pdf 2011 erwin ciliwung hydroscijour

8/6/2019 PDF 2011 Erwin Ciliwung Hydroscijour

1/45

ForP

eerReview

Only

The Hydrogeology of Ciliwung River Streams, SegmentBogor Jakarta, Indonesia

Journal: Hydrological Sciences Journal

Manuscript ID: HSJ-2011-0004

Manuscript Type: Original Article

Date Submitted by theAuthor:

06-Jan-2011

Complete List of Authors: Irawan, Dasapta; Institut Teknologi Bandung, Fac. of EarthSciences & Technology. Geological Eng.; Institut TeknologiBandung, Satuan Penjaminan MutuPuradimaja, Deny; Institut Teknologi Bandung, Applied GeologyBrahmantyo, Budi; Institut Teknologi Bandung, Applied Geology

Hydrological Sciences Journal


2/45

For

PeerRevie

wOnl

The Hydrogeology of Ciliwung River Streams, Segment Bogor 1

Jakarta, Indonesia2

Irawan, D.E.1, Puradimaja, D.J.

1, Brahmantyo, B.

1, Silaen, H.

1, Lubis, R.F.

23

1

Applied Geology Research Group, Faculty of Earth Sciences and Technology4Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia - Jl. Ganesa 10, Bandung, West Java, Indonesia, Tel/Fax: +62 22 2515

4990 - [email protected]

2Geotechnology, Indonesia Foundation of Science7

ABSTRACT8River water quality has degraded along its flow from upstream to downstream, as well as9

groundwater from recharge to discharge area. However the general and local10

hydrogeological system between the two water bodies at the Ciliwung stream have not11

been clearly defined. The purpose of this research is to unravel the relationship between12

river water groundwater in river bank, in terms of hydrodynamic and quality.13

Isopotentiometric mapping from Bogor-Jakarta has found three hydrodynamic14

relationships between river and groundwater at Ciliwung river stream. Each segment15

shows local variation of river and groundwater interaction. The three segments are:16

Segment 1: Bogor-Katulampa (Effluent stream), Segment II: Katulampa-Pasar Minggu,17

IIa: Katulampa-Depok (Combination stream), IIb: Depok-Pasar Minggu (Perched stream).18

Page 2 of 45 Hydrological Sciences Journal

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


3/45


4/45

ForPeer

Revie

wOnl

processes associated with the surface water bodies themselves, such as seasonally high49

surface-water levels and evaporation and transpiration of groundwater from around the50

perimeter of surface water bodies, are a major cause of the complex and seasonally51

dynamic groundwater flow fields associated with surface water. (Winter, 1999)52

At many locations on big cities, rivers have become disposal areas for municipalities or53

industries located at river banks. One of the rivers in Indonesia suffering to this problem is54

Ciliwung. The Ciliwung River stream is part of Ciliwung-Cisadane Catchment Area as55

noted by Department of Public Works (Public Works, 2007). It is a 140 km river which56

flows northward, passes Bogor and Jakarta (Figure 1), two vast expanding metropolises in57

Indonesia (LIPI, 1988). Such condition leads to the degradation of water quantity and58

quality. On the other side, river water and groundwater qualities are connected based on59

the hydrodynamic relationship between the two water bodies.60

1.2 Objective61

Documenting groundwater/surface-water interaction associated with rivers or lakes is62

critical to understanding shallow hydrogeological systems. Rivers vary in their relationship63

to local groundwater. The purpose of this paper is to unravel the hydrodynamic64

relationship between river water and groundwater. Specifically, the authors want to65

provide an overview of the effect of local groundwater table configuration and geologic66

characteristics of river beds. Sufficient knowledge on this matter will contribute to67


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


5/45

ForPeer

ReviewOnl

analysis (see also Figure 9). Observations were conducted in May to August 2006 from74

Bogor to Jakarta (Figure 9), with 10 main observation spots:75

5 spots at Bogor area: 3 spots at Bogor city, 1 spot at Katulampa area, and 1 spot at76

Cibubur area.77

2 spots at Depok area: 1 spot at Depok city and 1 spot at Universitas Indonesia78

campus area.79

3 spots at Jakarta area: 1 spot at Matraman, 1 spot at Mangga Besar, and 1 spot at80

