You are on page 1of 138

SUBSURFACE HYDROLOGY

By: Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE,DEA

Lecture note:
Post Graduate Program
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Faculty of Engineering Gadjah Mada University

Yogyakarta, 2012

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

I.

INTRODUCTION

1. Etymology
Hydrogeology

(eng)

Geohydrologie (fr)

Geohidrologi (id)

Geohydrology

(eng)

Hydrogeologie (fr)

Hidrogeologi (id)

2. Hydrology
a. Water cycle

THE WATER CYCLE


Water storage in the atmosphere
Precipitation
Water storage
in ice and snow

SUN

Sublimation
Condensation

Snowmelt runoff to stream

Infiltration

Surface runoff
Evapotranspiration

Groundwater
discharge

Spring

Groundwater
storage

Fresh water storage

Evaporation

Water storage in oceans

Fig. 1.1. Hydrological cycle

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

b. Water Balance
Water balance on the ground surface is:

R
PE = R + I
P
E
R
I

: Precipitation
: Evapotranspiration
: Runoff
: Infiltration

Fig 1.2. Water balance on the ground surface

O
S

I - O = S
I : Inflow
O : Outflow
S : Storage
Fig 1.3. Water balance of the storage

Acccording to Lee R. (1980): P + Ev annual 5 .105 km3/y, = the depth 973 mm


and needs 28 ceturies to evaporate by atmospheric destilation.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

c. Water Quantity in the Earth (Volume dimension x106 Km3 )


Table 1.1. Water distribution in the earth (Todd, 1970)
Volume x106

Items
Ocean location
Saline Water

1,320 Km3

Continents location
Lake fresh water
Lake saline water
Rivers
Soil moisture
Groundwater (above 4000 m)
Eternal ice and snow
Total volume
Atmosphere location:
Vapor

Percentage
97.300 %

0.125 Km3

0.0090 %

0.0080 %

0.0001 %

0.067 Km3

0.0050 %

0.6100 %

2.1400 %

0.104 Km

0.00125 Km
8.350 Km

29.200 Km

2.800 %

0.013 Km3

0.001 %

100.000 %

37.800 Km

1,360 Km

Total water

Table 1.2. Water distribution in the earth (Nace, 1971)


Items
Saline water
Ice & snow
Vapor
Groundwater
Surface water
Total water

Volume x106

Percentage
3

94.000 %

2.000 %

1,370 Km

30 Km

0.010 %
3

60 Km

4.000 %
0.040 %
100.000 %

Table 1.3. Water distribution in the earth (Huissman, 1978)


Items
Free water, consist of:
Saline water
Ice & snow
Vapor
Fresh water, consist of:

Groundwater

Surface water
Total water

Volume x106

1,370 Km

Percentage
97.200 %
2.100 %
0.001 %
0.600 %
98.80 %
1.20 %

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

100.000 %
4

Table 1.4. Water distribution in the earth (Baumgartner and Reichel, 1975)
Items
Solid
Liquid
Oceans
Continent; groundwater
Continent; surface water
Vapor
Total (all forms)
Saline water
Fresh water

Volume

Percentage

97.390 %

0.583 %

0.016 %

0.001 %

100.000 %

97.938 %

2.202 %

2.782 .10 Km

2.010 %

1.356 .10 Km
1.348 .10 Km

8.062 .10 Km
2.250 .10 Km

97.989 %

1.300 .10 Km
1.384 .10 Km

1.348 .10 Km
3.602 .10 Km

Table 1.5. Fresh water distribution in the earth (Baumgartner and Reichel, 1975)
Items
Volume
Percentage
7
3
2.782 .10 Km
77.23 %
Solid
6
3
8.187 .10 Km
22.73 %
Liquid
6
3
7.996 .10 Km
22.20 %
Groundwater
4
3
6.123 .10 Km
0.17 %
Soil moisture
5
3
1.261 .10 Km
0.35 %
Lakes
3
3
3.602 .10 Km
0.01 %
Rivers, organic
4
3
1.300 .10 Km
0.04 %
Vapor
7
3
3.602 .10 Km
100.00 %
Total (all forms)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

Table 1.6. Annual average water balance components for the earth (Baumgartner &
Reichel, 1975 in Lee R., 1980) (Fig. 1.4)
Item
Continent
Ocean
Earth
6
2
148.90
361.10
510.00
Area (10 km )
Volume (103 km3)

Precipitation

+111

+385

+496

Evaporation

-71

-425

-496

Discharge

-40

+40

+745

+1066

+973

-477

-1177

-973

-269

+111

Avererage depth (mm)

Precipitation

Evaporation

Discharge

ATMOSPHER

Q=40

P=111

P=385

E=71
Q=40
E=425

CONTINENT
OCEAN

Water balance:

P + E + Q = 0
Fig. 1.4. Earth water balance components, in 103 km3 (Baumgartner & Reichel, 1975 in
Lee R., 1980)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

d. Management of Groundwater
1). Advantages and Disadvantages of Groundwater
Table 1.7. Conjunctive use of Surface and Groundwater Resources (after Clendenen
in Todd, 1980)
Advantages
Disadvantages
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Greater water conservation


Smaller surface storage
Smaller surface distribution system
Smaller drainage system
Reduced canal lining
Greater flood control
Ready integration with existing
development
Stage development facilitated
Smaller evapotranspiration losses
Greater control over flow
Improvement of power load
Less danger than dam failure
Reduction in weed seed distribution
Better timing of water distribution

8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15. Almost good quality of water resources

1.

Less hydroelectric power

2. Greater power consumption


3. Decreased pumping efficiency
4. Greater water salination
5. More complex project operation
6. More difficult cost allocation
7. Artificial recharge is required
8. Danger of land subsidence

Table 1.8. Advantages and Disadvantages of subsurface and Surface Reservoirs


(after US Bureau of Reclamation)
Subsurface Reservoirs

Surface Reservoirs

Advantages

Disadvantages

1. Many large-capacity site available

1. Few new site available

2. Slight to no evaporation loss

2. High evaporation loss even in humid


climate

3. Require little land area

3. Require large land area

4. Slight to no danger of catastrophic

4. Ever-present danger of catastrophic

structural failure

failure

5. Uniform water temperature

5. Fluctuating water temperature

6. High biological purity

6. Easily contaminated

7. Safe from immediate radio active

7. Easily contaminated radio active

fallout

fallout

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

8. Serve as conveyance systems-canals

8. Water must be conveyed

or pipeline across land of others


unnecessary

Disadvantages
1. Water must be pumped
2. Storage and conveyance use only
3. Water maybe mineralized
4. Minor flood control value
5. Limited flow at any point
6. Power head usually not available
7. Difficult and costly to evaluate,
investigate and manage
8. Recharge opportunity usually
dependent of surplus of surface flows
9. Recharge water maybe require
expensive treatment

10. Continues expensive maintenance of


recharge area or wells

Advantages
1. Water maybe available by gravity flow
2. Multiple use
3. Water generally of relatively low
mineral content
4. Maximum flood control value
5. Large flows
6. Power head available
7. Relatively to evaluate, investigate and
manage
8. Recharge dependent o annual
precipitation
9. No treatment require recharge of
recharge water
10. Little maintenance required of
facilities

Table 1.9. Attributes of Groundwater (http://www.tn.gov.in/dtp/rainwater.htm)


There is more ground water than surface water
Ground water is less expensive and economic resource.
Ground water is sustainable and reliable source of water supply.
Ground water is relatively less vulnerable to pollution
Ground water is usually of high bacteriological purity.
Ground water is free of pathogenic organisms.
Ground water needs little treatment before use.
Ground water has no turbidity and color.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

Ground water has distinct health advantage as art alternative for lower
sanitary quality surface water.
Ground water is usually universally available.
Ground water resource can be instantly developed and used.
There is no conveyance losses in ground water based supplies.
Ground water has low vulnerability to drought.
Ground water is key to life in arid and semi-arid regions.
Ground water is source of dry weather flow in rivers and streams.

e. Data collection
1). Topographic data
2). Geologic data
3). Hydrologic data
(a). Surface inflow and outflow
(b). Imported and exported water
(c). Precipitation
(d). Consumptive use
(e). Changes in surface storage
(f). Changes in soil moisture
(g). Changes in groundwater storage
(h). Subsurface inflow and outflow

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

3. History

Dug well

Fig. 1.5. A crude dug well in Shinyanga Region of Tanzania. (after DHV Con. Eng.,
in Todd, 1980)
The simplest dug well is crude dug well where the people go down to draw a
water directly. Then brick or masonry casing dug well which were build before
century. The dug well with casing equipped by bucket, rope and wheel to draw
water.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

10

Fig. 1.6. Sketch of crude dug well cross section

Fig. 1.7. A modern domestic dug well with rock curb, concrete seal and hand
pump. (after Todd, 1980)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

11

Fig 1.8. Communal well equipped by recharge systems.

Fig 1.9. Traditional step well in India it is called baollis or vavadi were built from
8th to 15th century (Source: Nainshree G. Sukhmani A. Design of Water
Conservation System Through Rain Water Harvesting; An Excel Sheet Approach)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

12

Qanat
Qanat is a system of water exploitation which providing of irrigation water in
Central East. Qanat is a method to get clean water by digging horizontal gallery
across the slope surface of ground till reach groundwater table of the aquifer.
From this aquifer water flow with smaller slope than original slope of
groundwater table of impervious canal go in the direction of irrigation area (Fig.
1.10.). According to Todd (1980), the total gallery length of qanats in this area,
reach thousands of miles. Iran has the greatest concentration of qanats, here
some 22,000 qanats supply 75% of all water used in the country. Lengths of
qanats extend up to 30 km but most are less than 5 km. The depth of qanats
mother well is normally less than 50 m but instances of depth exceeding 250 m.
Discharges of qanants vary seasonally with water table fluctuation and seldom
exceed 100 m 3/h. The longest qanat near Zarand, Iran is 29 km with a mother
well depth of 96 m with 966 shafts along its length and the total volume of
material excavated is estimated at 75,400 m 3.

Fig. 1.10. Vertical cross section along a qanat (after Beaumont, in Todd, 1980)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

13

Fig 1.11. Roman aquaducts were built before century

Note:
1. Infiltration gallery/qanat
2. Steep chute in this case dropshafts
3. Settling tank
4. Tunnel and shafts
5. Covered trench

6. Aquaduct bridge
7. Siphon
8. Substruction
9. Arcade
10. Distribution basin
11. Water distribution (pipes)

Fig 1.12. Roman city water system provider

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

14

Crush Bore Well (Cable tool)

Crush Bore Well is a well which is build to provide drinking water by crush or
impact of a sharp cylindrical metal using cable tool to rise on the certain height
and then be released and fall down to the ground and create a hole which reach
ground water table. In Egypt this system was implemented since 3000 BC, in
Rome near the first century and in a small town in south French Artois, which
well had a hydraulic pressure and it created an artesian well due to the water
squirt out from the well (Fig.1.13.).

Fig. 1.13. Schematic cross section illustrating unconfined and confined aquifer
(after Todd, 1980)

Rotary Bore Well

Rotary bore well was implemented since 1890 in USA to draw gas and oil and the
hole reach 2,000 meter depth. Nowadays, the rotary bore well reach 7,000
meter depth.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

15

Springs

Spring is an outflow of ground water to the ground surface due to hydraulic


head or gravitational force (Fig. 1.14). This technique had been implanted since
before century like in Greek or Roman Kingdom. Spring water as a drinking
water is usually be conveyed by network of pipes or canals to the town. Like in
Trowulan as capital of Majapahit Kingdom it was implemented since 12nd century
that on the site of spring was built a temple is now called Tikus Temple.
Nowadays from this temple still flowing water even though with small discharge
and this building installed by inflow-outflow and overflow system and
conveyance pipes.

Fig. 1.14. Diagrams that illustrating types of gravity springs. (a). Depression

spring. (b). Contact springs. (c). Fracture artesian spring. (d). Solution tabular spring
(after Bryan, in Todd, 1980)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

16

Above:
Fig 1.15. Kaptering or spring
water catcher of Majapahit
Kingdom in Java was build in 12
century recently its called Tikus
Temple

Left:
Fig 1.16. Water pipes system with
diameter about 60 cm, convey the
water to the pond and housing of
the Kingdom
(Photo: Prof. Hardjoso P.)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

17

Left:
Fig 1.17. Distribution
pipe to the housing
(Photo: Prof. Hardjoso P.)

Left:
Fig 1.18. Fontains of Trwulan
city
(Photo: Prof. Hardjoso P.)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

18

Fig 1.19. Water pond with brick structure which is called Segaran Pond, about 6
hectares area where the water flow from the spring of Tikus Temple.

