CE 28 Analytical and Numerical Methods in Civil Engineering III

1st Semester, A.Y. 2011-2012

Machine Problem 3: Finite Element Method Applications in Civil Engineering
Author: Augustus C. Resurreccion, Ph.D

Groundwater Flow in Small Drainage Basins

References
1. Toth, J. (1963) A Theoretical Analysis of Groundwater Flow in Small Drainage Basins.
Journal of Geophysical Research vol. 68 no. 16, pp. 47954812.
2. Pinder, G.F. and M.A. Celia. Subsurface Hydrology. Section 5.2.2 Analytical Solutions in
Two Dimensions (Groundwater Flow in Small Drainage Basins). Wiley 2006 pp. 218221.
3. Zienckiewicz, O.C., Taylor, R.L. and Zhu, J.Z. The Finite Element Method: Its Basis and
Fundamentals (6th ed.) Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005.
Note: Most sentences in the following problem description are lifted directly from the above references.

Introduction

Toth(1963) presented a paper on the theoretical analysis of groundwater flow in small drainage
basins where he solved the two dimensional steady state groundwater flow equation for homogeneous, isotropic aquifer to study recharge, discharge and subsurface flow patterns in small
drainage basins, characterized by surface features such as streams and topographic highs. He
defined a small basin as an area bounded by a topographic high, its lowest parts being occupied
by an impounded body of surface water or by an outlet of a relatively low order stream and
having similar physiographic conditions over the whole the whole of its surface. The upper limit
for such basins is usually several hundred square miles.

Mathematical Development

The aquifer system is shown by Fig. 1, and is modelled using a rectangular area. This area
is bounded by a horizontal impermeable boundary at the base, while two theoretical vertical
impermeable boundaries extending downward from the stream and the water divide at the topographic high. For the upper limit of area, a horizontal line at the elevation of the stream along
which the fluid potential distribution is supposed to be the same as that of the water table.
There are several assumptions for the analytical solution of the groundwater flow in Toth(1963):
1. The assumption of a horizontal impermeable boundary as the lower limit of the basin is
justified because in the interval above this in which no such boundary is known, all groundwater belongs to the flow region of the basin. If however a relatively impermeable boundary
underlying the whole basin is present, the water systems below will not significantly interfere with the systems within the basin.
1

CE28 Analytical and Numerical Methods in Civil Engg. III

1st Sem, A.Y. 2011-2012

Machine Problem No. 3

due date: Oct. 2, 2011

Figure 1: Geometry of aquifer system.

2. The assumption of two vertical boundaries (especially on the left boundary) is correct if the
surface drainage pattern is symmetrical. That is, if the basin is bounded by two parallel
and equally removed surface water divides of equal topographic elevation.
3. The potential distribution at the horizontal upper boundary follows the water table which
is closely correlated to the surface topography, following the land surface. Further, slopes
of about 3 or less (from valley stream to topographic high) were assumed.
4. The geologic medium is isotropic and homogeneous.
Referring to Fig. 1, the valley bottom (x = 0) and the groundwater divide (x = S) are taken
as lines of symmetry, meaning that no flow crosses those lines (in normal direction). Also,
along the bottom (z = 0), no flow occurs perpendicular to the impermeable boundary. The top
boundary is the water table elevation. The water table location is represented by a straight
line that connects the elevation of the valley bottom to the elevation of the groundwater divide.
In addition, a sinusoidal function is superimposed on this sloping line to represent the spatial
variability of the topography within the basin (the highs and lows of the [sinusoidal function]
are.... representative of the hills and depressions of the land surface).
The equation of the water table elevation is given by
zt = z0 + c0 x + a0 sin (b0 x)

(1)

where c0 = slope of the line and a0 and b0 are parameters of the sinusoidal function.
The mathematical description of the problem is
2h 2h
+ 2 = 0,
x2
z

0 < x < S,

0 < z < z0

(2)

CE28 Analytical and Numerical Methods in Civil Engg. III

1st Sem, A.Y. 2011-2012

Machine Problem No. 3

due date: Oct. 2, 2011

where h is the fluid potential. The boundary conditions are

h
= 0 at z = 0
z
h
= 0 at x = 0
x
h
= 0 at x = S
x

(3b)

h = z0 + c0 x + a0 sin (b0 x) at z = z0

(3d)

