长时间尺度下济南泉水动态特征与驱动因素演变分析

孙斌; 李常锁; 许庆宇; 高帅; 刘春伟; 邢立亭; 于令芹

doi:10.11932/karst20230503

长时间尺度下济南泉水动态特征与驱动因素演变分析

doi: 10.11932/karst20230503

孙斌^{1, 2, 3,},
李常锁^{1, 2},
许庆宇^{1, 2},
高帅^{1, 2},
刘春伟^{1, 2},
邢立亭⁴,
于令芹¹

1.
山东省地质矿产勘查开发局八〇一水文地质工程地质大队(山东省地矿工程勘察院), 山东济南 250014
2.
山东省地下水环境保护与修复工程技术研究中心, 山东济南 250014
3.
中国海洋大学环境科学与工程学院, 山东青岛 266100
4.
济南大学水利与环境学院, 山东济南 250002

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金（42272288，42202294）；山东省自然科学基金（ZR2021QD084）

详细信息

作者简介:
孙斌（1982－），男，高级工程师，主要从事水文地质与环境地质勘察研究。Email: spinhlr@163.com

中图分类号: P641.5
计量
- 文章访问数: 176
- HTML浏览量: 99
- PDF下载量: 70
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-04-20
- 录用日期: 2023-07-25
- 网络出版日期: 2023-10-20
- 刊出日期: 2023-10-01

Analysis of dynamic characteristics and driving factors of Jinan spring water on a long-time scale

SUN Bin^{1, 2, 3
,},
LI Changsuo^{1, 2},
XU Qingyu^{1, 2},
GAO Shuai^{1, 2},
LIU Chunwei^{1, 2},
XING Liting⁴,
YU Lingqin¹

1.
801 Institute of Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology, Shandong Provincial Bureau of Geology & Mineral Resources (Shandong Provincial Geo-mineral Engineering Exploration Institute), Jinan, Shandong 250014, China
2.
Shandong Engineering Research Center for Environmental Protection and Remediation on Groundwater, Jinan, Shandong 250014, China
3.
College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao, Shandong 266100, China
4.
School of Water Conservancy and Environment, University of Jinan, Jinan, Shandong 250002, China