Fig 1.20. Ancient dug well cased by bricks in the housing of the Kingdom
(Photo: Prof. Hardjoso P.)
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

19

4. Qualitative Theory
a. Early Greek Philosophers
Homer, Thales (624-546 BC) and Plato (428-347 BC) hypothesized that
springs were formed by sea water conducted through subterranean channels
below the mountains, then purified and raised to the surface.
b. Aristoteles (384-322 BC
Water is every day carried up and is dissolved into vapor and rises to the upper
region, where it is condensed again by the cold and so returns to the earth.
c. Marcus Vitruvius (15 BC)
Theory of the hydrologic cycle, in which precipitation falling in the mountains
infiltrated the Earth's surface and led to streams and springs in the lowlands.
d. Early Roman Philosophers
Lucius Annaeus Seneca (1 BC AD 65) and Pliny clarify theory of Aristoteles is
precipitation fall down in the mountain, a part of water infiltrate to the ground
as a storage water and then flow out as springs.
e. Bernard Palissy (1509-1589)
He described more clearly about hydrological cycle from evaporation in the sea
till water come back again to the sea in his book: Des eaux et fontaines.
f. Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
The earth as a big monster whose suck water from the sea, be digested and
flow out as fresh water in springs.
g. Athanasius Kircher (1602-1680)
Interaction with magma heat which causes heated water to rise through
fissures and tidal and surface wind pressure on the ocean surface which forces
ocean water into undersea.
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

20

5. Quantitative Theory
a. Pierre Perrault (1608-1690)
He observed rainfall and stream flow in the Seine River basin, confirming
Palissy's hunch and thus began the study of modern scientific hydrology. He
said that the depth of precipitation in the Seine river, France was 520 mm/y
b. Edme Mariotte (1620-1684)
In his book Des mouvements des eaux Seine River: Discharge Q = 200.000
ft3/min, local flow is 1/6 part, evaporation is 1/3 part and infiltration is 1/3
part.
c. Edmund Halley (16561742)
He developed the equation of balance : I O = S
d. Daniel Bernoulli (1700-1782)
He stated that, in a steady flow, the sum of all forms of mechanical energy in a
fluid along a streamline is the same at all points on that streamline.
e. Jean Leonard Marie Poiseuille (1797-1869).
The original derivation of the relations governing the laminar flow of water
through a capillary tube was made by him in the early of 19th century.
f. Reynold (1883)
The Reynolds number NR is a dimensionless number that gives a measure of
the ratio of inertial forces V2/L to viscous forces V/L2 and consequently
quantifies the relative importance of these two types of forces for given flow
conditions.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

21

g. Henry Philibert Gaspard Darcy (June 10, 1803 January 3, 1858)


On his books Les fontaines publiques de Dijon (1856), he developed
mathematical equation for flow in porous media.
h. Badon Gabon (1888) and Herzberg (1901)
They developed equilibrium theory of fresh water and saline water in the
circular island with porous soil.
i. Jules Dupuit (1863)
In his book: Estudes Thoriques et Pratiques sur le mouvement des Eaux dans

les canaux dcouverts et travers les terrains permables, Dupuit developed


the formulas for groundwater flow from trench to trench with definite
distance, radial flow in unconfined and confined aquifer with definite distance.
j. Adolph Thiem (1870)
a German engineer who developed equation for the flow toward well and
infiltration galleries.
k. Gunther Thiem (1907)
In 1906, he continued Dupuit principle and his father research he developed
steady stage equation for the circular flow, using two test wells and drawdown
data, and the formula is nowaday called Dupuit-Thiem.
l. Lugeon (1930)
o Lugeon developed the double packer bore hole inflow test made at constant
head. Lugeon is a measure of transmissivity in rocks, determined by pressurized
injection of water through a bore hole driven through the rock.
m. Theis (1936)
The Theis equation was developed to determine transmissivity storage
coefficient by drawdown measuring at any given radius from the well.
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

22

n. Expansion of Theis
Cooper-Jacob simplified the Theis formula by negligible after the first two
terms, etc
o. Forchheimer (1930)
He developed the flow equation in borehole using new parameter is shape
factor and neglected data of observation well.
p. Expansion of Forchheimer
Development of formulas of shape factors by Samsioe (1931), Dahler (1936),
Taylor (1948), Hvorslev (1951), Aravin (1965), Wilkinson (1968), Al-Dahir &
Morgenstern (1969), Luthian & Kirkham (1949), Kirkham & van Bavel (1948),
Raymond & Azzouz (1969), Smiles & Young (1965) and Sunjoto (1988-2008).
q. Taylor (1940)
Certain guiding principles are necessary such as the requirement that the
formation of the flownet is only proper when it is composed of curvilinear
squares.
r. Sunjoto (1988)
Base on Forchheimer (1930) principle, Sunjoto (1988) developed an unsteady
state radial flow equation for well which was derived by integration solution.

6. Interest of Research

Russian
Dutch
Japanese
Indonesian

Groundwater in ice region


Groundwater in sand dunes
Hot groundwater
Recharge Systems

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

23

7. Dimension and Unit


a. Georgy System (mks)
Table 1.8. Dimension and Unit
Description

Dimension

Unit

mass
length
time
Force

m
l
t
mlt-2

gram
meter
second
N (Newton) = kgm.s-2

Energy

ml2t-2

J (Joule)

Power

ml2t-3

W (Watt) = N.m.s-1

Pressure

ml-1t-2

N.m-2

= N.m

b. Metric prefixes
Table 1.9. Metric prefices
Prefix
Symbol

Factor

Prefix

Symbol

Factor

tera

1012

centi

10-2

giga

109

milli

10-3

mega

106

micro

10-6

kilo

103

nano

10-9

hecto

102

pico

10-12

deca

da

101

femto

10-15

deci

10-1

atto

10-18

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

24

c. Conversion of unit
Table 1.10. Conversion
Description
Unit

mks

Note

Force

1 kg

g.N

1 N = 105 dynes

Energy

1 kg.m

g.J

g = 9.78 m.s-2 = 32.3 ft.s-2

Power

1 kg.ms-1

g.W

1 HP = 75.g.W = 734 W

d. Metric-English equivalents
Table 1.11. Metric-English equivqlent
1). Length
1 cm = 0.3937 in
1m

5). Velocity
1 m/s = 3.281 ft/s

= 3.281 ft

1 km = 0.6214 mi

= 2.237 mi/hr
1 km/hr = 0.9113 ft/s

2). Area

= 0.6214 mi/hr

1 cm2 = 0.1550 in2


1 m2 = 10.76 ft2
1 ha = 2.471 acre
1 km2 = 0.3861 mi2
3). Volume
1 cm3 = 0.06102 in3

6). Temperature
o

C = K 273.15
= (o F 32)/1.8

7). Pressure
1 Pa = 9.8692 .10-6 atm
= 10-5 bar

1l

= 0.2642 gal = 0.03531 ft3

= 10-2 millibar

1m3

= 264.2 gal = 35.31 ft3

= 10 dyne/cm2

= 8.106 .10-4 acre.ft

= 3.346 .10-4 ft H2O (4o C)


= 2.953 .10-4 in Hg ( 0o C)

4). Mass
1g

= 2.205 .10-3 lb (mass)

1 kg = 2.205 lb (mass)
= 9.842 .10-4 long ton

= 0.0075 mm Hg
= 0.1020 kg (force)/m2
= 0.02089 lb (force)/ft2

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

25

8). Flow rate


1 l/s

= 15.85 gpm
= 0.02282 mgd = 0.03531 cfs

1 m3/s = 1.585 .104 gpm

14). Gravitational acceleration, g


9.807 m/s2 = 32.2 ft/s2 (std., free fall)
15). Heat
1 J/m2 = 8.806 .10-5 BTU/ft2

= 22.82 mgd = 35.31 cfs


1 m3/d = 0.1834 gpm

1 J/kg = 4.299 .10-4 BTU/lb (mass)

= 2.642 .10-4 mgd = 4.087 .10-4 cfs


9). Force
1N

2.390 .10-5 cal/cm2

= 2.388 .10-4 cal/g


16). Density of water,

= 105 dyne

1000 kgmass/m3 = 1.94 slugs/ft3


(when 50o F/10o C)

= 0.1020 kg (force)
= 0.2248 lb (force)

17). Specific weight of water,


9.807 .103 N/m3 = 62.4 lb/ft3 (50oF/10oC)

10). Power
1 W = 9.478 .10-4 BTU/s

18). Dynamic viscosity of water,

= 0.2388 cal/s

1.30 .10-3 Pa.s=2.73 .10-5lb.s/ft2(50o/10oC)

= 0.7376 ft.lb (force)/s

10-3 Pa.s = 2.05 .10-5 lb.s/ft2 (68o F/20o C)

11). Water quality


1 mg/l = 1 ppm = 0.0584 grain/gal
12). Hydraulic conductivity
1 m/d = 24.54 gpd/ft2
= 1.198 darcy (water 20o C)
1 cm/s = 2.121 .104 gpd/ft2
= 1035 darcy (water 20o C)
13). Viscosity
1 Pa.s = 103 centistoke= 10 poise
= 0.02089 lb (force).s/ft2

19). Kinematic viscosity of water,


1.30.10-6m2/s=1.41 .10=5 ft2/s(50o F/10oC)
10-6 m2/s = 1.06 .10-5 ft2/s (68o F/20o C)
20). Atmospheric pressure, p (std)
1.013 .105 Pa = 14.70 psia
21). Energy
1 J = 9.478 .10-4 BTU
= 0.2388 cal
= 0.7376 ft.lb (force)
= 2.788 .10-7 kw.hr

1 m2/s = 106 centistoke = 10.76 ft2/s

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

26

e. Legends
1). Density

Symbol

Dimension

: ml-3

Unit

: kgmass.m-3 or slug.ft-3

Detail:

1 slug = 14.60 kgmass

1 feet = 0.305 m

1 slug.ft-3

= 514.580 kgmass.m-3

In practical use:

pure water

= 1,000 kgmass.m -3

= 1.94 slug.ft-3

sea water

= 1,026 kgmass.m -3

= 1.99 slug.ft-3

Table 1.12. Density of pure water in kgmass.m-3 dependent temperature to C


t
t
t
t

999.8679

10

999.7277

20

998.2323

30

995.6756

999.9267

12

999.5247

22

997.7993

32

995.0542

1000.0000

14

999.2712

24

997.3256

34

994.3991

999.9081

16

998.9701

26

996.8128

36

993.7110

999.8762

18

998.6232

28

996.2623

38

992.9936

2). Specific weight

Symbol

: = .g

Dimension

: ml-2t-2

Unit

: N.m-3 atau lbs.ft-3

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

27

3). Specific Gravity

Symbol

: s

Dimension

:-

Unit

:-

s = /w

= /w

4). Viscosity
(a). Dynamic viscosity

Symbol

Dimension

: ml-1t-1

Unit

: N.s.m-2

1 N.s.m-2 = 10 poise; 478 poise = 1 lbs.ft-2

Table 1.13. Dynamic viscosity of water in 10-2 poisses dependent temperature to C


t
t
t
t

1.7921

10

1.3077

20

1.0050

30

0.8007

1.6728

12

1.2363

22

0.9579

32

0.7679

1.5674

14

1.1709

24

0.9142

34

0.7371

1.4728

16

1.1111

26

0.8737

36

0.7085

1.3860

18

1.0559

28

0.8360

38

0.6814

(b). Cinematic viscocity

Symbol

Dimension

: l2t-1

Unit

: m2s-1 or stokes

1 m2s-1 = 10-4 stokes

1 ft2s-1 = 929 stokes

= /

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

28

5). Surface Tension

Symbol

Dimension

: mt-2

Unit

: N.m-1

water/air

= 0.074 N.m -1

Table 1.14. Relationship of , and of water


t = 10o C; p = atm

t = 60o F; p = atm

Water

Air

Unit

Water

Air

Unit

1000

1.37

kgmass.m-3

1.94

2.37 .10-3

slug.ft-3

1.3 .10-2

1.8 .10-4

poise

2.3 .10-5

3.7 .10-7

lbs.s.ft-2

1.3 .10-6

1.3 .10-5

m2s-1

1.2 .10-5

1.6 .10-4

ft2s-1

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM

29

II. GENERAL DESCRIPTION


1. Terminology
a. Aquifer
The origin of aqua is water and ferre is contain.
b. Aquiclude
The origin of claudere is to shut.
c. Aquifuge
The origin of fugere is to expel.
d. Aquitard
The origin of tard is late.