Sunter Ancol.81

2.1 Groundwater Flow net Analysis82

A flow net is a graphical representation of two-dimensional steady-state groundwater flow83

through aquifers. The method consists of filling the flow area with stream line, which84

perpendicularly to the equipotential lines. The construction of a flow net only provides an85

approximate solution to the flow problem.86

Flow nets provide a general knowledge of the regional groundwater flow patterns that the87

hydrogeologist can use to determine such information as areas of recharge and discharge.88

Fetter have stated that flow nets are an important concept of hydrology. The proper89

construction of flow nets is one of the most powerful analytical tools used by the90

hydrologist to analyze groundwater flow (Fetter, 1988).91

The surface of the water table is referred to as potentiometric surface represents the92

Page 5 of 45Hydrological Sciences Journal

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


6/45

ForPeer

ReviewOnl

Winter (1999) used numerical models of steady state, two-dimensional vertical sections to99

further build on the concepts developed regarding the interactions of groundwater and lake100

water. The study was designed to evaluate the interaction of groundwater and surface water101

that resulted from different: geometry of the groundwater system, anisotropy, hydraulic102

conductivity contrasts within the groundwater system, water-table configuration, and depth103

of the surface-water body. By analyzing two-dimensional vertical sections, the results have104

application only to long linear surface-water bodies (streams, lakes, or wetlands) aligned105

perpendicular to groundwater flow paths. (Winter, 1999)106

In this research there were six (6) points of water level measurements, observed at dug107

wells and river stream. The measurements were referenced to mean sea level in order to108

analyze the water flow movement. The flow net analysis was also applied by Lubis and109

Puradimaja (2006) in their research on Cikapundung stream. (Lubis and Puradimaja, 2006)110

2.2 Geoelectrical Measurements111

Various articles and text books have summarized the technique and importance of112

geoelectrical measurements in hydrogeological mapping. The purpose of a geoelectrical113

survey is to determine the subsurface resistivity distribution, which can then be related to114

physical conditions of interest such as lithology, porosity, the degree of water saturation,115

and the presence or absence of voids in the rock. The basic parameter of a geoelectrical116

measurement is resistivity. Resistance (R), measured in ohms, is the result of an electrical117


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


7/45

ForPeer

ReviewOnl

Equation 2 pa = RA/L124

Resistivity measurements are made by injecting electric current through two current125

electrodes and measuring the resulting voltage difference at other two potential electrodes.126

Apparent resistivity (a) values are calculated from the current (I) and voltage (V) values.127

Setup of generic four-electrodes configuration is displayed in Figure 4.128

Equation 3 pa = kV/I129

The k value is the geometric factor which depends on the arrangement of the four130

electrodes. It can be calculated for any configuration according to following formula, with131

the subscripted "r" values are distances as defined in the adjacent sketch.132

Equation 4 k = 2[1/ (1/r1 - 1/r2 - 1/r3 + 1/r4)]133

The popular resistivity measurement technique was introduced by Schlumberger.134

According to this technique, the center point of the electrode array remains permanent, but135

the electrodes spacing is increased to gather more information about layers of the136

subsurface (Figure 5).137

The calculated resistivity value is not the true resistivity of the subsurface, but an138

apparent value which is the resistivity of a homogeneous ground which will give the139

same resistance value for the same electrode arrangement. The measured values of140

apparent resistivity need to be converted to true resistivity for actual conditions in 2D141

profile with the RES2DINV (Loke, 2000).142


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


8/45

ForPeer

ReviewOnl

factors such as the porosity, the degree of water saturation and the concentration of148

dissolved salts.149

There were four (4) points of geoelectrical measurement with 50 m length configuration:150

two (2) points at left river bank and two (2) points at right river bank (Figure 6). This151

configuration was determined to give more depth to each measurement, maximizing the152

limited space in urban areas of Bogor and Jakarta. The points were also objected to provide153

geological information beneath the river bed.154

2.3 Hydrochemistry155

The hydrochemistry is controlled by several factors, including climate, soil properties,156

lithology, and human activities on the ground. Aside from those factors, the interaction157

between the river water and the adjacent groundwater may also play important roles in158

determining the quality of the groundwater.159

The determination of chemical and physico-chemical parameters was carried out in order160

to characterize the relationship between rocks and leaching water. The physico-chemical161

parameterstemperature, pH, and electrical conductivity (EC)were determined directly162

on the field. Temperature, pH, and EC were measured with portable Hanna equipments.163