(3a)

(3c)

The specific discharge (Darcy velocity) is given by the following:



h
h
i+
k
q=K
x
z

(4)

The analytical solution given by Toth(1963) for the problem described above is
a0
c0 S
+ 0 (1 cos b0 S)
2
Sb
"
mx
mz
#

cos
cosh
X
a0 b0 (1 cos b0 S) cos m
c0 S 2
S
S
(5)
+2
+
(cos
m

1)
mz0
2

m2 2
(b0 ) m2 2 /S 2
S cosh
m=1
S

h = z0 +

A recharge area (or recharge line in 2D) is an area along the top of the domain along which the
head decreases with depth, implying that the water flows downwards into the domain, across
the upper boundary. Conversely, a discharge area (or discharge line) is one for which the head
increases with depth, implying the water flows upwards and out of the domain across the top
boundary. Recharge and discharge areas (lines) are separated by hinge lines (or hinge points in
2D).
Toth (1963) identified three zones, which are 1) local flow systems, 2) intermediate flow systems
and 3) regional flow systems. A local flow system has its recharge area along a local (sinusoidal)
topographic high and its discharge area along the adjacent topographic flow. An intermediate
flow system has recharge and discharge areas that are separated by one or more other topographic
highs and lows but does not span the entire hill slope length. A regional flow system is a system
whose recharge area includes the water divide and whose discharge area includes the valley
bottom.

Problem Statement

Your task is solve for the fluid potential within the domain mentioned above by means of the
Finite Element Method. The governing equation is given by (2) and the form of the boundary
conditions by (3a) to (3d). The problem geometry and relevant boundary descriptions are shown
in Fig. 1. For domain discretization (i.e., mesh generation), you are to make use of the FEM
Pre/Post Processor Gmsh. The domain should be discretized using 3-node triangular elements
which employ linear shape functions so that the derivatives are constant within each element.
Make several runs of the simulation, each time using a different values for c0 , a0 and b0 . Use a
direct method such as LU Decomposition or Gaussian Elimination to solve the resulting global
linear system. Output visualization may be accomplished using either Paraview or Gmsh.
3

CE28 Analytical and Numerical Methods in Civil Engg. III

1st Sem, A.Y. 2011-2012

Machine Problem No. 3

due date: Oct. 2, 2011

Note that in standard FEM, the value of the derivatives of the primary variable are exact only
at the Gauss points, which for the 3-node element corresponds to the centroid of the element.
In general, the values of derivatives at the nodes are not unique since each element attached to
a node will yield nodal derivatives that are different from those coming from the other attached
elements. Hence, the recovery of gradient values at the nodes requires making use of special
processes. The most straightforward of these is nodal averaging, wherein we obtain the nodal
derivatives by simply averaging the different values reported at that location by all elements
attached to the node, without factoring in the nodal distance to the element Gauss points. A
more accurate procedure known as superconvergent patch recovery is discussed in Zienckiewicz
and Taylor(2005).
It remains to specify the values of the components of the hydraulic conductivity tensor K. Here
we will assume that the behavior is isotropic, i.e. K = 2 105 m/s.
One report is needed for this machine problem. The report must contain the following:
1. Title page including academic integrity pledge
2. Abstract - contains the summary of the report including problem being solved, numerical
model used and summary of results
3. Problem statement - formulation of the problem including physical significance of the problem, formulation of the partial differential equation, derivation of the weak form, essential
and natural boundary conditions
4. Numerical model - discussion on the numerical method used to solve the problem.
5. Implementation of Numerical Model - discussion on how to use the numerical model,
flowcharts, and pseudocodes
6. Results and Discussion - results in the form of well prepared figures with proper axis labels.
For each discretization used, we need at least three figures:
(a) a plot of the finite element mesh,
(b) a plot showing the variation of the hydraulic head (equipotential lines), and
(c) a plot of the velocity vectors. It is recommended that you also plot the streamlines.
Gmsh and Paraview have built in routines/modules for accomplishing this. Compare
the potential at several nodes with the analytical solution. Using the results, approximately identify recharge and discharge areas (lines), and hinge points at the top
bound
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
8. Source code
Written reports and softcopies (in .pdf) must be submitted on October 2, 2011 (before 10 am).
Late submissions will not be accepted.