Aquifer parameter identification and interpretation with

different analytical methods

Mehmet E Birpinar
Yildiz Technical University, Civil Engineering Faculty, Hydraulics Division, Yildiz 80750, Istanbul, Turkey

Abstract

Aquifer tests yield estimations of hydrogeological parameters through suitable analytical models from field data recorded as
drawdown variations by time or distance. In practice, most often a single model is adopted with a set of assumptions, and
unfortunately, field data deviations from the model type curves are not considered in interpretations. This is a rather mechanistic
approach which implies assumptions that the aquifer is geologically homogeneous and isotropic. Such an approach cannot be true
because within the aquifer test area there may appear heterogeneities and anisotropies which hinder the application of a single
model. It is, therefore, necessary to try several available models for the same aquifer test data, in order to extract possible variabilities
in hydrogeological parameters. Such an extensive study can only be done when there is a set of aquifer test data with main and
observation wells at different distances and directions.
This paper presents an analysis of an aquifer test in a thick alluvial valley in Pakistan. The aquifer consists of extremely
heterogeneous sediments. Different approaches including the Theis, Jacob, Hantush, and Singh analytical models, are used to
analyse the drawdown data from several observation wells.

Keywords: aquifer parameter, transmissivity, storage coefficient, aquifer tests, analytical methods

Introduction
Movement and abstraction of groundwater in the geological forma-
tions are dependent on the hydrogeological parameters of the
aquifers. The purpose of any aquifer test is to determine the
hydrogeological parameters. Among the basic parameters are the
storativity, transmissivity and leakage coefficients. The hydro-
geological parameters are hidden in the field test data and their
identification is possible using the available of physically plausible
models suitable for the prevailing field circumstances. Evaluation
of aquifer parameters, namely, transmissivity T, and storage coef-
ficient S, from aquifer test data has been a continual field research.
Several conventional and computer-based methods are available
for analysing (Kruseman and De Ridder, 1991). Due to a different
set of assumptions on each method, the hydrogeological parameter
estimates are quite different from each other. Efforts have been
made to develop simple calculation methods for aquifer parameters
since Cooper and Jacob (1946) proposed their simple and widely
used method. The main limitation of this method is that the
dimensionless time factor , u, should be less than 0.01. However,
according to Singh (2000) it cannot be applied to estimate aquifer
parameters when most of the data have u > 0.01. On the other hand,
the curve-matching method proposed by Theis (Lohman, 1972)
involves much subjectivity in judging the best match between the
observed and theoretical curves, especially when only early
drawdowns are considered (Singh, 2000). Furthermore, Sen (1987)
proposed a unique storage coefficient determination approach for
large diameter wells which experience steady or quasi-steady
groundwater flow conditions. The application of the method does
not require any complicated mathematical procedure as in the
classical-type curve matching procedures. This method becomes
 (90) 212 259 70 70 x 2453; fax: (90) 212 259 67 62;
e-mail: birpinar@yildiz.edu.tr
Received 1 July 2002; accepted in revised form 14 April 2003.
very effective when it is coupled with the Theim (1906) formula.
Singh (2000) proposed a simple method for explicit determination
of confined aquifer parameters from early drawdown data. This
method makes use of a few early drawdown data at an observation
well and yields accurate values of confined aquifer parameters with
no curve matching requirement. The method converges to the
Cooper-Jacob method for late drawdown data. Application of the
method on published data sets shows that the estimates of the
aquifer parameters using only a few initial drawdowns are as good
as those obtained by Theis curve matching when all data, including
the late drawdowns (u < 0.01), are used. Singh (2001a) has also
proposed another robust optimisation method for the calculation of
aquifer parameters from shorter duration aquifer test data when
there is an impervious boundary. Another simple method that uses
the temporal derivative of drawdowns was proposed for the explicit
evaluation of confined aquifer parameters utilising the early
drawdowns (Singh, 2001b). The method uses an analytical ap-
proach to calculate the temporal derivative of drawdowns. The
method can analyse the drawdown data on multiple observation
wells taken together to obtain averaged aquifer parameters. The
method was applied to published data sets and results were com-
pared with the traditional methods already available in the litera-
ture. Singh (2002) proposed another simple method for the identi-
fication of confined aquifer parameters and effective distance to
either an impermeable boundary or a recharge from the drawdowns
observed at an observation well due to pumping at a constant rate.
This paper concentrates on a significant issue with regard to the
interpretation of aquifer tests, i.e. ensuring meaningful interpreta-
tions. This issue commonly arises from the use of computer
programs to interpret aquifer test data which generally leads to
misinterpretations. The objective of any software is to create the
best match of the time-drawdown data regardless of the suitability
of the analytical model to the hydrogeological setting. Hence, there
are several pitfalls involved in employing commonly used
computer programs and mechanistic-type curve fittings without