All instruments were calibrated daily on the field. All duplet water samples from dug wells164

and river stream were collected by hand in 2 L of low-density polyethylene (LDPE)165

sampling bottles.166


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


9/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnl

from formation/connate water and sea water. Or it also can be brought by industrial and173

domestic pollution in case in the study area.174

The measurements of major elements also can show us the groundwater behaviour in terms175

of groundwater interaction with the aquifer and its interaction with surface water.176

Moderate to high concentration of calcium, sodium, and magnesium can be the result from177

aquifer enrichment. On the other side, chloride or sulphate enrichment can also be the178

influence of water pollution from industrial of domestic waste.179

Seven (7) major elements concentration were determined in the laboratory byStandard180

Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA et al., 1992), consist of:181

calcium (Ca2+

), sodium (Na+), magnesium (Mg

2+), potassium (K

+), chloride (Cl

-),182

bicarbonate (HCO3-) and sulphate (SO4

2-). Chemical test results then was validated using183

ion balance equation (see Equation 5), before further analyses with 20% of maximum error184

balance. Samples with error balance higher than 20% will be re-tested, while samples have185

lower than 20% error balance will be included in interpretation.186

Equation 5 [( cations - anions) / ( cations + anions)] x 100%187

Field measurements were taken at each spot, consists of one (1) groundwater sample from188

dug well at left river bank, one (1) river water sample, and one (1) sample from dug well at189

right river bank (Figure 7).190


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

P 10 f 45 H d l i l S i J l


10/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

3.1 General Model196

The methodology used in this research is based on schematic drawing of river-groundwater197

relationship by Lee (1980) op.cit (Lubis and Puradimaja, 2006). There are four models,198

effluent flow (groundwater seeps to river), influent flow (river water seeps to aquifer),199

perched (river water seeps to aquifer through vadose zone), and isolated (no flow between200

river and groundwater) (Figure 9). Woessner (2000) also proposed five (5) types of201

interactions in fluvial plain environment, consists of: gaining stream (a); losing stream (b202

and c); parallel-flow (d); flow-through (e) (Figure 10). (Woessner, 2000)203

Winter (1999), as additional overview, has observed the interaction between lake water and204

groundwater. There is groundwater flow in the upper part of the groundwater system205

toward the lake for all conditions (Figure 11A) and outward seepage through deeper parts206

of the lake for some conditions (Figure 11B). The key to understanding these differences in207

seepage conditions is the continuity of the boundary of the local groundwater flow system208

that underlies the lake. If the boundary is continuous, as shown in Figure 11A, all hydraulic209

heads within the local flow system are greater than the head represented by lake level,210

which prevents water from seeping from the lake. On the other hand, if the flow-system211

boundary is not continuous, lake water can seep into the ground water system. The212

presence of a stagnation point, which is the point of least head along the flow-system213

boundary, indicates that the flow-system boundary is continuous.214


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

P 11 f 45H d l i l S i J l


11/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

regional flow system that is recharged at the highest topographic point on the right side of220

the diagram and that passes at depth beneath the local flow system associated with the lake.221

3.2Typical Model of Indonesia222Cikapundung river stream as observed by Lubis and Puradimaja (2006), is divided in to223

three (3) zones (Figure 12), consists of Zone 1 as Isolated flow (Curug Dago to upstream224

segment); Zone 2 as Effluent flow (Curug Dago to Viaduct segment); and Zone 3 as225

Influent flow (Viaduct to downstream segment). Another lesson learned from Cisadane226

river stream by Yeni (2008) in period of 2006-2007, which divides the river in to there (3)227

zones: Zone 1 as Effluent flow (Kranggan Batu Ceper segment); Zone 2 as Perched flow228

(Batu Ceper Kali Baru segment); and Zone 3 as Influent flow (Kali Baru Tanjung229

Burung segment)230

4. THE RESULT: CILIWUNG RIVER MODEL231

4.1 Regional Geological Setting232

The location of this study is part of Ciliwung catchment area, which has area of + 435233

Km2. It lies from Gunung Pangrango (3019 m dpl) to Jakarta bay (0 m dpl). Citarum and234

