English
引用本文:管 凝,毕华兴,张清涛,等.北京市昌平区不同层位地下水埋深时空动态特征 及其对降水的响应[J].灌溉排水学报,2023,42(S1):103-108.
GUAN Ning,BI Huaxing,ZHANG Qingtao,et al.北京市昌平区不同层位地下水埋深时空动态特征 及其对降水的响应[J].灌溉排水学报,2023,42(S1):103-108.
【打印本页】   【下载PDF全文】   查看/发表评论  【EndNote】   【RefMan】   【BibTex】
←前一篇|后一篇→ 过刊浏览    高级检索
本文已被:浏览 53次   下载 50 本文二维码信息
码上扫一扫!
分享到: 微信 更多
北京市昌平区不同层位地下水埋深时空动态特征 及其对降水的响应
管 凝,毕华兴,张清涛,李粟粟,焦振寰
1.北京林业大学 水土保持学院,北京 100083;2.林木资源高效生产全国重点实验室, 北京 100083;3.水土保持国家林业和草原局重点实验室,北京 100083; 4.北京市水土保持工程技术研究中心,北京 100083;5.林业生态工程教育部工程研究中心, 北京 100083;6.北京市昌平区水文水质监测中心,北京 102200
摘要:
【目的】探究北京市昌平区不同层位地下水埋深时空动态特征及其对降水的响应。【方法】基于2021—2022年北京市昌平区98处地下水自动监测井(浅层井75处、深层井16处、基岩井7处)的实测地下水埋深数据及降水观测数据,结合克里金插值法和Cross-correlation方法,分析了昌平区不同层位地下水埋深的空间分布、时间动态变化及其对降水的响应。【结果】昌平区地下水埋深的空间分布整体为东南部较高,西北部较低。浅层地下水埋深在2个观测年度均存在1处降落漏斗,深层地下水在2021年存在1处降落漏斗,但于2022年消失,基岩地下水埋深无降落漏斗。深层地下水埋深分布的空间变异性明显高于浅层和基岩层;浅层地下水和深层地下水在各月呈同步增长或下降趋势,埋深最大值分别出现在2021年6月和2022年5月,最小值出现在2021年12月和2022年12月。基岩地下水埋深的月变化规律与浅层及深层相比具有明显差异,月尺度上不同层位地下水埋深整体表现为基岩层>深层>浅层。【结论】2021年的地下水埋深整体高于2022年,这与降水量的年际变化有关;不同层位地下水对月降水量的响应不同,其中基岩地下水埋深对降水的响应存在明显的时滞性,滞后时间为6个月;而浅层和深层地下水无明显时滞性。
关键词:  昌平区;地下水;降水;响应时滞性
DOI:10.13522/j.cnki.ggps.2023220
分类号:
基金项目:
Spatial and Temporal Dynamic Characteristics of Groundwater Burial Depth at Different Levels and Its Response to Precipitation in Changping District, Beijing
GUAN Ning, BI Huaxing, ZHANG Qingtao, LI Susu, JIAO Zhenhuan
1. College of Soil and Water Conservation,Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China; 2. State Key Laboratory of Efficient Production of Forest Resources, Beijing 100083, China; 3. Key Laboratory of State Forestry and Grass Administration on Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing 100083, China; 4. Beijing Engineering Research Center of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing 100083, China; 5. Engineering Research Center of Forestry Ecological Engineering. Ministry of Education, Beijing 100083, China; 6. Changping Hydrology and Water Quality Monitoring Center, Beijing 102200, China
Abstract:
【Objective】 To explore the temporal and spatial dynamic characteristics of groundwater depth at different levels and its response to precipitation in Changping District, Beijing. 【Method】Based on the measured groundwater depth data and precipitation observation data from 98 automatic groundwater monitoring Wells (75 shallow Wells, 16 deep Wells, and 7 bedrock Wells) in Changping District, Beijing from 2021 to 2022, combined with Kriging interpolation method and cross-correlation method, The spatial distribution, temporal dynamic change of groundwater depth and its response to precipitation at different levels in Changping District are analyzed. 【Result】The spatial distribution of groundwater depth in Changping region was higher in the southeast and lower in the northwest. In shallow groundwater depth, there was a descending funnel in both observation years; in deep groundwater, there was a descending funnel in 2021, but it disappeared in 2022; in bedrock groundwater depth, there was no descending funnel. The spatial variability of buried depth distribution of deep groundwater is obviously higher than that of shallow and bedrock layers. The shallow groundwater and deep groundwater showed a simultaneous increase or decrease trend in each month, with the maximum buried depth appearing in June 2021 and May 2022, and the minimum buried depth appearing in December 2021 and December 2022, respectively. The monthly variation of groundwater depth in bedrock is obviously different from that in shallow layer and deep layer. The overall variation of groundwater depth in different layers on the monthly scale is bedrock layer > deep layer > shallow layer. 【Conclusion】The overall groundwater depth in 2021 is higher than that in 2022, which is related to the inter-annual variation of precipitation. The response of groundwater to monthly precipitation is different in different layers, and the response of groundwater depth of bedrock to precipitation has an obvious lag time of 6 months. There is no obvious time lag between shallow and deep groundwater.
Key words:  Changping District; groundwater; precipitation; response time lag