第五章 結論與建議
5.2 建議
1. 本研究目前僅考量濁水溪主要影響範圍(主扇)，未來可應用本研 究建立之方法，推求濁水溪沖積扇其他流域之水力傳導係數。
2. 因本研究雖有高密度之地電阻測點，但相較之下水質資料數量 少，須進行內外插計算，而增加不確定性。此外因水質較易受汙 染變化幅度大，也需考慮沿海地區海水入侵影響水質之可能性，
故建議加入可信賴區間，說明可參考範圍。
3. 若地電阻測深曲線與岩心一致，將增加模式之精確度。因此建議 欲施作地電阻探測推估水力傳導係數時，盡量靠近觀測井施作，
以降低岩性的變異性。
86
參考文獻
1. Archie, G. (1942), The electrical resistivity log as an aid in
determining some reservoir characteristics, Trans. AIMe, 146(99), 54-62.
2. Bear, J. (1972), Dynamics of fluid flow in porous media, Amer.
Elsevier Publ. Co., NY.
3. Beresnev, I. A., C. E. Hruby, and C. A. Davis (2002), The use of multi-electrode resistivity imaging in gravel prospecting, Journal of applied geophysics, 49(4), 245-254.
4. Chang P.Y., Chang. L. C., Chen W.F., Chiang C.J. (2012), Constructing the Hydrogeological Model of the Choushuichi Fan-delta in Central Taiwan with the Electrical Resistivity
Measurements, in AGU Fall Meeting 2012, edited, San Francisco, CA, USA.
5. Choukér ( 1971), Methodische and theorestische Untersuchungen for geophysikalischen Grundwasser Erkundung.
6. Chukwudi, C. (2011), Geoelectrical studies for estimating aquifer hydraulic properties in Enugu State, Nigeria, International Journal of the Physical Sciences, 6(14), 11.
7. Clavier, C., G. Coates, and J. Dumanoir (1984), Theoretical and experimental bases for the dual-water model for interpretation of shaly sands, Old SPE Journal, 24(2), 153-168.
8. Danielsen, J. E., E. Auken, F. Jørgensen, V. Søndergaard, and K. I.
Sørensen (2003), The application of the transient electromagnetic method in hydrogeophysical surveys, Journal of Applied Geophysics, 53(4), 181-198.
9. Danielsen, J. E., T. Dahlin, R. Owen, P. Mangeya, and E. Auken (2007), Geophysical and hydrogeologic investigation of groundwater in the Karoo stratigraphic sequence at Sawmills in northern
Matabeleland, Zimbabwe: a case history, Hydrogeology Journal, 15(5), 945-960.
10. De Lima, O., and S. Niwas (2000), Estimation of hydraulic parameters of shaly sandstone aquifers from geoelectrical measurements, Journal of hydrology, 235(1), 12-26.
11. Domenico, P. A., and F. W. Schwartz (1990), Physical and chemical hydrogeology, Wiley New York.
12. Hickin, A. S., B. Kerr, T. E. Barchyn, and R. C. Paulen (2009), Using
87
ground-penetrating radar and capacitively coupled resistivity to investigate 3-D fluvial architecture and grain-size distribution of a gravel floodplain in northeast British Columbia, Canada, Journal of Sedimentary Research, 79(6), 457-477.
13. Hubbard, S. S., and Y. Rubin (2000), Hydrogeological parameter estimation using geophysical data: a review of selected techniques, Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 45(1), 3-34.
14. Khalil, M. A., A. M. Abbas, F. M. Santos, U. Masoud, and H. Salah (2012), Application of VES and TDEM techniques to investigate sea water intrusion in Sidi Abdel Rahman area, northwestern coast of Egypt, Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 1-9.
15. Kumar, B. P., and R. S. Sharma (2004), Effect of fly ash on
engineering properties of expansive soils, Journal of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, 130(7), 764-767.
16. Mele, M., R. Bersezio, and M. Giudici (2012), Hydrogeophysical imaging of alluvial aquifers: electrostratigraphic units in the
quaternary Po alluvial plain (Italy), International Journal of Earth Sciences, 1-21.
17. Mele, M., R. Bersezio, M. Giudici, Y. Rusnighi, and D. Lupis (2010), The architecture of alluvial aquifers: an integrated
geological-geophysical methodology for multiscale characterization, paper presented at Proceedings of the Second National Workshop
‘‘Multidisciplinary approach for porous aquifer characterization’’.
Mem Descr Carta Geol d’It XC.
18. Mendoza, G. F., T. S. Steenhuis, M. T. Walter, and J. Parlange (2003), Estimating basin-wide hydraulic parameters of a semi-arid
mountainous watershed by recession-flow analysis, Journal of Hydrology, 279(1), 57-69.