Cileungsir River flows at the east part of Ciliwung catchment, while Cisadane flows at the235

west part. The study area has a high annual rainfall (1500 - 3200 mm/year). Maximum236

rainfall occurs during the month of November to March, while minimum rainfall in May to237

September (see Figure 13).238


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



12/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

The stratigraphy of the area can be divided into four (4) units. The oldest unit is Tertiary244

Sediments. This unit is grouped into 1 unit because considered to be basement with low245

hydraulic conductivity. The 2nd

unit is Volcanic Deposits, which generally have high246

hydraulic conductivity. The 3rd

unit is the intercalation of Fluvio-Marine sediments which247

overlaid by Bogor Volcanic Fans. The 4th

unit is Young Marine Sediments at coastal area248

of Jakarta (Effendi, 1974 and Turkandi, 1992). (Effendi, 1974) (Turkandi, 1992)249

4.2 Regional Recharge-Discharge System250

Groundwater spring points are commonly located at 300-600 masl. The lithology at spring251

sites are generally composed of breccias, lahar, and lava of young volcanic deposits252

(Figure 14). Based on spring observation, geology observation and O18

isotope, Asseggaf253

and Puradimaja (1998) proposed the recharge-discharge system as presented in Figure 15 .254

The groundwater system in the area was recharged from more elevation higher than 1000255

masl and then discharged at elevation of 300-600 m. Isopotentiometric lines of the area256

shows radial flow pattern of groundwater. (Asseggaf and Puradimaja, 1998)257

These facts lead to interpretation that recharge area of upstream Ciliwung were local258

system. On the other hand, facts that the same system flow to Jakarta were not found. The259

implication was although interpreted to be in the same Quaternary Deposits, Bogors260

groundwater system differs from Jakartas, because of The Depok High.261Lubis et.al (2008) have delineated the recharge discharge system of Jakarta Basin, based262


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



13/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

4.4 Groundwater Flownet268

Stream water and groundwater samples were collected at each region of interest between in269

dry season in 2006. For this study, more than 50 points of observation and water samples270

were collected in 2006, as summarized in Error! Reference source not found.. Stream271

flows were measured with custom made portable equipment. Groundwater levels were272

measured with portable custom made water level meter. The samples were immediately273

filtered through 0.45 mm membranes. Samples for cation analysis were acidified to pH less274

than 2 with nitric acid. Unstable parameters such as pH, temperature and electrical275

conductivity (EC) were measured in situ using portable meters.276

4.5 Hydrochemistry277

In the absence of adequate monitoring of surface water levels and groundwater elevations,278

hydrochemical criteria may be used to establish water behaviour. While it is acknowledged279

that this will only provide qualitative data, it is a very useful technique in regions where it280

is otherwise not possible to establish the relationship of surface water to the groundwater281

systems. Water quality at Segment 1 shows no significant difference between river water282

and groundwater. The values of the measured parameters (temperature, TDS, EC, pH) are283

relatively flat. Slight increase of TDS and EC at Sr.1.18 are caused by local garbage284

disposal site which is located at river bank. The effluent stream interaction has not shown285

any particular pattern in water quality. Groundwater quality is interpreted to be in286


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



14/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

water. This condition is indicated the effluent stream model is more dominant at Segment293

2a than influent model.294

On the other hand, Segment 2b shows decreasing pattern of TDS and EC in groundwater295

samples is still continued. The same values in river water are showing similar increasing296

pattern. The 2 water samples are not showing any relationship. This condition is due to297

perched stream model, where river water does not in contact with groundwater. It still have298

enough time and distance to infiltrate to the aquifer below Ciliwung river stream.299

At Segment 3a, TDS and EC values in groundwater increases at Sr.IV.3-Sr.IV.11. The300

same pattern is also shown by values in river water, with slightly lower concentration.301

Segment 3b shows erratic data behaviour in groundwater as well as in river water (Figure302

19 and Figure 20). The 2 conditions can be explained as the impact of influent stream303

model, where the low quality river water influences the groundwater at river bank.304

4.6 Groundwater River Water Interaction305

General interaction between groundwater and river water on a river stream consist of306

effluent stream, influent stream, isolated stream, and perched stream, or combination307

between the four types, controlled by topography and aquifer depth (Puradimaja, 2006).308