摘要

摘要: 为识别60多年济南市区泉水动态变化规律，以长系列动态监测资料为基础，利用相关分析、偏相关分析、回归分析及水均衡分析等方法，对泉水动态变化特征及其自然−人类活动等影响因素进行分析。结果表明：济南市区四大泉群动态经历了壮观喷涌、景观衰减、长期间断断流和调控复涌四个变化阶段，总体表现为驱动因素逐渐增多，泉水复涌前降水量影响逐渐减弱，开采量、城市建设及水利工程影响逐渐增强，复涌后人工调控占据主导作用。定量识别出：一阶段主控因素为降水量和开采量，平均影响量58.17、−9.58万m³·d⁻¹，二阶段主控因素降水量、开采量和水利工程，平均影响量52.01、−42.61、−5.98万m³·d⁻¹，三阶段主控因素为开采量、降水量、水利工程和城市建设，平均影响量−51.82、51.42、−6.92、−2.40万m³·d⁻¹，四阶段主要受控降水量、开采量、生态补源、城市建设和水利工程，平均影响量为55.38、−25.44、10.36、−8.99、−6.56万m³·d⁻¹。相关研究可为北方岩溶泉水保护提供依据。
- 济南 /
- 四大泉群 /
- 泉水动态特征 /
- 驱动因素
Abstract: Springs of Jinan City in Shandong Province are typically large karst ones in Northern China. With 136 mouths of springs, there are four major spring groups, namely, Baotu Spring, Heihu spring, Wulongtan spring and Pearl spring, distributed around the moat in the urban area. Springs are the lifeblood of Jinan City and play an important role in the development of this city. However, since the dry season in 1972, the springs had witnessed seasonal cutoffs. Baotu Spring even experienced complete cutoffs throughout the respective year of 1982, 1988 and 1989. From 1999 to 2002, the cutoff of this spring spanned 926 days, the longest cutoff time in history. Until September 2003, thanks to a series of measures taken by the government, the four major springs began to gush all year-round, but the spring flow is much less than before. Currently, studies usually focus on short-time-span spring dynamics in Jinan instead of long-term comparative studies on spring dynamics in different periods. Especially, the strong human influence on spring dynamics after springs gushed again needs further research. Few analyses of the influence factors of complex human activities, such as the impact of urban construction are relatively few. In these studies, the whole built-up area has been taken as the object, which ignores the fact that the runoff discharge area itself does not have the condition of infiltration, resulting in the overestimation of hardening area in statistics. In order to comprehensively explore the dynamic evolution of the four major spring groups and the main control factors affecting spring gushing, we have conducted a study on the dynamic characteristics and causes of springs over the past 60 years for the development and utilization of karst groundwater resources and environmental protection in the Jinan region. To identify the dynamic change pattern of the four spring groups in Jinan, we have studied the dynamic change characteristics of the springs and their influencing factors such as natural-human activities, etc. through correlation analysis, partial correlation analysis, regression analysis, and water balance analysis, based on a series of monitoring data for a long term. The results indicate that the dynamics of the four springs in Jinan City have experienced four stages: stage 1 from 1959 to 1967, at which the springs gushed spectacularly with a large amount of flow at a high water level; stage 2 from 1968 to 1980, at which the landscape of springs attenuated with a small amount of flow at a low water level; stage 3 from 1981 to 2002, at which the springs experienced long-term intermittent cutoff with a very small amount of flow at a rather low water level; stage 4 from 2003 up till now, at which the springs gushed again because of the regulated restoration. At stage 4, the average flow rate of springs decreased from 366.6 thousand m³·d⁻¹ to 142.0 thousand m³·d⁻¹, then to 46.9 thousand m³·d⁻¹, but subsequently recovered to 170.6 thousand m³·d⁻¹; the average water level of springs decreased from 30.48 m to 27.91 m, then to 26.25 m, but afterward, recovered to 28.24 m. In addition, this study quantitatively identifies the influencing factors and the degree of impact in each stage. The main control factors at stage 1 are precipitation and extraction, with an average impact degree of 581.7 thousand m³·d⁻¹and −95.8 thousand m³·d⁻¹; the main control factors at stage two are precipitation, extraction and water engineering, with an average impact degree of 520.1 thousand m³·d⁻¹, −426.1 thousand m³·d⁻¹ and −59.8 thousand m³·d⁻¹; the main control factors at stage 3 are extraction, precipitation, water engineering, and urban construction, with an average impact degree of −518.2 thousand m³·d⁻¹, 514.2 thousand m³·d⁻¹, −69.2 thousand m³·d⁻¹ and −24.0 thousand m³·d⁻¹; the main control factors at stage 4 are precipitation, extraction, ecological replenishment sources, urban construction, and water engineering, with an average impact degree of 553.8 thousand m³·d⁻¹, −254.4 thousand m³·d⁻¹, 103.6 thousand m³·d⁻¹, −89.9 thousand m³·d⁻¹ and −65.6 thousand m³·d⁻¹. In general, precipitation and extraction control the spring flow, but other driving factors gradually increased with the development at the four stages. Before the springs gushed again, the impact of precipitation gradually weakened, but the influence of extraction, urban construction and water conservancy projects gradually increased by degrees. After the springs gushed again, the impact of the government's regulation and control played a dominant role. To keep a continuous gush of spring, first of all, we should ensure that Baotu Spring area 3-type water conversion can be effectively carried out. Besides, we should strengthen dynamic monitoring and regulation, rationally coordinate major factors such as groundwater mining, ecological replenishment and water conservancy projects, etc., and formulate an optimal groundwater development program in a scientific and elaborate way, relying on the sharing mechanism among different departments. Finally, in order to reduce the impact of urbanization on springs, we should strengthen the protection and restoration of ecological environmental in the recharge area of southern springs so as to improve the capacity of water resources conservation. The research results can provide basis for spring runoff protection.
- Jinan /
- four major spring groups /
- spring dynamic characteristics /
- driving factors

HTML

图 1 趵突泉泉域地质背景图

Figure 1. Hydrogeological background of Baotu Spring area

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 泉流量、泉水位动态曲线图（1959~2020）

Figure 2. Dynamic curve of spring discharge and spring water level (1959-2020)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 泉流量与直接补给区内城市建设面积年际变化图

Figure 3. Interannual variation of spring flow and urban construction area in the direct recharge area

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 四阶段各因素折算影响量对比图

Figure 4. Comparison of conversion influence quantities of various factors in the four stages

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 济南趵突泉泉域典型时期泉流量及泉水位统计表

Table 1. Statistics of spring discharge and spring water level in the typical period of Baotu Spring area in Jinan

年代	年均泉流量/×10⁴ m³·d⁻¹				年均泉水位/m
年代	最大值	最小值	平均值	Cv	最大值	最小值	平均值	Cv
1960s	50.18	26.13	36.66	0.24	21.86	28.75	30.48	0.04
1970s	20.13	9.42	14.20	0.21	28.67	27.25	27.90	0.02
1980s	9.29	0.04	3.79	0.80	27.43	24.26	26.25	0.04
1990s	15.71	0	6.56	0.94	27.80	24.21	26.48	0.04
2000s	25.6	0.15	13.68	0.67	28.71	25.1	27.6	0.05
2010s	18.71	13.78	15.62	0.10	28.67	27.83	28.24	0.01
注：变异系数（Cv）为无量纲。 Note: variation coefficient (Cv) is dimensionless.