2. Vertical Distribution
Ground surface

Soil water zone


P

ZONE OF
AERATION

Intermediate
vadoze
zone

e
VADOZE
WATER

r
m
e

Capillary zone

Groundwater table

ZONE OF
SATURATION

Saturated zone

GROUND /
PHREATIC
WATER

l
e

Impermeable

Fig. 2.1. Diagram of zones in permeable soil

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

30

a. Zone of Aeration
This zone divided into:

Soil water zone

Intermediate vadose zone

Capillary zone

2 = 2
=

hc

2r

hc

: height of capillary zone


: surface tension (dynes/cm)
: specific weight of water
: radius of tube
: contact angle of water and wall

When pure water in clean glass, = 0


and temperature at 20o C so value of
s = 75 dyne/cm
= 0.076 g/cm and,
=

0.15

Fig. 2.2. Schematic of capillary rise

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

31

Table 2.1. Capillary rise in samples of unconsolidated materials (after Lohman in Todd,
1980)
Soils Type

Grain size (mm)

Height of capillary (cm)

Fine gravel

5 -2

2.50

Very coarse sand

2 -1

6.50

Coarse sand

1 0.5

1.50

Medium sand

0.5 0.2

24.60

Fine sand

0.2 0.1

42.80

Silt

0.1 0.05

105.50

Silt

0.05 0.002

200.00

Table 2.3. Capillary rice of some soils type (Murthy, 1977)


Soils Type
Sand, coarse

Size of particles (mm)

Capillary rise (cm)

2.00 - 0,60

1.50 5

Sand, medium

0.60 0.20

5 15

Sand, fine

0.20 0.06

15 - 50

Silt

0.06 0.002

50 - 1,500

Clay, coarse

0.002 0.0002

1,500 15,000

Clay, colloid

< 0.0002

>15,000

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

32

b. Zone of Saturation
1). Specific retention (Sr)
Sr

= Wr / V

Wr

: the rest water volume after drainage

: total volume of soil

2). Specific yield (Sy)


Sy

= Wy / V

Wy

: volume of water which be drained

= S r + Sy

c. Solid Liquid and Air System

Solid phase

geometricly difficult be soluble

Liquid phase

solution organic & unorganic

Air phase

vapor

Va

air

Wa

Vw

water

Ww

Vs

solid

Ws

Vv

Fig. 2.3. Diagram of solid, water and air relationship


Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

33

1). Void ratio (e)


The ratio of the volume of voids (Vv) to the volume of solids (Vs), is defined as void
ratio, and:
=

2). Porosity (n)


The ratio of the volume of voids (Vv) to the total volume (V), is defined as porosity,
so:
=

100%

3). Degree of saturation (S)


The ratio of volume of water (Vw) to the volume of voids (Vv) sis defined as degree
of saturation so:
=

100%

4). Water content (w)


The ratio of weight of water (Ww) in the voids to the weight of solids so:
=

100%

5). Unit Weight

a). Unit weight of water (w)


The ratio of weight of water to the volume of water in the same temperature (w)
and (o) is designated as unit weight of water at 4o C.

= 1

3=1

3=1

3 = 1000

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

34

b). Total unit weight of soil mass (t)


The ratio of the weight of the mass (W) to the volume of the mass (V) so:

c). Dry unit weight mass (d)


The ratio of the weight of solids (Ws) to the total volume (V)

d). The ratio of the saturated weight of the mass (sat)


Saturated unit weight soil mass (when S = 100%) to the total volume (V).

e). Unit weight of solid (s)


The ratio of the weight of solids (Ws) to the volume of solids (Vs)

f). Specific gravity (Gm)


Specific gravity of a substance is the ratio of its weight in air to the weight of an
equal volume of water at reference temperature 4o C.

The specific gravity of mass of soil including air, water and solid:
=

= =

The specific gravity of mass of soil excluding air, water and solid:
=

=
= =

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

35

3. Type Aquifer
gs

gs

K1<K
gwt = ps

a. Unconfined aquifer

b. Semi unconfined aquifer


gs

K=0

gs

ps

ps

K1<K

gwt

gwt
D=H

gs
gwt
gwt

e. Suspended aquifer

d. Semi confined/leaky aquifer

c. Confined aquifer

gwt = ps

Note:

gs
ps
gwt
gwt
D
H
K

:
:
:
:

ground surface
piezometric surface
groundwater table
groundwater table of
perched water
: thickness of aquifer
: depth of groundwater
: coefficient of permeability

Fig. 2.4. Types of aquifers

Note: Compare to Todd (1980) page 44 about leaky aquifer, which the elevation of
gwt is higher than ps.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

36

III.

BASIC PARAMETERS

1. Law of Groundwater Flow


a. Poiseuilles Law

where

=
va
w
R

2
8
:
:
:
:
:

(3.1)

average velocity
unit weight of water
radius of tube
viscosity of fluid
hydraulic gradient

This equation is the proof of Poiseuilles Law which states that the velocity in laminar
flow is proportional to the first power of the hydraulic gradient i.

b. Darcys Law (1856),


1). Equation
=

(3.2)

General equation can be written as a vector form:


=

Substitute to the Laplace Equation:


=

+
+

(3.3)

Consider on x=0 direction only so:

=0

&

=0

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

37

The equation becomes:

=
+

=
= +

= +

= +

(3.4)

The essential point of above equation is that the flow through the soils is also
proportional to the first power of the hydraulic gradient i as propounded by Posseuilles
Law. And the discharge is by Darcys equation is:
=

Q
K
A
dh
dl

:
:
:
:
:

where,

(3.5)

discharge
coefficient of permeability
section area of aquifer
difference water elevation
length of aquifer

2). Similar equations


Fouriers Law on heat transfer {Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier (1768 1830)}:

(3.6)

where,
H
k
A
dT
dx

:
:
:
:
:

rate of heat flow


thermal conductivity
cross section area
temperature difference
thickness

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

38

Ohms Law on electrical current flow {George Simon Ohm (1787 - 1854)}:
=

where,
I
C
a
dv
dl

:
:
:
:
:

(3.7)

current
coefficient of conductivity
sectional area of conductor
drop in voltage
length of conductor

3). Validity of Darcy Law

It can be written in other equation as:


=

where,
NR
D

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

(3.8)

(3.9)

Reynolds Number
diameter of pipe
density of water
flow velocity
viscosity of fluid
unit weight of fluid
acceleration of gravity

Experiments show that Darcys law is valid for NR < 1 and does not depart seriously up
to NR = 10, and this value represents an upper limit to the validity of Darcys law (Todd,
1980).

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

39

2. Permeability of soils
a. Factors that affect permeability

Void ratio
Grain size
Temperature
Structure and stratification

Interrelated of grain size and void ratio will affect permeability of soils. Smaller
grain size, smaller void ratio which leads to reduce size of flow channels and lower
permeability.
1). Void ratio
The ratio of the volume of voids (Vv) to the volume of solids (Vs), is defined as void
ratio, and:
=

= .

1 +

(3.17)

The relationship between real pore channels to the idealized pore channel is:

where,

L
a
L
a

:
:
:
:

length of idealized channel


area of idealized channel
length of real channel
area of real channel

(3.18)

2). Grain size


If the cross section of a tube is circular, the flow in the tube as per Poiseuilles
Law is:

2
=

The average velocity flow in the tube:

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(3.27)

40

2 2
=
=
.
8
32

(3.28)

3). Temperature

The coefficient of permeability K is product of k which is dependent on


temperature and a function of the void ratio e, and the value of k is expressed:


1,
=
=
2.
162

(3.29)

Where, C is constant which is independent of temperature and the expression of


K may now be as below and K varies as w/.
= . . ().

(3.30)

4). Structure and stratification


Kv

K1

V1.i.K1

Z1

K2

V2.i.K2

Z2

Kn-1

Vn-1.i.Kn-i

Kn

Vn.i.Kn

Kh

Zn-1
Zn

Fig 3.1. Diagram of soil layers structure


a). Flow in the Horizontal Direction
Q = V.A = V. Z = K.i.Z
Q = (V1.Z1 + V2.Z 2 + + Vn-1.Zn-1 + Vn.Zn)
Q = (K1.i.Z1 + K2.i.Z2 + + Kn-1.i.Zn-1 + Kn.i.Zn)
=

( + + + )

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(3.31)
41

b). Flow in the Vertical Direction


The hydraulic gradient is h/Z and:
=

= 1 1 = 2 2 =

If h1, h2 hn are the loss of heads in each of the layers, therefore:

or,

H = h1 + h2 + hn
H = Z1h1 + Z2H2+ ..Zn Hn

Substitution:
=

+
+ +

(3.32)

b. Method of Determination
1). Laboratory Method
a). Constant head permeability method
The coefficient of permeability K is computed:

b). Falling head permeability method

(3.33)
(3.34)

The coefficient of permeability K can be determined on the basis of drop in


head (ho- h1 ) and the elapse time (t1 - to).

= = . .

( )

when A = a the equation be:

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(3.35)
(3.38)

42

where:


( )

K
:
L
:
A
:
a
:
ho h1 :
to t1 :

(3.39)

coefficient of permeability
length of sample
cross section area of sample
cross section area stand pipe
head of water in observation well 1 and 2 respectively
duration of flow in observation well 1 and 2 respectively

c). Computation from consolidation test data


In the case of materials of very low permeability with K less than 10-6 cm/s
consolidation test apparatus with permeability attachment may be used. The
coefficient of permeability K of sample can be computed from equation:
=

where,
K
L
A
Q
h
t

. .
:
:
:
:
:
:

(3.40)

coefficient of permeability
length of sample
cross section area of sample
discharge in certain time t
average head
duration of flow

d). Computation from grain size distribution


On the basis of Poiseuilles Law the coefficient of permeability can be
computed:
= 2

(3.41)

According to Allen Hazen (1911) in Murthy (1977) the empirical equation can
be computed as:

2
= 10

where,

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(3.42)
43

K
C
D10

: coefficient of permeability (cm/s)


: a factor (100 <C< 150)
: effective size of grain (cm)

e). Computation from horizontal capillary test


This method base on the Darcys Law and compute the K are sometimes used
where the soil permeability fall within the range of 10-3 to 10-6 cm/s but this
method not very accurate (Murthy, 1974).
2). Field Methods
a). Pumping test
The pumping test method is equal to the method of computing discharge from
the well using equation of Dupuit or Dupuit-Thiem for confined and unconfined
aquifer as mentioned in article V.
b). Casing Bore hole test
According to Murthy (1977), hydraulic gradient of the some conditions are:
(1). Without pressure and end casing above groundwater table
H = hw
(2). Without pressure and end casing below groundwater table
H = hw
(3). With pressure and end casing above groundwater table
H = hw + hp
(4). With pressure and end casing below groundwater table
H = hw + hp

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

44

Q & hp

hw

Q & hp

hw

Hb
hw

hw

Hg

(1). H=hw

(2). H=hw

(3). H=hw+ hp

(4). H=hw+ hp

Fig 3.2. Bore hole in some conditions

(1). Murthy (1977)


The coefficient of permeability is calculated by making use of formula:
=

where:
Q
K
H

0.18

: discharge (L3/T)
: coefficient of permeability (L/T)
: hydraulic head (L) Fig. 3.2.

Note:
Compare to Forchheimer (1930) that Q= FKH and to Harza (1935), Taylor (1948) and
Hvorslev (1951) that F = 5,5 r. And Sunjoto (2002) developed the formula for the same
condition that F = 2r.
(2). Forchheimer (1930)
Forchheimer (1930) proposed to find a coefficient of permeability (K) by bore hole with
certain diameter and depth.
=

( )

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(3.49)
45

where:
K
R
F
t1

h1

:
:
:
t2 :

coefficient of permeability (L/T)


radius of well (L)
shape factor (L) (F = 4 R, Forchheimer, 1930)
time of the measurement respectively (T)

h2 : height of water of the measurement respectively (L)


: cross section area of well (L2 , As = R2)

As

c). Partial permeable casing bore hole test


(1). Suharyadi (1984)
There are two conditions of hydraulic head (Fig. 3.3) as:

The hole is submerged in groundwater:


H = difference of groundwater table to the water elevation test

The hole above the groundwater table:


H = Depth of water test on the hole minus half of permeable hole length
Q

Hw
gwt

Hw

gwt
2R
(1). The hole test below ground
water table

(H=Hw)

2R
(2). The hole test above ground
water table

H=Hc+1/2L

Fig. 3.3. Hydraulic head dimension on bore hole test according to Suharyadi
(1984)
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

46

The coefficient of permeability can be computed by:


=

2.30

2
2

(3.44)

where,
K
L
H
R

:
:
:
:

coefficient of permeability
length of permeable part
Hydraulic head (L R)
radius of casing

d). Uncasing bore hole test


(1). Pecker test
Suharyadi (1984)

(3.50)

= +

Q and H2

Q and H2

H1

(3.51)

Q and H2

Q and H2

H1

gwt

gwt
H1

H1
L

L
1/2L

L
1/2L
gwt

gwt
2R
(a). One pecker test
which zone test
is submerged

2R
(b). One pecker test
which zone test is
above groundwater table

2R
(c). Two peckers test
which zone test
is submerged

2R
(d). Two peckers test
which zone test is
above groundwater table

Fig. 3.6. Hydraulic head dimension on packer test (after Suharyadi, 1984)
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

47

(2). Boast and Kirkham (in Todd, 1980)


=

(3.52)

Lw

H
2rw

Fig. 3.7. Diagram of auger hole and dimensions for determining coefficient of
permeability (after Boast and Kirkham, in Todd, 1980)
(3). Sunjoto (1988)

where:

=
H
F
K
Q
C
I
A

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

(8.53)

depth of hollow well (L)


shape factor (L)
coefficient of permeability (L/T)
inflow discharge (L3/T), dan Q = C I A
runoff coefficient of roof ( )
precipitation intensity (L/T)
roof area (L2)