Available on website http://www.wrc.org.za ISSN 0378-4738 = Water SA Vol. 29 No. 3 July 2003 251
OB5 (r=245 m) PW21
consideration of the hydrogeological setting and
OB1 (r=30.50 OB2 (r=122 m)
without employing multiple assessments of the aq-
uifer test data. In the following sequel, almost all of
the suitable classical (Theis, 1935; Jacob, 1940;
Hantush, 1956) and dimensionless straight-line (Sen,
OB3 (r=61 m) 1990; 1995) methods are employed for qualitative
and quantitative interpretations as presented by
Ahmad (1998).
OB7 (r=122 m) It is the purpose of this paper to discard the use
of a single analytical model use to determine aquifer
parameters. Hence, several analytical models are
applied to aquifer test data in the Chaj Doab area in
OB4 (r=183 m)
Pakistan with the explanation of deviations from the
model-type curves. Finally, a new method is pro-
Figure 1
posed to calculate the radius of influence.
Plan view of PW and observation wells at CTW-21

Study area description

The main reason for selecting the Chaj Doab area in

(a) Pakistan was the availability of extensive aquifer
test data. As shown in Fig. 1, there are 6 observation
(OB) wells drilled at different distances and direc-
tions from the pumping well (PW). The dominant
geological unit in the study area is Quaternary
alluvium. This alluvium has been deposited on a
base of igneous and metamorphic rocks of
Precambrian age or on semi-consolidated Tertiary
rocks as described by Kidwai (1963). The
unconsolidated alluvial complex consists of sand,
silt, clay and gravel in different proportions depend-
ing on the environmental forces involved in the
depositing agency. Environmental forces here mean
slopes of the ancestral streams, barriers faced by
them, the amount of water and sediments moving
together in those streams and the climates of the
source areas. The deposits of the area are of highly
heterogeneous nature with little horizontal or verti-
cal continuity. Interfingering lenses of silty clay
with sands are widespread in the region. The thick-
ness of the alluvium is not known accurately. Only
alluvium has occurred in the exploratory test holes
(b)
drilled to maximum depth of 500 m. Kidwai (1963),
Arif (1966) and Chaudhry (1966) have described
the alluvium of the area as acting as an overall
unconfined aquifer. The subsurface geological com-
position indicates the unconfined nature of the
aquifer with abundance of clayey deposits in the
area. Interpretation of these sections in terms of
hydrostratigraphy gives enough clues to conclude
that the hydrogeological unit in the study area is
composed of different types of aquifer. This view is
supported by the conversion of geological logs of
observation wells at pumping test sites into
hydrostratigraphic units and then, finally, to the
nearest counterpart in the form of aquifer, aquitard
and aquiclude, (Ahmad, 1998)
For the identification of aquifer parameters in
the Chaj Doab area of Pakistan, pumping tests were
performed at different locations to get the repre-
sentative coverage of the area. Time-drawdown data
of pumping and recovery phases were recorded both
Figure 2 in the main and observation wells simultaneously.
Theis type curve matching (a) OB1; (b) OB2 These pumping tests were carried out by WASID