Based on groundwater flow net analysis, The Ciliwung Model has three (3) hydrodynamic309

relationships, as follows (from Bogor to Jakarta).310

Segment 1: Katulampa-Cibubur-Bogor (Effluent stream)311


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



15/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

o Sub segment IIIb: Salemba-Mangga Besar-Muara Beres Area (Influent317

stream)318

Effluent type was found at Katulampa-Cibubur-Bogor (Segment I). This hydrodynamic319

type dominated the upstream of Ciliwung River. The geological condition consisted of320

mainly volcanic breccias of Pangrango volcanic deposit. Hydraulic gradient was measured321

3.5% from west and east river bank with convergent pattern. This segment had low322

potential of water contamination (Figure 16).323

Bogor-Depok-Universitas Indonesia (Segment II) was observed to have combination and324

perched type. The volcanic fan deposit and alluvium deposit dominates this segment.325

Groundwater discharged to river stream from east bank then the river water infiltrated the326

aquifer to the west bank. Both water directions moved with 0.5% of hydraulic gradient.327

More detailed subsurface mapping is needed to uncover the geometry of old river deposit.328

This segment had low potential of water contamination (Figure 17 and Figure 18).329

Universitas Indonesia-Salemba-Mangga Besar-Muara Beres (Segment III) had influent330

type hydrodynamic relationship. Alluvium deposit dominates this segment. This segment331

characterized by the infiltration of river water to the aquifer in divergent pattern with less332

than 0.1% of hydraulic gradient. Based on physical and chemical measurement, this333

segment had a high potential of contamination (Figure 19 and Figure 20).334

Variation of hydrodynamic relationship was also reflected in the water quality (Figure 21).335

gy g

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



16/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

groundwater chemistry in emergent springs and seeps along the Ciliwung stream is highly342

variable and complex at localised scales. At larger scale, contrasts in geological343

environment can explain the stream chemistry differences in dry season. However, at344

smaller scales, differences in flow path depths, reaction kinetics and water residence times345

are probably interacting to explain local variability.346

Isopotentiometric mapping from Bogor-Jakarta has found three (3) hydrodynamic347

relationships between river and groundwater at Ciliwung river stream. Each segment348

shows local variation of river and groundwater interaction.349

Variation of hydrodynamic relationship was also reflected in the water quality. The total350

dissolved solids (TDS) were low at Segment I and II. Low conductivity indicates low351

contamination at Segment I and II. Nevertheless, the complete tests of the water samples352

have to be taken to determine its usability as drinking water. More detail research on heavy353

metals concentration in the water is needed to understand the interference of water quality.354

On the other hand, TDS values raises as the water comes to downstream segment. Segment355

III, in this case, shows fluctuated values in high ranges. This condition indicates the higher356

water pollution of river water, as well as groundwater.357

This research illustrates the degradation of river water and groundwater quality in one358

particular river stream. The degradation is much higher with the growth of settlements and359

industries along river bank. This research also point out that when it comes to water360

g y g

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



17/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

management. Similar study should also be done at many rivers which flow through big367

cities in Indonesia, such as Surabaya, Medan, Makassar, etc. (LIPI, 1988)368

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT369

The initiation of this work was financially supported by Directorate General of Higher370

Education (DIKTI) with Competitive Grant Scheme Program 2006-2007. The authors also371

would like to thank our undergraduate and graduate students, who have given their time372

and energy in the field work. Highest appreciation is also awarded to Prof. Sudarto373

Notosiswoyo and Dr. Lilik Eko Widodo from Faculty of Mining and Petroleum374

Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung for their lesson learned regarding groundwater375

flow and hydrochemistry analysis, and Dr. Prihadi Sumintadireja from Faculty of Earth376

Sciences and Technology Institut Teknologi Bandung for his inputs on geoelectrical377

measurement. All the opinions and discussion have enriched the manuscript.378

379

REFERENCES380

APHA, AWWA and WEF, 1992. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and381

Wastewater APHA Publisher, Washington.382

Asseggaf, A. and Puradimaja, D.J., 1998. Identifikasi Kawasan G. Salak- G.Gede- G.383

Pangrango sebagai Zone resapan dan Luahan daerah Ciawi-Bogor, Kabupaten384

Bogor-Jawa Barat, Prosiding Pertemuan Ilmiah Tahunan XXVII. IAGI,385

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



18/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

LIPI, 1988. Proyek Studi Potensi Sumberdaya Alam Indonesia: Potensi dan Kualitas391

