BahanKuliah PDF

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 1

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 SUN
Water storage Sublimation

in ice and snow
Snowmelt runoff to stream Condensation
Infiltration Surface runoff

Evapotranspiration
Spring
Groundwater Fresh water storage
discharge
Evaporation
Groundwater
storage
Water storage in oceans
Fig. 1.1. Hydrological cycle

b. Water Balance
Water balance on the ground surface is:
P E
R
P–E = R + I
P : Precipitation
E : Evapotranspiration
I R : Runoff
I : Infiltration
Fig 1.2. Water balance on the ground surface
I 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.

c. Water Quantity in the Earth (Volume dimension x106 Km3 )
Table 1.1. Water distribution in the earth (Todd, 1970)

Items Volume x106 Percentage
Ocean location
• Saline Water 1,320 Km3 97.300 %
Continents location
• Lake fresh water 0.125 Km3 0.0090 %
3
• Lake saline water 0.104 Km 0.0080 %
3
• Rivers 0.00125 Km 0.0001 %
• Soil moisture 0.067 Km3 0.0050 %
3
• Groundwater (above – 4000 m) 8.350 Km 0.6100 %
3
• Eternal ice and snow 29.200 Km 2.1400 %
3
Total volume 37.800 Km 2.800 %
Atmosphere location:
• Vapor 0.013 Km3 0.001 %
3
Total water 1,360 Km 100.000 %
Table 1.2. Water distribution in the earth (Nace, 1971)

3
Saline water 1,370 Km 94.000 %
3
Ice & snow 30 Km 2.000 %
Vapor 0.010 %
3
Groundwater 60 Km 4.000 %
Surface water 0.040 %
Total water 100.000 %
Table 1.3. Water distribution in the earth (Huissman, 1978)

3
Free water, consist of: 1,370 Km
• Saline water 97.200 %
• Ice & snow 2.100 %
• Vapor 0.001 %
• Fresh water, consist of: 0.600 %
 Groundwater 98.80 %
 Surface water 1.20 %
Total water 100.000 %

Table 1.4. Water distribution in the earth (Baumgartner and Reichel, 1975)
Items Volume Percentage
7 3
Solid 2.782 .10 Km 2.010 %
9 3
Liquid 1.356 .10 Km 97.989 %
9 3
• Oceans 1.348 .10 Km 97.390 %
6 3
• Continent; groundwater 8.062 .10 Km 0.583 %
5 3
• Continent; surface water 2.250 .10 Km 0.016 %
4 3
Vapor 1.300 .10 Km 0.001 %
9 3
Total (all forms) 1.384 .10 Km 100.000 %
9 3
• Saline water 1.348 .10 Km 97.938 %
7 3
• Fresh water 3.602 .10 Km 2.202 %
Table 1.5. Fresh water distribution in the earth (Baumgartner and Reichel, 1975)
Items Volume Percentage
7 3
Solid 2.782 .10 Km 77.23 %
6 3
Liquid 8.187 .10 Km 22.73 %
6 3
• Groundwater 7.996 .10 Km 22.20 %
4 3
• Soil moisture 6.123 .10 Km 0.17 %
5 3
• Lakes 1.261 .10 Km 0.35 %
3 3
• Rivers, organic 3.602 .10 Km 0.01 %
4 3
Vapor 1.300 .10 Km 0.04 %
7 3
Total (all forms) 3.602 .10 Km 100.00 %

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
Area (10 km ) 148.90 361.10 510.00
Volume (103 km3)
• Precipitation +111 +385 +496
• Evaporation -71 -425 -496
• Discharge -40 +40 0
Avererage depth (mm)
• Precipitation +745 +1066 +973
• Evaporation -477 -1177 -973
• Discharge -269 +111 0
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. Greater water conservation 1. Less hydroelectric power

2. Smaller surface storage 2. Greater power consumption
3. Smaller surface distribution system 3. Decreased pumping efficiency
4. Smaller drainage system
4. Greater water salination
5. Reduced canal lining
5. More complex project operation
6. Greater flood control
7. Ready integration with existing 6. More difficult cost allocation
development 7. Artificial recharge is required
8. Stage development facilitated 8. Danger of land subsidence
9. Smaller evapotranspiration losses
10. Greater control over flow
11. Improvement of power load
12. Less danger than dam failure
13. Reduction in weed seed distribution
14. Better timing of water distribution
15. Almost good quality of water resources
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

8. Serve as conveyance systems-canals 8. Water must be conveyed
or pipeline across land of others
unnecessary
Disadvantages Advantages
1. Water must be pumped 1. Water maybe available by gravity flow
2. Multiple use
2. Storage and conveyance use only 3. Water generally of relatively low
3. Water maybe mineralized mineral content
4. Maximum flood control value
4. Minor flood control value 5. Large flows
5. Limited flow at any point 6. Power head available
6. Power head usually not available 7. Relatively to evaluate, investigate and
7. Difficult and costly to evaluate, manage
investigate and manage 8. Recharge dependent o annual
8. Recharge opportunity usually precipitation
dependent of surplus of surface flows
9. Recharge water maybe require 9. No treatment require recharge of
expensive treatment recharge water
10. Continues expensive maintenance of 10. Little maintenance required of
recharge area or wells 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.

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

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.

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)

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)

• 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)

Fig 1.11. Roman aquaducts were built before century
Note:
1. Infiltration gallery/qanat 6. Aquaduct bridge
2. Steep chute in this case dropshafts 7. Siphon
3. Settling tank 8. Substruction
4. Tunnel and shafts 9. Arcade
5. Covered trench 10. Distribution basin
11. Water distribution (pipes)
Fig 1.12. Roman city water system provider

• 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.

• 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)

Above:
Fig 1.15. Kaptering or spring
water catcher of Majapahit
Kingdom in Java was build in 12
century recently it’s 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.)

Left:
Fig 1.17. Distribution
pipe to the housing
Left:
Fig 1.18. Fontains of Trwulan
city

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

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.

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 (1656–1742)
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 ρV2/L to viscous forces μV/L2 and consequently
quantifies the relative importance of these two types of forces for given flow
conditions.

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 Thèoriques et Pratiques sur le mouvement des Eaux dans
les canaux dècouverts et à travers les terrains permèables, 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.