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 泉流量与降水量、开采量相关分析统计表

Table 2. Statistics of correlation coefficient between spring discharge and the indexes such as precipitation and exploitation

	阶段一	阶段二	阶段三	阶段四	全阶段
相关系数（降水量）	0.857^**	0.344	0.560^**	0.585^*	0.428^**
相关系数（开采量）	−0.507	−0.523	0.389	0.418	−0.766^**
注：表示在0.05水平上显著相关；表示在0.01水平上显著相关。 Note: indicates a significant correlation at the level of 0.05; ** indicates a significant correlation at the level of 0.01.

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 泉流量与降水量、开采量偏相关分析统计表

Table 3. Statistics of partial correlation coefficient between spring discharge and the indexes such as precipitation and exploitation

	阶段一	阶段二	阶段三	阶段四	全阶段
偏相关系数（降水量）	0.844	0.679	0.609	0.487	0.529
偏相关系数（开采量）	−0.445	−0.746	0.471	0.219	−0.797

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 年生态补源总量统计表/万m³

Table 4. Statistics of total amount of annual ecological supplementary sources (ten thousand m³)

年份	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
补源量	800	900	800	1 900	1 900	750	1 067	1 811	1 800	2 056

年份	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020
补源量	1 848	1 969	4 104	5 986	5 976	6 992	6 325	6 513	6 695	6 595

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(20)