Sumberdaya Air di Hulu Ciliwung, LIPI, Jakarta.392

Loke, M.H., 2000. Electrical Imaging Surveys for Environmental and Engineering Studies:393

A Practical Guide to 2-D and 3-D Surveys. Heritage Geophysics.394

Lubis, R., Sakura, Y. and Delinom, R., 2008. Groundwater recharge and discharge395

processes in the Jakarta groundwater basin, Indonesia. Hydrogeology Journal,396

16(5): 927-938.397

Lubis, R.F. and Puradimaja, D.J., 2006. The Hydrodynamics of River Water and398

Groundwater at Cikapundung River, Bandung, Indonesia, Proceedings of399

International Association of Engineering Geologist. International Association400

of Engineering Geologists, Nottingham, UK.401

Public Works, D., 2007. Official Web Site of Departemen Pekerjaan Umum.402

Puradimaja, D.J., 2006. The Hydrogeology of Volcanic and Karst Areas, Professorship403

Inauguration Speech. ITB, Bandung, pp. 63.404

Turkandi, T., 1992. Peta Geologi Lembar Jakarta dan Kepulauan Seribu, Jawa. Pusat405

Penelitian dan Pengembangan Geologi (P3G), Bandung.406

Winter, T.C., 1999. Relation of streams, lakes, and wetlands to groundwater flow systems.407

Hydrogeology Journal, 7(1): 28-45.408

Woessner, W.W., 2000. Stream and Fluvial Plain Ground Water Interactions: Rescaling409

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



19/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



20/45

ForPeerR

eviewOnly

1

Figure 1 Thee points rule to construct the groundwater flow lines. It is necessary to have a2

minimum of three observation points to calculate a flow direction.3

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


21/45



22/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

Figure 1 Electrodes setup in DC resistivity method2

Electri current

source

Measured

current

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47



23/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

Figure 1 Common arrays in resistivity surveys and their geometric factors.2

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



24/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

2

3

4

5

6

Figure 1 Schematic of geological measurement points in each region of interest7

Ciliwung stream

flow

Geoelectrical

pointCorrelation

section

Region of interest

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



25/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Figure 1 Schematic of water sampling points in each region of interest10

Ciliwung stream

flow

Groundwaterlevel

measurement and

sampling point

Correlation

section

Region of interest

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



26/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

Figure 1 Methodology of the research14

Field observation

River water levelmeasurement

Groundwater levelmeasurement

Physical

propertiesmeasurement

Watersampling

Flow net

analysis

T, TDS, EC,

pH chartConcentration of

ions: Ca, Na, Mg,

K, HCO3, Cl, SO

Hydrodynamic

relationshipWater quality

spatial analysis

Hydrodynamic-

water quality

relationshio

Topographical

mapGeological data

Water quality data

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



27/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

Figure 1 General model of hydrodynamic relationship between river and groundwater2

(Lee, 1980 op.cit Lubis and Puradimaja, 2006)3

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



28/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

Figure 1 Fluvial plain-ground water and stream channel interactions showing channel cross2

sections classified as: a) gaining stream; (b) and (c) losing stream; (d) parallel-flow; (e)3

flow-through (Woessner, 2000)4

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



29/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

2

Figure 1 A,B Numerical simulation of steady-state two-dimensional groundwater flow in a3

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



30/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

Figure 1 The hydrodynamic relationship between river-groundwater of Cikapundung,2

Bandung (Lubis and Puradimaja, 2006)3

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



31/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



32/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47



33/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

Figure 1 Regional recharge-dischage system of Ciliwung catchment area (Asseggaf and2

Puradimaja, 1998)3

4

1

2

3

4

5

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2425

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

3334

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47


1


34/45

ForPeerR

e

viewO

nly

0,00

50,00

100,00

150,00

200,00

250,00

300,00

350,00

400,00

1.Katulampa

Area

1.Katulampa

Area

2.BogorCityArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

5.U

niversitasIndonesiaDepokArea

5.U


5.U


5.U


6.Matraman-ManggaraiArea

6.Matraman-ManggaraiArea

7.Balekambang-CondetArea

7.Balekambang-CondetArea

8.Kemir

iArea

9.MuaraBeres-SukaHar

iArea

9.MuaraBeres-SukaHar

iArea

GWL elevation (masl)