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 ⇒ Groundwater in ice region
• Dutch ⇒ Groundwater in sand dunes
• Japanese ⇒ Hot groundwater
• Indonesian ⇒ Recharge Systems

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

Description Dimension Unit
mass m gram
length l meter
time t second
Force mlt-2 N (Newton) = kgm.s-2
Energy ml2t-2 J (Joule) = N.m
Power ml2t-3 W (Watt) = N.m.s-1
Pressure ml-1t-2 N.m-2
b. Metric prefixes
Table 1.9. Metric prefices

Prefix Symbol Factor Prefix Symbol Factor
tera T 1012 centi c 10-2
giga G 109 milli m 10-3
mega M 106 micro µ 10-6
kilo k 103 nano n 10-9
hecto h 102 pico p 10-12
deca da 101 femto f 10-15
deci d 10-1 atto a 10-18

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 5). Velocity
1 cm = 0.3937 in 1 m/s = 3.281 ft/s
1m = 3.281 ft = 2.237 mi/hr
1 km = 0.6214 mi 1 km/hr = 0.9113 ft/s
2). Area = 0.6214 mi/hr
1 cm2 = 0.1550 in2 6). Temperature
1 m2 = 10.76 ft2 o
C = K – 273.15
1 ha = 2.471 acre = (o F – 32)/1.8
1 km2 = 0.3861 mi2 7). Pressure
3). Volume 1 Pa = 9.8692 .10-6 atm
1 cm3 = 0.06102 in3 = 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)
4). Mass = 2.953 .10-4 in Hg ( 0o C)
1g = 2.205 .10-3 lb (mass) = 0.0075 mm Hg
1 kg = 2.205 lb (mass) = 0.1020 kg (force)/m2
= 9.842 .10-4 long ton = 0.02089 lb (force)/ft2

8). Flow rate 14). Gravitational acceleration, g
1 l/s = 15.85 gpm 9.807 m/s2 = 32.2 ft/s2 (std., free fall)
= 0.02282 mgd = 0.03531 cfs 15). Heat
1 m3/s = 1.585 .104 gpm 1 J/m2 = 8.806 .10-5 BTU/ft2
= 22.82 mgd = 35.31 cfs = 2.390 .10-5 cal/cm2
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 = 2.388 .10-4 cal/g
9). Force 16). Density of water, ρ
1N = 105 dyne 1000 kgmass/m3 = 1.94 slugs/ft3
= 0.1020 kg (force) (when 50o F/10o C)
= 0.2248 lb (force) 17). Specific weight of water, γ
10). Power 9.807 .103 N/m3 = 62.4 lb/ft3 (50oF/10oC)
1 W = 9.478 .10-4 BTU/s 18). Dynamic viscosity of water, µ
= 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 19). Kinematic viscosity of water, ν
1 mg/l = 1 ppm = 0.0584 grain/gal 1.30.10-6m2/s=1.41 .10=5 ft2/s(50o F/10oC)
12). Hydraulic conductivity 10-6 m2/s = 1.06 .10-5 ft2/s (68o F/20o C)
1 m/d = 24.54 gpd/ft2 20). Atmospheric pressure, p (std)
= 1.198 darcy (water 20o C) 1.013 .105 Pa = 14.70 psia
1 cm/s = 2.121 .104 gpd/ft2 21). Energy
= 1035 darcy (water 20o C) 1 J = 9.478 .10-4 BTU
13). Viscosity = 0.2388 cal
1 Pa.s = 103 centistoke= 10 poise = 0.7376 ft.lb (force)
= 0.02089 lb (force).s/ft2 = 2.788 .10-7 kw.hr
1 m2/s = 106 centistoke = 10.76 ft2/s

e. Legends
1). Density
• Symbol :ρ
• 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:
• ρpure water = 1,000 kgmass.m -3 = 1.94 slug.ft-3
• ρsea 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 ρ t ρ t ρ t ρ
0 999.8679 10 999.7277 20 998.2323 30 995.6756
2 999.9267 12 999.5247 22 997.7993 32 995.0542
4 1000.0000 14 999.2712 24 997.3256 34 994.3991
6 999.9081 16 998.9701 26 996.8128 36 993.7110
8 999.8762 18 998.6232 28 996.2623 38 992.9936
2). Specific weight
• Symbol : γ ⇒ γ = ρ.g
• Dimension : ml-2t-2
• Unit : N.m-3 atau lbs.ft-3

3). Specific Gravity
• Symbol : s ⇒ s = ρ/ρw = γ/γw
• Dimension :-
• Unit :-
4). Viscosity
(a). Dynamic viscosity
• Symbol : µ
• 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 µ t µ t µ t µ
0 1.7921 10 1.3077 20 1.0050 30 0.8007
2 1.6728 12 1.2363 22 0.9579 32 0.7679
4 1.5674 14 1.1709 24 0.9142 34 0.7371
6 1.4728 16 1.1111 26 0.8737 36 0.7085
8 1.3860 18 1.0559 28 0.8360 38 0.6814
(b). Cinematic viscocity
• Symbol : υ
• Dimension : l2t-1
• Unit : m2s-1 or stokes
• 1 m2s-1 = 10-4 stokes
• 1 ft2s-1 = 929 stokes
• υ = µ /ρ

5). Surface Tension
• Symbol :σ
• Dimension : mt-2
• Unit : N.m-1
• σ water/air = 0.074 N.m -1
Table 1.14. Relationship of ρ, σ and υ of water

t = 10o C; p = atm t = 60o F; p = atm
Water Air Unit Water Air Unit
ρ 1000 1.37 kgmass.m-3 1.94 2.37 .10-3 slug.ft-3
µ 1.3 .10-2 1.8 .10-4 poise 2.3 .10-5 3.7 .10-7 lbs.s.ft-2
υ 1.3 .10-6 1.3 .10-5 m2s-1 1.2 .10-5 1.6 .10-4 ft2s-1

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
Intermediate e
vadoze
ZONE OF zone r
AERATION VADOZE
WATER m
e
Capillary zone
a
Groundwater table
b
l
GROUND /
ZONE OF PHREATIC
Saturated zone e
SATURATION WATER
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
2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 = ℎ𝑐𝑐 𝜋𝜋𝑟𝑟 2 𝛾𝛾
2𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏
ℎ𝑐𝑐 =
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟
hc : height of capillary zone