Note:

When steady flow condition (8.53) become F =Q/KH


The solution of this equation by trial and error.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

48

Table 3.1. Value of C after Boast and Kirkham (in Todd, 1980)
Lw/
rw

y/
Lw

(H-Lw)/Lw for Impermeable Layer

H-Lw

0.05

0.1

0.2

0.5

(H-Lw)/Lw for Infinitely


Impermeable Layer
5
2
1
0.5

1.00
0.75
0.50

447
469
555

423
450
537

404
434
522

375
408
497

323
360
449

286
324
411

264
303
386

255
292
380

254
291
379

252
289
377

241
278
359

213
248
324

166
198
264

1.00
0.75
0.50

186
196
234

176
187
225

167
180
218

154
168
207

134
149
188

123
138
175

118
133
169

116
131
167

115
131
167

115
130
166

113
128
164

106
121
156

91
106
139

1.00
0.75
0.50

51.9
54.8
66.1

48.6
52.0
63.4

46.2
49.9
61.3

42.8
46.8
58.1

38.7
42.8
53.9

36.9
41.0
51.9

36.1
40.2
51.0

35.8
40.0
50.7

35.5
39.6
40.3

34.6
38.6
49.2

32.4
36.3
466

10

1.00
0.75
0.50

18.1
19.1
23.3

16.9
18.1
22.3

16.1
17.4
21.5

15.1
16.5
20.6

14.1
15.5
19.5

13.6
15.0
19.0

13.4
14.8
18.8

13.4
14.8
18.7

13.3
14.7
18.6

13.1
14.5
18.4

12.6
14.0
17.8

20

1.00
0.75
0.50

59.1
62.7
76.7

55.3
59.4
73.4

53.0
57.3
71.2

50.6
55.0
68.8

48.1
52.5
66.0

47.0
51.5
64.8

46.6
51.0
64.3

46.4
50.8
64.1

46.2
50.7
63.9

45.8
50.2
63.4

44.6
48.9
61.9

50

1.00
0.75
0.50

1.25
1.33
1.64

1.28
1.27
1.57

1.14
1.23
1.54

1.11
1.20
1.50

1.07
1.16
1.46

1.05
1.14
1.44

1.04
1.13
1.43

1.03
1.12
1.42

1.02
1.11
1.39

100

1.00
0.75
0.50

0.37
0.40
0.49

0.35
0.38
0.47

0.34
0.37
0.46

0.34
0.36
0.45

0.33
0.35
0.44

0.32
0.35
0.44

0.32
0.35
0.44

0.32
0.34
0.43

0.31
0.34
0.43

Table 3.2. Coefficient of Permeability of some Soils (Casagrande and Fadum)


K (cm/sec)

Soils type

Drainage
Condition

101 - 102

Clean gravels

Good

Pumping Test

101

Clean sand

Good

Constant head or Pumping test

10-1 10-4

Clean sand and gravel

Good

Constant head, Falling head

mixtures

Recommended method of
determining K

or Pumping test

10-5

Very fine sand

Poor

Falling head

10-6

Silt

Poor

Falling head

10-7 10-9

Clay soils

Practically
impervious

Consolidation test

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

49

3). Lugeon Test


Maurice Lugeon (July 10, 1870 - October 23, 1953) was a Swiss geologist, and the
pioneer of nape tectonics. He was a pupil of Eugne Renevier. The Lugeon test,
extensively used in Europe, is a special case of double packer bore hole inflow test made
at constant head.
Lugeon is a measure of transmissivity in rocks, determined by pressurized injection
of water through a bore hole driven through the rock.
o

One Lugeon (LU) is equal to one liter of water per minute injected into 1 meter
length of borehole at an injection pressure of 10 bars.

1 Lugeon Unit = a water take of 1 liter per meter per minute at a pressure of 10
bars.

Lugeon value : water take (liter/m/min) x 10 bars/test pressure (in bars)


The Lugeon unit is not strictly a measure of hydraulic conductivity but it is a good

approximation for grouting purposes and 1 Lugeon is approximately equivalent to 1x10-5


cm/s or 1x10-7 m/s.
The three successive test runs, each of 5 minutes duration enable a rough
assessment of the water behavior.
Analysis:
This test will be analyzed by principle of:

Forhheimer (1930) for steady flow condition


=

Sunjoto (2010) for the shape factor of each condition (Fig.3.8.)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

50

Q in 10 bar

Q in 10 bar

(1). Condition of well a.

(2). Condition of well b.

Q in 10 bar

2R

2R

Q in 10 bar

2R
(3). Condition of well b.

2R
(4). Condition of well c.

Fig. 3.8. Schematic of condition of well and packers location.

Data:
o Radius of hole
o
o
o
o
o

: R = 0.05 m (according to Suharyadi that diameter


of hole = 3 or 4 inches)
Hydraulic head
: H = 10 bar = 102 m
Discharge
: Q = 1 l/min = 1.66667 .10 -05 m3/s
Length of hole
:L=1m
The three successive test runs, each of 5 minutes duration, in constant
discharge
Hole diameter usually used:
Drill bit
: 73 mm
Drill hole
: 76 mm
Casing
: 85 or 87 mm

To compute the value of Shape Factor, Sunjoto (2010) proposed formula for three
conditions of well as:

Condition of (a) well Fig. 3.8.(a):


=

2( + 2 ) 2 2
+ + 1

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(3.53)
51

Condition of well (b) Fig. 3.8.(b):


=

(3.54)

( + 2) 2
+ + 1

Condition of well (c) Fig. 3.8.(c):


2
=
( + 2 ) 2
+ + 1

2
2

(3,55)

Hole with diameter 76 mm


Shape Factor of each hole (3.53, 3.54, 3.55):

=
=
=

21

2(1 + 2 0.0376) 2 1 2
+
+ 1

0.0376
0.0376
21

2
(1 + 2 0.0376)
1
+
+ 1

0.0376
0.0376

21

= 1.33570 m

= 1.56643 m

2
(1 + 2 0.0376)
1
+
+ 1

2 0.0376
2 0.0376

= 1.89308 m

The test will be measured on the constant discharge or in steady flow condition, so
the computation of the coefficient of permeability using Forchheimer formula (1930):

Condition of well a.:


1.66667 .105
=
= 1.22332 .107 m/s
1.33570 102

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

52

Condition of well b.:


1.66667 .105
=
= 1.04313 .107 m/s
1.56643 102
Condition of well c:
1.66667 .105
=
= 0.86314.107 m/s
1.89308 102

Compare the results above for all conditions (a. b, c) to the Lugeon aproximation that K
= 1x10-5 cm/s = 1x10-7 m/s

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

53

IV.

PARALLEL FLOW

Dupuit (1863) developed the formulas for groundwater flow from trench to trench with
definite distance, radial flow in unconfined and confined aquifer with definite distance.
The assumption of simplification of this formula are (Castany, 1967):

Steady flow
Incompressible water and soil
Equipotentiales are plane
In accordance with Darcys Law
Vertical flow is neglected
Homogeneous and isothrope
Distance of flow is constant

1. Free Aquifer
In this case the flow through the permeable layer as unconfined or free aquifer like in
Fig. 4.1.

H1
H2

x
Fig. 4.1. Flow through unconfined embankment
a. Discharge Equation

V = K.i

Dupuit (1863) in Castany (1967):

i = sin

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

54

=
=

2 + 2

2 + 2

1 +

Due to the assumption of vertical velocity is neglected so :


2
1 + = 1

(4.1)

Darcy.s Law (1856)

so:

. = . .

= = =

(4.2)

. (. 1)

= .
1

0 = . . 2 12
=

where,

1
(12 22 )
2

=
H1
H2
L
h

:
:
:
:

(4.3)

depth of upstream
depth of downstream
length of aquifer
height of flow line in distance of x

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

55

x
b
K

: distance from upstream


: length of embankment
: coefficient of permeability

b. Flow line Equation


Continuity general flow:
2 2 2 2

+
+ = 0
2
2 2

In this case that h is function of x and N = 0 (precipitation) and equation becomes:

2 2
=0
2

and the general solution is:


2
= 2 = +

Boundary condition:
x=0

h = H1 ;

H12 = B

x=L

h = H2 ;

h2= AL + B

22 12
=

So the equation of flow line is:



+
=

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(4.4)

56

2. Confined aquifer
In this case the flow through a permeable layer as laid down under impermeable layer
likes Fig. 4.2.

H1

H2

Fig. 4.2. Flow through confined embankment

a. Discharge
Laplace equation:

+
+
; = . .
=

2 1
1 2
=
= +

= +

where,
D
b

(4.5)

: thickness of aquifer
: width of aquifer

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

57

b. Flow line equation


Laplace Equation

2
=0
2

Boundary condition:

=A
dx

= Ax + B

= 0 = 1 1 =

= = 2 2 = + 1

2 1

(4.6)

The examples below are:

Unconfined aquifer embankment


Horizontal stratified embankment
Embankment with rain
Embankment with evaporation
Embankment between trench and impermeable zone
Confined aquifer
Confined aquifer with variation thickness

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

58

EXAMPLES
1. Unconfined aquifer embankment

H1
H2

Fig. 4.3. Flow through unconfined embankment


Data:

K = 10-6 m/s, H1 = 6 m, H2 = 2 m and L = 40 m.

Compute:
a). Flow line equation
b). Discharge through the embankment
c). Height of flow line in 20 m from upstream
Answer:
a. Flow line equation
General continuity equation:
2 2 2 2

+
+ = 0
2 2 2 2 2

Due to the flow only in one direction and no precipitation so the equation only
h function x and N = 0 and differential equation becomes:
2 2
=0
2

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

59

The solution is:


2
=

Boundary condition:

2 = +

x=0

h = H1

; H12 = B

x=L

h = H2

; H22 = AL + B

H22 = AL + H12
=

22 12

Using data above the equation will be:


2 = +


+
=

2 =

22 62
+ 62
40

2 = 0.80 + 36

b. Discharge through the embankment


= =

So,

(2 )
=

(2 )
22 12
22 12
2
=

+ 1 =

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

60

(22 12 )
=
2

For b = 1 meter so:

106 . 1. (62 22 )
=
= 4.107 3
2.40
b. Height of flow line in 20 m from upstream:
2 = 1.25 + 36

2 = 0.80 20 + 36 = 20
h = 4.472 m

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

61

2. Horizontal stratified embankment


K1

H1

K2

H2

L1

K3

H3

L2

H4

L3

Fig. 4.4. Flow through unconfined stratified embankment


Data:

K1 = 10-4 m/s, K2 = 10-5 m/s, K3 = 10-6 m/s, L1 = 80 m, L2 = 70 m,


L3= 40 m, H1 = 10 m, H4 = 4 m.

Compute:
a). Discharge through the embankment
b). Height of H2 and H3
c). Flow line equation equation
Answer:
Q = 7,368 m3/s
H2 = 9,926 m
H3 = 9,470 m

Flow line equation equation for each strata


Layer I

h1 2 = -0,015 x1 + 100

Layer II

h22 = -0,147 x2 + 98,525

Layer III

h32 = -0,147 x3 + 89,681

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

62

The discharge Q = Q1 = Q 2 = Q3

The flow line for each layer are:


Layer I:

22 12
=
1 + 12
1
Layer II:
32 22
2
2 + 22
2 =
2
12

Layer III:
32

42 32
=
3 + 32
3

The discharge for each layer are:


Layer I:

1 (12 22 )
1 =
21

12 22 =

21
1

2 (22 32 )
2 =
22

22 32 =

22
2

Layer II:

Layer III:

3 (32 42 )
3 =
23

The defference is:


12 42 =

32 42 =

23
3

2 1 2 3
+
+
1 2 3

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

63

(12 42 )
=

2 1 + 2 + 3
1 2 3

(102 + 42 )
=
= 1.213 106 3
70
40
80
2 4 + 5 + 6
10
10
10
Te flow line equation needs the values of H2 and H3 are:
102

22

2 1.213 106 80
=
1 104

9.9152 22 =

2 1.213 106 70
1 105

2 = 9.915

3 = 9.018

The flow line for each layer are:


Layer I:
12 =

Layer II:
22

9.9152 102
1 + 102
80

9.0182 9.9152
=
2 + 9.9152
70

Layer III:

32 =

42 9.0182
3 + 9.0182
40

12 = 0.2121 + 100

22 = 0.2432 + 98.307

32 = 1.6333 + 81.324

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

64

3. Embankment with rain

H1
H2

Fig. 4.5. Flow through unconfined embankment with precipitation


Data:

H1 = 8 m, H2 = 2 m, L = 50 m, K = 10-6 m/s, N = 4,8 10-8 m/s.

Compute:
a). Flow line equation
b). Highest elevation of flow line (when horizontal)
c). Discharge through the embankment
Answer:
a. Flow line equation
2 2
2 2
2
2 + = 0 2 =
2

2
2
2
=
+ 2 =

2 =

2 2
+ +
2

Boundary condition:

= 0 = 1

2 =

2
+ +

= 12

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

65

= = 2
2

+ 22 = 21

Flow line equation becomes:

22

2
=
+ +

22 =21

2 22 12
=
+
+
+ 12


( )
2 = 12 (22 12 ) +

Substitution of the data:

4.80 108
22 82
(
)
. 50 +
+ 82
=
6
10
50
2

2 = 4,80. 102 . 2 + 1,20. + 64

b. Highest flow line.


