International Conference on Urban Hydrology for the 21st Century

14-18th October, Kuala Lumpur

Geological Mapping and Groundwater Physical-Chemical Properties Characterization

An Approach to Spring Recharge Area Conservation

D. Erwin Irawan
Department of Geology, Institut Teknologi dan Sains Bandung
Jl. Ir. H. Juanda No. 215, 40135 Bandung, Indonesia
e-mail: r-win@centrin.net.id

Deny Juanda P.
Department of Geology, Institut Teknologi Bandung
Jl. Ganesha No. 10, 40132 Bandung, Indonesia
e-mail: denyjp@bdg.centrin.net.id

Abstract The overall depletion of groundwater has escalated conservation issues by many
govermental and non govermental agencies. A hydrogeological study has been carried out on spring
belt of Ciremai Volcano, Kabupaten Kuningan, West Java Province, to determine the spring’s
recharge – discharge system. This study used 3 methods: surface geological mapping and spring
observations; interpretation of physical and chemical characteristic of water; and groundwater travel
time prediction.
The spring belt can be divided into 3 zones based on the aquifer: Zone 1 lahar pore space aquifer
system, Zone 2 lava flows fracture aquifer system, and Zone 3 pyroclastic breccias pore space aquifer
system. Field permeability test shows high permeability values. Lahar residual soil shows the largest
permeability value of 1.26 - 2.53 cm/min, followed by pyroclastic breccias soil 1.5 cm/min, and lava
soil 0.5 – 1.2 cm/min. The condition indicates the soil material is potential to infiltrate rain water into
the aquifer.
From chemical analysis, the rain water had low conductivity and bicarbonate type water, while most of
the groundwater samples were classified in to 3 types: Mesothermic, low conductivity, bicarbonate
type; Hypothermic, low conductivity, bicarbonate type (Cibulan spring), Hyperthermic water with
high conductivity, NaK-bicarbonate type (Sangkanurip spring). The type 1 and type 2 water were
likely similar to rain water characteristics. Both water types were included in meteoric water cycles.
While, type 3 is possibly influenced by high mineralization of Na and K from volcanic gas
enrichment.
Potentiometric map on the spring belt area shows a radial flow regionally, showed by 2 major flow
directions, SW-NE on Area 1 with 0.4 of hydraulic gradient and NW-SE on Area 2 with gradient of
0.3. The groundwater flow on both areas were controlled by undulating morphology.
Surface observations around Cibulan spring indicates heterogeneous geological conditions. Permeable
lahar deposit serves as confined aquifer. While potentiometric analysis shows eastward groundwater
flow with 0.3 of gradient value. The flow is parallel to ridges and valleys orientation, proving that
morphology plays significant role to control groundwater movement. Moreover, rainfall and spring
discharge fluctuation data shows 3 months of average difference between rainfall’s peak and spring
discharge’s. The result inferred that the groundwater travel time is around 3 months.
All the indications prove a local recharge – discharge system and very dependent to rainfall.
Therefore, the recharge area is very limited and controlled by aquifer distributions, morphology, and
hydrogeologic boundary. The delineation can assist in contructing conservation program.
Key words: groundwater basin analysis, volcanic aquifer system

1
 International Conference on Urban Hydrology for the 21st Century
14-18th October, Kuala Lumpur

1. INTRODUCTION

As widely known, Indonesia is a part of ring of fire, consisting of almost 130 Quartenary volcanoes.
The unconsolidated quartenary volcanic deposit sets up a good volcanic aquifer shown by spring belt
in many cases. Mean while, due to the vast growth of population and industry, the groundwater
resources has been decreasing rapidly. The overall depletion has escalated conservation issues by
many govermental and non govermental agencies.

Concerning the conservation issues, identifying and delineating the groundwater basin should be the
first step in order to determine the suitable groundwater conservation plans. According to Mandel
(1981)1, the delineation of groundwater systems aims at the recognition of the hydrogeologic
boundaries enclosing the system, the mechanisms of recharge, and discharge, along with the flow
paths of groundwater from recharge areas to discharge areas.