252 ISSN 0378-4738 = Water SA Vol. 29 No. 3 July 2003 Available on website http://www.wrc.org.za
(Water and Soil Investi-
gation Division) of WAP- TABLE 1
DA (Water and Power Estimated transmissivity values from the various methods for the selected data
Development Authority)
in Pakistan (WAPDA, Well Distance Theis Jacob methods Hantush methods Singh
number from the method method
1983. Although all the
pumping (2000)
aquifer test data are well
treated with different ana-
lytical methods, for the r (m) TTh TJ(dd-t) TJ(dd-r) TJ(dd-t/r2) TH-J TIP T
sake of brevity, only the
aquifer test data set re-
P21 - - - - - - - -
corded at site CTW-21
are presented in detail. G1 30.48 0.018 0.019 0.021 0.016 0.018 -
G2 121.92 0.019 0.024 0.026 0.029 0.017 0.0160
Analytical models
and G3 60.96 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.026 0.017 0.0110
interpretations G4 182.88 0.022 0.033 0.036 0.057 0.019 0.0216
The pumping test at G5 243.84 0.020 0.033 0.034 0.064 0.018 0.0204
CTW-21 site was per- G7 121.92 0.020 0.024 0.025 0.036 0.015 0.0140
formed for an 8-day du-
ration starting from 17 Aquifer mean 0.020 0.026 0.021 0.027 0.038 0.017 0.0170
September 1959 at 10:00
local time to 25 Septem- Note: Length unit is meter and time unit is second
ber 1959 at 10:00. The
pumping rate of water
withdrawal from the PW TABLE 2
was fixed at 0.0629 m3/s. Estimated storage coefficient values from the various methods for the selected data
On the basis of infer-
ences depicted from the Well Distance Theis Jacob methods Hantush methods Singh
qualitative analysis of the number from the method method
time-drawdown data col- pumping (2000)
lected during the pump- well
ing and recovery phases,
r (m) STh SJ(dd-t) SJ(dd-r) S(dd-t/r ) SH-J SIP S
the aquifer has been iden- 2

tified as having combined

characters of confined, G1 30.48 6.5*10-4 5.6*10-4 5.6*10-4 7.5 *10-4 6.2*10-4 -
leaky and unconfined be- G2 121.92 5.5*10 -4
3.9*10 -4
4.1*10 -4
3.3*10 -4
4.9*10 -4
5.2*10-4
haviours. As this does not
qualify solely for any G3 60.96 6.2*10-4 4.6*10-4 5.3*10-4 4.5*10-4 2.8*10-4 4.3*10-4 6.2*10-4
known category of aqui- G4 182.88 6.8*10-4 4.6*10-4 4.9*10-4 8.2*10-4 6.1*10-4 5.2*10-4
fer, therefore, the quanti-
tative evaluations of the G5 243.84 6.7*10-4 4.1*10-4 4.1*10-4 1.1*10-4 5.0*10-4 5.7*10-4
hydrogeological param- G7 121.92 6.7*10-4 4.4*10-4 5.1*10-4 2.4*10-4 5.5*10-4 6.7*10-4
eters such as transmissi-
vity T, storage coefficient Aquifer mean 6.4*10-4 4.5*10-4 5.3*10-4 4.0*10-4 4.2*10-4 5.3*10-4 5.8*10-4
S, hydraulic conductiv-
ity K and leakage factor Note: Length unit is meter and time unit is second.
L, are possible after the
acceptance of a consider-
able error amount with available analytical techniques. Therefore, regime manages itself in such a way, where the Theis solution
the hydrogeological parameters are estimated by using different remains inapplicable for the determination of transmissivity and
techniques available in the literature for overall unconfined aquifer storage coefficient because drawdowns do not change with con-
and leaky aquifers. secutive increments of time.
Transmissivities and storage coefficient estimates by means of From the examination of time-drawdown data on semi-loga-
the Theis method are shown in Figs. 2 a and b as an example and rithmic scale as presented in Fig. 3a, the deviation from straight line
the results for all observation wells are presented collectively in occurs at about the 30th minute from the start of the pump. It means
Tables 1 and 2. It is obvious that all the OB wells exhibit the that prior to this time, the implication of the Jacob straight-line
transmissivities approximately in the same range of 0.02 m2/s. As methods can be considered valid. Thus, the data are processed by
in Fig. 2 only initial portions of time-drawdown graphs on log-log the Jacob time-drawdown and distance-drawdown methods (Fig.
scale match with initial and moderate parts of the Theis curve. On 3a). The numerical results are given again in Tables 1 and 2. The
the other hand, storage coefficients appear in the range of 10-4. transmissivities determined with this method vary between 0.02
Therefore, after about one hour of constant pumping, the aquifer and 0.033 m2/s. The time-drawdown method gives successively