τ : surface tension (dynes/cm)
γ : specific weight of water
r : radius of tube
λ
λ : contact angle of water and wall
hc
When pure water in clean glass, λ = 0
and temperature at 20o C so value of
2r
τs = 75 dyne/cm
= 0.076 g/cm and,
0.15
ℎ𝑐𝑐 =
𝑟𝑟
Fig. 2.2. Schematic of capillary rise

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 Size of particles (mm) Capillary rise (cm)
Sand, coarse 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

b. Zone of Saturation
1). Specific retention (Sr)
Sr = Wr / V
Wr : the rest water volume after drainage
V : total volume of soil
2). Specific yield (Sy)
Sy = Wy / V
Wy : volume of water which be drained
α = 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
Vv
Vw water Ww
V
Vs solid Ws
Fig. 2.3. Diagram of solid, water and air relationship

1). Void ratio (e)
The ratio of the volume of voids (Vv) to the volume of solids (Vs), is defined as void
ratio, and:
𝑉𝑉𝑒𝑒
𝑒𝑒 =
𝑉𝑉𝑠𝑠
2). Porosity (n)
The ratio of the volume of voids (Vv) to the total volume (V), is defined as porosity,
so:
𝑉𝑉𝑣𝑣
𝑛𝑛 = × 100%
𝑉𝑉
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:
𝑉𝑉𝑤𝑤
𝑆𝑆 = × 100%
𝑉𝑉𝑣𝑣
4). Water content (w)
The ratio of weight of water (Ww) in the voids to the weight of solids so:
𝑊𝑊𝑤𝑤
𝑤𝑤 = × 100%
𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠
5). Unit Weight
a). Unit weight of water (γw)
The ratio of weight of water to the volume of water in the same temperature (γw)
and (γo) is designated as unit weight of water at 4o C.

𝑔𝑔𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑡𝑡𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓
γ𝑤𝑤 = 1 � 3=1
𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐
� 3=1
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
� 3 = 1000
𝑚𝑚
� 3
𝑚𝑚

b). Total unit weight of soil mass (γt)
The ratio of the weight of the mass (W) to the volume of the mass (V) so:
𝑊𝑊
γ𝑡𝑡 =
𝑉𝑉
c). Dry unit weight mass (γd)
The ratio of the weight of solids (Ws) to the total volume (V)
𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠
γ𝑑𝑑 =
𝑉𝑉
d). The ratio of the saturated weight of the mass (γsat)
Saturated unit weight soil mass (when S = 100%) to the total volume (V).
𝑊𝑊
γ𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 =
𝑉𝑉
e). Unit weight of solid (γs)
The ratio of the weight of solids (Ws) to the volume of solids (Vs)
𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠
γ𝑠𝑠 =
𝑉𝑉𝑠𝑠
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:
γ𝑡𝑡 𝑊𝑊
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚 = = = γ𝑠𝑠 = 𝐺𝐺
γ𝑜𝑜 𝑉𝑉γ𝑜𝑜
• The specific gravity of mass of soil excluding air, water and solid:
γ𝑠𝑠 𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠
𝐺𝐺 = = = γ𝑠𝑠 =
γ𝑜𝑜 𝑉𝑉𝑠𝑠 γ𝑜𝑜 𝑉𝑉𝑠𝑠

3. Type Aquifer
gs gs
K K1<K gwt = ps
gwt = ps
H
H D K
a. Unconfined aquifer b. Semi unconfined aquifer
gs gs
K=0 ps ps
K1<K
gwt
gwt
D=H K D H K
c. Confined aquifer d. Semi confined/leaky aquifer
gs
Note:
gwt’ gs : ground surface
ps : piezometric surface
gwt gwt : groundwater table
H
gwt’ : groundwater table of
perched water
D : thickness of aquifer
e. Suspended aquifer
H : depth of groundwater
K : 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.

III. BASIC PARAMETERS
1. Law of Groundwater Flow
a. Poiseuille’s Law
𝛾𝛾𝑤𝑤 𝑅𝑅2 𝑖𝑖
𝑣𝑣𝑎𝑎 = (3.1)
8µ
where
va : average velocity
γw : unit weight of water
R : radius of tube
µ : viscosity of fluid
i : hydraulic gradient
This equation is the proof of Poiseuille’s Law which states that the velocity in laminar
flow is proportional to the first power of the hydraulic gradient i.
b. Darcy’s Law (1856),
1). Equation
ℎ
𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 ⇒ 𝑖𝑖 = (3.2)
𝑙𝑙
General equation can be written as a vector form:

𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
Substitute to the Laplace Equation:

𝛿𝛿ℎ𝑖𝑖 𝛿𝛿ℎ𝑗𝑗 𝛿𝛿ℎ𝑘𝑘
𝑉𝑉 = −𝐾𝐾 � 𝑖𝑖 + 𝑗𝑗 + 𝑘𝑘� (3.3)
𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿
Consider on x=0 direction only so:

𝛿𝛿ℎ𝑗𝑗 𝛿𝛿ℎ𝑘𝑘
=0 & =0
𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿

The equation becomes:
𝛿𝛿ℎ𝑖𝑖
𝑉𝑉 = −𝐾𝐾 � �
𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿
𝑑𝑑 𝑎𝑎
𝑉𝑉 = −𝐾𝐾 �− 𝑥𝑥 + 𝑎𝑎�
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑏𝑏
𝒂𝒂 𝒅𝒅𝒅𝒅 𝒉𝒉
𝑽𝑽 = +𝑲𝑲 𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐 𝑽𝑽 = +𝑲𝑲 𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐 𝑽𝑽 = +𝑲𝑲 𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐 𝑽𝑽 = 𝑲𝑲𝑲𝑲 (3.4)
𝒃𝒃 𝒅𝒅𝒅𝒅 𝒍𝒍
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 Posseuille’s
Law. And the discharge is by Darcy’s equation is:

𝑑𝑑ℎ
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐾𝐾 𝐴𝐴 (3.5)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
where,
Q : discharge
A : section area of aquifer
dh : difference water elevation
dl : length of aquifer
2). Similar equations
 Fourier’s Law on heat transfer {Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier (1768 – 1830)}:
𝒅𝒅𝒅𝒅
𝑯𝑯 = 𝒌𝒌𝒌𝒌 (3.6)
𝒅𝒅𝒅𝒅
where,
H : rate of heat flow

k : thermal conductivity
A : cross section area
dT : temperature difference
dx : thickness

 Ohm’s Law on electrical current flow {George Simon Ohm (1787 - 1854)}:
𝒅𝒅𝒅𝒅
𝑰𝑰 = 𝑪𝑪 𝒂𝒂 (3.7)
𝒅𝒅𝒅𝒅
where,
I : current
C : coefficient of conductivity
a : sectional area of conductor
dv : drop in voltage
dl : length of conductor
3). Validity of Darcy’ Law
𝝆𝝆𝝆𝝆𝝆𝝆
𝑵𝑵𝑹𝑹 = (3.8)
𝝁𝝁
It can be written in other equation as:
γ𝝊𝝊𝝊𝝊
𝑵𝑵𝑹𝑹 = (3.9)
𝝁𝝁𝝁𝝁
where,
NR : Reynold’s Number
D : diameter of pipe
ρ : density of water
ν : flow velocity
µ : viscosity of fluid
γ : unit weight of fluid
g : acceleration of gravity
Experiments show that Darcy’s 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 Darcy’s law (Todd,
1980).

