Lecture note:
Post Graduate Program
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Faculty of Engineering Gadjah Mada University
Yogyakarta, 2012
I.
INTRODUCTION
1. Etymology
Hydrogeology
(eng)
Geohydrologie (fr)
Geohidrologi (id)
Geohydrology
(eng)
Hydrogeologie (fr)
Hidrogeologi (id)
2. Hydrology
a. Water cycle
SUN
Sublimation
Condensation
Infiltration
Surface runoff
Evapotranspiration
Groundwater
discharge
Spring
Groundwater
storage
Evaporation
b. Water Balance
Water balance on the ground surface is:
R
PE = R + I
P
E
R
I
: Precipitation
: Evapotranspiration
: Runoff
: Infiltration
O
S
I  O = S
I : Inflow
O : Outflow
S : Storage
Fig 1.3. Water balance of the storage
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
Volume x106
Percentage
3
94.000 %
2.000 %
1,370 Km
30 Km
0.010 %
3
60 Km
4.000 %
0.040 %
100.000 %
Groundwater
Surface water
Total water
Volume x106
1,370 Km
Percentage
97.200 %
2.100 %
0.001 %
0.600 %
98.80 %
1.20 %
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)
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
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)
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.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15. Almost good quality of water resources
1.
Surface Reservoirs
Advantages
Disadvantages
structural failure
failure
6. Easily contaminated
fallout
fallout
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
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
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 semiarid 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
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.
10
Fig. 1.7. A modern domestic dug well with rock curb, concrete seal and hand
pump. (after Todd, 1980)
11
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)
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)
13
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)
14
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 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.
15
Springs
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)
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.)
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.)
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, DEAHydrology of GroundwaterPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM
19
4. Qualitative Theory
a. Early Greek Philosophers
Homer, Thales (624546 BC) and Plato (428347 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 (384322 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 (15091589)
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 (15711630)
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 (16021680)
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, DEAHydrology of GroundwaterPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM
20
5. Quantitative Theory
a. Pierre Perrault (16081690)
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 (16201684)
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 (17001782)
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 (17971869).
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.
21
22
n. Expansion of Theis
CooperJacob 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), AlDahir &
Morgenstern (1969), Luthian & Kirkham (1949), Kirkham & van Bavel (1948),
Raymond & Azzouz (1969), Smiles & Young (1965) and Sunjoto (19882008).
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
23
Dimension
Unit
mass
length
time
Force
m
l
t
mlt2
gram
meter
second
N (Newton) = kgm.s2
Energy
ml2t2
J (Joule)
Power
ml2t3
W (Watt) = N.m.s1
Pressure
ml1t2
N.m2
= N.m
b. Metric prefixes
Table 1.9. Metric prefices
Prefix
Symbol
Factor
Prefix
Symbol
Factor
tera
1012
centi
102
giga
109
milli
103
mega
106
micro
106
kilo
103
nano
109
hecto
102
pico
1012
deca
da
101
femto
1015
deci
101
atto
1018
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
Power
1 kg.ms1
g.W
1 HP = 75.g.W = 734 W
d. MetricEnglish equivalents
Table 1.11. MetricEnglish 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
6). Temperature
o
C = K 273.15
= (o F 32)/1.8
7). Pressure
1 Pa = 9.8692 .106 atm
= 105 bar
1l
= 102 millibar
1m3