Available on website http://www.wrc.org.za ISSN 0378-4738 = Water SA Vol. 29 No. 3 July 2003 253
(a) (b)
Figure 3
Application of Jacob straight line methods (a) time-drawdown, (b) distance-drawdown
(a)
Figure 4
Application of Jacob drawdown-t/r2 method (a) OB-1, (b) OB-2
increasing values of transmissity as the distance of the OB wells
increases from the PW. It may be because of the change in hydraulic
gradient within the radius of influence. The hydraulic gradient is
maximum near the PW and minimum at the periphery of the
depression cone. As one moves towards the centre of the depres-
sion cone, the change in hydraulic gradient increases too. Although
on the time-drawdown semilogarithmic graph, the hydraulic gradi-
ent does not appear explicitly, it affects the drawdowns measured
at different distances from the PW implicitly.
The same data are also used for the Jacob distance-drawdown
method. Hence, a single value of transmissivity emerges as 0.021
m2/s, but a further property of this method is that it also gives the
value of radius of influence which in the present case is 400 m. The
radius of influence has a definite physical significance because at
the time of exploitation, it helps in selecting the locations of the
production wells to prevent any interference. Storage coefficients
deduced from both Jacob methods are shown in Table 2 with their
range between 3.9 x 10-4 to 5.6 x 10-4. Although the time-drawdown
Jacob method gives as many storage coefficient values as there are
number of observation wells, the distance-drawdown method
254 ISSN 0378-4738 = Water SA Vol. 29 No. 3 July 2003
(b)
reveals only one value of storage coefficient which is 5.3 x 10-4. The
Jacob distance-time-drawdown (Fig. 4 a; b) method has also been
applied to the same data set for each of the observation wells. The
results of T and S for this method have been given in Tables 1 and
2 collectively.
As the time-drawdown plots on semi-logarithmic scale (Fig.
3a) for the total time length depict steady state after about 100 min
of pump start-up, the aquifer can be considered as leaky. For the
determination of hydrogeological parameters such as transmissivity
T, storage coefficient S and leakage factor L, of the aquifer under
study, Hantush-Jacob (1955) and Hantush inflection point meth-
ods are applied and the results are shown in Tables 1 and 2 with the
relevant graphs in Figs. 5 a and b, respectively. The Hantush-Jacob
method is a type curve matching model in which a curve having an
r/L value equal to 0.1 is used, because curves with higher r/L values
are not found in the available literature. Transmissivities calculated
with this method range between 0.016 and 0.064 m2/s whereas the
storage coefficients are of the order of 10-4 and lie in the acceptable
range. The Hantush inflection point method reveals transmissivity
values in the range between 0.015 and 0.019 m2/s. The variation
Available on website http://www.wrc.org.za
among the transmissivities evaluated with the (a)
Hantush inflection point method is very small
compared to the Hantush-Jacob method.
The same data set for the observation
wells is also applied to the Singh (2000)
analytical method. Values of s/t (drawdown/
time) were plotted against t, and the peak was
located by drawing a smooth curve through
the plotted points for each selected case (Fig.
6). The results of transmissivity and storage
coefficient values are given in Tables 1 and 2
for all the observation wells. The trans-
missivity values are in the range of 0.014 to
0.022 m2/s with the storage coefficients of the
order of 10-4.

Conclusions

In practice, most often aquifer tests are ap-

plied mechanically without consideration of
the deviations between the field data and the (b)
available type curves. It has been shown in
this paper that a single analytical model can-
not yield meaningful interpretations, and there-
fore, in order to take into account possible
aquifer heterogeneity and anisotropy features,
several convenient analytical models have
been applied, each with supplementary inter-
pretations. Various analytical methods have
been applied to the Chaj Doab area (Pakistan)
aquifer tests supported by qualitative inter-
pretations for deviations from the available
type curves or straight lines.
In addition to classical analytical models
such as the Theis, Jacob and Hantush type
curves, the Singh (2000) analytical method
has also been applied. The combined applica-
tion of all these methods with qualitative
interpretations extract the maximum possible
information from given field data. Figure 5
Hantush-Jacob type curve matching to field data (a) OB-1 (b) OB-2

