Natasa Ravbar - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Uploads
Papers by Natasa Ravbar
Natural Hazards and Earth …, Jan 1, 2005
8th Conference on Limestone …, 2006
... Integrating temporal hydrologic variations into karst groundwater vulnerability mapping - exa... more ... Integrating temporal hydrologic variations into karst groundwater vulnerability mapping - examples from Slovenia. Author: Ravbar, Nataa & Goldscheider, Nico: Group: zbornik; Publication: Pproceedings of the 8th conference on limestone hydrogeology; Location: Neuchatel; ...
Acta carsologica, 2010
That flattener is a cave passage, which though wide, is so low that movement is only possible in ... more That flattener is a cave passage, which though wide, is so low that movement is only possible in a prone position [10]. see also crawl.? ... KarstBase a bibliography database in karst and cave science. ... That donga is in the nullarbor plain, australia, a shallow, closed depression, ...
Hydrological Processes, 2011
Hydrogeology Journal, 2009
Journal of Environmental Management, 2010
The vulnerability of four European aquifers with different hydrogeological and climatic character... more The vulnerability of four European aquifers with different hydrogeological and climatic characteristics was evaluated using the COP method. The results obtained were statistically analyzed by determination coefficients to measure which factor has greater importance in the vulnerability index. Furthermore, a new parameter has been designed to measure the vulnerability for the whole of the aquifer. The results demonstrate that COP is a useful method to assess the vulnerability of the test sites under consideration. The results obtained are coherent with the conceptual model of each pilot aquifer and the available hydrogeological information (hydrographs, isotopic data, tracer tests). Fissured carbonate aquifers (diffuse flow systems) are less vulnerable than karst aquifers (conduit flow systems) and the vulnerability index is more positively correlated with the O factor (unsaturated zone protection capacity) in the first case. The karst aquifers are more vulnerable than fissured aquifers and they show a higher correlation between the C factor (karst features) and the vulnerability index. Climatic variation (precipitation for example) influences the final vulnerability index of the aquifers according to the weight in the index and the spatial distribution.
Environmental Earth Sciences, 2011
Carbonates and Evaporites, 2011
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
EGU General Assembly 2009, held 19- …, Jan 1, 2009
Abstract An overview of exceptional natural processes or natural hazards from the human perspecti... more Abstract An overview of exceptional natural processes or natural hazards from the human perspective in Slovene karst areas is made. Some types of natural hazards are typical for karst due to the process of karstification and resulting geomorphological and hydrological ...
J. Mudry et al. (eds.), H2Karst Research in Limestone Hydrogeology, Environmental Earth Sciences,
Abstract In a shallow karst aquifer in SW Slovenia assessment of groundwater and drinking water s... more Abstract In a shallow karst aquifer in SW Slovenia assessment of groundwater and drinking water source vulnerability has been performed using different methods. The small, but well defined, Orehek karst is mainly drained by the no longer exploited orentan spring. The recharge area of the spring is well karstified, densely wooded, and covered by thin soils. Besides precipitation, the pring is additionally recharged by temporally active sinking streams. To assess the vulnerability, two methods, COP+K and Slovene approach, have been applied. Both methods provide tools for assessing vulnerability in carbonate rocks. They both ank among very sophisticated methods that require vast amounts of data, time, and financial and technical resources. Both ethods share the same methodological procedure and consider the same type of information, categorized by the same factors. On the other hand, the scoring, classification and weighting of individual arameters between the methods are different. Consequently, the resulting maps differ significantly. Major differences between the results are identified and discussed.
Natural Hazards and Earth …, Jan 1, 2005
8th Conference on Limestone …, 2006
... Integrating temporal hydrologic variations into karst groundwater vulnerability mapping - exa... more ... Integrating temporal hydrologic variations into karst groundwater vulnerability mapping - examples from Slovenia. Author: Ravbar, Nataa & Goldscheider, Nico: Group: zbornik; Publication: Pproceedings of the 8th conference on limestone hydrogeology; Location: Neuchatel; ...
Acta carsologica, 2010
That flattener is a cave passage, which though wide, is so low that movement is only possible in ... more That flattener is a cave passage, which though wide, is so low that movement is only possible in a prone position [10]. see also crawl.? ... KarstBase a bibliography database in karst and cave science. ... That donga is in the nullarbor plain, australia, a shallow, closed depression, ...
Hydrological Processes, 2011
Hydrogeology Journal, 2009
Journal of Environmental Management, 2010
The vulnerability of four European aquifers with different hydrogeological and climatic character... more The vulnerability of four European aquifers with different hydrogeological and climatic characteristics was evaluated using the COP method. The results obtained were statistically analyzed by determination coefficients to measure which factor has greater importance in the vulnerability index. Furthermore, a new parameter has been designed to measure the vulnerability for the whole of the aquifer. The results demonstrate that COP is a useful method to assess the vulnerability of the test sites under consideration. The results obtained are coherent with the conceptual model of each pilot aquifer and the available hydrogeological information (hydrographs, isotopic data, tracer tests). Fissured carbonate aquifers (diffuse flow systems) are less vulnerable than karst aquifers (conduit flow systems) and the vulnerability index is more positively correlated with the O factor (unsaturated zone protection capacity) in the first case. The karst aquifers are more vulnerable than fissured aquifers and they show a higher correlation between the C factor (karst features) and the vulnerability index. Climatic variation (precipitation for example) influences the final vulnerability index of the aquifers according to the weight in the index and the spatial distribution.
Environmental Earth Sciences, 2011
Carbonates and Evaporites, 2011
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
Cave and Karst Systems of the World, 2015
EGU General Assembly 2009, held 19- …, Jan 1, 2009
Abstract An overview of exceptional natural processes or natural hazards from the human perspecti... more Abstract An overview of exceptional natural processes or natural hazards from the human perspective in Slovene karst areas is made. Some types of natural hazards are typical for karst due to the process of karstification and resulting geomorphological and hydrological ...
J. Mudry et al. (eds.), H2Karst Research in Limestone Hydrogeology, Environmental Earth Sciences,
Abstract In a shallow karst aquifer in SW Slovenia assessment of groundwater and drinking water s... more Abstract In a shallow karst aquifer in SW Slovenia assessment of groundwater and drinking water source vulnerability has been performed using different methods. The small, but well defined, Orehek karst is mainly drained by the no longer exploited orentan spring. The recharge area of the spring is well karstified, densely wooded, and covered by thin soils. Besides precipitation, the pring is additionally recharged by temporally active sinking streams. To assess the vulnerability, two methods, COP+K and Slovene approach, have been applied. Both methods provide tools for assessing vulnerability in carbonate rocks. They both ank among very sophisticated methods that require vast amounts of data, time, and financial and technical resources. Both ethods share the same methodological procedure and consider the same type of information, categorized by the same factors. On the other hand, the scoring, classification and weighting of individual arameters between the methods are different. Consequently, the resulting maps differ significantly. Major differences between the results are identified and discussed.