= 10 dyne/cm2
4). Mass
1g
1 kg = 2.205 lb (mass)
= 9.842 .104 long ton
= 0.0075 mm Hg
= 0.1020 kg (force)/m2
= 0.02089 lb (force)/ft2
25
= 15.85 gpm
= 0.02282 mgd = 0.03531 cfs
= 105 dyne
= 0.1020 kg (force)
= 0.2248 lb (force)
10). Power
1 W = 9.478 .104 BTU/s
= 0.2388 cal/s
26
e. Legends
1). Density
Symbol
Dimension
: ml3
Unit
: kgmass.m3 or slug.ft3
Detail:
1 feet = 0.305 m
1 slug.ft3
= 514.580 kgmass.m3
In practical use:
pure water
= 1,000 kgmass.m 3
= 1.94 slug.ft3
sea water
= 1,026 kgmass.m 3
= 1.99 slug.ft3
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
Symbol
: = .g
Dimension
: ml2t2
Unit
27
Symbol
: s
Dimension
:
Unit
:
s = /w
= /w
4). Viscosity
(a). Dynamic viscosity
Symbol
Dimension
: ml1t1
Unit
: N.s.m2
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
Symbol
Dimension
: l2t1
Unit
: m2s1 or stokes
= /
28
Symbol
Dimension
: mt2
Unit
: N.m1
water/air
= 0.074 N.m 1
t = 60o F; p = atm
Water
Air
Unit
Water
Air
Unit
1000
1.37
kgmass.m3
1.94
2.37 .103
slug.ft3
1.3 .102
1.8 .104
poise
2.3 .105
3.7 .107
lbs.s.ft2
1.3 .106
1.3 .105
m2s1
1.2 .105
1.6 .104
ft2s1
29
2. Vertical Distribution
Ground surface
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
30
a. Zone of Aeration
This zone divided into:
Capillary zone
2 = 2
=
hc
2r
hc
0.15
31
Table 2.1. Capillary rise in samples of unconsolidated materials (after Lohman in Todd,
1980)
Soils Type
Fine gravel
5 2
2.50
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
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
32
b. Zone of Saturation
1). Specific retention (Sr)
Sr
= Wr / V
Wr
= Wy / V
Wy
= S r + Sy
Solid phase
Liquid phase
Air phase
vapor
Va
air
Wa
Vw
water
Ww
Vs
solid
Ws
Vv
33
100%
100%
100%
= 1
3=1
3=1
3 = 1000
34
The specific gravity of mass of soil including air, water and solid:
=
= =
The specific gravity of mass of soil excluding air, water and solid:
=
=
= =
35
3. Type Aquifer
gs
gs
K1<K
gwt = ps
a. Unconfined aquifer
K=0
gs
ps
ps
K1<K
gwt
gwt
D=H
gs
gwt
gwt
e. Suspended 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
Note: Compare to Todd (1980) page 44 about leaky aquifer, which the elevation of
gwt is higher than ps.
36
III.
BASIC PARAMETERS
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.
(3.2)
+
+
(3.3)
=0
&
=0
37
=
+
=
= +
= +
= +
(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
(3.6)
where,
H
k
A
dT
dx
:
:
:
:
:
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
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).
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
:
:
:
:
(3.18)
2
=
(3.27)
40
2 2
=
=
.
8
32
(3.28)
3). Temperature
1,
=
=
2.
162
(3.29)
(3.30)
K1
V1.i.K1
Z1
K2
V2.i.K2
Z2
Kn1
Vn1.i.Kni
Kn
Vn.i.Kn
Kh
Zn1
Zn
( + + + )
(3.31)
41
= 1 1 = 2 2 =
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:
(3.33)
(3.34)
= = . .
( )
(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
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
(3.41)
According to Allen Hazen (1911) in Murthy (1977) the empirical equation can
be computed as:
2
= 10
where,
(3.42)
43
K
C
D10
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
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.
=
( )
(3.49)
45
where:
K
R
F
t1
h1
:
:
:
t2 :
As
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, DEASubsurface HydrologyPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM=2012
46
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
(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, DEASubsurface HydrologyPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM=2012
47
(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)
Note:
48
Table 3.1. Value of C after Boast and Kirkham (in Todd, 1980)
Lw/
rw
y/
Lw
HLw
0.05
0.1
0.2
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
Soils type
Drainage
Condition
101  102
Clean gravels
Good
Pumping Test
101
Clean sand
Good
101 104
Good
mixtures
Recommended method of
determining K
or Pumping test
105
Poor
Falling head
106
Silt
Poor
Falling head
107 109
Clay soils
Practically
impervious
Consolidation test
49
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.
50
Q in 10 bar
Q in 10 bar
Q in 10 bar
2R
2R
Q in 10 bar
2R
(3). Condition of well b.
2R
(4). Condition of well c.