Some previous research by the author in identifying the recharge-discharge system on volcanic aquifer
system has been carried out, as follows: Asseggaf and Puradimaja (1998)2; Irawan et.al (2000)3;
Irawan (2001)4, and Irawan et.al. (2001)5 All the research were using physical-chemical properties
analysis, combined with surface and subsurface geological observations. The general result is that the
radial groundwater flow in volcanic area is controlled by the spreading of volcanic aquifer, the
hydrogeologic boundary, and the morphological feature in the area.

Another case study has been carried out on east slope of Mt. Ciremai. It is a strato-type volcano with
elevation of 3072 masl, situated 20 km south of Cirebon, Kecamatan Cilimus – Jalaksana, Kabupaten
Kuningan, West Java Province (Figure 1). Its diameter from the peak to the foot slope is about 10 km.
The location was selected because of the large amount of groundwater which are forming spring belt
with no less than 300 springs; discharged over 1500 l/sec of water (IWACO-WASECO, 19896). The
scientific interest is to determine the hydrogeological conditions and the recharge – discharge system,
which controlled such large amount of spring discharge.

2. THE METHODS

The technique used in this study was a combination of the aquifer characteristic study and
groundwater behaviour study (see Figure 2). The two techniques are: (1). Surface mapping of
volcanic aquifer system on 1 : 25.000 map scale and, (2). Interpretation of physical and chemical
characteristic of water.

The first technique was carried out in order to recognize the geometry of the aquifer and the
hydraulic properties of soil (unconfined aquifer) from 10 field permeability measurements. The
observations were taken on volcanic rock exposures and spring locations.

The second technique was performed with the aim to identify the origin of groundwater and its
movement. This technique consisted of interpretation of physical and chemical properties of
groundwater samples. The samples was taken from 24 springs sites, 1 river sampling site, and 1 rain
water sample. The physical properties measurements included: temperature ( oC), conductivity
(S/cm), pH; while the chemical properties measurements consisted of major elements concentration
(Ca2+, Na+, Mg2+, Cl-, K-, HCO3-).

More detailed analysis was applied to a spesific spring, which was selected according to the high
amount of its discharges and its contribution to public water supply. In such area, the analysis was also
supported with groundwater travel time prediction as one of the basic consideration to delineate the
recharge area. Basically, the prediction is based on comparison of rainfall gauge fluctuation and the
spring discharge fluctuation. More over, the recharge area delineation also considered the
morphological feature as one of the primary feature controlling the unconfined groundwater.

2
 International Conference on Urban Hydrology for the 21st Century
14-18th October, Kuala Lumpur

3. THE RESULTS

3.1 Hydrogeological conditions

A. Aquifer and Spring Characteristics

Based on the aquifer and spring observation, the springs at East slope of Mt. Ciremai (Cilimus-
Jalaksana area) can be divided into 3 spring belts based on elevation: Zone 1 100-250 masl; Zone 2
250-650 masl (largest frequency); and Zone 3 650-1250 masl. Each spring belt corresponded to
volcanic aquifers distribution:

 Lahar pore space aquifer system (< 750 masl). The aquifer discharged depression and contact
springs with total spring discharge of 1063 l/sec.

 Lava flows fracture aquifer system (750-1250 masl). The aquifer discharged fracture spring
with total spring discharge of 80 l/sec

 Pyroclastic breccias pore space aquifer system (1250 – 3100 masl). The aquifer discharged
depression springs with total spring discharge of 18.2 l/sec of total discharge.

The overall spring discharge potential is presented in Table 1, while the 3D geological condition and
the spring types are presented in Figure 3.