19. Niwas, S., B. Tezkan, and M. Israil (2011), Aquifer hydraulic
conductivity estimation from surface geoelectrical measurements for Krauthausen test site, Germany, Hydrogeology Journal, 19(2),
307-315.
20. Ortega, A., A. Benito‐Calvo, J. Porres, A. Pérez‐González, and M.
Martín Merino (2010), Applying electrical resistivity tomography to the identification of endokarstic geometries in the Pleistocene Sites of the Sierra de Atapuerca (Burgos, Spain), Archaeological Prospection, 17(4), 233-245.
88
21. Park, S. K., and S. K. Dickey (1989), Accurate estimation of
conductivity of water from geoelectrical measurements—A new way to correct for clay, Ground Water, 27(6), 786-792.
22. Purvance, D. T., and R. Andricevic (2000), On the
electrical-hydraulic conductivity correlation in aquifers, Water Resources Research, 36(10), 2905-2913.
23. Sen, P. N., P. A. Goode, and A. Sibbit (1988), Electrical conduction in clay bearing sandstones at low and high salinities, Journal of Applied Physics, 63(10), 4832-4840.
24. Sikandar, P., and E. Christen (2012), Geoelectrical Sounding for the Estimation of Hydraulic Conductivity of Alluvial Aquifers, Water resources management, 1-15.
25. Simandoux (1963), Dielectric measurements in porous media and application to shaly formation, 18(Supplementary Issue), 22.
26. Soupios, P. M., M. Kouli, F. Vallianatos, A. Vafidis, and G.
Stavroulakis (2007), Estimation of aquifer hydraulic parameters from surficial geophysical methods: A case study of Keritis Basin in
Chania (Crete–Greece), Journal of Hydrology, 338(1), 122-131.
27. Taheri Tizro, A., K. Voudouris, and Y. Basami (2012), Estimation of porosity and specific yield by application of geoelectrical method–A case study in western Iran, Journal of Hydrology.
28. Urish, D. W. (1981), Electrical resistivity—hydraulic conductivity relationships in glacial outwash aquifers, Water Resources Research, 17(5), 1401-1408.
29. Vinegar, H., and M. Waxman (1984), Induced polarization of shaly sands, Geophysics, 49(8), 1267-1287.
30. Waxman, M., and L. Smits (1968), 1863-A-Electrical Conductivities in Oil-Bearing Shaly Sands, Old SPE Journal, 8(2), 107-122.
31. Worthington, P. F. (1993), The uses and abuses of the Archie
equations, 1: The formation factor-porosity relationship, Journal of applied geophysics, 30(3), 215-228.
32. Zarroca, M., J. Bach, R. Linares, and X. M. Pellicer (2011), Electrical methods (VES and ERT) for identifying, mapping and monitoring different saline domains in a coastal plain region (Alt Empordà, Northern Spain), Journal of Hydrology, 409(1), 407-422.
33. Zecharias, Y. B., and W. Brutsaert (1988), Recession characteristics of groundwater outflow and base flow from mountainous watersheds, Water Resour. Res, 24(10), 1651-1658.
89
34. 中央地質調查所 (1999), 台灣地區地下水觀測網第一期計畫-濁 水溪沖積扇-水文地質調查研究總報告 Rep., 經濟部中央地質調 查所 Taipei, Taiwan.
35. 吳尹聿 (2012), 雲林地區濁水溪沖積扇地下水補注地質敏感區地 電阻勘查, 130 pp, 國立臺灣海洋大學, 基隆市.