Figure 6
Application of Singh (2000) method (a) OB-2, (b) OB-4

Available on website http://www.wrc.org.za ISSN 0378-4738 = Water SA Vol. 29 No. 3 July 2003 255
References
AHMAD N (1998) Evaluation of Groundwater Resources in the Upper
Middle Part of Chaj Doab Area, Pakistan. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis,
Technical University of Istanbul. 308 pp.
ARIF AH (1966) Analysis of Selected Tests of Aquifer Characteristics,
Pakistan. Wasid Pub. 45 25-60.
CHAUDHRY AR (1966) Analysis of hydrologic performance tests in
unconfined aquifers. Tech. Paper No. 14, Water and Power Develop-
ment Authority, Water and Soil Investigation Division, Pakistan.
3-53.
COOPER HH and JACOB CE (1946) A generalized graphical method for
evaluating formation constants and summarizing well field history.
Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 27 526-534.
HANTUSH MS (1956) Analysis of data from pumping tests in leaky
aquifers. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 37 702-714.
HANTUSH MS and JACOB CE (1955) Non-steady radial flow in an
infinite leaky aquifer. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 36 95-100.
JACOB CE (1940) On the flow of water in an elastic artesian aquifer. Am.
Geophys. Un. Trans. 72 574.
KRUSEMAN GP and DE RIDDER NA (1991) Analysis and Evaluation of
Pumping Test Data. ILRI Publ. 47, 2nd Ad., Wageningen, The Nether-
lands.
KIDWAI ZU (1963) Geology of Rechna and Chaj Doab West Pakistan.
Water & Soils Invest. Div. Bull. 5 16-20.
256 ISSN 0378-4738 = Water SA Vol. 29 No. 3 July 2003
LOHMAN LW (1972) Ground-Water Hydraulics. U.S. Geological Survey
Profl. Paper 708.
SINGH SK (2000) Simple method for confined-aquifer parameter estima-
tion. J. Irrig. and Drainage Eng., ASCE 126 (6) 404-407.
SINGH SK (2001a) Identifying impervious boundary and aquifer param-
eters from pump test data. J. Hydraul. Eng., ASCE 127 (4) 280-285.
SINGH SK (2001b) Confined aquifer parameters from temporal derivative
of drawdowns. J. Hydraul. Eng., ASCE 127 (6) 466-470.
SINGH SK (2002) Aquifer boundaries and parameter Identification Sim-
plified. J. Hydraul. Eng., ASCE 128 (8) 774-780.
SEN Z (1987) Storage coefficient determination from quasi-steady state
flow. Nordic Hydrol. 18 101-110.
SEN Z (1990) Dimensionless straight type lines for aquifer test. J. Hydraul.
Eng., ASCE 116 (9) 1145-1156.
SEN Z (1995) Applied Hydrogeology for Scientists and Engineers. CRC,
Lewis Pub. New York. 161-299.
THEIM G (1906) Hydrologische Methoden. J.M. Gebhart, Leipzig. 56.
THEIS CV (1935) The relation between the lowering of the piezometric
surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using
groundwater storage. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 2 519-524.
WAPDA (1983) Hydrogeological Data of Chaj Doab. Vol. II, Basic Data
Release No. 9. Directorate General of Hydrogeology, WAPDA, La-
hore, Pakistan. 15-50.
Available on website http://www.wrc.org.za
OB5 (r=245 m)
PW21 OB1 (r=30.50 m) OB2 (r=122 m)

OB3 (r=61 m)

OB7 (r=122 m)

OB4 (r=183 m)

Figure 1 Plan view of PW and observation wells at CTW-21

1
 CTW-21/O1 t=100 min
D 10
s=1.00 m
r
a 1/u=700
w u=1.43*10-3
10
d W(u)=3.5
o
w Q=0.063 m3/min
n
x 1 r=30.48 m
(m) T=Q W(u)/4πs
T=0.018 m2/min
1
S=u 4 t T/r2
S=6.46*10-4
0.1
1 10 100 1000 104 Time (min)
W(u)
0.1
1 10 100 1000 104 1/u

(a)

CTW-21/O2 t=100 min

s=0.08 m
W(u)
1/u=55
1 u=0.018
D
r W(u)=0.3
a Q=0.063 m3/sec
w
d r=121.92 m
o T=Q W(u)/4πs
w
0.1 T=0.019 m2/min
n x
(m) S=u 4 t T/r2
S=5.5 *10-4