B. Field permeability test

From field permeability test (Chow et.al., 19647; Miyazaki, 19938), it can be concluded that all types
of soil can functioned as potential recharge materials. The conclusion is confirmed by the permeable
soils that varies upon rock type. Soil derived from lahar shows the largest permeability values of 1.26 -
2.53 cm/min, followed by pyroclastic breccias soil 1.5 cm/min, and soil of lava flow 0.5 – 1.2 cm/min
(see Table 2). The high field permeability value (Linsley & Franzini, 19789) indicates that the soil
material is very potential to infiltrate rain water into the aquifer.

3.2 Groundwater movement

3.2.1 Interpretation on physical and chemical properties of water

The interpretation is based on comparison between physical and chemical properties of groundwater,
rain water, and river water. This technique is supported by assumption, that naturally, the
characteristics of meteoric type groundwater is similar to rain water’s. While, the anomalous
characteristics of groundwater indicates that the water does not follow the meteoric water cycles and
interpreted to be undergo a distinct circulation as well as chemical processes.

From Table 3.1-3.3 and Piper Diagram Plot (Piper, 194410), it can be seen that the rain water had low
conductivity and bicarbonate type water, while most of the groundwater samples were classified in to
3 types (see Figure 4):
1. Mesothermic, low conductivity, and bicarbonate type water (Dominant type)
2. Hypothermic, low conductivity, and bicarbonate type water (Cibulan spring)
3. Hyperthermic water with high conductivity, and NaK-bicarbonate type water (Sangkanurip
spring)

Based on that data and assumption, the type 1 and type 2 water is likely similar to rain water
characteristics. Both water types are included in meteoric water cycles, which the rain water directly
infiltrate and served as the spring recharge.

3
 International Conference on Urban Hydrology for the 21st Century
14-18th October, Kuala Lumpur

Significant difference is showed by the high amount of Na-K ions on type 3 water. The condition is
supposed to be caused by different kind of cycle and is influenced by high mineralization of Na and K.
The high mineralization of Na and K ions are commonly resulted from volcanic gas enrichment.

3.2.2 Isophreatic reconstruction

Regional isophreatic map based on spring elevation and water table measurements on 2 areas shows 2
groundwater flow directions, SW-NE and NW-SE. Based on the condition, the overall groundwater
flow is appeared to be radial (see Figure 5). The results of groundwater flow reconstruction in Area 1
and Area 2 is shown in Figure 5.

Result on Area 1 shows SW-NE major flow direction with 0.4 of hydraulic gradient, while result on
Area 2 presents NW-SE flow with gradient of 0.3. The groundwater flow on both areas were
controlled by undulating morphology of strato volcano. This condition was found especially on the
slope of river streams which consisted of many small depression springs or seepage zone.

4. DETERMINING THE CIBULAN SPRING RECHARGE SYSTEM

4.1 Detailed aquifer system

Based on surface observations around Cibulan spring, the geological conditions is appeared to be
heterogeneous. The aquifer consists of permeable lahar deposit served as aquifer. In some section, the
aquifer is confined by impermeable layers of lavas (see Figure 6). The impermeable layer of lava
formed a small ridge which covers limited surface of lahar aquifer unit. The confined condition is
confirmed by the artesian condition on Cibulan Spring area.

Furthermore, the isophreatic analysis shows eastward groundwater flow with hydraulic gradient value
of 0.3. The flow seemed to be parallel to eastward orientation of ridges and valleys. This fact were also
the prove that in volcanic area morphology plays significant role to control the groundwater
movement, especially the unconfined groundwater.

4.2 Prediction of groundwater travel time

This technique analysis the behaviour of rainfall gauge and spring discharge at a given time period
(see Figure 7). The time series data, preferably a year data, of rainfall and spring discharge plotted at
the same scale. The peaks and the valleys of plotted data are then being compared. During the
comparison, it can be noticed that the peaks and the valleys of both data series are not exactly
coincides one to another. The difference can be noted as the time travel of groundwater; as the rain
water infiltrate to the aquifer, circulate, then emerge as springs (Freeze & Cherry, 1979 11; Hem,
197012, Matthess, 198213). The monthly average rainfall data was taken continuously from 1991-2000
periode, while the spring discharge observation was taken un-continuously on January 1988, March
1988, July 1989, and January-July 2001.