Location of highest flow line
2
=0

2
= 4.80 . 102 .2 + 1.20 = 0

9.60 . 102 . + 1.20 = 0

1.20
12.50
9.60 . 102

So x = 12.50 m from upstream/left ward

The heigt of water table when in horizontal condition or when x = 12.50 m


2 = 4.80 . 102 . 12.502 + 1.20 .12.50 + 64 = 71.50
h = 8,46 m

c. Discharge through the embankment.

1
2
= = =

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

66


( )
= 12 (12 22 ) +
2

Boundary condition:

= =

(12 = 22 )
=
2
2

106 . 1. (82 22 )
50
=
= 4.80 . 108 . 1.
2 50
2
= . =
= =
=

(12 = 22 )

+
2
2

106 . 1. (82 22 )
50
+ 4.80 . 108 . 1.
2 50
2

= , . =

d. The maximum elevation of flow line when H1 = H2 = H


2 = 2 +

( )

2
=0

The extreem point is:

= + ( ) = 0

2 = 2 + .
2

2 = 2 +

2
4

= 2 +

2
4

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

67

4. Embankment with evaporation

H1

H2

Fig 4.6. Flow through unconfined embankment with evaporation


Data:

H = H1 = H2 = 5 m, K = 0,25 10-3 m/s, E = 0,12 10-6 m/s

Compute:
Lowest elevation of flow line
Answer:
Flow line equation,
Darcys Law:

Continuity equation:
=
=
=

Boundary condition:
x=0
x = L,

h = ho

h=H

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

68

2
=

2 =

Substitution of data:
252 2 =

0.12 . 106
1502 h2o = 24.20 ho = 3.77m
0.25 . 103

So te lowest point is 3.77 m.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

69

5. Embankment between trench and impermeable strata


N

H1

imaginary
aquifer

H1

H2

2L

Fig. 4.7. Flow through unconfined embankment

Data:

K = 1,574.10-4 m/s, N = 1,574.10-8 m/s, L = 400 m, H1= 8 m

Continuity equation:
2 2

+ = 0
2 2 2

2
2 2
=
2
2

2 =

2
+ 1 + 1

Boundary condition:

x = 0 h = H1

C2 = H12

x = 2L h = H2
1 =

H22

1
42
22 12 +

4NL2
=
+ 2C1 L + H12
K

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

70

Flow line equation becomes:


2 =

where,

42
+
22 12 +
+ 12

H1 = H2 = H = 8 m so:

2 2
=
+
+ 2

It will be maximum when;

So,

2
=0

2
2 2
=
+
=0

2
.
2

Its mean that hmax occurs when x = L so,


2 =

2 22
+
+ 2

2
+ 2
=

And discharge:

1
2 2
= =
. . =

+
+ 2

=
2

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

71

a. So the height of ground water table function of x:


2 =

2 2
+
+ 2

b. The height of ground water table in L:


2
1.1574 . 108 . 4002
+ 2 =
+ 82
=

1.1574 . 104
Hmax = 8.9443 m

c. Discharge in x = 0:
2 2
1
=
+

1
1.1574 . 108 . 400

= 1.1574 . 104 0 +

2
1.1574 . 104

= -4,6296.10-6 m 3/s/m
= 4,6296.10-6 m 3/s/m (kearah kiri)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

72

6. Unconfined aquifer

H1

H2

Fig. 4.8. Flow through confined embankment


Data:

H1 = 15 m, H2 = 10 m, D = 7 m, L = 100 m, K = 10-5 m/s

Compute:
a. Flow line equation
b. Discharge through the embankment

Answer:
a. Flow line equation
Laplace equation,
2
=0
2

= +

Boundary condition:
= 0

=
=

2 1

= 1 1 =

= 2 2 = + 1

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

73

Flow line equation becomes:


=

10 15
+ 15
100

= 0.015 + 15

b. Discharge
=

2 1
1 2
=
=

= 1. 105 . 1.7

15 10
= 3.50 . 106 3
100

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

74

7. Unconfined aquifer with variable thickness

H1

D1

D2

H2

Fig. 4.9. Flow through confined embankment

Data:
H1 = 8 m, H2 = 6 m, D1 = 2 m, D2 = 3 m, L = 100 m, K 1.10-7 m/s
Compute:
a. Discharge through the embankment
b. Flow line equation
Answer:
a. Discharge through the embankment
=
= 2 +

32
= 2 + 0.01
100

= (2 + 0.01 )

= (2 + 0.01 )

Solution by integration:

== . 1. 107 . (2 + 0.01 ) +

(2 + 0.01 )

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

75

Boundary condition:
= 0

= 100
1 2:

1 = 1 = 8 = . 1. 107 2 +

2 = 2 = 6 = . 1. 107 3 +

3
2 = . 1. 107
2

= . .
b. Flow line equation

Substitute q:
8 = . 1. 107 . 2 +

Substitute C:

= 11.42

= . 1. 107 . (2 + 0.01 ) +

So the flow line equation will be:

= . . . ( + . ) + .

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

76

V.

RADIAL FLOW

Assumptions for the equations are (Dupuit-Thiem):

The soils surrounding the well is assumed homogeneous

The flow towards the well is assumed as steady, laminar, radial and horizontal

The horizontal velocity is independent of depth

The ground water table is assumed as horizontal in all direction

The hydraulic gradient at any point on the drawdown is equal to the slope of
the tangent at the point. According to Castany G. (1967) that value is sinus at
the point.

1. Unconfined aquifer
a. Dupuit (1863)

h
hw

rw
r
R

Fig. 5.1. Circular unconfined aquifer


Let h be the depth of water at radial distance r. The area of the vertical cylindrical
surface of radius r and depth h through which water flow is:
A = 2rh
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.1)
77

The hydraulic gradient is:

(5.2)

V = Ki

(5.3)

Q = KiA

(5.4)

Discharge of inflow when the water levels in the well remain stationary (Darcys Law)

Substituting for Eqn (1) and (2) for (3), the rate inflow across the cylindrical
surface is:

=
2
(5.5)

The equation for discharge outflow from pumping is:

( )

(5.8)

The equation for permeability of soil is:


=

(5.8)

where,
H

: depth of water outside of aquifer layer

hw

: depth of water at face of pumping well

: radius of outside of aquifer layer

rw

: radius of pumped well

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

78

b. Dupuit-Thiem
1). According to UNESCO (1967),
G. Thiem (1906) based on Dupuit and Darcy principle developed a formula
of pumping and the formula is called Dupuit-Thiem.
Let h be the depth of water at radial distance r (Fig. 5.2.). The area of the
vertical cylindrical surface of radius r and depth h through which water
flow is:

h2
h1

r1
r

r2

Fig. 5.2. Pumping in unconfined aquifer


Area of cylinder of piezometric h and radius r: A = 2rh

The hydraulic gradient is: =

Darcys Law: V = Ki and Q = KiA


Substituting, so the rate inflow across the cylindrical surface is:
=

Rearranging the terms, so:


Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.9)

79

2
=

The equation for permeability of soil is:


=

(5.12)

The equation for discharge outflow from pumping is (Fig, 5.2):


Dupuit-Thiem Formula for the full penetration well in free aquifer:

where,

Q
K
D
r1 r2
h1 h2

:
:
:
:
:

(5.12)

discharge of pumping
coefficient of permeability
thickness of aquifer layer
distance from well to observation well 1 and 2 respectively
head of water in observation well 1 and 2 respectively

2). According to Castany (1967)


G. Thiem (1906) based on Dupuit principle developed a formula of pumping
in unconfined aquifer and the formula is called Dupuit-Thiem (Fig. 5.3.).
Darcys law:
= 2

dr/dh = tg

= 2. tg

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.13)
(5.14)
(5.15)

80

1
w

h2
h1
hw

rw

r1
r2
Ri

Fig. 5.3. Pumping in unconfined aquifer


tg =

1 2
r2 r1

For first permanent regime:

(5.16)

= 21 1 . tg

(5.17)

= 21 11 . tg1

(5.18)

For second permanent regime:

Dupuit-Thiem equation for the full penetration well in free aquifer:


( + )( )

=

( + )( )

where:

Q
K
r1 r2
1 2

:
:
:
:

(5.20)

(5.20)

discharge of pumping
coefficient of permeability
distance from well to observation well 1 and 2 respectively
drawdown in observation well 1 and 2 respectively

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

81

3). According to Murthy V.N.S. (1977)


Murthy developed the formula for unconfined aquifer by other parameters
and can be found as (Fig.5.3.):

=
=

( )

( )

(5.21)
(5.21)

If we write hw = (H - w) where w is the depth of maximum drawdown in the


test well or pumped well so (Castany, 1967):

=
=
=

( )

( )

(5.22)
(5.22)

where:
Q
K
Ri
rw
H
w

: discharge of pumping
: coefficient of permeability
: radius of influence
: radius of pumped well
: depth of water before pumping
: maximum drawdown (on well)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

82

2. Confined aquifer
a. Dupuit (1863)

H
hw

rw
R

Fig. 5.4. Circular unconfined aquifer

= . =

= 2

] = 2]

Dupuit (1863) formula for full penetration well on confined aquifer:


( )
=

where,

Q
K
D
R
rw
H
hw

:
:
:
:
:
:

(5.23)
(5.23)

discharge of pumping
coefficient of permeability
thickness of aquifer
radius of influence
radius of pumped well
depth of water outside of aquifer layer
: depth of water at face of pumping well

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

83

b. Dupuit-Thiem (1906)
1). According to UNESCO (1967)

h1

h2

r1
r2

Fig. 5.5. Circular unconfined embankment


=
Dupuit-Thiem formula for full penetration well on confined aquifer:

=

( )

(5.24)

(5.24)

where,

Q
K
D
r1 r2
h1 h2

:
:
:
:
:

discharge of pumping
coefficient of permeability
thickness of aquifer
distance from well to observation well 1 and 2 respectively
head of water in observation well 1 and 2 respectively

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

84

2). According to Castany (1967)

h2
h1
D

r1
r2

Fig. 5.6. Circular unconfined aquifer

Dupuit-Thiem equation for the full penetration well in confined aquifer:


=
=

( )

( )

where:
Q
K
D
r1 r2
1 2

:
:
:
:
:

(5.25)
(5.25)

discharge of pumping
coefficient of permeability
thickness of aquifer layer
distance from well to observation well 1 and 2 respectively
drawdown in observation well 1 and 2 respectively

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

85

3. Alternate equations of the Dupuit-Thiem principle for radial flow are:


1). Pumping in circular aquifer
a). Unconfined aquifer:
o Without observation well and with piezometric head data:
=

(5.8)

o Without observation well and with drawdown data:


=


( )

5.22)

b). Confined aquifer:


o Without observation well and with piezometric head data:
=


( )

(5.23)

2). Pumping in unlimited aquifer


a). Unconfined aquifer:
o Without observation well and with piezometric head data:

( )

(5.21)

o Without observation well and with drawdown data:


=

( )

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.22)

86

o With one observation well and with piezometric head data:


=

o With one observation well and with drawdown data:

( )
=

( + )( )

o With two observation wells data and piezometric head data:

(5.12)

(5.22)
(5.20)

(5.12)

o With two observation wells and drawdown data:


=

( + )( )

(5.20)

b). Confined aquifer:


o Without observation well and with piezometric head data:

=
=

( )
.
o With one observation well and with piezometric head data:

( )
o With one observation well and with drawdown data:

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.24)

(5.24)

87

( )

o With two observations well and piezometric head data:

( )

(5.25)
(5.24)

o With two observations well and drawdown data:

( )
( )
=

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.25)

(5.25)

88

3). Special case of confined aquifer


According to Murthy (1977), figure below shows a confined aquifer with the
test well and two observation wells. The elevation of water in the observation wells
rises above the top of the aquifer due to artesian pressure. When pumping at steady
flow condition from artesian well two cases might found they are:
Case 1: The water level in the test well might remain above the roof level (hw >
D)
Case 2: The water level in the test well might fall below the roof level (hw < D)

Case 2
Case 1

h1
D

hw

rw
r1
r
Ri

Fig. 5.7. Circular unconfined aquifer


Case 1: (hw > D)
=
=


( )

This equation is like mention above.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.26)
(5.26)

89

Case 2: (hw < D)


=
=

( )

(5.27)

( )

(5.27)

4. Correction to flow line


Real curve

H
h

h+h

Theoretic curve

Fig. 5.10. Pumping in unconfined aquifer


a. Castany (1967) implemented Dupuit (1868) equation:

For the lateral flow:


=

2 ( + )2
2

( ) = [ ( )]

For the free aquifer and parallel flow:


=

2 ( + )2

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.28)

90

= [ (

)]

b. Ehrenberger (1928)

