Exploring the use of alternative groundwater models to understand the hydrogeological flow processes in an alluvial context (Tiber River, Rome, Italy)

Environmental Earth Sciences

Volumn 71, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 1115-1121

  La Vigna, Francesco ^a   Demiray, Zeynep ^b   Mazza, Roberto ^c  

^a Roma Capitale   (Italy)

^b SULEYMAN DEMIREL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^c ROMA TRE UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

Author keywords

Alternative models; Conceptual model; Hypothesis testing

Indexed keywords

EARTH SCIENCES; SOILS;

CONCEPTUAL MODEL; GROUNDWATER MODELING; GROUNDWATER MODELS; HYDROGEOLOGICAL FLOWS; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; MODEL FITTING; SPECIFIC SITES;

GROUNDWATER;

ALLUVIAL PLAIN; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; FLOW MODELING; FLOW PATTERN; GROUNDWATER FLOW; HYDROGEOLOGY;

ITALY; TIBER RIVER;

EID: 84892680601     PISSN: 18666280     EISSN: 18666299     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12665-013-2515-8     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. ASTM International (2004) Standard guide for application of a ground-water flow model to a site-specific problem. D5447-04.
2. Barberi F, Carapezza ML, Giordano G, Pensa A, Ranaldi M (2008) The geothermal resources of the city of Rome: the case study of the confined aquifer within the basal conglomerate of the Tiber river alluvional deposits. La Geologia di Roma dal Centro Storico alla Periferia, Parte Prima. SELCA-Firenze, pp 407-420, 443.
3. Bozzano F, Andreucci A, Gaeta M, Salucci R (2000) A geological model of the buried Tiber River valley beneath the historical centre of Rome. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 59: 1-21.
4. Bozzano F, Caserta A, Govoni A, Marra F, Martino S (2008) Static and dynamic characterization of alluvial deposits in the Tiber River Valley: new data for assessing potential ground motion in the City of Rome. J Geophys Res 113, B01303: 1-21.
5. Campolunghi MP, Capelli G, Funiciello R, Lanzini M (2007) Geotechnical studies for foundation settlement in Holocenic alluvial deposits in the City of Rome (Italy). Elsevier B. V. Eng Geol 89(2007): 9-35.
6. Certes C, De Marsily G (1991) Application of the pilot-points method to the identification of aquifer transmissivities. Adv Water Resour 14: 284-300. doi: 10. 1016/0309-1708(91)90040-U.
7. Cinti FR, Marra F, Bozzano F, Cara F, Di Giulio G, Boschi E (2008) Chronostratigraphic study of the Grottaperfetta alluvial valley in the city of Rome (Italy): investigating possible interaction between sedimentary and tectonic processes. Ann Geophys 51, n. 5/6.
8. Cutter WB (2007) Valuing groundwater recharge in an urban context. Land Econ 83(2): 234-252. doi: 10. 3368/le. 83. 2. 234.
9. Demiray Z, La Vigna F, Mazza R (2011) A ground water modeling case-study with Modflow-2005. The Valco S. Paolo area (Rome, Italy). Lambert Academic Publishing GmbH & Co., Saarbrücken, Deutschland. ISBN: 978-3-8454-0720-3.
10. Di Salvo C, Di Luzio E, Mancini M, Moscatelli M, Capelli G, Cavinato GP, Mazza R (2012) GIS-based hydrostratigraphic modeling of the city of Rome (Italy): analysis of the geometric relationships between a buried aquifer in the Tiber Valley and the confining hydrostratigraphic complexes. Hydrogeol J 20: 1549-1567. doi: 10. 1007/s10040-012-0899-2.
11. Giudici M (2001) Development, calibration and validation of physical models. In: Clarke KC, Parks BO, Krane MC (eds) Geographic information systems and environmental modeling. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, pp 100-121.