The plotted data illustrated that the rain season occur on January until May, while the dry season occur
on June until December. On the other hand, the maximum of spring discharge was on April, and the
predicted minimum discharge on September until October. The average difference of the peaks and
valleys between both data series were around 3 months. The result inferred that the groundwater travel
time, since the infiltration process begin until emerge to surface as springs, were around 3 months.

4
 International Conference on Urban Hydrology for the 21st Century
14-18th October, Kuala Lumpur

4.3 Delineation of recharge area

The recharge area delineation are based on 2 approaches: theoretical and field (surface-subsurface)
observation. The theoritical approach was based on correlation of rainfall and spring discharge graph
after Todd (1984)14. According to Todd (1984), from the correlation between rainfall and spring
discharge can be obtained recharge area extent.

Based on Todd’s graph, the springs on the area are grouped in to 5 and analyzed using the graph. The
result shows range of spring recharge area extent of 50 to 1000 km2. Regarding the graph, Todd’s
theoritical approach must be supported with more field observation approach, considering that the
graph was constructed based on subtropical climate with dominant sedimentary rock.

The high amount of rain in the area (maximum of 4000 mm) are giving significant influence to spring
discharge as well to recharge area extent. Additionally, undulating morphological control has an
important control to unconfined groundwater. Moreover, the spring is fed from the layer of volcanic
breccia aquifer which is overlain by lava flow ridge. The lava flow is giving an artesian condition on
Cibulan Spring Area. The ridge geometry also controls the groundwater flow path. Furthermore, the
physical and chemical properties of water shows a local circulation, with predicted travel time is 3
months.

Based on above facts, the recharge area is delineated. The delineation is elongate following the
volcanic breccia ridge as the aquifer. The area extent is at least 3 km 2 covering the laharic breccia
(Figure 9). The result is more limited if compared to Todd’s graph result because of the various
volcanic geological condition which control the hydrogeologic boundary and distinct morphological
feature.

5. CONCLUSIONS

1. The volcanic aquifer system around Ciremai Mt. can be divided in to: pore space system of
pyroclastic breccia and lahar, fracture system of lava. Each unit consists of residual soil
aquifer and fresh rock aquifer.
2. All of the aquifer units show high heterogenity of permeable and impermeable layers in detail
scale; it is indicated by limited area extent of artesian condition on Cibulan Spring.
3. Based on detailed isophreatic analysis in 2 areas, the groundwater system shows a radial flow.
Such flow is controlled by volcanic deposit geometry and volcanic deposit flow pattern.
4. Geological mapping and groundwater characterization can be used as an approach to
determine spring recharge system and to delineate spring recharge area.
5. Based on the volcanic aquifer mapping and high rainfall measurement, the spring recharge
area extent results is more limited compared to spring recharge area from Todd’s graph.
6. More detailed subsurface investigation can give more support in detailing the spring recharge
area delineation.
7. The spring recharge area identification is the first step of groundwater basin management to
plan the groundwater conservation program.