( )
= ,

c. Vodgeo Institut (1954)

= , ( ),

(5.28)

(5.29)
(5.30)

d. Iokutaro Kano (1939)

0,324 < C < 1,60

(5.31)

e. Vibert (1949)

= , +

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.32)

91

5. Radius of depletion
According to many researchers, the radius of depletion depends on the depression
cone because the drawdown of pumping:

a. W.Sichardt (in Castany, 1967)


= ( )

where,

(5.33)

Ri
: radius of depletion (m)
H h : drawdown (m)
K
: permeability (m/s)

b. H.Cambefort (in Castany, 1967)


=

where,

Ri
H
Ki

(5.34)

: radius of depletion (m)


: drawdown (m)
: permeability (m/s)

c. I. Choultse (in Castany, 1967)


=

me
T
H
K
Ri

porosity of soil
duration of pumping (s or h)
drawdown (m)
permeability (m/s or m/h)
radius of depletion (m)

where,

:
:
:
:
:

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.35)

92

d. I.P. Koussakine (in Castany, 1967)


=

where,

K
T

(5.36)

: permeability (m/s)
: duration of pumping (hour)

e. Dupuit

1). Lateral flow :


1). Dupuit (in Castany, 1967)

(5.37)

(5.38)

2). Castany (1967)

2). Radial flow (in Castany, 1967):


Using Darcys Law, Castany (1967) proposed an equation:
=

+
( 2 2 )

( )
+

(5.39)

Sunjoto tried to improve above formula as:

( )
=

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

93

( )

= .

where,
Ri
r
Q
H
K
h

:
:
:
:
:
:

(5.40)

radius of depletion (m)


radius of observation well location (m)
discharge (m3/h)
drawdown (m)
permeability (m/h)
height of water on observation well (m)

f. Some authors (in Castany, 1967)


=

where,

Ri
Q
I

(5.41)

: radius of influence (L)


: rate of pumping (L/T3)
: precipitation intensity (debit/L2/T)

g. Kozen (in Bogomolov et Silin-Bektchoutine (1955)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(5.42)

94

h. G.V. Bogomolov (in Castany, 1967)


Table 5.1. Coefficient of permeability and Radius of depletion
Aquifer material
Granulometric
Coefficient of
Well
fraction
Permeability
discharge
(mm)
(m/day)
(m3/hour)
Clay sand
0,01-0,05
0,500-1,000
0,100-0,300
Fine sand
0,01-0,05
1,500-5,000
0,200-0,400
Clay sand in small
0,10-0,25
10,00-15,00
0,500-0,800
grains
Sand in small grains
0,10-0,25
20,00-25,00
0,800-1,700
Clay sand in medium
0,25-0,50
20,00-25,00
1,600-10,00
grains
Sand in medium grains
0,25-0,50
35,00-50,00
15,00-20,00
Clay sand in big grains
0,50-1,00
35,00-40,00
20,00-25,00
Sand in big grains
0,50-1,00
60,00-75,00
40,00-50,00
Gravels
100,0-125,0
75,00-100,0

Radius of
Depletion
(m)
65
65
75
75
100
100
100
125
150

Note: drawdown 5-6 meter

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

95

VI. FRESH AND SALINE WATER BALANCE


1. Basic equation
Badon Ghyben (1888) and Herzberg (1901),

precipitation

ground surface
h

groundwater surface
sea level

hf

fresh water
hs

boundary area of saline


water and fresh water
saline water

Fig. 6.1. Schematic of cross section circular homogenous, isotropic and porous island.
=

Normal condition:
Sea water

(6.3)

s = 1.025 tmass/m 3 = 1,025 kgmass /m3


} so:

Fresh water f = 1.00 tmass /m3 = 1,000 kgmass /m3

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

96

2. Shape of the Fresh-Salt Water interface

Ground surface

Water table

xo

Sea

zo
Fresh water

Saline water

Interface

Fig. 6.2. Flow pattern of fresh water in an unconfined coastal aquifer


The exact shape of the interface is (Glover in Todd, 1927):
2
2
+

(6.4)

2 12

=
( + )

(6.5)

2 =

The corresponding shape for the water table is given by:

The width xo of the submarine zone through which fresh water discharges
into the sea can be obtained for z=0,
=

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(6.6)

97

The depth of the interface beneath the shoreline zo, occurs where x = 0 so
that:
=

3. Upconing

(6.7)

Upconing is phenomenon that occurs when an aquifer contains an underlying of


saline water and is pumped by a well penetrating only the upper freshwater
portion of the aquifer, a local rise of the interface bellow the well occurs.

Fig. 6.2. Diagram of upconing of underlying saline water to a pumping well


(after Schmorak and Mercado ini Todd, 1980)
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

98

According to Todd (1980) using Dupuit assumption and Ghyben-Herzberg relation, the
upconing is:
=

Comment:

()

(6.8)

Compare 2d of this equation to the shape factor of Sunjoto (2002) F = 2R

Base on Forchheimer (1930) principle, Sunjoto proposes that the upconing is:
=
Usually:

o Sea water

o Fresh water f

(6.9)
= 1,000 kgmass /m3 = 1.00 tmass/m 3
= 1,000 kgmass /m3 = 1.00 tmass/m 3

And for the security take z/d < 0.50

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

99

4. Drawdown versus Built up


a. Theory of Dupuit-Thiem
pump axis level

gs

gwl

( + )

h
Drawdown due to
pumping

h1

r1
r2

Fig.6.3. Schematic of pumping

Discharge (Dupuit-Thiem) base on Darcys Law:

(6.11)

Problem: Solution of this equation needed minimum two dependent unknown (h 2 & r2)
so this formula is difficult for predicting computation.
where,
P : power (kN.m/s = kW)
Q : discharge (m3/s)
: specific weight of water
(9.81 kN/m3)
H : gap of groundwater level to pump axis (m)
S : drawdown (m)

: pump efficiency
K : coefficient of permeability (m/s)
h1 : piezometric of observation well 1
h2 : piezometric of observation well 2
r1 : radius of observation well 1
r2 : radius of observation well 2

From the above legends and schematic (Fig. 6.3) so the Power:

( + )

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(6.12)

100

b. Theory of Forhheimer (1930)

t1

h1

t2

h2

( )

2R

Fig.6.4. Theory of Forchheimer (1936)


According to Forchheimer (1930) discharge (Q) on the hole with casing is hydraulic
head (H) multiplied by coefficient of permeability (K) multiplied by shape factor (F),
and for the hole with casing F = 4 R.
On his auger test with Q = 0, or water was poured instantly and then be measured the
relationship between duration (t) and height of water on hole (h), he derived
mathematically the equation to compute coefficient of permeability:
=

( )

where,
K : coefficient of permeability
R : radius of hole
F : shape factor (F=4R)
h1 : depth of water in the beginning
h2 : depth of water in the end
t1 : time in the beginning
t2 : time in the end

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(6.13)

101

c. Theory of Sunjoto (1988)


Q

H
Q/FK
K

Built up due to
recharging

T
Relationship between H an T

Fig.6.5. Theory of recharge well and anti-drawdown (Sunjoto, 1988)


1). Discharge
Base on the steady flow condition theory of Forchheimer (1930), Sunjoto (1988)
developed the equation of discharge through the hole with continue discharge flow to
the hole which was derived mathematically by integration and the result is unsteady
flow condition:
Forchheimer (1936) formula:
=

(6.14)

Sunjoto (1988) formula:


=

(6.15)

This formula (6.14) when duration T is infinite so the equation will become Q = FKH
(see Fig. 6.5)
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

102

2). Drawdown - Built up value


Drawdown due to pumping (S) will occur in discharge system by pumping (Fig. 6.3) and
the reverse side the built up (anti-drawdown) due to recharging (H) will occur (Fig.
6.5) for the recharge system. For the equal condition and equal parameters the both
value drawdown and anti-drawdown are equal with opposite direction.
a). Steady flow condition

= =

b). Unsteady flow condition

= =

(6.16)
(6.17)

(negative sign means that the direction is opposite and in this case downward)
where,
S
H
Q
F
K
T
R

: drawdown (m)
: depth of water on the hole/well (m)
: discharge through the well (m3/s)
: shape factor (m)
: coefficient of permeability (m/s)
: duration of flow (s)
: radius of pipe/well (m)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

103

EXAMPLE:
Pumping system with discharge Q = 0.1667 m3/s, gab between pumping axis to the
groundwater level H = 6.50 m, coefficient of permeability K = 0.00047 m/s, length of
screen casing or perforated pipe L = 18 m and diameter of casing is 45 cm, fresh
water: f = 1,000 kg/m3 or f = 9.81 kN/m 3 and saline water: s = 1,025 kg/m3 or s =
10.552 kN/m3. Tip of the well in -28 m and the pumps are installed on the sandy
costal which beneath of the pump in -160.00 m laid the boundary of fresh and saline
water.
Compute:
Power needed and how is the pumping system related to salt water intrusion.

Q=0.1667 m3/s

+1.5
6.50 m

5.00 m

-5.00
S

23.00 m
18.00 m

-28.00
K=4.70*10

-4

Fig.6.6. Pumping data


Shape factor installed:
=

2 18 + 2 0.225 2

2
18
18 + 2 0.225
+
+ 1

2 0.225
2 0.225

= 25.95

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

104

The drawdown of 1 pump installed:

0.1667
=
= 13.667

25.95 0.00047
To decrease of drawdown value S is by increasing value of F value, in this case be
installed 4 wells with same dimension and each well equipped by P = 4.30 KW.
=

The drawdown of 4 pumps installed:


=

0.1667
= .
4 25.95 0.00047

The pumps are installed on the sandy costal which beneath of them laid down the
boundary of fresh and saline water in 200,00 m.
Upconing:
According to Sunjoto Eq.(6.9) is:
=

3.41
= 136,40
1,025 1,000
1,000

Power needed:

P = 0.1667 m3/s x 9.81 kN/m3 x (6.50+3.41) m/ 0.60 = 27 kN.m/s = 27 kW

Conclusion:
The level of boundary will move upward to 200 + 136.40 = 63.60 m and due to the
tip of the well level is 28 m so the saline water will not flow into tip of pipe so there
is not sea water intrusion.
Recommendation:
To avoid saline water intrusion to the pump so the shape factor Fd should be
increased by enlarging the diameter of well or/and adding the length of porous well.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

105

5. Saline water pumping


Since the last three decades, the cultivation of fish in coastal area speedy increase
due to the demand of fish consumption increases. The fishpond in fresh water and
brackish water had been developed largely in Indonesia and then the fish cultivation
in seawater is now its beginning to be developed. A seawater fishpond in sandy
coastal area which was equipped by geo-membrane had been developed in Yogyakarta
Special Province with 7.20 ha area, 60 cm depth. One third of water should be
replaced by seawater. The needed pumping system for hydraulic head
H = 7.50 m
and coefficient of permeability K = 0.00047 m/s and saline water: s = 1,025 kg/m 3 or
s = 10.552 kN/m3. This fishpond was installed 4 types of pumping system and one
system still under design. The problem is that the discharge of pumping only less than
half of the design discharge even though the power was doubled.
Volume of pond:
Vp = 72,000 m 2 x 0.60 m = 43,200 m 3
Daily seawater volume needed:
Vn = 33 % x 43,200 m3 = 14,400 m 3
Daily seawater discharge needed:
Qn = 14,400/24/3,600 = 0.1667 m 3/s 10 m 3/mnt
Power needed (without drawdown occurs):
Pn = Q H / kNm/s
Pn = 0.1667 m3/s x 10.552 kN/m 3x 7,50 m/ 0.60 = 21.99 kN.m/s = 21.99 kW

Analysis:

According to Forchheimer (1930) that radial flow in porous media, discharge (Q) is
equal to shape factor (F) multiplied by coefficient of permeability (K) multiplied by
hydraulic head (h).
=

(6.18)

(6.19)

(6.20)

Pumping power is discharge multiplied by specific weight of water multiplied by


hydraulic head divided by efficiency of pump system.