Data:
o Radius of hole
o
o
o
o
o
To compute the value of Shape Factor, Sunjoto (2010) proposed formula for three
conditions of well as:
2( + 2 ) 2 2
+ + 1
(3.53)
51
(3.54)
( + 2) 2
+ + 1
(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):
52
Compare the results above for all conditions (a. b, c) to the Lugeon aproximation that K
= 1x105 cm/s = 1x107 m/s
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
i = sin
54
=
=
2 + 2
2 + 2
1 +
(4.1)
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
55
x
b
K
+
+ = 0
2
2 2
2 2
=0
2
Boundary condition:
x=0
h = H1 ;
H12 = B
x=L
h = H2 ;
h2= AL + B
22 12
=
(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
a. Discharge
Laplace equation:
+
+
; = . .
=
2 1
1 2
=
= +
= +
where,
D
b
(4.5)
: thickness of aquifer
: width of aquifer
57
2
=0
2
Boundary condition:
=A
dx
= Ax + B
= 0 = 1 1 =
= = 2 2 = + 1
2 1
(4.6)
58
EXAMPLES
1. Unconfined aquifer embankment
H1
H2
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
59
Boundary condition:
2 = +
x=0
h = H1
; H12 = B
x=L
h = H2
; H22 = AL + B
H22 = AL + H12
=
22 12
+
=
2 =
22 62
+ 62
40
2 = 0.80 + 36
So,
(2 )
=
(2 )
22 12
22 12
2
=
+ 1 =
60
(22 12 )
=
2
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
61
H1
K2
H2
L1
K3
H3
L2
H4
L3
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
h1 2 = 0,015 x1 + 100
Layer II
Layer III
62
The discharge Q = Q1 = Q 2 = Q3
22 12
=
1 + 12
1
Layer II:
32 22
2
2 + 22
2 =
2
12
Layer III:
32
42 32
=
3 + 32
3
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
32 42 =
23
3
2 1 2 3
+
+
1 2 3
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
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
64
H1
H2
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
65
= = 2
2
+ 22 = 21
22
2
=
+ +
22 =21
2 22 12
=
+
+
+ 12
( )
2 = 12 (22 12 ) +
4.80 108
22 82
(
)
. 50 +
+ 82
=
6
10
50
2
2
= 4.80 . 102 .2 + 1.20 = 0
1.20
12.50
9.60 . 102
1
2
= = =
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
= , . =
( )
2
=0
= + ( ) = 0
2 = 2 + .
2
2 = 2 +
2
4
= 2 +
2
4
67
H1
H2
Compute:
Lowest elevation of flow line
Answer:
Flow line equation,
Darcys Law:
Continuity equation:
=
=
=
Boundary condition:
x=0
x = L,
h = ho
h=H
68
2
=
2 =
Substitution of data:
252 2 =
0.12 . 106
1502 h2o = 24.20 ho = 3.77m
0.25 . 103
69
H1
imaginary
aquifer
H1
H2
2L
Data:
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
70
where,
42
+
22 12 +
+ 12
H1 = H2 = H = 8 m so:
2 2
=
+
+ 2
So,
2
=0
2
2 2
=
+
=0
2
.
2
2 22
+
+ 2
2
+ 2
=
And discharge:
1
2 2
= =
. . =
+
+ 2
=
2
71
2 2
+
+ 2
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
= 4,6296.106 m 3/s/m
= 4,6296.106 m 3/s/m (kearah kiri)
72
6. Unconfined aquifer
H1
H2
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
73
10 15
+ 15
100
= 0.015 + 15
b. Discharge
=
2 1
1 2
=
=
= 1. 105 . 1.7
15 10
= 3.50 . 106 3
100
74
H1
D1
D2
H2
Data:
H1 = 8 m, H2 = 6 m, D1 = 2 m, D2 = 3 m, L = 100 m, K 1.107 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 )
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 ) +
= . . . ( + . ) + .
76
V.
RADIAL FLOW
The flow towards the well is assumed as steady, laminar, radial and horizontal
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
(5.1)
77
(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)
( )
(5.8)
(5.8)
where,
H
hw
rw
78
b. DupuitThiem
1). According to UNESCO (1967),
G. Thiem (1906) based on Dupuit and Darcy principle developed a formula
of pumping and the formula is called DupuitThiem.