RWL elevation (masl)

(a) Comparison between water elevation: groundwater and river water

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

2526

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

3435

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49


1


35/45

ForPeerR

e

viewO

nly

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1.KatulampaArea

1.KatulampaArea

2.BogorCit

yArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

5.UniversitasIndonesiaDepo

kArea


kArea


kArea


kArea

6.Matraman-Manggara

iArea

6.Matraman-Manggara

iArea

7.Balekambang-Conde

tArea

7.Balekambang-Conde

tArea

8.Kemi

riArea

9.MuaraBeres-SukaHariArea


GW pH

RW pH

(b) Comparison between pH: groundwater and river water

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

2526

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

3435

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49


1


36/45

ForPeerR

e

viewO

nly

0,00

100,00

200,00

300,00

400,00

500,00

600,00

700,00

800,00

1.KatulampaArea

1.KatulampaArea

2.BogorCit

yArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea


kArea


kArea


kArea


kArea

6.Matraman-Manggara

iArea

6.Matraman-Manggara

iArea

7.Balekambang-Conde

tArea

7.Balekambang-Conde

tArea

8.KemiriArea



GW TDS (ppm)

RW TDS (ppm)

Comparison between Total Dissolved Solids (TDS): groundwater and river water

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

2526

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

3435

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49


1


37/45

ForPeerR

e

viewO

nly

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1.KatulampaArea

1.KatulampaArea

2.BogorCit

yArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

4.DepokCit

yArea

5.U

niversitasIndonesiaDepo

kArea

5.U


kArea

5.U


kArea

5.U


kArea

6.Matraman-Manggara

iArea

6.Matraman-Manggara

iArea

7.Balekambang-Conde

tArea

7.Balekambang-Conde

tArea

8.KemiriArea



GW EC (S/cm)

RW EC (S/cm)

(d) Comparison between electro-conductivity (EC): groundwater and river water

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

1617

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

2526

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

3435

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49


1


38/45

ForPeerR

e

viewO

nly

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

39

1.KatulampaArea

1.KatulampaArea

2.BogorCit

yArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

3.Cibubu

rArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea

4.DepokCityArea


kArea


kArea


kArea


kArea

6.Matraman-Manggara

iArea

6.Matraman-Manggara

iArea

7.Balekambang-Conde

tArea

7.Balekambang-Conde

tArea

8.Kemi

riArea



GWTemp (0C)

RWTemp (0C)

Air Temp (0C)

(e) Comparison between temperature (air, groundwater, and river water)

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

1617

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

2526

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49


1


39/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

C A T I O N S A N I O N S%meq/l

Na+K HCO +CO3 3 Cl

Mg SO4

Ca

Calcium (Ca) Chloride (Cl)

S

ulfa

te(

SO4)

+C

hlorid

e(C

l)

Calcium(Ca)+Magnesium(Mg

)

Carbo

nate

(C

O3)

+B

icarbona

te(

HCO

3)Sodium

(Na)+Potassium(K)

Sulfate(SO4)

Mag

nesiu

m(M

g)

80 60 40 20 20 40 60 80

80

60

40

20

20

40

60

80

20

40

60

80

80

60

40

20

20

40

60

80

20

40

60

80

80

60

40

20

80

60

40

20

MA-1MA-2MA-3MA-4BK01BK02BK03BK06KM01KM02MB-01MB-02

MB-04MB-05S-01S-02S-03S-04CL01

CL02CL03CL04

2

Figure 1 Hydrochemistry of the study area in Piper plot.3

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47


1


40/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

Figure 1 Hydrodynamic model of Segment 1 (Bogor-Katulampa)2

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

4243

44

45

46

47


1

2


41/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

2

Figure 1 Hydrodynamic model of Segment 2a (Katulampa-Depok)3

4

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


1

2


42/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

Figure 1 Hydrodynamic model of Segment 2b (Depok-Pasar Minggu)2

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


1

2


43/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

2

3

Figure 1 Hydrodynamic model of Segment 3a (Pasar Minggu-Matraman-Salemba)4

5

6

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


1

2


44/45

ForPeerR

eviewOn

ly

1

Figure 1 Hydrodynamic model of Segment 3b (Salemba-Mangga Besar)2

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47


45/45

pdf 2011 erwin ciliwung hydroscijour

Documents