According to Sunjoto (2008), when drawdown of pumping is equal to hydraulic head


the equation becomes:

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

106

where,
Q : discharge (m3/s)
F : shape factor of well (m)
K : coefficient of permeability (m/s)
H : hydraulic head of pumping (m)
P : power (kN.m/s)
: specific weight of water (kN/m3)
: pump efficiency

Due to there is not data of saline water and fresh water boundary so it was
decided that the value of drawdown should be big enough to achieve the high upconing
and it will get get saline water discharge, In this case the drawdown was decided
equal to hydraulic gradient and shape factor needed can be computed by (6.20):
0,16672 1.025
=
= 47,29
0,60 2.135,85 0,00047

1. Lying pipes
This pumping system consists of four pipes of 20 cm diameter non-perforated and
the tip of pipes was covered by screen filter. The pipes were lied down about 1 m
under the ground (sand) surface and always sink under low sea water surface to
achieve the discharge water free from predators. The installed shape factors is
(Sunjoto, 2002):
F=2R
(6.21)
where,
F : shape fator of pipe (m)
R : radius of pipe (m)
Computed by (5), the installed shape factor for the 4 pipes is (6.21):
Fi = 4 x 2 x x 0,10 = 2,51 m

This system was not installed the pump due to the current of the sea is big
enough to destroy the lied pipes.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

107

4 0,20 m

Indian Ocean

Fig.6.7. Lying pipes


2. Cubical Water Intake
This system consist of hollow 6 m sides cubical concrete structure and the base of
cube without concrete slab lied down on the costal sand and sink always under
lowest sea level. The aim of this system is keeping of 2 pumps from fast current
and high wave. Inside of the cube was installed two cylinder concrete of 60 cm
diameter where the tip of suction pumps take a water. So the shape factor of this
install system is (6.21):
Fi = 2 x 2 x x 0,30 = 3,77 m
This system was installed 2 pumps of 1x3.00 KW and 1x4.00 KW

Indian Ocean

6.00

Fig.6.8. Cubical Water Intake


3. Impermeable Deep well
This system consists of 2 steel non perforated pipes of 45 cm diameter with length
60 m and the installed shape factor can be computed by (6.21):
F = 2 x 2 x x R = 2 x 2 x x 0,225 = 2,827 m
This system was installed 2 pumps of 16.00 KW
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

108

Indian Ocean
60 m

Fig.6.9. Deep Well


4. Perforated swallow pipes
This system consists of 6 meter perforated pipes 30 cm diameter was installed in
costal sandy area and according to Sunjoto (2002) the shape factor is:
=

2 + 22

+ 2 2
+ + 1

2
2

(6.22)

where,
F : shape factor of pipe (m)
R : radius of pipe (m)
L : porous length (m)

So shape factor (6.22):


2 6 + 2 0,15 2
=
= 10,326
2
6
6 + 2 0,15
+
+ 1

2 0,15
2 0,15

This system was installed 1 pumps of 1x3.00 KW

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

109

Indian Ocean

6,00

Fig.6.10. Swallow Porous Pipes

Analysis

a. Installations
Acctually there were 4 types of pumping systems were built in this project but
the Lying Pipes was broken down by the current and the wave of the ocean and the
pump was not installed so its rest 3 pumping systems operate with the conditions:
1). Total installed power
P = 0 + (3,00 + 4,50) + (16.00 + 16.00) + 3,00 = 42,50 KW
Design power was 21,99 KW
2). Total installed shape factor:
F = 0 + 3,770 + 2,827 + 10,326 = 16,923 m
Needed shape factor is 47,29 m.
3). Total real discharge:
Q = Q1 + Q2 + Q3 + Q 4
Q = 0 + (0,18 + 0,27) + (1,80 + 1,80) + 0,18 = 4,23 m3/mnt
Design discharge was 10 m3/mnt.
b. Shape factor point of view
1). Cubic Water Intake
When this system without 60 cm cylinder concrete, it will get bigger shape
factor as:
= 4
(6.23)
= 46 6 = 24 , = 3,77
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

110

To get shape factor F = 47,29 m you can build Cubical Water Intake Pumping
System with dimension:

When Cylinder form so the radius is:


R = 47,29 / 2 = 7,50 m.

When Rectangular form the sides are (6.23):


= 4 = 47,29 = 11,83 12

To provide the discharge of the project 10 m3/mnt it can be built only one Cubic
Water Intake Pumping System with dimension radius 7.50 m for the Cylinder form or
Rectangular form with the sides 12 m, equiped by 5 x 4,50 KW pumps.

2). Deep well


To provide the discharge of the project 10 m3/mnt it can be built only 3 Deep
Wells equiped by 16 m perforated pipes and the shape factor (6.22):
= 2

2 16 + 2 0,225 2
2

16
16 + 2 0,225
+
+ 1
2 0,225
2 0,225

= 2 23,726 = 47,452

To provide the discharge demand of the project 10 m3/mnt it can be built only 2
Deep Wells with 16 m perforated pipe each, equiped by 2 x 12 KW pumps.
3). Perforated swallow well
To provide the discharge of the project 10 m3/mnt it can be built only 5
Perforated Swallow Well Systems due to total shape factor is 5 x 10,326 = 51.63 m >
47,26 m with 5 x 4.50 Kw Pumps.

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

111

c. Horizontal perforated pipes (Imron Rosyadi, 2004)


According to Imron Rosyadi (2004) in his Master Thesis that the best solution
is 3 m diameter concrete cylinder with height of 13 m shoud be sunk 8 m on the sand
and equiped 5 perforated pipes 4 m length and 10 cm diameter (Fig.6.11)

13.00
Indian Ocean

10 cm

3.0

4.00

Fig.6.11. Horizontal perforated pipes


1). Shape factor of concrete cylinder is (6.21):
F1 = 2 x x 1,50 = 9,42 m

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

112

2). Shape factor of perforated pipes is (6.22):


2 = 5

2 4 + 2 0,05 2

4
4 + 2 0,05
+
+ 1
2 0,05
2 0,05

= 5 5,769 = 28,845

Total shape factor of concrete cylinder and horizontal perforated pipes is:
F = F1 + F2 = 9,42 + 28, 845 = 38,265 m < 47,29 m.
Conclusion:
The all designs never considerated shape factor of tip of well therefore the power
was doubled but the discharge was only less than half of the designed value.

5. Horizontal Perforated Pipe (HPP)


HPP is perforated pipe which are installed horizontally to get bigger discharge or
recharge of the well. For discharge well the hydraulic head is the drawdown of
pumping and for recharge well the hydraulic head is the difference of groundwater
elevation on the well before and after pumping.

Gambar 6.12. Cross section of horizontal perforated pipes

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

113

Data:
Coefficient of permeability K = 10-3 m/s
Length of HPP L = 4 m
Radius of HPP r = 0.15 m
Radius of well R = 2 m
Number of pipe n = 8 pcs
Diameter of pipe pore f = 0.003 m
Pores distance 0.15 m
Axis of HPP elevation: 9.50 m
Groundwater elevation above HPP: -6.50 m
Ground surface elevation: 0.00 m

Some of the methods of computation are:


a. Mikel & Klaers Methode (1956)
=

(6.24)

where,
Q
n
L
W

: discharge (m 3/s)
: number of pipe
: length of pipe (m)
: flow velocity (m/s)
3

= = = 103 = 0.001
3

Discharge of 8 pore pipes:

= 8 42 0,001 = 0.402285 3

b. Spiridonoff & Hantushs Method (1964)


=

where,
Q
Sv
Af
h
D

: discharge (m 3/s)
: specific yield aquifer of sand and gravel (Sv = 20 %)
: total area of pore hole of each pipe (m2)
: distance between axis of pipe to groundwater level (m)
: diameter of pipe (m)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(6.25)

114

Total area of pore holes of each pipe:


=

1
1
2 = 0.0032 162 = 0.114557 2
4
4

Distance between axis of HPP to groundwater level: h= 3 m


Discharge of 8 pipes:
= 8 0.20 0.114557 3 = 0.549874 3

c. Nasjonos Method (2002)

.


= .

where,
Q
Af
K
L
D
h
l

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

(6.26)

discharge (m3/s)
total area of pore hole of each pipe (m2)
coefficient of permeability (m/s)
length of pipe (m)
diameter of pipe (m)
distance between axis of pipe to groundwater level (m)
distance of flow (m)

Discharge of 8 pore pipes:


0.114557 3 0.2366

103 32 0.30 = 0.102159 3
= 148.41
3
4 0.3
d. Das, Saha, Rao dan Uththmanthans Method (2009)

The assumption of pores clogging is 50%


The assumption Af is 20% the surface area of pipe
= %

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(6.27)

115

where,
Q
L
D
Af
V

:
:
:
:
:

discharge (m3/s)
length of pipe (m)
diameter of pipe (m)
total area of pore hole of each pipe (m2) = 20 % area of pipe
flow velocity in the pipe (m/s) V = 0.50 cm/s=0.005 m/s

Discharge of 8 pipes:
= 8 ( 4 0.30 20%) 50% 0.005 = 0.150857 3
e. Sunjotos Method (1988; 2002)
This method describes that when the condition is steady flow so the formula is
Forhheimer (1930) but that when the condition is unsteady flow so the formula is
Sunjoto (1988) as follows:
When steady flow condition Forhheimer (1930):
=

where,
Q
F
K
H
R
T

(6.28)

: discharge (m 3/s)
: shape factor of pipe or well (m) Table 8.1.
: coefficient of permeability (m/s)
: hydraulic head (m)
: radius of well or pipe (m)
: duration of flow (s)

Total length of HPP is L = 4 x 8 = 32 m


The assumption that hydraulic head is H = 3 m
Diameter of well is D = 4 m or radius R = 2 m
The porosity and coefficient of permeability of pipe pore is bigger than the
soil and permeability of porous wall of well is bigger to the permeability of soil.

Shape factor for this condition (Sunjoto, 2002):


=

+
+ +

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(6.29)
116

6 =

2 32 + 2 0.15 2

32
32 + 2 0,15
+
+ 1
2 0,15
2 0,15

= 37.58047

All the methods are computed in steady flow condition using the above data so:
1). Discharge through 8 pipes when base and wall of well is impermeable:
1 = = 37.58047 103 3 = 0.112743 3
2). Discharge through 8 pipe pores when base of well is porous and wall of well is
impermeable:
Shape factor of well for this condition (Sunjoto, 2002) is:
4 = 2 = 2 2 = 12.566371
Discharge through the well base:
= = = 12.566371 103 3 = 0.037699 3
Total discharge is:

2 = (0.112474 + 0.037699 ) = 0.150441 3


3). Discharge through 8 pipe pores when both of base and wall of well are porous:

Shape factor for wall with depth of water is L = 4 m with radius R = 2 m is (Sunjoto,
2002):

6 =

+ 2
+ + 1

2
2

2 4 + 2 0.15 2

4+22 4
+
+ 1
22
22

= 20.99929 3

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

117

Discharge through the well base :


= = = 20.99929 103 3 = 0.062999 3
Total discharge is:

3 = (0.112474 + 0.037699 + 0.062999 ) = 0.213172 3


Table 8.6. Comparison of the result
No.
Method
1

Mikel & Klaer (1956)

Spiridonoff & Hantush


(1964)
Nasjono (2002)

3
4
5

Das, Saha, Rao &


Uththmanthan (2009)
Sunjoto (1988; 2002)

Discharges (m 3/s)
0.402285
0.549874
0.102159

1 = 0.112474

0.150857

2 = 0.150441

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

3 = 0.213172

118

VII. UNSTEADY FLOW


1. Theis (1935)
The assumptions made in applying these equations to solution of aquifer problems are:

The system is infinite


The aquifer is homogenous, isotropic and uniform thickness
Prior to removal or addition of water the piezometric is horizontal
The pumping is at constant rate
The pumped well penetrates the aquifer
Water removed from storage is discharged immediately

Theis (1906) used the exponential integral solution to analyze unsteady flow in the
following term:

( )
=
4

(7.1)

The integral is a function of lower limit u and is known as an exponential integral. It


can be expanded as a convergent series so that Eq. 7.1. becomes:
=

. +
+

. ! . !
. !

(7.2)

where,
2
=
4

(7.3)

The storage coefficient is


=

4
2

(7.4)

The exponential integral W(u) = -Ei(-u) can be represented by the series below and
the values is tabulated in Table 7.1.
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

119

() = . +

. ! . !
. !