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
(5.9)
79
2
=
(5.12)
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
dr/dh = tg
= 2. tg
(5.13)
(5.14)
(5.15)
80
1
w
h2
h1
hw
rw
r1
r2
Ri
1 2
r2 r1
(5.16)
= 21 1 . tg
(5.17)
= 21 11 . tg1
(5.18)
=
( + )( )
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
81
=
=
( )
( )
(5.21)
(5.21)
=
=
=
( )
( )
(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)
82
2. Confined aquifer
a. Dupuit (1863)
H
hw
rw
R
= . =
= 2
] = 2]
( )
=
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
83
b. DupuitThiem (1906)
1). According to UNESCO (1967)
h1
h2
r1
r2
=
( )
(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
84
h2
h1
D
r1
r2
( )
( )
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
85
(5.8)
( )
5.22)
( )
(5.23)
( )
(5.21)
( )
(5.22)
86
( )
=
( + )( )
(5.12)
(5.22)
(5.20)
(5.12)
( + )( )
(5.20)
=
=
( )
.
o With one observation well and with piezometric head data:
( )
o With one observation well and with drawdown data:
(5.24)
(5.24)
87
( )
( )
(5.25)
(5.24)
( )
( )
=
(5.25)
(5.25)
88
Case 2
Case 1
h1
D
hw
rw
r1
r
Ri
( )
(5.26)
(5.26)
89
( )
(5.27)
( )
(5.27)
H
h
h+h
Theoretic curve
2 ( + )2
2
( ) = [ ( )]
2 ( + )2
(5.28)
90
= [ (
)]
b. Ehrenberger (1928)
( )
= ,
= , ( ),
(5.28)
(5.29)
(5.30)
(5.31)
e. Vibert (1949)
= , +
(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:
where,
(5.33)
Ri
: radius of depletion (m)
H h : drawdown (m)
K
: permeability (m/s)
where,
Ri
H
Ki
(5.34)
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,
:
:
:
:
:
(5.35)
92
where,
K
T
(5.36)
: permeability (m/s)
: duration of pumping (hour)
e. Dupuit
(5.37)
(5.38)
+
( 2 2 )
( )
+
(5.39)
( )
=
93
( )
= .
where,
Ri
r
Q
H
K
h
:
:
:
:
:
:
(5.40)
where,
Ri
Q
I
(5.41)
(5.42)
94
Radius of
Depletion
(m)
65
65
75
75
100
100
100
125
150
95
precipitation
ground surface
h
groundwater surface
sea level
hf
fresh water
hs
Fig. 6.1. Schematic of cross section circular homogenous, isotropic and porous island.
=
Normal condition:
Sea water
(6.3)
96
Ground surface
Water table
xo
Sea
zo
Fresh water
Saline water
Interface
(6.4)
2 12
=
( + )
(6.5)
2 =
The width xo of the submarine zone through which fresh water discharges
into the sea can be obtained for z=0,
=
(6.6)
97
The depth of the interface beneath the shoreline zo, occurs where x = 0 so
that:
=
3. Upconing
(6.7)
98
According to Todd (1980) using Dupuit assumption and GhybenHerzberg relation, the
upconing is:
=
Comment:
()
(6.8)
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
99
gs
gwl
( + )
h
Drawdown due to
pumping
h1
r1
r2
(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:
( + )
(6.12)
100
t1
h1
t2
h2
( )
2R
( )
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
(6.13)
101
H
Q/FK
K
Built up due to
recharging
T
Relationship between H an T
(6.14)
(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, DEASubsurface HydrologyPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM=2012
102
= =
= =
(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)
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
2 18 + 2 0.225 2
2
18
18 + 2 0.225
+
+ 1
2 0.225
2 0.225
= 25.95
104
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.
=
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:
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.
105
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)
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 nonperforated 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.
107
4 0,20 m
Indian Ocean
Indian Ocean
6.00
108
Indian Ocean
60 m
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)
109
Indian Ocean
6,00
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, DEASubsurface HydrologyPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM=2012
110
To get shape factor F = 47,29 m you can build Cubical Water Intake Pumping
System with dimension:
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 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.
111
13.00
Indian Ocean
10 cm
3.0
4.00
112
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.
113
Data:
Coefficient of permeability K = 103 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
(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
= 8 42 0,001 = 0.402285 3
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)
(6.25)
114
1
1
2 = 0.0032 162 = 0.114557 2
4
4
.
= .
