基于高分辨率示踪技术的岩溶隧道涌水来源识别及含水介质研究
Application of high-resolution tracer technique in identifying the source of water gushing and the structure of aquifer medium in karst tunnel
-
摘要: 利用高分辨率示踪技术探讨了重庆三泉隧道突水来源,并对含水介质进行了刻画,结果表明:(1)隧道涌水段受长滩地下河影响,而麦阴槽落水洞为长滩地下河的补给来源之一;(2)试验段岩溶含水介质通畅,地下水流速快,为典型紊流态;地下河管道结构不均匀,发育两条过水通道,为主管道并联支管道,无溶潭和地下湖发育;利用Qtracer2软件,计算得到地下河几何参数及水文地质参数:地下管道储水体积为1 148.4 m3,表面积为1.30×106 m2,平均直径为1.37 m,长度为780 m;摩擦系数为0.51,舍伍德数为1 055.1,施密特数为1 140,水力深度为1.08 m,分子扩散边界层厚度为1.3 mm;(3)因试验时间短、试验为小流量期及存在其他地下河出口等条件制约,示踪剂天来宝的回收率较低,上湾洼地与隧道涌水段连通关系有待进一步研究;(4)由于三泉隧道涌水点与地表水具有直接水力联系,且涌水量大,建议引走地表洼地水源、填埋隧道上方麦阴槽落水洞或在隧道下方新建泄水洞排水。Abstract: The study area is located in the Longyan river basin, a tributary of Wujiang river, and is in Sanquan town, Nanchuan district, Chongqing. The strata of this area comprise the upper Cambrian dolomite. The terrain is dominated by medium mountain and mid-low mountains, with topographic high in the northeast and low in the southwest. Dissolution karst depressions and dolines are well developed in the area, below which is the Changtan underground river basically recharged by the source from Shangwan depression and Maiyincao depression. The Sanquan tunnel is located at 60 m under the Changtan underground river, where water inrush disaster occurred during the rainstorm on 15 and 16 April 2016. This study focuses on the verification of the connection between gushing water and Changtan river, identification of the source of gushing water and the discussion on the properties of the karst aquifer media. A highresolution tracer test using sodium fluorescein and Tinopal CBS-X was applied to the localities between the tunnel water bursting point and Shangwan and Maiyincao depressions . The results show that,(1) The receiving point received the Tinopal CBS-X released at Maiyincao depression , but no sodium fluorescein from Shangwan depression was received. The recovery rate of the Tinopal CBS-X at the left and right caves were 28.7% and 36.6%, respectively;(2) The maximum flow velocity of groundwater is 246.1 m?h-1 , with an average value of 118.5 m?h-1 . Two breakthrough curves (BTCs) presented a double-peaked shape, with the main peak in the front and the second peak in the back;(3) Based on the application of Qtracer2 software, the geometric and hydrogeological parameters such as flow channel volume, flow channel surface area, average diameter, distance of underground river, the friction coefficient, Sherwood number, Schmidt number, hydraulic depth and molecular diffusion boundary layer thickness are 1,148.4 m3 , 1.30×106 m2, 1.37 m, 780 m, 0.51, 1,055.1, 1,140, 1.08 m and 1.3 mm, respectively. From the analytical results, it is realized that there is a hydraulic connection between Maiyincao sinkhole and the tunnel gushing point, affected by Changtan underground river. The low recovery rate of Tinopal CBS-X is perhaps attributed to the presence of other discharge points and the properties of the flow systems. The groundwater flow field is a typical turbulent flow pattern. Two conduits are developed in this karst aquifer, controlled by parallel fissures without underground lakes. The hydraulic connectivity between Shangwan depression and water gushing section needs a further study. The accuracy of the study depend on flow condition, test period, density of monitoring points, and a contrastive test is necessary. Tunnel excavation disturbance and continuous precipitation are the main causes of water inrush to the tunnel, which is a type of karst pipeline inrush disaster. Due to the water inrush point of the Sanquan tunnel has direct hydraulic connection with surface water, and the amount of water gushing is large, it is suggested to drain the water from the depression, fill the Maiyincao sinkhole above the tunnel, or build a drainage ditch at the bottom of the tunnel.
