Assessment of groundwater vulnerability using Modified DRASTIC, Logistic Regression and AHP-DRASTIC (Hashtgerd plain)

Document Type : Research Paper


1 university of tehran

2 University of Tehran faculty

3 professor of university of Tehran


Parts of the Plain are different roles as pollutants velocity and reach into groundwater. Land assessment and their proper management for a variety of land uses, due to their susceptibility to transfer contaminations is essential. DRASTIC method as overlaying way has the seven influencing parameters for contamination susceptibility mapping. Due to local effects on DRASTIC model parameters, coefficients modify for the input data is required. . According to multiple studies in the Hashtgerd plain, to assess the aquifer vulnerability, modified DRASTIC method, logistic regression-DRASTIC and hierarchical analysis process DRASTIC was used. In addition to the DRASTIC input parameters, land uses were used in analysis considering its role in the production of contamination. The western part of the study area, there is an aquifer that charged from the eastern of the plain. DRASTIC model as output of the model validate with nitrates and eastern areas was excluded. In validating indicators of vulnerability, Spearman correlation, are calculated respectively 0.79, 0.84, 0.86 and 0.91 for DRASTIC, modified DRASTIC, logistic regression-DRASTIC and hierarchical analysis process –DRASTIC and Analytical Hierarchy Process has the highest correlation coefficient.


Main Subjects

al-Adamat, R. A., Foster, I. D. & Baban, S. M. 2003. Groundwater vulnerability and risk mapping for the Basaltic aquifer of the Azraq basin of Jordan using GIS, Remote sensing and DRASTIC. Applied Geography, 23, 303-324.
Aller, L., Lehr, J. H., Petty, R. & Bennett, T. 1987. drastic: a standhrdized system to evaluate ground water pollution potential using hydrugedlugic settings.
Fritch, T. G., Mcknight, C. L., Yelderman Jr, J. C. & Arnold, J. G. 2000. An aquifer vulnerability assessment of the Paluxy aquifer, central Texas, USA, using GIS and a modified DRASTIC approach. Environmental Management, 25, 337-345.
Gemitzi, A., Petalas, C., Tsihrintzis, V. A. & Pisinaras, V. 2006. Assessment of groundwater vulnerability to pollution: a combination of GIS, fuzzy logic and decision making techniques. Environmental Geology, 49, 653-673.
Kalinski, R. J., Kelly, W. E., Bogardi, I., Ehrman, R. L. & Yaniamoto, P. D. 1994. Correlation between DRASTIC vulnerabilities and incidents of VOC contamination of municipal wells in Nebraska. Groundwater, 32, 31-34.
Panagopoulos, G., Antonakos, A. & Lambrakis, N. 2006. Optimization of the DRASTIC method for groundwater vulnerability assessment via the use of simple statistical methods and GIS. Hydrogeology Journal, 14, 894-911.
Rupert, M. 2001. Calibration of the DRASTIC ground water vulnerability mapping method. Groundwater, 39, 625-630.
Satty, T. L. 1980. The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill New York.
Secunda, S., Collin, M. & Melloul, A. 1998. Groundwater vulnerability assessment using a composite model combining DRASTIC with extensive agricultural land use in Israel's Sharon region. Journal of Environmental Management, 54, 39-57.
Shahmaleki, N. K., S.M.R.Behbahani, Boani, A. M. & K.Khodai. 2013. Copparson of Logistic Regression, modified drastic and AHP-DRASTIC for  groundwater vulnerability. Journal of Environmental Studies, 38, 79-92.
Shemshaki, A., Mohammadi, Y. & Bolourchi, M. J. 2011. Investigation on Confined Aquifer & its Role on Subsidence Occurrence in Hashtgerd Plain. Scientific Quarterly Journal, GEOSCIENCES, 20, 137-142.
Tim, U., Jain, D. & Liao, H. H. 1996. Interactive Modeling of Ground‐Water Vulnerability Within a Geographic Information System Environmenta. Groundwater, 34, 618-627.