12. Giudici M (2003) Some problems for the application of inverse techniques to environmental modelling. In: Alessandrini G, Uhlman G (eds) Inverse problems: theory and applications. Contemporary Mathematics, vol 333. American Mathematical Society, Providence, pp 89-97.
13. Giudici M, Margiotta S, Mazzone F, Negri S, Vassena C (2012) Modeling hydrostratigraphy and groundwater flow of a fractured and karst aquifer in a Mediterranean basin (Salento peninsula, southeastern Italy). Environ Earth Sci 67: 1891-1907. doi: 10. 1007/s12665-012-1631-1.
14. Gòmez-Hernàndez JJ, Sahuquillo A, Capilla JE (1997) Stochastic simulation of transmissivity fields conditioned to both transmissivity and piezometric data, 1. Theory. J Hydrol 203: 163-174.
15. Harbaugh AW (2005) MODFLOW-2005, the US Geological Survey modular ground-water model-the ground-water flow process: US Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 6-A16, variously paged.
16. Hill MC, Tiedeman CR (2007) Effective groundwater model calibration with analysis of data, sensitivities, predictions, and uncertainty: Hoboken. Wiley, New Jersey 455 p.
17. Konikow LF, Bredehoeft JD (2003) Ground-water models cannot be validated. Adv Water Resour 15(1): 75-83. doi: 10. 1016/0309-1708(92)90033-X.
18. La Vigna F, Ciadamidaro S, Mazza R, Mancini L (2010) Water quality and relationship between superficial and groundwater in Rome (Aniene River basin, central Italy). Environ Earth Sci 60: 1267-1279. doi: 10. 1007/s12665-009-0267-2.
19. Martin PJ, Frind EO (1998) Modeling a complex multi-aquifer system: the Waterloo Moraine. Ground Water 36: 679-690.
20. Mastrocicco M, Vignoli G, Colombani N, Abu Zeid N (2010) Surface electrical resistivity tomography and hydrogeological characterization to constrain groundwater flow modeling in an agricultural field site near Ferrara (Italy). Environ Earth Sci 61: 311-322. doi: 10. 1007/s12665-009-0344-6.
21. Neuman SP, Wierenga PJ (2003) A comprehensive strategy of hydrogeologic modeling and uncertainty analysis for nuclear facilities and sites. University of Arizona, Report NUREG/CR-6805.
22. Passadore G, Monego M, Altissimo L, Sottani A, Putti M, Rinaldo A (2012) Alternative conceptual models and the robustness of groundwater management scenarios in the multi-aquifer system of the Central Veneto Basin, Italy. Hydrogeol J 20: 419-433.
23. Refsgaard JC, Christensen S, Sonnenborg TO, Seifert D, Hojberg AL, Troldborg L (2012) Review of strategies for handling geological uncertainty in groundwater flow and transport modeling. Adv Water Resour 36: 36-50.
24. Rojas R, Kahunde S, Peeters L, Batelaan O, Feyen L, Dassargues A (2010) Application of a multimodel approach to account for conceptual model and scenario uncertainties in groundwater modelling. J Hydrol 394: 416-435.
25. Spitz K, Moreno J (1996) A practical guide to groundwater and solute transport modeling. Wiley, USA.
26. Valota G, Giudici M, Parravicini G, Ponzini G, Romano E (2002) Is the forward problem of ground water hydrology always well posed? Ground Water 40: 500-508. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1745-6584. 2002. tb02534. x.
27. Vassena C, Durante C, Giudici M, Ponzini G (2008) The importance of observations on fluxes to constrain ground water model calibration. Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C, 33: 1105-1110. doi: 10. 1016/j. pce. 2008. 01. 004.
28. Vassena C, Rienzner M, Ponzini G, Giudici M, Gandol C, Durante C, Agostani D (2012) Modeling water resources of an highly irrigated alluvial plain: coupling and calibrating soil and ground water models. Hydrogeol J 20: 449-467. doi: 10. 1007/s10040-011-0822-2.
29. Winston RB (2009) ModelMuse-a graphical user interface for MODFLOW-2005 and PHAST: US Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 6-A29. http://pubs. usgs. gov/tm/tm6A29.