(7.5)

Table 7.1. Values of W(u) for Values of u


u

2.0

3.0

0.219

0.049

0.013

0.0038

10-1

1.82

1.22

0.91

0.70

0.56

0.45

0.37

0.31

0.26

10-2

4.04

3.35

2.96

2.68

2.47

2.30

2.15

2.03

1.92

10-3

6.33

5.64

5.23

4.95

4.73

4.54

4.39

4.26

4.14

10-4

8.63

7.94

7.53

7.25

7.02

6.84

6.69

6.55

6.44

10-5

10.94

10.24

9.84

9.55

9.33

9.14

8.99

8.86

8.74

10-6

13.24

12.55

12.14

11.85

11.63

11.45

11.29

11.16

11.04

10-7

15.54

14.85

14.44

14.15

13.93

13.75

13.60

13.46

13.34

10-8

17.84

17.15

16.74

16.46

16.23

16.05

15.90

15.76

15.65

10-9

20.15

19.45

19.05

18.76

18.54

18.35

18.20

18.07

17.95

10-10

22.45

21.76

21.76

21.06

20.84

20.66

20.50

20.37

20.25

10-11

24.75

24.06

24.06

23.36

23.14

22.96

22.81

22.67

22.55

10-12

27.05

26.36

26.36

25.67

25.44

25.26

25.11

24..97

24.86

10-13

29.36

28.66

28.66

27.97

27.75

27.56

27.41

27.28

27.16

10-14

31.66

30.97

30.56

30.27

30.05

29.87

29.71

29.58

29.46

10-15

33.96

33.27

32.86

32.58

32.35

32.17

32.02

31.88

31.76

1.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

0.0011 0.00036 0.00012 0.000038 0.000012

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

120

Example:
Pumping in confined aquifer, with full penetration and a discharge 2500 m3/d.
Observation well 60 m away from the well. Data found of drawdown in function of
duration of pumping and value of r 2/t is tabulated in Table 7.2.:
Table 7.2. Pumping test data

t
(min)
0
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
4
5
6

s
(m)
0
0,20
0,27
0,30
0,34
0,37
0,41
0,45
0,48

r2/t
m /min

3600
2400
1800
1440
1200
900
720
600
2

t
(min)
8
10
12
14
18
24
30
40
50

s
(m)
0,53
0,57
0,60
0,63
0,67
0,72
0,76
0,81
0,85

r2/t
m /min
450
360
300
257
200
150
120
90
72
2

t
(min)
60
80
100
120
150
180
210
240
-

s
(m)
0,90
0,93
0,96
1,00
1,04
1,07
1,10
1,12

r2/t
m /min
60
45
36
30
24
20
17
15
2

Solution:
Values of s and r 2/t are plotted on logarithmic paper and values of W(u) and u from
Table. 7.1. are plotted on another another sheet of logarithmic paper and curve is
drawn through the points. The two sheets are superposed and shifted with coordinate
axe parallel until the observational point coincide with the curve as shown in Fig. 7.1.
convenient match point is selected with W(u) = 1.00 and u = 1 x 10-2, so that s = 0.18 m
and r 2/t = 150 m3/min = 216,000 m3/d. Thus, from equation:
=
=

2500 (1.00)

( ) =
= 1110 2
4 (0.18)
4

4 4(1110)(1 x 102 )
=
= 0.000206
216,000
2

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

121

Fig. 7.1. Theis method of superposition for solution of the non equilibrium equation

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

122

2. Expansion of Theis (1935)


a. Cooper-Jacob (1946)
Cooper-Jacob noted that for small value of r and large value of t, u is small so
that the series terms of Theis formula become negligible after the first two
terms then the drawdown can be expressed by the asymptote:
=

2
0.5772

4
4

2.25
2.30
2

4

Rewriting and changing to decimal logarithms, this reduce to:

(7.6)
(7.7)

Therefore, a plot of drawdown s versus the logarithms of t shows a straight line.


Projecting this line to s = 0, where t = to (Fig. 9.2)
0=

2.30
2.25

4
2

(7.8)

Fig. 7.2. Cooper-Jacob method for solution of the non equilibrium equation
and it follows:
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

123

2.25
=1
2

(7.9)

2.25
2

(7.10)

resulting in:
=

And value for T can be obtained by noting that if t/to = 10, then log t/to = 1, there
for replacing s by s, where s is the draw down difference per log cycle of t and
equation becomes:
=

2.30
4

The straight line approximation for this method should be restricted to small values
of u (u < 0.01) to avoid large errors.

EXAMPLE:
From pumping test data Table 9.1, s and t plotted on semilogathmic paper, as shown in
Fig. 9.2. A straight line is fitted through the points, and s = 0.40 m and t o = 0.39
= 2.70 .10-4 day are read. Then,

min
=

2.30 2.30(2500)
=
= 1090 2
4 (0.40)
4

2.25 2.25(1090)(2.70 . 104 )


=
(60)2
2

and,

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

124

b. Chow (1952)
He introduced a method of solution with the advantages of avoiding curve fitting and
being unrestricted in application. The observational data are plotted on
semilogarithmic paper in the same manner as for the Cooper-Jacob method. On the
plotted curve, choose an arbitrary point and note the coordinates, t and s. Next, draw
a tangent to the curve at the chosen point and determine the drawdown difference
s, in feet, per log cycle of time. Then compute F(u) from:

or,

= ( )

( )

=
2.30

(7.11)
(7.12)

and find corresponding values of W(u) and u from Fig. 9.3. and finally compute the
formation constants T , s and r2/t of Theis equation.

Fig. 7.3. Relation among F(u), W(u) and u (After Chow 1952, in Todd, 1980)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

125

EXAMPLE:
In Fig. 9.4. data are plotted from Table 9.1. and point A is selected on the curve
where t = 6 min = 4.20 .10-3 day and s = 0.47 m. A tangent is constructed as shown;
the drawdown difference per log cycle of time is s = 3.80 m. Then F(u) = 0.47/0.38
= 1.24, and from Fig. 9.3. W(u) = 2.75 and u = 0.038. Hence,
=

2500 (2.75)
( ) =
= 1160 2
4 (0.47)
4

4 4(1160)(4.2 x 103 )(0.038)


=
= 0.000206
(60)2
2

Fig. 7.4. Chow method for solution of the non equilibrium equation

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

126

c. Recovery Test (Todd, 1980)


At the end of a pumping test, when pumping is stopped, the water levels in pumping
observation wells will begin rice. This is referred to as the recovery of groundwater
levels, while measurements of drawdown below the original static water level during
the recovery period are known as residual drawdown. (See Fig. 9.5). It should be
noted that measurement of the recovery within a pumped well provide an estimate of
transmissivity even without an observation well and no comparable value of S can be
determined by this recovery test method.
The rate f recharge Q to the well during recovery is assumed constant and equal to
the mean pumping rate. The drawdown after pumping shut down will be identically the
same as if the discharge had been continued and hypothetical recharge well with the
same flow were superposed on the discharging well at the instant the discharge is
shut down.

Fig. 7.5. Drawdown and recovery curves in an observation well near pumping well
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

127

Using Theis principle that the residual drawdown s can be given as,
=

where,

[ ( ) ()]
4

2
=
4

2
=
4

(7.13)
(7.14)

and t and t are defined in Fig. 9.5. and for small r , large t the well functions can be
approximated by the equations:
.

(7.15)

And the transmissivity becomes:


=

2.30
4

(7.16)

EXAMPLE:
A well pumping at an uniform rate 2500 m3/d was shut down after 240 min and
measurements were made in an observation well of s and t and computation of values
of t/t tabulated in Table. 9.3, and then plotted versus s on semilogarithmic paper
(Fig. 9.6 ). A straight line is fitted through the points ands = 0.40 m is determined,
then:
=

2.30 2.30(2500)
=
= 1140 3
4 (0.40)
4

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

128

Fig. 7.6. Recovery test method for solution of the non equilibrium equation

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

129

Table 7.3. Recovery test data, pump shut down at 240 min (after Todd, 1980)
t

t/t

min

min

241

241

0.89

242

121

0.81

243

81

0.76

245

49

0.68

247

35

0.64

10

250

25

0.56

15

255

17

0.49

20

260

13

0.55

30

270

0.38

40

280

0.34

60

300

0.28

80

320

0.24

100

340

3.4

0.21

140

380

2,7

0.17

180

420

2.3

0.14

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

130

VIII. RECHARGE SYSTEM


1. Well
Using Forchheimer (1930) principle which form is steady state flow condition,
Sunjoto (1988) developed an unsteady state radial flow formula for well which
was derived by integration solution. His formula computes a dimension of
recharge well, which catch rainwater to infiltrate to the ground to increase
groundwater storage.

Hollow well
=

(8.1)

Filled material well


=

H
H
F
K
T
R
Q
C
I
A
n

depth of hollow well (L)


depth of filled material well (L)
shape factor (L)
coefficient of permeability (L/T)
dominant duration of precipitation (T)
radius of well (L)
inflow discharge (L3/T), dan Q = C I A
runoff coefficient of roof ( )
precipitation intensity (L/T)
roof area (L2)
porosity of filled material ( )

where:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(8.2)

131

Formula Development of Shape Factors


a. Ellipse

Basic equation of ellipse (LaRue et Risi, 1960. Mathmatiques Intermediaires):

2 2
+
=1
2 2

Theoreme:

2 = 2 + 2

(8.3)

x
ae
y

e : excentrisity of ellipse and e < 1


a and b positive

Fig. 8.1. Ellipse


b. Basic equation of radial flow
R

H
dh
H1

R0

Ho

dr

Fig. 8.2. Cross section of aquifer between two impermeable layers


Boundary condition:

x = Ro
Y = Ho
Y = H1

x=R
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

132

Darcys Law (1856)


= =

= = 2
2
=

(8.4)

c. Well condition 5b of Dachler.


According to Dachler (1936), the direction of equipotential to the permeable casing
will be an ellipses form and the stream lines which are perpendicular to them are flow
lines which hyperbolic form, and from his equation can be concluded that no water
flow through the base of the well (Fig. 8.5.).
When h = H and a = the equation will be:
( ) =

( ) =

(8.5)

2
+ 1 +
2

2 ( )

2
+ 1 +

When t = L, a = R so:
=

+ +

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

(8.6)

133

Fig. 8.3. Cross section of aquifer under impermeable layer (Dachler, 1936)

d. Well condition 5b of Sunjoto (1989)


Assumption I:
Assumption II:

= + 2
a = Ro 2( L + R);

b = L;

c=R

Explication of assumption I.
The fact that there is a flow of water though the base of well so it must be
taken consideration.

Area of base of well is equal to the area of the wall which length R but due
to the hydraulic gradient on the base of well is bigger than on the wall so we
take value 2/3 R as an addition of length of permeable well.

Finally on the detail computation it found that addition of length of permeable


wall is not 2/3 R but R. ln2:

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

134

L=L+Rln2

b. Theoritic

a. Real

Fig. 8.4. Cross section of real and theoritic aquifer


1
2 + = 2 + 2
2

= ( + ) + +

Substitution:
=
=

(8.4)

2 ( + 2)

( + 2) + 2 + 2

2 ( + 2)

2
+ 2
+ 1 +

(8.7)

(8.7)

+
+ +

(8.8)

When R = 1, L = 0 and = + 2 so F5b = 3,964 R and this value approach

99% of F3b = 4R (Forchheimer, 1930)

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

135

Table 8.2. Assumption I, between real and theorem condition on the tip of well

Description

Dachler (1936)
Length of permeable wall

Sunjoto (1989; 2010)


Length of permeable wall

Real

Function

Real

Function

Condition 1

Condition 5b

L+ R.ln2

Condition 6b

L+ R.ln2

Table 8.3. Assumption II between real and theorem condition on the tip of well
Description

Dachler (1936)

Sunjoto (1989; 2010)

Condition 1

a = Ro 4( L + R)
b = 2L
c=R

Condition 5b

a = Ro L
b=L
c=R

a = Ro 2( L + R)
b=L
c=R

Condition 6b

a = Ro L
b=L
c=R

a = Ro ( L + R)
b=L
c=R

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

136

Table 8.4. Flowchart of formula derivation


No

Condition

Shape Factor

Reverences

3b

Forchheimer
(1930)
Dachler (1936)
Aravin (1965)

3 = 4
=

5b

5 =

2 + 22

+ 2 2
+ + 1

4 = 5.50

4b

=
=

6b

6 =

4,000

+ +

F
when
L=0



+ +

2 + 22

+ 2 2

+ + 1
2
2

Dachler (1936)

0/0

Sunjoto (2002)

3,964

Harza (1935)
Taylor (1948)
Hvorslev
(1951)
Sunjoto (2002)

5,50
3
6,283
4
5

Dachler (1936)

0/0

Sunjoto (2002)

6,283

Note: The flowchart of thinking

Formula F3b was derived mathematically like F 2a and F3a.

Based on F3b, be derived the first F5b then the second F6b finally the third F4b.
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

137

REFERENCES
Porchet M., 1931. Hydrodinamique des puits. Ann. Du Genie Rural fasc.6
UNESCO, 1967. 1967. Methods and Techniques of Groundwater Investigation and Development, Water
Resources Series No. 33, New York.
Murthy V.N.S. 1977. Soil Mechanic and Foundation Engineering, Delhi (2nd ed.)
Todd, D.K. 1980. Groundwater Hydrology, John Wiley & Sons.
Chow, V.T. 1952. On the determination of transmissibility and storage coefficients from pumping test data ,
Trans. Amer. Geophysical Union, v.33, pp. 397-404.
Cooper H.H,Jr. and Jacob C.E. 1946. A generalized graphical method for evaluating formations constants
and summarizing well-field history, Trans. Amer. Geophysical Union, v.27, pp. 526-534.
This C.V. 1935. He relation between the lowering of piezometric surface and the rate and duration of
discharge of well using groundwater storage, Trans. Amer. Geophysical Union, v.16, pp. 519-524
Glover R.E.1966. Groundwater movement, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Engineering Monograph no 31,
Denver,76.
Lee, Richard. 1980. Forest Hydrology, translated by Subagio Sentot, Gadjah Mada Press, Yogyakarta
Chow, V.T. 1964. Handbook of Applied Hydrology. New York, McGraw Hill Book Co.
LinsleynR.K., M.A. Kohler J.I.H. Paulhus. 1975. Hydrology for Engineers. New York, McGraw Hill Book
Co.
Suharyadi. 1984. Geohidrologi (Ilmu Air Tanah) Lecture none, Jurusan Teknik Geologi Fakultas Teknik
Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Subsurface Hydrology-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM=2012

138