5
 International Conference on Urban Hydrology for the 21st Century
14-18th October, Kuala Lumpur

References
1
Mandel S. (1981). “Groundwater Resources: Investigation and Development”. Academic Press,
pp. 217
2
Asseggaf, A. & Puradimaja, D.J. (1998). “Identifikasi Kawasan G. Salak – G. Gede sebagai Zona
Resapan dan Luahan Daerah Ciawi – Bogor Kabupaten Bogor – Jawa Barat”. Prosiding PIT
IAGI XXVII, pp. 4-136 - 4-142
3
Irawan, D.E., Puradimaja, D.E., Yuwono, S. & Syaifullah, T.A. (2000)., “Pemetaan Endapan
Bahan Volkanik dalam Upaya Identifikasi Akifer pada Sistem Gunungapi. Studi Kasus:
Daerah Pasir Jambu-Situwangi Soreang, Kabupaten Bandung, Jawa Barat”, Jurnal Buletin
Geologi, Vol 3, Tahun 2000
4
Irawan, D.E. (2001). “Karakterisasi Sistem Akifer dan Pola Aliran Airtanah pada Endapan
Gunungapi Strato. Studi Kasus: Zona Mataair pada Lereng Timur Gunungapi Ciremai,
Kecamatan Cilimus-Jalaksana, Kabupaten Kuningan, Jawa Barat”. Tesis Magister
5
Irawan, D.E., Syaifullah, T.A., Puradimaja, D.J. (2001). “Volcanic Aquifer
Characterization and Groundwater Flow Study. Case Study: Volcanic Region with Six
Strato eruption Centers in Pasir Jambu – Situwangi, Soreang – Bandung (West Java)”.
Prosiding PIT IAGI XXX
6
IWACO-WASECO. (1989). “West Java Provincial Water Sources Master Plan for Water
Supply: Kabupaten Kuningan”. Vol A, Directorate of Water Supply, Ministry of Public Works
7
Chow, VT (ed). (1964). “Handbook of Applied Hydrology”. McGraw-Hill, pp. 12.1-12.30
8
Miyazaki, T. (1993). “Water Flow in Soils”. Dekker, pp. 29 – 45
9
Linsley, R.K. & Franzini, J.B. (1978). Water Resources Engineering. McGraw Hill
10
Piper, A.M. (1944). “A Graphic Procedure in The Geochemical Interpretation of Water-
Analysis”. American Geophysical Union Trans., Vol 25, pp. 914-923
11
Freeze & Cherry. (1979). “Groundwater”. Prentice-Hall, pp. 192-301
12
Hem, J.D. (1970). “Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Characteristics of Natural
Water”. USGS Water Supply Paper, pp. 10-201
13
Matthess, G. (1982). “Properties of Groundwater”. John Wiley & Sons
14
Todd, DK. (1984). “Groundwater Hydrology”. John Wiley & Sons, pp. 49

6
 Skala 1 : 1.500.000

A B

C D

Daerah penelitian

Figure 1 Location of study area

Figure 2 Flow chart of the study

 m
00
30
m
27
50 m Spring
(650 - zone III
00
25 m
50 m m
22 0
2 00 17
5 0
15
00
m
m 1250 m
12
5 0
m
dpl) Spring Zon
3250 10
00 e II
(250 - 650 Spring Zo
mdpl) ne
(100 - 250 I
m
0
3000 75

50
0
m
0
m md pl)
2750 50 m
0
50 m
0
2500 25

2250

2000

1750

1500

1250 Quartenary
1000 volcanic rock
750
aquifer units
500 Tertiary folded
250
sedimentary rock STRATIGRAPHIC OF VOLCANIC DEPOSIT UNITS
aquifer units
0 500 m Relative Absolut Volcanic Units
age age
Pyroclastic fall

QUARTENARY
breccia
Pyroclastic flow
breccia

Lava

Lahar
13.350

Figure 3 Summary of geological conditions and spring types

 Table 1 Spring discharge based on aquifer type

Aquifer Elevation Number Discharge

(mdpl) of spring (l/sec)
Pyroclastic breccia 1250 2 18
Fresh rock Lava 850 1 80
Lahar 325-825 13 1062
Pyroclastic breccia 1225 2 0.2
Soil Lava 660 0 0
Lahar 480-550 5 1
TOTAL 23 1161.2

Table 2 Field permeability measurement results

No Soil (derived from) .k (cm/minute)

1 Pyroclastic breccia 1.5509

2 Pyroclastic breccia 1.5426
3 Lava 1.2858
4 Lava 0.5991
5 Lahar 2.5295
6 Lahar 1.7865
7 Lahar 1.5818
8 Lahar 1.2576
9 Lahar 1.7858
10 Lahar 1.5615
Average 1.5481
F1 = measurement result F2 = calculation result
 Table 3.1 Physical characteristic of groundwater
(observation on springs and dug wells)

