و ۲) یک سناریوی نزدیکتر به شرایط واقعی. نتایج نشان داد که در سناریوی اول، مخروط افت هرگز به حالت پایدار نمیرسد ولی در سناریوی دوم پس از مدتی طولانی پایدار میشود و در هر دو حالت حریم تاثیر نهایی کل آبخوان است. یافتهها آشکار ساخت که تلقی تغییرات ناچیز سطح آب در چاه به عنوان شرایط پایدار (همانگونه که در ضابطه ۷۴۷ آمده) از دو جهت نادرست است: اولاً تعیین حریم باید پیش از حفاری چاه انجام شود و ثانیاً تغییرات کم سطح آب در چاه به معنی شرایط پایدار نیست. این پژوهش نشان داد که ضابطه ۷۴۷ نه تنها برآورد قابل قبولی از شعاع تأثیر ارائه نمیدهد، بلکه اساساً استفاده از مفهوم «شعاع تأثیر» به عنوان «حریم کمی» فاقد اعتبار علمی است. پیشنهاد میشود حریم کمی هر چاه به صورت دایرهای حول آن در نظر گرفته شود که در آن محدوده حجم برداشت سالانهی چاه با درصدی از حجم تغذیه سطحی سالانه برابر باشد. بر این اساس، فاصله مناسب بین دو چاه جمع جبری شعاع حریم کمی آنها خواهد بود.
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
Quantitative Protection Zone for Water Wells: A Critical Review of Iranian Guidelines (Regulation 747)
نویسندگان [English]
-
Amin Ahmadi
1
-
Gholamreza Mirzavand
2
-
Maryam Zebarjad
3
1
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Dez.C., Islamic Azad University, Dezful, Iran
2
Department of Civil Engineering, Dez.C., Islamic Azad University, Dezful, Iran
3
Department of Physics, Dez.C., Islamic Azad University, Dezful, Iran
چکیده [English]
This study critically evaluates Regulation 747, Iran's guideline for determining the quantitative protection zone of water wells, highlighting its conceptual flaws. The regulation erroneously equates the radius of influence with the quantitative protection zone, though these are distinct concepts. To assess the regulation's methods, a well in an unconfined aquifer was simulated using Modflow under two scenarios: 1) a simplified scenario matching the regulation's assumptions, and 2) a more realistic scenario. Results showed that in the first scenario, the cone of depression never stabilized, while in the second, it stabilized after a long period; in both cases, the final radius of influence encompassed the entire aquifer. The findings reveal that misinterpretation of minor water level changes as steady-state conditions (as in Regulation 747) is incorrect for two reasons: first, protection zones must be established prior to drilling, and second, minor changes do not indicate stability. The study concludes that Regulation 747 provides an unreliable estimate of the radius of influence and that using it as a quantitative protection zone is invalid. Instead, a circular protection area is proposed, where the annual pumping volume equals a percentage of the annual recharge within that area. Thus, the safe distance between two wells should be the sum of their protection radii.
کلیدواژهها [English]
-
quantitative protection zone
-
influence zone
-
influence radius
-
unconfined aquifer
-
numerical modeling
Ahmadi, A., Chitsazan, M., Mirzaee, S. Y., & Nadri, A. (2022). The effects of aquifer and well parameters on Capture Zone and Discharge Zone in alluvial unconfined aquifers. Journal of Engineering Geology, 16(2), 1-28. [In Persian] http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/JEG.2022.16.2.1019241
Ahmadi, A., Chitsazan, M., Mirzaee, S. Y., & Nadri, A. (2023). The effects of influence radius and drawdown cone on the areas related to the protection of water wells. Journal of Hydrology, 617, 129001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.129001
Ahmadi, A., Mirzaee, S. Y., Mirzavand, G., Chitsazan, M., & Nadri, A. (2025). Determining the quantitative protection zone of water wells in alluvial unconfined aquifer. Advanced Applied Geology, 15(2), 21-49. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22055/aag.2024.46034.2434
Ahmadi, A., Mirzavand, G., & Zebarjad, M. (2023). The drawdown cone of influence zone in water wells in unconfined alluvial aquifers and the influence of physical parameters of the aquifer on it. Journal of Engineering Geology, 17(3), 299-320. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22034/jeg.2023.17.3.1019242
Ahmadi, A., Zebarjad, M., & Mirzavand, G. (2024). Influence of well physical parameters on the cone of depression in the zone of influence of water wells in unconfined alluvial aquifers. Journal of Engineering Geology, 18(1), 90. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22034/jeg.2024.18.1.1019243
Ashtianimoghaddam, Ghodsieh, Mahdavy, M., Malekian, A., & Motamedvaziri, B., (2017). Estimation of Well Field by using Fuzzy Logic in Damghan Plain, Iran. Hydrogeology, 2(1), 20-30. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22034/hydro.2017.5349