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:
𝑉𝑉𝑒𝑒
𝑒𝑒 =
𝑉𝑉𝑠𝑠
𝑒𝑒
𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 = 𝐴𝐴. (3.17)
1 + 𝑒𝑒
The relationship between real pore channels to the idealized pore channel is:
𝐿𝐿 × 𝑎𝑎′ = 𝐿𝐿′ × 𝑎𝑎 (3.18)

where,
L : length of idealized channel
a : area of idealized channel
L’ : length of real channel
a’ : area of real channel
2). Grain size
If the cross section of a tube is circular, the flow in the tube as per Poiseuille’s
Law is:
γ𝑤𝑤 𝑅𝑅2
𝑞𝑞 = 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 (3.27)
8µ
The average velocity flow in the tube:

𝑞𝑞 γ𝑤𝑤 𝑅𝑅2 𝑖𝑖 γ𝑤𝑤 𝑑𝑑2
𝑣𝑣𝑎𝑎 = = = . 𝑖𝑖 (3.28)
𝑎𝑎 8µ 32µ
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:
𝑎𝑎1, γ𝑤𝑤 𝐶𝐶 γ𝑤𝑤
𝑘𝑘 ′ = 2. = (3.29)
16𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋2 µ µ
Where, C is constant which is independent of temperature and the expression of

K may now be as below and K varies as γw/µ.
γ𝑤𝑤
𝐾𝐾 = 𝐶𝐶. 𝐹𝐹. (𝑒𝑒). (3.30)
µ
4). Structure and stratification

Kv
▼
K1 V1.i.K1 Z1
K2 V2.i.K2 Z2
Z
Kh ►
Kn-1 Vn-1.i.Kn-i Zn-1
Kn Vn.i.Kn 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)
𝟏𝟏
𝑲𝑲𝒉𝒉 = (𝑲𝑲 𝒁𝒁 + 𝑲𝑲𝟐𝟐 𝒁𝒁𝟐𝟐 + ⋯ + 𝑲𝑲𝒏𝒏 𝒁𝒁𝒏𝒏 ) (3.31)
𝒁𝒁 𝟏𝟏 𝟏𝟏

b). Flow in the Vertical Direction
The hydraulic gradient is h/Z and:
ℎ
𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾𝑣𝑣 = 𝐾𝐾1 𝑖𝑖1 = 𝐾𝐾2 𝑖𝑖2 = … … … … 𝐾𝐾𝑛𝑛 𝑖𝑖𝑛𝑛
𝑍𝑍
If h1, h2 ………hn are the loss of heads in each of the layers, therefore:
H = h1 + h2 + …………hn
or,
H = Z1h1 + Z2H2+ ……..Zn Hn
Substitution:
𝒁𝒁
𝑲𝑲𝒗𝒗 = (3.32)
𝒁𝒁𝟏𝟏 𝒁𝒁𝟐𝟐 𝒁𝒁
+ + ⋯ + 𝒏𝒏
𝑲𝑲𝟏𝟏 𝑲𝑲𝟐𝟐 𝑲𝑲𝒏𝒏
b. Method of Determination
1). Laboratory Method
a). Constant head permeability method
The coefficient of permeability K is computed:

𝒉𝒉
𝑸𝑸 = 𝑲𝑲 𝑨𝑨 𝒕𝒕 (3.33)
𝑳𝑳
𝑸𝑸𝑸𝑸
𝑲𝑲 = (3.34)
𝒉𝒉 𝑨𝑨 𝒕𝒕
b). Falling head permeability method
The coefficient of permeability K can be determined on the basis of drop in
head (ho- h1 ) and the elapse time (t1 - to).

ℎ
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 𝐾𝐾. . 𝐴𝐴 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 (3.35)
𝐿𝐿
𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂 𝒉𝒉𝒐𝒐
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (3.38)
𝑨𝑨(𝒕𝒕𝟏𝟏 − 𝒕𝒕𝒐𝒐 ) 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏
when A = a the equation be:

𝑳𝑳 𝒉𝒉𝒐𝒐
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (3.39)
(𝒕𝒕𝟏𝟏 − 𝒕𝒕𝒐𝒐 ) 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏
where:
L : length of sample
A : cross section area of sample
a : cross section area stand pipe
ho h1 : head of water in observation well 1 and 2 respectively
to t1 : 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:

𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄
𝐾𝐾 = (3.40)
ℎ. 𝐴𝐴. 𝑡𝑡
where,
L : length of sample
A : cross section area of sample
Q : discharge in certain time t
h : average head
t : duration of flow
d). Computation from grain size distribution
On the basis of Poiseuille’s Law the coefficient of permeability can be
computed:
𝐾𝐾 = 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 2 (3.41)
According to Allen Hazen (1911) in Murthy (1977) the empirical equation can
be computed as:
2
𝐾𝐾 = 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶10 (3.42)
where,

K : coefficient of permeability (cm/s)
C : a factor (100 <C< 150)
D10 : effective size of grain (cm)
e). Computation from horizontal capillary test
This method base on the Darcy’s 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

Q Q Q & hp Q & hp
hw ’
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:

0.18 𝑄𝑄
𝐾𝐾 =
𝑟𝑟 𝐻𝐻
where:
Q : discharge (L3/T)
K : coefficient of permeability (L/T)
H : 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 = 2πr.
(2). Forchheimer (1930)
Forchheimer (1930) proposed to find a coefficient of permeability (K) by bore hole with
certain diameter and depth.

𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅𝟐𝟐 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 (3.49)
𝑭𝑭(𝒕𝒕𝟐𝟐 − 𝒕𝒕𝟏𝟏) 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏

where:
R : radius of well (L)
F : shape factor (L) (F = 4 R, Forchheimer, 1930)
t1 t2 : time of the measurement respectively (T)
h1 h2 : height of water of the measurement respectively (L)
As : cross section area of well (L2 , As = π R2)
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 Q
Hw
Hw
gwt
L
L
gwt
2R 2R
(1). The hole test below ground (2). The hole test above ground
water table water table
(H=Hw) H=Hc+1/2L
Fig. 3.3. Hydraulic head dimension on bore hole test according to Suharyadi
(1984)
The coefficient of permeability can be computed by:
2.30 𝑄𝑄 𝐿𝐿 𝑄𝑄 𝐿𝐿
𝐾𝐾 = 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 = 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 (3.44)
2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 𝑅𝑅 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 𝑅𝑅
where,
L : length of permeable part
H : Hydraulic head (L ≥ R)
R : radius of casing
d). Uncasing bore hole test
(1). Pecker test
• Suharyadi (1984)
𝟐𝟐. 𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑 𝑸𝑸 𝑳𝑳 𝑸𝑸 𝑳𝑳
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 (3.50)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 𝑹𝑹 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 𝑹𝑹
𝑯𝑯 = 𝑯𝑯𝟏𝟏 + 𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 (3.51)
Q and H2 Q and H2 Q and H2 Q and H2
H1 H1
gwt gwt
H1
H1
L L L L
1/2L 1/2L
gwt gwt
2R 2R 2R 2R
(a). One pecker test (b). One pecker test (c). Two peckers test (d). Two peckers test
which zone test which zone test is which zone test which zone test is
is submerged above groundwater table is submerged above groundwater table
Fig. 3.6. Hydraulic head dimension on packer test (after Suharyadi, 1984)

(2). Boast and Kirkham (in Todd, 1980)
𝑪𝑪 𝒅𝒅𝒅𝒅
𝑲𝑲 = . (3.52)
𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟖𝟖 𝒅𝒅𝒅𝒅
Lw y
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)
𝑄𝑄 −𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹
𝐾𝐾 = �1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 � �� (8.53)
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 2
where:
H : depth of hollow well (L)
F : shape factor (L)
Q : inflow discharge (L3/T), dan Q = C I A
C : runoff coefficient of roof ( )
I : precipitation intensity (L/T)
A : roof area (L2)
Note:
• When steady flow condition (8.53) become F =Q/KH

• The solution of this equation by trial and error.

Table 3.1. Value of C after Boast and Kirkham (in Todd, 1980)
Lw/ y/ (H-Lw)/Lw for Impermeable Layer H-Lw (H-Lw)/Lw for Infinitely
rw Lw Impermeable Layer
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 ∞ 5 2 1 0.5
1 1.00 447 423 404 375 323 286 264 255 254 252 241 213 166
0.75 469 450 434 408 360 324 303 292 291 289 278 248 198
0.50 555 537 522 497 449 411 386 380 379 377 359 324 264
2 1.00 186 176 167 154 134 123 118 116 115 115 113 106 91
0.75 196 187 180 168 149 138 133 131 131 130 128 121 106
0.50 234 225 218 207 188 175 169 167 167 166 164 156 139
5 1.00 51.9 48.6 46.2 42.8 38.7 36.9 36.1 35.8 35.5 34.6 32.4
0.75 54.8 52.0 49.9 46.8 42.8 41.0 40.2 40.0 39.6 38.6 36.3
0.50 66.1 63.4 61.3 58.1 53.9 51.9 51.0 50.7 40.3 49.2 466
10 1.00 18.1 16.9 16.1 15.1 14.1 13.6 13.4 13.4 13.3 13.1 12.6
0.75 19.1 18.1 17.4 16.5 15.5 15.0 14.8 14.8 14.7 14.5 14.0
0.50 23.3 22.3 21.5 20.6 19.5 19.0 18.8 18.7 18.6 18.4 17.8
20 1.00 59.1 55.3 53.0 50.6 48.1 47.0 46.6 46.4 46.2 45.8 44.6
0.75 62.7 59.4 57.3 55.0 52.5 51.5 51.0 50.8 50.7 50.2 48.9
0.50 76.7 73.4 71.2 68.8 66.0 64.8 64.3 64.1 63.9 63.4 61.9
50 1.00 1.25 1.28 1.14 1.11 1.07 1.05 1.04 1.03 1.02
0.75 1.33 1.27 1.23 1.20 1.16 1.14 1.13 1.12 1.11
0.50 1.64 1.57 1.54 1.50 1.46 1.44 1.43 1.42 1.39
100 1.00 0.37 0.35 0.34 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.31
0.75 0.40 0.38 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.34 0.34
0.50 0.49 0.47 0.46 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.43 0.43
Table 3.2. Coefficient of Permeability of some Soils (Casagrande and Fadum)
K (cm/sec) Soils type Drainage Recommended method of

Condition determining K
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 or Pumping test
10-5 Very fine sand Poor Falling head
10-6 Silt Poor Falling head
10-7 – 10-9 Clay soils Practically Consolidation test

impervious

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

𝑸𝑸
𝑸𝑸 = 𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 ⇒ 𝑲𝑲 =
𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭
• Sunjoto (2010) for the shape factor of each condition (Fig.3.8.)

Q in 10 bar Q in 10 bar Q in 10 bar Q in 10 bar
L L L L
2R 2R 2R 2R
(1). Condition of well a. (2). Condition of well b. (3). Condition of well b. (4). Condition of well c.
Fig. 3.8. Schematic of condition of well and packers location.
Data:
o Radius of hole : R = 0.05 m (according to Suharyadi that diameter
of hole Φ = 3 or 4 inches)
o Hydraulic head : H = 10 bar = 102 m
o Discharge : Q = 1 l/min = 1.66667 .10 -05 m3/s
o Length of hole :L=1m
o The three successive test runs, each of 5 minutes duration, in constant
discharge
o 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):
2π𝐿𝐿
𝐹𝐹𝑎𝑎 = (3.53)
2(𝐿𝐿 + 2𝑅𝑅 ) � 2𝐿𝐿 2
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅

• Condition of well (b) Fig. 3.8.(b):
2π𝐿𝐿
𝐹𝐹𝑏𝑏 = (3.54)
(𝐿𝐿 + 2𝑅𝑅) � 𝐿𝐿 2
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅
• Condition of well (c) Fig. 3.8.(c):