1 10 100 1000 104 1/u

0.01
1 10 100 1000 104 Time (min)
(b)

Figure 2 Theis type curve matching (a) OB-1, (b) OB-2,

2
 1.6 D
r O1(30.5 m) P21
1.4 a
w T1=0.019 m2/sec
1.2
d O3 (61 m)
o T2=0.024 m2/sec
1.0
w
0.8 n
O2 (122 m) T3=0.021 m2/sec
O7 (122 m)
(m)
0.6 T4=0.033 m2/sec
O4 (183 m)
0.4 O5 (245 m) T5=0.033 m2/sec
0.2
T7=0.024 m2/sec
0
1 100 104 Time (min)

S1=5.6 10-4 S3=4.6 10-4 S5=4.1 10-4

S2=3.9 10-4 S4=4.6 10-4 S7=4.4 10-4

(a)
1.4
D OB1 P21
1.2 r (30 min)
a
w T=2.3 Q/ 2π∆s
1.0
d OB3
S=2.25 tT/ro2
o
0.8 w ∆s =1.10
n OB2
0.6 (m) Ro=400 m
OB7
0.4 T=0.021 m2/sn
OB4 OB5 S=5.3*10-4
0.2

0 Ro
10 100 1000
Distance (m)

(b)
Figure 3 Application of Jacob straight line methods (a) time-drawdown, (b) distance-drawdown

3
 P21/OB1
1.6
D
1.4 r
a
1.2 w
d
1.0 o T=2.3 Q/4π∆s
w
0.8 n S=2.25T(t/r2)0
(m)
(t/r2)0=2 10-4
0.6
∆s=0.55
0.4
T=0.021 m2/sec
0.2 S=5.6*10-4

0
10-4 0.01 1 t/r2 100

(a)

P21/OB2
1.0
D
r
0.8 a
w
d
o T=2.3 Q/4π∆s
0.6
w
n S=2.25T(t/r2)0
(m)
0.4 (t/r2)0=1.2 10-4

∆s=0.45

0.2 T=0.026 m2/sec

S=4.1 10-4

0
10-5 0.001 0.1 t/r2

(b)

Figure 4 Application of Jacob drawdown-t/r2 method (a) OB-1, (b) OB-2

4
 CTW-21
1E 2 1E+2 OB-1
T = Q W(u, r/L) / 4π s
S = u 4 t T / r2
Q = 0.0629 m3/sn
t = 90 min
10 10 s = 0.30 m
r = 30.5 m

Field data sheet T = 0.016 m2 /sec

1 1
S = 7.5 x 10-4

0.1 1 10 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4

0.1 0.1

1 10 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5

(a)

CTW-21
10 OB-2 T = Q W(u, r/L) / 4π s
S = u 4 t T / r2
10
Q = 0.0629 m3/sn
t = 20 min
s = 0.03 m
r = 122 m
1
1
T = 0.029 m2 /sec

S = 3.3 x 10-4
0.1
0.1

1 10 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5

0.01
0.01

0.1 1 10 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4

(b)

Figure 5. Hantush-Jacob type curve matching to field data (a) OB-1 (b) OB-2

5
 OB-2
0,05
s* / t* = 0.044 m/min

0,04

0,03

r = 121.92 m Q=0.06286 m3/sec

0,02
t* = 4.60 min
s* / t* = 0.044 m/min
α* = t* / r2= 3.095*10-4
s* = 0.044*4.60 = 0.2024
0,01
T = 5.152*10-2 Q / s* = 0.016 m2/sec
S = 1.7393 T α * = 5.17*10-4
t* = 4.60 min
0
1 t (min) 10

(a)

OB-4
0,016

0,014 s* / t* = 0.015 m/min

0,012

0,01

0,008 r = 182.88 m
Q=0.06286 m3/sec
t* = 10 min
0,006
s* / t* = 0.015 m / min
α* = t* / r2= 2.989*10-4 min / m2
0,004 T = 5.152*10-2 Q / s* = 0.0216 m2/sec
S = 1.7393 T α* = 5.2*10-4
0,002
t* = 10 min
0
1 10 100
t (min)

(b)

Figure 6 Application Singh (2000) method (a) OB-2, (b) OB-4