Bahrami, M. & rajabi, S. (2022). Investigation and Comparison of Different Methods for Calculating the Well Radius of Influence in Kavar County of Fars Province. Journal of Aquifer and Qanat, 2(2), 14-23. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22077/jaaq.2022.2193
Bresciani, E., R. N. Shandilya, P. K. Kang & S. Lee (2020). Well radius of influence and radius of investigation: What exactly are they and how to estimate them? Journal of Hydrology, 583, 124646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124646
Cooper Jr, H. & C. E. Jacob (1946). A generalized graphical method for evaluating formation constants and summarizing well‐field history. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union 27(4), 526-534. https://doi.org/10.1029/TR027i004p00526
DTIPA (2018). Manual on Estimation of Influence Radius for Groundwater Resources (Water wells and Qanats), No 747. [In Persian] https://doi.org/nezamfanni.ir
Farmanifard, M., Najafi, B. M., Mohamadi, F., & Fathollah M. F., (2022). Estimation and study of privacy interference of exploitation wells to identify vulnerable areas of the aquifer (Case study: Ravansar-Sanjabi aquifer in Kermanshah). Advanced Technologies in Water Efficiency, 2, 85-102. https://doi.org/10.22126/ATWE.2022.7582.1016
IGNSL (2014). Capture-Zone-Delineation-Technical-Report (Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Limited, Issue GNS Science Report 2013/57). www.gns.cri.nz
Langevin, C. D., Hughes, J.D., Banta, E.R., Niswonger, R.G., Panday, Sorab, & Provost, A.M. (2017). Documentation for the MODFLOW 6 Groundwater Flow Model: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 6, chap. A55, 197 p. https://doi.org/10.3133/tm6A55
Moench, A. F. (1997). "Flow to a well of finite diameter in a homogeneous, anisotropic water table aquifer." Water Resources Research 33(6): 1397-1407. https://doi.org/10.1029/97WR00651
Nagheli, S., Samani, N., & Barry, D. A. (2020). Capture zone models of a multi-well system in aquifers bounded with regular and irregular inflow boundaries. Journal of Hydrology X, 7, 100053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hydroa.2020.100053
Nohani, E., Babaali, H. & Dehghani, R. (2026). Evaluation of metaheuristic models in groundwater level analysis of Delfan Plain, Lorestan. Journal of Aquifer and Qanat, 5(2), 79-98. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22077/jaaq.2025.8834.1096
Pollock, D. (2016). User Guide for MODPATH Verison 7–a Particle Tracking Model for MODFLOW. Open-file Report 2016–1086. US Geol Surv Washington, DC MODPATH, 7. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20161086
Theis, C. V. (1935). The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using ground‐water storage. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union 16(2): 519-524. https://doi.org/10.1029/TR016i002p00519
UKEA (2019). Manual for the production of Groundwater Source Protection Zones U.K.Environment Agency. Environment Agency Horizon House, Deanery Road, Bristol BS1 5AH. www.gov.uk/environment-agency
USEPA (2008). Systematic approach for evaluation of capture zones at pump and treat systems. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/ada/
USGS (1991). Description and evaluation of selected methods used to delineate wellhead-protection areas around public-supply wells near Mt. Hope, Kansas (U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Issue Report 90-4102). https://books.google.com/books?id=WlGITJCoakUC
Winston, R. B. (2019). ModelMuse Version 4: A graphical user interface for MODFLOW 6 [Report](2019-5036). (Scientific Investigations Report, Issue. U. S. G. Survey. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20195036
WRC (2023). Guidance document on Protection Zones (Delineation and Protection)
Zand Goharrizi, F., Karimi, H., Karami, A., Mirzaie Badizi, F. & Pourchangiz, R. (2025). Evaluation of some Qanat protection zone determination methods. Journal of Aquifer and Qanat, 6(1), 167-180. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22077/jaaq.2025.9107.1107
Zhai, Y., X. Cao, Y. Jiang, K. Sun, L. Hu, Y. Teng, J. Wang & J. Li (2021). Further discussion on the influence radius of a pumping well: A parameter with little scientific and practical significance that can easily be misleading. Water 13(15): 2050. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13152050
)