2π𝐿𝐿
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐 = (3,55)
(𝐿𝐿 + 2𝑅𝑅 ) � 𝐿𝐿 2
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2𝑅𝑅 2𝑅𝑅
Hole with diameter 76 mm
Shape Factor of each hole (3.53, 3.54, 3.55):
2∗π∗1
𝐹𝐹𝑎𝑎 = = 1.33570 m
2(1 + 2 ∗ 0.0376) � 2 ∗ 1 2
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
0.0376 0.0376
2∗π∗1
𝐹𝐹𝑏𝑏 = = 1.56643 m
2
(1 + 2 ∗ 0.0376) � 1
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
0.0376 0.0376
2∗π∗1
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐 = = 1.89308 m
2
(1 + 2 ∗ 0.0376) � 1
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2 ∗ 0.0376 2 ∗ 0.0376
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 .10−5
𝐾𝐾𝑎𝑎 = = 1.22332 .10−7 m/s
1.33570 × 102

• Condition of well b.:
1.66667 .10−5
𝐾𝐾𝑏𝑏 = = 1.04313 .10−7 m/s
1.56643 × 102
• Condition of well c:
1.66667 .10−5
𝐾𝐾𝑐𝑐 = = 0.86314.10−7 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

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 Darcy’s 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
L
x
Fig. 4.1. Flow through unconfined embankment
a. Discharge Equation
• Dupuit (1863) in Castany (1967):
V = K.i ⇒ i = sin α ⇒

𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 =
�𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 2 + 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 2
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐾𝐾 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾 =
�𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 2 + 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 2 2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
�1 + � �
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Due to the assumption of vertical velocity is neglected so :
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
�1 + � � = 1 ⇒ 𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾 (4.1)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
• Darcy.s Law (1856)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 ⇒ 𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾 (4.2)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
so:
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 ⇒ 𝑞𝑞 = 𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 = 𝐾𝐾 . (𝑦𝑦. 1)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑞𝑞. 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 𝐾𝐾. 𝑦𝑦. 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑞𝑞 � 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 𝐾𝐾 � 𝑦𝑦. 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
1 𝐻𝐻
𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞⁆𝐿𝐿0 = 𝐾𝐾. . 𝑦𝑦 2 ⁆𝐻𝐻12
2
1
𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 𝐾𝐾(𝐻𝐻12 − 𝐻𝐻22 )
2
𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏 − 𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐
𝑸𝑸 = 𝑲𝑲𝑲𝑲 (4.3)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐
where,
H1 : depth of upstream
H2 : depth of downstream
L : length of aquifer
h : height of flow line in distance of x
x : distance from upstream
b : length of embankment
b. Flow line Equation
Continuity general flow:
𝐾𝐾 𝛿𝛿 2 ℎ′2 𝛿𝛿 2 ℎ′2
� + � + 𝑁𝑁 = 0
2 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿 2 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿 2
In this case that h is function of x and N = 0 (precipitation) and equation becomes:
𝑑𝑑2 ℎ2
=0
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 2
and the general solution is:
𝑑𝑑ℎ2
= 𝐴𝐴 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 ℎ2 = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Boundary condition:
x=0 ⇒ h = H1 ; H12 = B
x=L ⇒ h = H2 ; h2= AL + B
𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12
𝐴𝐴 =
𝐿𝐿
So the equation of flow line is:
𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − 𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏
𝒉𝒉 =𝟐𝟐
𝒙𝒙 + 𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏 (4.4)
𝑳𝑳

2. Confined aquifer
In this case the flow through a permeable layer as laid down under impermeable layer
likes Fig. 4.2.
H1
φ
D H2
Fig. 4.2. Flow through confined embankment
a. Discharge
Laplace equation:
𝛿𝛿ℎ𝑖𝑖 𝛿𝛿ℎ𝑗𝑗 𝛿𝛿ℎ𝑘𝑘

𝑉𝑉 = −𝐾𝐾 � 𝑖𝑖 + 𝑗𝑗 + 𝑘𝑘� ; 𝑄𝑄 = 𝑉𝑉. 𝑏𝑏. 𝐷𝐷
𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐻𝐻2 − 𝐻𝐻1 𝐻𝐻1 − 𝐻𝐻2

𝑄𝑄 = −𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 = −𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 = +𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿
𝑯𝑯𝟏𝟏 − 𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐
𝑸𝑸 = +𝑲𝑲𝑲𝑲𝑲𝑲 (4.5)
𝑳𝑳
where,
b : width of aquifer

b. Flow line equation
Laplace Equation
𝜕𝜕 2 𝜑𝜑 𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕
=0 ⇒ =A ⇒ 𝜑𝜑 = Ax + B
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 2 dx
Boundary condition:
𝑥𝑥 = 0 ⇒ 𝜑𝜑 = 𝐻𝐻1 ⇒ 𝐻𝐻1 = 𝐵𝐵
𝑥𝑥 = 𝐿𝐿 ⇒ 𝜑𝜑 = 𝐻𝐻2 ⇒ 𝐻𝐻2 = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝐻𝐻1
𝐻𝐻2 − 𝐻𝐻1
𝐴𝐴 =
𝐿𝐿
𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝑯𝑯𝟏𝟏
𝝋𝝋 = 𝐱𝐱 + 𝑯𝑯𝟏𝟏 (4.6)
𝑳𝑳
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

EXAMPLES
1. Unconfined aquifer embankment
H1
H2
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:
𝐾𝐾 𝜕𝜕 2 ℎ2 𝜕𝜕 2 ℎ2
� + � + 𝑁𝑁 = 0
2 𝜕𝜕 2 𝑥𝑥 2 𝜕𝜕 2 𝑦𝑦 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:
𝑑𝑑2 ℎ2
=0
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 2

The solution is:
𝑑𝑑ℎ 2
= 𝐴𝐴 ⇒ ℎ 2 = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Boundary condition:
x=0 ⇒ h = H1 ; H12 = B
x=L ⇒ h = H2 ; H22 = AL + B
⇒ H22 = AL + H12
𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12
𝐴𝐴 =
𝐿𝐿
Using data above the equation will be:
ℎ2 = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵
𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − 𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏
𝟐𝟐
𝒉𝒉 = 𝒙𝒙 + 𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏
𝑳𝑳
22 − 62
ℎ2 = 𝑥𝑥 + 62
40
ℎ2 = −0.80 𝑥𝑥 + 36
b. Discharge through the embankment
ℎ 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 𝑑𝑑(ℎ2 )
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾ℎ𝑉𝑉𝑥𝑥 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾ℎ =−
𝑥𝑥 2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑑𝑑(ℎ2 ) 𝑑𝑑 𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12 2

𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12
= � 𝑥𝑥 + 𝐻𝐻1 � =
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿
So,

𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 (𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12 )
𝑄𝑄 =
2𝐿𝐿
For b = 1 meter so:
10−6 . 1. (62 − 22 )
𝑄𝑄 = = 4.10−7 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
2.40
b. Height of flow line in 20 m from upstream:
ℎ2 = −1.25 𝑥𝑥 + 36
ℎ2 = −0.80 × 20 + 36 = 20
h = 4.472 m

2. Horizontal stratified embankment
K1 K2 K3
H1 H2
H3 H4
L1 L2 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

The discharge Q = Q1 = Q 2 = Q3
The flow line for each layer are:
Layer I:
𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12
ℎ12
= 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝐻𝐻12
𝐿𝐿1
Layer II:
2
𝐻𝐻32 − 𝐻𝐻22
ℎ2 = 𝑥𝑥2 + 𝐻𝐻22
𝐿𝐿2
Layer III:
𝐻𝐻42 − 𝐻𝐻32
ℎ32 = 𝑥𝑥3 + 𝐻𝐻32
𝐿𝐿3
The discharge for each layer are:
Layer I:
𝐾𝐾1 𝑏𝑏 (𝐻𝐻12 − 𝐻𝐻22 ) 2𝑄𝑄𝐿𝐿1
𝑄𝑄1 = ⇒ 𝐻𝐻12 − 𝐻𝐻22 =
2𝐿𝐿1 𝐾𝐾1 𝑏𝑏
Layer II:
𝐾𝐾2 𝑏𝑏(𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻32 ) 2𝑄𝑄𝐿𝐿2
𝑄𝑄2 = ⇒ 𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻32 =
Layer III:
𝐾𝐾3 𝑏𝑏 (𝐻𝐻32 − 𝐻𝐻42 ) 2𝑄𝑄𝐿𝐿3
𝑄𝑄3 = ⇒ 𝐻𝐻32 − 𝐻𝐻42 =
The defference is:
2𝑄𝑄 𝐿𝐿1 𝐿𝐿2 𝐿𝐿3

𝐻𝐻12 − 𝐻𝐻42 = � + + �
𝑏𝑏 𝐾𝐾1 𝐾𝐾2 𝐾𝐾3

𝑏𝑏 (𝐻𝐻12 − 𝐻𝐻42 )
𝑄𝑄 =
𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿
2 � 1 + 2 + 3�
𝐾𝐾1 𝐾𝐾2 𝐾𝐾3
𝑏𝑏 (102 + 42 )
𝑄𝑄 = = 1.213 10−6 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
80 70 40
2 � −4 + −5 + −6 �
10 10 10
Te flow line equation needs the values of H2 and H3 are:
2 × 1.213 10−6 × 80
102 − 𝐻𝐻22 = ⇒ 𝐻𝐻2 = 9.915 𝑚𝑚
1 × 10−4
2 × 1.213 10−6 × 70
9.9152 − 𝐻𝐻22 = ⇒ 𝐻𝐻3 = 9.018 𝑚𝑚
1 × 10−5
The flow line for each layer are:
Layer I:
9.9152 − 102
ℎ12 = 𝑥𝑥1 + 102 ⇒ ℎ12 = −0.212𝑥𝑥1 + 100
80
Layer II:
9.0182 − 9.9152
ℎ22 = 𝑥𝑥2 + 9.9152 ⇒ ℎ22 = −0.243𝑥𝑥2 + 98.307
70
Layer III:
42 − 9.0182
ℎ32 = 𝑥𝑥3 + 9.0182 ⇒ ℎ32 = −1.633𝑥𝑥3 + 81.324
40

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:
𝐾𝐾 𝜕𝜕 2 ℎ2 𝜕𝜕 2 ℎ2 2𝑁𝑁
� 2 � + 𝑁𝑁 = 0 ⇒ � 2 � =
2 𝜕𝜕 𝑥𝑥 𝜕𝜕 𝑥𝑥 𝐾𝐾
𝑑𝑑ℎ2 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁

� �=− + 𝐴𝐴 ⇒ � 𝑑𝑑ℎ2 = − � 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾
2𝑁𝑁𝑥𝑥 2 𝑁𝑁𝑥𝑥 2
ℎ2 = − + 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵 ⇒ ℎ2 = − + 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵
2𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾
Boundary condition:
𝑥𝑥 = 0 ⇒ ℎ = 𝐻𝐻1 ⇒ 𝐵𝐵 = 𝐻𝐻12

𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2
𝑥𝑥 = 𝐿𝐿 ⇒ ℎ = 𝐻𝐻2 ⇒ 𝐻𝐻22 =− + 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵
𝐾𝐾
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 1 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝐻𝐻22 =𝐻𝐻21
𝐴𝐴 = � + 𝐻𝐻22 = 𝐻𝐻21 � ⇒ 𝐴𝐴 = +
𝐾𝐾 𝐿𝐿 𝐾𝐾 𝐿𝐿
Flow line equation becomes:
𝑁𝑁𝑥𝑥 2 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12

2
ℎ =− + + 𝑥𝑥 + 𝐻𝐻12
𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾 𝐿𝐿
𝑥𝑥 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
ℎ2 = 𝐻𝐻12 − (𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12 ) + (𝐿𝐿 − 𝑥𝑥 )
𝐿𝐿 𝐾𝐾
Substitution of the data:
2
4.80 10−8 22 − 82
ℎ = −6
( )
𝑥𝑥. 50 − 𝑥𝑥 + � � 𝑥𝑥 + 82
10 50
ℎ2 = −4,80. 10−2 . 𝑥𝑥 2 + 1,20. 𝑥𝑥 + 64
b. Highest flow line.

Location of highest flow line
𝑑𝑑ℎ2 𝑑𝑑ℎ2
=0 ⇒ = −4.80 . 10−2 .2𝑥𝑥 + 1.20 = 0
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
1.20
−9.60 . 102 . 𝑥𝑥 + 1.20 = 0 ⇒ 𝑥𝑥 = − 12.50 𝑚𝑚
9.60 . 10−2
So x = 12.50 m from upstream/left ward
The heigt of water table when in horizontal condition or when x = 12.50 m
ℎ2 = −4.80 . 102 . 12.502 + 1.20 .12.50 + 64 = 71.50
h = 8,46 m
c. Discharge through the embankment.