-
[1] 杨平恒.重庆青木关地下河系统的水文地球化学特征及悬浮颗粒物运移规律[D].重庆:西南大学,2010:1-9. [2] 袁道先,蒋勇军,沈立成,等.现代岩溶学[M].北京:科学出版社,2016:292-296. [3] 王勐,许兆义,王连俊,等.圆梁山毛坝向斜段隧道涌突水灾害及对地下水的影响[J].中国安全科学学报,2004,14(5):6-10. [4] 魏兴萍,张虹,苏程烜.重庆南山隧道工程涌水隐患研究[J].中国岩溶,2016,35(1):74-80. [5] 庄旭峰,孙东.实例分析隧道建设对岩溶水的影响[J].中国岩溶,2016,35(6):681-687. [6] 曹锐,吕玉香,裴建国.南川黄泥垭隧道工程对水文地质条件的影响分析[J].中国岩溶,2017,36(5):691-696. [7] 重庆南江地质工程勘察设计院.三泉隧道水文地质调查报告[R].2012. [8] 王树芳.岩溶含水系统降水入渗补给研究进展[J].水文,2014,34(6):1-8. [9] 于正良,杨平恒,谷海华,等.基于在线高分辨率示踪技术的岩溶泉污染来源及含水介质特征分析:以重庆黔江区鱼泉坎为例[J].中国岩溶,2014,33(4):498-503. [10] 裴建国,谢运球,章程,等.湘中溶蚀丘陵区示踪试验:以湖南新化为例[J].中国岩溶,2000,19(4):366-371. [11] 黄芬,尹伟璐,胡晓农,等.桂林毛村地下河流域雨季与旱季定量示踪分析[J].中国岩溶,2017,36(5):648-658. [12] Pronk M,Goldscheider N,Zopfi J.Dynamics and interaction of organic carbon,turbidity and bacteria in a karst aquifer system[J].Hydrogeology Journal,2006,14(4):473-484. [13] 庞菊梅,庞忠和,孔彦龙,等.岩溶热储井间连通性的示踪研究[J].地质科学,2014,49(3):915-923. [14] Qi J H, Xu M, Cen X Y, et al. Characterization of karst conduit network using long-distance tracer test in Lijiang, southwestern China[J]. Water, 2018, 949(10):1-19. [15] 赵一,李衍青,覃星铭,等.南洞地下河岩溶管道展布及结构特征的示踪试验解析[J].中国岩溶,2017,36(2):226-233. [16] 李源,王滨,张全秀.矿山排泥库渗漏特性的地下水示踪试验研究[J].水土保持通报,2012,32(2):96-99,104. [17] 赵小二,常勇,彭伏,等.水箱管道系统溶质运移实验研究及其岩溶水文地质意义[J].吉林大学学报(地球科学版),2017,47(4):1219-1228. [18] Wu Y X,Daniel H.Hyporheic exchange in a karst conduit and sediment system-A laboratory analog study[J].Journal of Hydrogeology,2013,501 (13) :125-132. [19] 范威,王川,金晓文,等.吉莲高速公路钟家山隧道涌突水条件分析[J].水文地质工程地质,2015,42(2):38-43,51. [20] 张湘文,王涛,程胜高.示踪试验在隧道涌水与断层水力联系调查中的应用:以江西萍乡钟家山为例[J].环境影响评价,2015,37(2):66-69,78. [21] 尹洪,王晓青.在线高分辨率示踪技术在重庆南山隧道水渗漏的应用研究[J].重庆建筑,2013,12(7):16-18. [22] 易连兴,赵良杰,卢海平,等.两种常用染色剂管道及淤泥条件下示踪及对比:以丁旗地下河连通试验为例[J].中国岩溶,2017,36(5):721-726. [23] Goldscheider N,Meiman J,Pronk M,et al.Tracer tests in karst hydrogeology and speleology[J].International Journal of Speleology,2008,37(1):27-40. [24] Licha T,Niedbala A,Bozau E,et al.An assessment of selected properties of the fluorescent tracer,Tinopal CBS-X related to conservative behavior,and suggested improvements[J].Journal of Hydrology,2013,484(6):38-44. [25] 杨立铮.贵州普定后寨地下河岩溶水运动特征[J].中国岩溶,1982,1(1):18-26. [26] WILSON J.Karst Conduit Matrix Exchange and the Karst Hyporheic Zone[C]// Karst Water Institute & National Cave and Karst Research Institute.Abstract of Symposium on carbon and Boundaries in Karst.Carlsbad,New Mexico,USA,2013. [27] 王开然,姜光辉,郭芳,等.桂林东区峰林平原岩溶地下水示踪试验与分析[J].现代地质,2013,27(2):454-459. [28] 曾莘茹,姜光辉,郭芳,等.桂林甑皮岩洞穴遗址地下水示踪及污染来源分析[J].中国岩溶,2016,35(3):245-253. [29] 刘树林,范泽英,杨平恒,等.基于在线高分辨率示踪试验的岩溶地下河管道特征分析:以重庆市彭水县岩窝坨至纸厂泉段地下河为例[J].西南大学学报(自然科学版),2015,37(10):125-130. [30] 梅正星.我国喀斯特地下水示踪概况[J].中国岩溶,1988,7(4):371-377. [31] 杨立铮,刘俊业.试用示踪剂浓度—时间曲线分析岩溶管道的结构特征[J].成都地质学院学报,1979(4):44-49. [32] 陈雪彬,周军,蓝家程,等.基于在线示踪技术的岩溶地下河流场反演与水文地质参数估算[J].中国岩溶,2013,32(2):148-152. [33] 杨平恒,袁道先,蓝家程,等.基于在线高分辨率监测和定量计算的岩溶地下水示踪试验[J].西南大学学报(自然科学版),2013,35(2):103-108. [34] FIELD M S.The QTRACER2 Program for Tracer-Breakthrough Curve Analysis for Tracer Tests in Karstic Aquifers and Other Hydrologic Systems[M].United States Environmental Protection Agency,2002.
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 2040
- HTML浏览量: 611
- PDF下载量: 833
- 被引次数: 0