Code Springs/Dugwells Elv Ta Tu EC pH

(mdpl) (oC) (oC) (µS/cm)
Aquifer unit: Lahar
43 Cikacu 2 800 21 23 83 6
53 Ciwaruling 825 21.5 23 131 6.3
63 Sinang Pangsiraman 475 22 23 132 6.2
73 Silinggonom 475 22 24 135 7.1
83 Ragasakti-1 475 18 20.5 180 6.8
93 Ragasakti-2 500 19 20.5 175 6.5
123 Cibulan 500 22 22.5 207 6
143 Cimanceng 700 22 22 129 6.5
153 Balong Dalem-1 560 20 23 178 6.6
163 Balong Dalem-2 560 21 23 180 6.6
173 Balong Dalem-3 560 21 23 185 6.6
183 Kebon Balong 325 21 23 170 6
193 Sangkanurip 325 40.5 23 3800 5.8
203 Singkup 325 21 23 215 5.9
103 Ck 1 825 20.5 22 110 6.2
113 Ck 2 825 21 22 109 6
233 Cbl 1 500 21 23 151 6
243 Cbl 2 500 20.5 23 126 6
253 Rgs 450 20.5 23 125 6
Aquifer unit: Lava
32 Cikacu 1 850 20 21 80 6.5
Aquifer unit: Pyroclastic breccia
11 Cibunar 1 1250 20 20.5 190 6.5
21 Cibunar 2 1250 20 21 190 6.5
211 Cb 1 1225 20 21.8 110 6
221 Cb 2 1225 20 22.2 115 6
Ta = Temperature of groundwater, Tu = Temperature of environment

Table 3.2 Physical characteristic of groundwater from spring

(IWACO-WASECO, 1989)

No Spring T (oC) EC (µS/cm) pH

1 Cibinuang 23.1 157 6
2 Leles 24.5 190 6.5
3 Cisengir 26.4 440 -
4 Cikawadanan 27.6 257 6
5 Cipari 21.8 188 5.9
6 Cigimpur 22.6 92 -
7 Cisamaya 23.3 158 -
8 Ciluwuk 26.5 400 7.1
 Tabel 3.3 Chemical properties of the groundwater

Airtanah
Jenis Air sungai Air hujan
Mesotermal Hipertermal
Lokasi SM-Cibulan Ma Sangkanurip S. Cimanis Kec. Cilimus
Sifat kimia mg/l meq/l mg/l meq/l mg/l meq/l mg/l Meq/l
Ca2+ 12.90 0.64 265.21 13.23 21.00 1.05 0.97 0.05
Mg2+ 8.20 0.67 195.94 16.12 15.30 1.26 0.36 0.03
Na+ 11.30 0.49 1437.15 62.52 16.20 0.70 1.10 0.05
K+ 3.50 0.09 221.74 5.67 10.30 0.26 0.26 0.01
SO42- 10.20 0.21 2.00 0.04 21.40 0.45 4.20 0.09
Cl- 3.90 0.11 2753.39 77.67 15.60 0.44 1.10 0.03
HCO3- 98.40 1.61 230.18 3.77 121.40 1.99 1.20 0.02
Balance ionic 0.94 8.97 6.49 2.08
DHL (µS/cm) 207 3800 120 14
T air (oC) 22 40.5 29.5 19
pH 6 5.8 5.8 6.3

Tabel 3.4 Summary of groundwater chemical fasies

Sample Chemical facies
Taken from (spring)
No Anion Cation
1 Cibinuang HCO3 Non-dominant
2 Leles HCO3 Non-dominant
4 Cikawadanan HCO3 Non-dominant
6 Cipari HCO3 Non-dominant
7 Cigimpur HCO3 Ca
8 Cisamaya HCO3 Non-dominant
9 Telaga Nilem HCO3 Non-dominant
Cibulan (153) HCO3 Non-dominant
Sangkanurip (193) Cl Na+K
River water HCO3 Non-dominant
Rain water HCO3 Non-dominant
 100
10
0