36. 黃亦青 (2008), 應用三維地電阻方法評估污染物的傳輸及分佈之 可行性先導研究, 115p, 嘉南藥理科技大學, 台南市
90
91
92
93
海豐(2) 170270 2629400 463 38.54 166 178 429 興化(3) 176700 2628850 1165 97.04 185 197 414 九隆(3) 191170 2627780 359 29.90 179 191 394 海園(3) 165470 2624550 481 13.36 160 196 426 和豐(2) 169999 2626540 416 23.12 303 330 352 安南(2) 172570 2622640 503 13.96 159 195 434 虎溪二(3) 199330 2624540 568 47.32 212 224 358 箔子(3) 162600 2614900 310 10.32 176 206 478 明德(4) 167485 2617020 202 11.25 196 214 458
宏崙(2) 182664 2620669 81 9.02 207 217 587
宜梧(3) 166296 2604660 285 18.98 244 254 482
舊庄(4) 188020 2614870 78 4.34 180 198 454
嘉興(3) 194030 2616370 860 71.65 194 206 281 東和(2) 205250 2620500 2593 86.44 72 102 413 大溝(2) 168600 2607410 436 24.23 195 213 355 水林(2) 172220 2608150 105 17.57 191 197 392
94
附錄二 地電阻測勘原理與測量方式
(一) 地電阻率測勘原理
ㄧ般影響地下地層電阻的因素有岩性、礦物組成、含水量、孔隙 率、孔隙水組成及溫度等，當地層層序變化造成有明顯的層間電阻率 對比，或是欲探測地下不同電阻率目標之存在，例如隧道、埋藏金屬 物、未爆彈(UXO)等，就適用以地電阻方法作為探測工具。地電阻法 之測勘原理，乃利用直流電或低頻交流電流經由一對電極(A、B)通入 地下，於地下建立人工電場。並利用另一對電極(M、N)測量電場在 M、N 間之電位差(如圖附 2-1)，而據此計算地層的視地電阻率
(Apparent Resistivity)，進而再運用反推計算方法推求地層真實地電阻 率(True Resistivity)。
圖附 2-1 地電阻探測儀器示意圖
95
根據歐姆定律，電流(I)與電壓(V)成正比，與電阻(R)成反比 V =I R……… (式附 2-1) 當電流通過不同的地質材料時會因為電阻性質不同，而測得不同 的電位差；電阻性質的大小則又決定於電流流過地質材料之流線長度 和流線之總截面積，以及物質的內部性質(即電阻率(ρ))有關，可進 一步表示為
………(式附 2-2)
………(式附 2-3) 上式中，R 為電阻，ρ為電阻率， l 為電流流線的長度， A 為 電流線的總截面積。在任一均質的地表通入電流強度為 I 之直流電，
因為空氣為絕緣體，因此電流會同經由導入點呈放射狀向外流出，成 為一個半球面體(如附圖 2-2)。而電流是等量的分配在每一個地方，
所以距通入電流 r 處，電位(V)也相等，且在均質的地表定義極薄的 殼層為 dr。
圖附 2-2 電流流動示意圖
96
運用上述原理，可進行地電阻法(Geoelectric Resistivity Method) 之測勘，原理為：假設在均質的地面上任意佈上四根電極(A, M, N, B)，經由一對電極(A, B)導入直流電或低頻之交流電，於地下建立人 工電場；並利用另一對電極(M, N)測量電場在 M, N 間之電位差如附 圖 2-2，根據此即可計算該地層的視電阻率（Apparent Resistivity）由 式附 2-5 推出
97
其中，ΔV 為電位差VAM,VBM,VAN,VBM
為電流極對電位極的絕對電 位，AM,BM,AN,BN為電極至電極間的距離，K 為幾何排列因子 (Geometric Factor)。
但往往視電阻率並不能代表地下地層的真實電阻率(True
（Schlumberger Array）、雙偶極排列（Dipole-dipole Array）及雙極排 列（Pole-pole Array）等。然而本研究僅使用施蘭卜吉排列，故以下 只針對此方法詳加介紹。
施蘭普吉陣列是在同一直線上以一對和陣列中心等距 S 的電 流極 A 和 B，電位極 M 和 N 以相距 a 在電流極 A 和 B 間移動 測量(圖附 2-3)。要測得較深資料只要將電流極半展距 S 加大，便可
98
取得較深層資料(圖附 2-4)。優點為因測量極在電流極間，所以收到 的資料度雜訊小[黃亦青, 2008]。
圖附 2-3 施蘭普吉陣列(Schlumberger Array)示意圖[黃亦青, 2008]
圖附 2-4 施蘭普吉陣列(Schlumberger Array)施測方式[黃亦青, 2008]
99
(二) 地電阻測量方式
目前一般常見的大區域地電阻測量方式，可以分為一維地電阻方 法以及二維地電阻方法。一維地電阻法是運用上述的電極排列原則，
固定電極中點位置，例如以施蘭卜吉與溫奈排列法為例，固定電位極 MN 之中點位置，逐次增加電流極的間距。如此可在一個地點反應地 下不同深度之電性分布。其優點是能省時快速了解地下一維地層分層 大致概況，而缺點則是易受到側向不均質影響，而產生錯誤的解釋。
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
5119.0 173900 2609100 水林 1930
5185.0 164525 2608100 無 >2000
5265.0 169200 2607200 大溝 636
5267.0 172000 2607425 水林 758
5417.0 171075 2605100 無 >2000
5489.0 168775 2604600 無 >2000
5566.0 170100 2603200 無 >2000
5714.0 168600 2601200 瓊埔 995