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)
(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)
+
+ +
(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:
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
117
3
4
5
Discharges (m 3/s)
0.402285
0.549874
0.102159
1 = 0.112474
0.150857
2 = 0.150441
3 = 0.213172
118
Theis (1906) used the exponential integral solution to analyze unsteady flow in the
following term:
( )
=
4
(7.1)
. +
+
. ! . !
. !
(7.2)
where,
2
=
4
(7.3)
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, DEASubsurface HydrologyPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM=2012
119
() = . +
. ! . !
. !
(7.5)
2.0
3.0
0.219
0.049
0.013
0.0038
101
1.82
1.22
0.91
0.70
0.56
0.45
0.37
0.31
0.26
102
4.04
3.35
2.96
2.68
2.47
2.30
2.15
2.03
1.92
103
6.33
5.64
5.23
4.95
4.73
4.54
4.39
4.26
4.14
104
8.63
7.94
7.53
7.25
7.02
6.84
6.69
6.55
6.44
105
10.94
10.24
9.84
9.55
9.33
9.14
8.99
8.86
8.74
106
13.24
12.55
12.14
11.85
11.63
11.45
11.29
11.16
11.04
107
15.54
14.85
14.44
14.15
13.93
13.75
13.60
13.46
13.34
108
17.84
17.15
16.74
16.46
16.23
16.05
15.90
15.76
15.65
109
20.15
19.45
19.05
18.76
18.54
18.35
18.20
18.07
17.95
1010
22.45
21.76
21.76
21.06
20.84
20.66
20.50
20.37
20.25
1011
24.75
24.06
24.06
23.36
23.14
22.96
22.81
22.67
22.55
1012
27.05
26.36
26.36
25.67
25.44
25.26
25.11
24..97
24.86
1013
29.36
28.66
28.66
27.97
27.75
27.56
27.41
27.28
27.16
1014
31.66
30.97
30.56
30.27
30.05
29.87
29.71
29.58
29.46
1015
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
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 102, 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
121
Fig. 7.1. Theis method of superposition for solution of the non equilibrium equation
122
2
0.5772
4
4
2.25
2.30
2
4
(7.6)
(7.7)
2.30
2.25
4
2
(7.8)
Fig. 7.2. CooperJacob method for solution of the non equilibrium equation
and it follows:
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEASubsurface HydrologyPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM=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 .104 day are read. Then,
min
=
2.30 2.30(2500)
=
= 1090 2
4 (0.40)
4
and,
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 CooperJacob 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)
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 .103 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
Fig. 7.4. Chow method for solution of the non equilibrium equation
126
Fig. 7.5. Drawdown and recovery curves in an observation well near pumping well
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEASubsurface HydrologyPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM=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)
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
128
Fig. 7.6. Recovery test method for solution of the non equilibrium equation
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
130
Hollow well
=
(8.1)
H
H
F
K
T
R
Q
C
I
A
n
where:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
(8.2)
131
2 2
+
=1
2 2
Theoreme:
2 = 2 + 2
(8.3)
x
ae
y
H
dh
H1
R0
Ho
dr
x = Ro
Y = Ho
Y = H1
x=R
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEASubsurface HydrologyPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM=2012
132
= = 2
2
=
(8.4)
( ) =
(8.5)
2
+ 1 +
2
2 ( )
2
+ 1 +
When t = L, a = R so:
=
+ +
(8.6)
133
Fig. 8.3. Cross section of aquifer under impermeable layer (Dachler, 1936)
= + 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.
134
L=L+Rln2
b. Theoritic
a. Real
= ( + ) + +
Substitution:
=
=
(8.4)
2 ( + 2)
( + 2) + 2 + 2
2 ( + 2)
2
+ 2
+ 1 +
(8.7)
(8.7)
+
+ +
(8.8)
135
Table 8.2. Assumption I, between real and theorem condition on the tip of well
Description
Dachler (1936)
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)
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
136
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
Based on F3b, be derived the first F5b then the second F6b finally the third F4b.
Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEASubsurface HydrologyPost Graduate Program JTSLFTUGM=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. 397404.
Cooper H.H,Jr. and Jacob C.E. 1946. A generalized graphical method for evaluating formations constants
and summarizing wellfield history, Trans. Amer. Geophysical Union, v.27, pp. 526534.
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. 519524
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
138