Ca
+
l
+C

Mg
4
SO

7
0

0
86
912
4
0

0
100 3 100
O
Na

HC
+

SO 4
Mg

3
CO

2
9 861
7 4
0
10
10

6
0

0 2
7
0
491 8
10

0
0

0
10
0

Ca Cl
Figure 4 Piper diagram of major elements
 0 1 km

Study area

Detailed study
area 1 & 2

Regional
groundwater flow

Figure 5.1 Map of regional groundwater flow and detailed study area. The detailed groundwater flow
for area 1 and area 2 were presented on Figure 4.1 and 4.2
 D

775
143

750

560
0
80
0 123
80 253
243
B

725

675
700

500
750
153

5
62
650

500
163

525
600
650

0
5

600
700

57

55
173

550
C

PETA ISOFREATIK DAN ALIRAN AIRTANAH

DI KAWASAN SUMUR ARTESIS CIBULAN
Keterangan:
Mataair
Batuan lava
Batuan breksi Sumur artesis Cibulan
lahar 0 Kontur isofreatik
70
0 500 m Arah aliran
0 Kontur topografi
70 airtanah

A B

Sumur artesis
Cibulan

750 750

SUMUR ARTESIS
CIBULAN
500 500
? ? ?
LAPISAN IMPERMEABEL
375 375

Figure 5.2 Detailed groundwater flow in Area 1

 D

775
143

750

560
0
80
0 123
80 253
243
B

725

675
700

500
750
153

5
62
650

500
163

525
600
650

0
5

600
700

57

55
173

550
C

PETA ISOFREATIK DAN ALIRAN AIRTANAH

DI KAWASAN SUMUR ARTESIS CIBULAN
Keterangan:
Mataair
Batuan lava
Batuan breksi Sumur artesis Cibulan
lahar 0 Kontur isofreatik
70
0 500 m Arah aliran
0 Kontur topografi
70 airtanah

A B

Sumur artesis
Cibulan

750 750

SUMUR ARTESIS
CIBULAN
500 500
? ? ?
LAPISAN IMPERMEABEL
375 375

Figure 5.3 Detailed groundwater flow in Area 2

Figure 6 Detailed groundwater flow in Cibulan Spring
 800 600
3 months time difference

700
500
600

Spring discharge (l/sec)

400
500
Rainfall (mm)

400 300

300
200

200

100
100

0 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Dec
Notes: Bulan Rainfall
* Rainfall data periode 1991-2000 Spring discharge 1989
* Spring discharge data: taken January 1988, Spring discharge 2001
March 1988, April 1988; July 1989; and January-July 2001 Spring discharge 1988

Figure 7 Prediction of groundwater travel time

 ‘
6o52’06”LS

00
0 2 km
3
40 2

108o24’36”BT

108 32’00”BT
1

o
00
00
4

35

30

00
25
6

Isohyet line
6o54’40”LS 2000
2000 mm/year

Study area

Spring
Sample Spring Number of Total Rainfall
recharge area
No group spring discharge (mm/year)
(km2)
1 Cibunar 4 18.2 3500 50
2 Cikacu 5 175.5 3750 500
3 Ragasakti 3 21.1 3250 50
4 Sangkanurip 3 66 2750 100
5 Balong Dalem 4 607 2750 1000

10000

l
al
nf
R ai
1000 a l m
nu m
An 0.
1

m
m
1
Catchment Area
Km2

100 m
m
10

m
m
0
10 10

m
m
00
10
100
m
m
0
00
10
10
Hektar

1 2 5
1
3

0.1 1 10 100 1 3 10
(l/sec) (m /sec)
Spring Discharge

Figure 8 Prediction of the spring recharge area

Figure 9 The result of spring recharge area delineation