[1]	钱学溥. 山西省岩溶泉水[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 1979(5):47-52. QIAN Xuebo. Karst spring in Shanxi Province[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 1979(5):47-52.
[2]	柏红. 济南泉水漫谈[J]. 山东国土资源, 2009, 25(10):66-68. BAI Hong. Primary introduction to springs in Jinan City[J]. Shandong Land and Resources, 2009, 25(10):66-68.
[3]	张效平, 宋儒. 洪山泉流量动态及影响因素分析[J]. 中国煤田地质, 2002, 14(3):31-32, 41. ZHANG Xiaoping, SONG Ru. Discharge dynamics of Hongshan spring and its analyses on influence factors[J]. Coal Geology of China, 2002, 14(3):31-32, 41.
[4]	梁永平, 高洪波, 张江华, 霍建光, 王桃良. 娘子关泉流量衰减原因的初步定量化分析[J]. 中国岩溶, 2005, 24(3):227-231. LIANG Yongping, GAO Hongbo, ZHANG Jianghua, HUO Jianguang, WANG Taoliang. Preliminary quantitative analysis on the causes of discharge attenuation in Niangziguan spring[J]. Carsologica sinica, 2005, 24(3):227-231.
[5]	王茂枚, 束龙仓, 季叶飞, 陶玉飞, 董贵明, 刘丽红. 济南岩溶泉水流量衰减原因分析及动态模拟[J]. 中国岩溶, 2008, 27(1):19-23. WANG Maomei, SHU Longcang, JI Yefei, TAO Yufei, DONG Guiming, LIU Lihong. Causes of spring's of flux attenuation and simulation of spring's regime: A case in Jinan karst spring area[J]. Carsologica Sinica, 2008, 27(1):19-23.
[6]	于苗, 邢立亭, 吴吉春, 侯玉松, 朱恒华, 彭玉明, 李罡. 基于时间序列分形的济南岩溶大泉动态研究[J]. 地质学报, 2020, 94(8): 2509-2519. YU Miao, XING Liting, WU Jichun, HOU Yusong, ZHU Henghua, PENG Yuming, LI Gang. Study of large karst springs using the time series fractal method in Jinan[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 2020, 94(8): 2509-2519.
[7]	唐春雷, 晋华, 梁永平, 赵春红, 申豪勇, 潘尧云, 景泽. 娘子关泉域岩溶地下水位变化特征及成因[J]. 中国岩溶, 2020, 39(6):810-816. TANG Chunlei, JIN Hua, LIANG Yongping, ZHAO Chunhong, SHEN Haoyong, PAN Yaoyun, JING Ze. Characteristics and causes of variation of karst groundwater level in the Niangziguan spring area[J]. Carsologica sinica, 2020, 39(6):810-816.
[8]	陈荦, 张幼宽, 王长申. 基于时间序列分析的辛安泉流量变化研究[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2012, 39(1):19-23, 41. CHEN Luo, ZHANG Youkuan, WANG Changshen. A study of evolution of the discharge of the Xin'an spring with time series analysis[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2012, 39(1):19-23, 41.
[9]	郝永红, 王玮, 王国卿, 杜欣, 朱宇恩, 王学萌. 气候变化及人类活动对中国北方岩溶泉的影响:以山西柳林泉为例[J]. 地质学报, 2009(1):138-144. HAO Yonghong, WANG Wei, WANG Guoqing, DU Xin, ZHU Yuen, WANG Xuemeng. Effects of climate change and human activities on the karstic springs in Northern China: A case study of the Liulin springs[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 2009(1):138-144.
[10]	王亚捷, 王国卿, 郝永红, 李华敏, 赵娇娟. 人类活动对柳林泉域水文过程影响研究[J]. 水文, 2011, 31(3):82-87. WANG Yajie, WANG Guoqing, HAO Yonghong, LI Huamin, ZHAO Jiaojuan. Effect of human activities on hydrological process of Liulin springs[J]. Journal of China Hydrology, 2011, 31(3):82-87.
[11]	李华敏, 吴敬, 赵娇娟, 郝永红, 王亚捷, 曹碧波. GM(1, 1)分解模型与ARIMA模型在岩溶地下水模拟中的对比研究:以柳林泉流量模拟为例[J]. 中国岩溶, 2011, 30(3):260-269. LI Huamin, WU Jing, ZHAO Jiaojuan, HAO Yonghong, WANG Yajie, CAO Bibo. Comparative study on karst groundwater simulation between GM (1, 1) decomposition model and ARIMA model: A case study on discharge simulation of the Liulin spring[J]. Carsologica sinica, 2011, 30(3):260-269.
[12]	王喆. 岩溶地下水系统演化的数值模拟[J]. 地质科技情报, 2013, 32(4):201-206. WANG Zhe. Numerical simulation of the karst groundwater system evolution[J]. Geological Science and Technology Information, 2013, 32(4):201-206.
[13]	相华, 封得华, 蒋国民. 济南四大泉群泉水出流量分析[J]. 山东水利, 2017(12):49-50.
[14]	迟光耀, 邢立亭, 主恒祥, 侯新宇, 相华, 邢学睿. 大气降水与济南泉水动态变化的定量关系研究[J]. 地下水, 2017, 39(1):8-11. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1184.2017.01.002 CHI Guangyao, XING Liting, ZHU Hengxiang, HOU Xinyu, XIANG Hua, XING Xuerui. The study of quantitative relationship between the spring water and the dynamic change of the atmospheric precipitation in Jinan[J]. Ground Water, 2017, 39(1):8-11. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1184.2017.01.002
[15]	倪寒茜, 束龙仓, 韩刚, 张曼琦, 王鑫, 王小博, 余亚飞, OPOKU Portia Annabelle. 城市化对趵突泉泉域降水入渗补给的影响[J]. 南水北调与水利科技(中英文), 2020, 18(6):64-70, 147. NI Hanxi, SHU Longcang, HAN Gang, ZHANG Manqi, WANG Xin, WANG Xiaobo, YU Yafei, OPOKU Portia Annabelle. Impact of urbanization on precipitation infiltration recharge in Baotu Spring basin[J]. South–to–North Water Transfers and Water Science & Technology, 2020, 18(6):64-70, 147.
[16]	尹德超, 吴玺, 崔虎群, 王文祥, 王晓燕, 王茜, 安永会. 西北内陆盆地浅层地下水温度场及动态类型: 以酒泉东盆地为例[J]. 地质科技通报, 2022, 41(1):193-202. YIN Dechao, WU Xi, CUI Huqun, WANG Wenxiang, WANG Xiaoyan, WANG Qian, AN Yonghui. Temperature field and dynamic types of shallow groundwater in the northwest inland basin: A case study of the Jiuquan east basin[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2022, 41(1):193-202.
[17]	吴兴波, 牛景涛, 牛景霞, 宋星原. 人工回灌对济南泉水系统修复的影响[J]. 人民黄河, 2004(8):20-22. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1379.2004.08.009 WU Xingbo, NIU Jingtao, NIU Jingxia, SONG Xingyuan. Influence of artificial recharge of groundwater on rehabilitation of spring system in Jinan[J]. Yellow River, 2004(8):20-22. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1379.2004.08.009
[18]	刘江, 李波, 杨增元, 杜雪梅. 卧虎山水库对济南泉水影响的定量分析[J]. 水资源保护, 2012, 28(1):67-70. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-6933.2012.01.016 LIU Jiang, LI Bo, YANG Zengyuan, DU Xuemei. Quantitative analysis of influences of Wohushan reservoir on Jinan karst spring basin[J]. Water Resources Protection, 2012, 28(1):67-70. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-6933.2012.01.016
[19]	李波. 卧虎山水库对济南泉域岩溶水补给的影响[D]. 济南: 济南大学, 2011. LI Bo. The influence of Wohushan reservoir to Jinan karst spring basin[D]. Jinan: University of Jinan, 2011.
[20]	李传谟. 济南岩溶水资源的分析与泉水名胜的保护[J]. 中国岩溶, 1985, 4(Suppl.1):31-39. LI Chuanmo. Analysis on karst resources and preservation of famous spring in Jinan[J]. Carsologica sinica, 1985, 4(Suppl.1):31-39.