ℎ 1 𝑑𝑑ℎ2
𝑞𝑞 = 𝑏𝑏ℎ𝑉𝑉 = 𝑏𝑏ℎ �−𝐾𝐾 � = − 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
𝑥𝑥 2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
1 𝑑𝑑 𝑥𝑥 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
𝑄𝑄 = − 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 � �𝐻𝐻12 − (𝐻𝐻12 − 𝐻𝐻22 ) + (𝐿𝐿 − 𝑥𝑥 )��
2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐿𝐿 𝐾𝐾
Boundary condition:
𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 (𝐻𝐻12 = 𝐻𝐻22 ) 𝐿𝐿

𝑥𝑥 = 𝑜𝑜 ⇒ 𝑄𝑄 = = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
2𝐿𝐿 2
10−6 . 1. (82 − 22 ) 50
𝑄𝑄 = = 4.80 . 10−8 . 1.
2 × 50 2
𝑸𝑸 = −𝟔𝟔 . 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏=𝟕𝟕 𝒎𝒎𝟑𝟑⁄𝒔𝒔 ⇒ 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤
𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 (𝐻𝐻12 = 𝐻𝐻22 ) 𝐿𝐿

𝑥𝑥 = 𝐿𝐿 ⇒ 𝑄𝑄 = + 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
2𝐿𝐿 2
10−6 . 1. (82 − 22 ) 50
𝑄𝑄 = + 4.80 . 10−8 . 1.
2 × 50 2
𝑸𝑸 = 𝟏𝟏, 𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎 . 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏=𝟔𝟔 𝒎𝒎𝟑𝟑⁄𝒔𝒔 ⇒ 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟ℎ𝑡𝑡 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤
d. The maximum elevation of flow line when H1 = H2 = H
𝑁𝑁
ℎ2 = 𝐻𝐻2 + 𝑥𝑥 (𝐿𝐿 − 𝑥𝑥 )
𝐾𝐾
The extreem point is:
𝜕𝜕ℎ2 𝑑𝑑ℎ2 𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁
=0 ⇒ = − 𝑥𝑥 + (𝐿𝐿 − 𝑥𝑥 ) = 0
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾
𝑁𝑁 𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2
ℎ2 = 𝐻𝐻2 + . �𝐿𝐿 − � ⇒ ℎ2 = 𝐻𝐻2 +
𝐾𝐾 2 2 4𝐾𝐾
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2
ℎ𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = �𝐻𝐻2 +
4𝐾𝐾

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,
Darcy’s Law:
𝑑𝑑ℎ
𝑞𝑞 = −𝐾𝐾ℎ
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Continuity equation:
𝑞𝑞 = 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
𝐸𝐸
ℎ𝑑𝑑ℎ = 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥
𝐾𝐾
Boundary condition:
x=0 ⇒ h = ho
x = L, ⇒ h=H
𝐻𝐻 𝐿𝐿
𝐸𝐸
� ℎ𝑑𝑑ℎ = � 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥
𝐾𝐾
ℎ𝑜𝑜 𝑜𝑜
𝐸𝐸 2 𝐿𝐿
ℎ2 ⁆𝐻𝐻
ℎ 𝑜𝑜 = 𝑥𝑥 ⁆𝑜𝑜
𝐾𝐾
𝐸𝐸 2
𝐻𝐻2 − ℎ = 𝐿𝐿
𝐾𝐾
Substitution of data:
0.12 . 10−6
252 − ℎ𝑜𝑜2 = 1502 ⇒ h2o = 24.20 ⇒ ho = 3.77m
0.25 . 10−3
So te lowest point is 3.77 m.

5. Embankment between trench and impermeable strata
N N
imaginary
aquifer H2
H1 H1
L 2L
Data:
K = 1,574.10-4 m/s, N = 1,574.10-8 m/s, L = 400 m, H1= 8 m
Continuity equation:
𝐾𝐾 𝜕𝜕 2 ℎ2
� � + 𝑁𝑁 = 0
2 𝜕𝜕 2 𝑥𝑥 2
𝜕𝜕 2 ℎ2 2𝑁𝑁
� 2 2
�=−
𝜕𝜕 𝑥𝑥 𝐾𝐾
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2
ℎ2 = − + 𝐶𝐶1 𝑥𝑥 + 𝐶𝐶1
𝐾𝐾
Boundary condition:
x = 0 ⇒ h = H1 ⇒ C2 = H12
4NL2
x = 2L ⇒ h = H2 ⇒ H22 =− + 2C1 L + H12
K
1 4𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2
𝐶𝐶1 = �𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12 + �
2𝐿𝐿 𝐾𝐾

𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2 𝑥𝑥 4𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2
ℎ2 = − + �𝐻𝐻22 − 𝐻𝐻12 + � + 𝐻𝐻12
𝐾𝐾 2𝐿𝐿 𝐾𝐾
where,
H1 = H2 = H = 8 m so:
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
ℎ2 = + + 𝐻𝐻2
𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾
It will be maximum when;
𝑑𝑑ℎ2
=0
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
So,
𝑑𝑑ℎ2 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝐾𝐾
=− + =0 ⇒ 𝑥𝑥 = . ⇒ 𝑥𝑥 = 𝐿𝐿
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾 2𝑁𝑁
Its mean that hmax occurs when x = L so,
−𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 −2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2
ℎ2 = + + 𝐻𝐻2
𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2
𝐻𝐻𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = � + 𝐻𝐻2
𝐾𝐾
And discharge:
𝑑𝑑ℎ 1 𝑑𝑑 −𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁

𝑄𝑄 = −𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 = −𝐾𝐾 . 𝑏𝑏. ℎ = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 � + + 𝐻𝐻2 �
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾
1 −2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 � + �
2 𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾

a. So the height of ground water table function of x:
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
ℎ2 = + + 𝐻𝐻2
𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾
b. The height of ground water table in L:
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 1.1574 . 10−8 . 4002

𝐻𝐻𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = � + 𝐻𝐻2 = � + 82
𝐾𝐾 1.1574 . 10−4
Hmax = 8.9443 m
c. Discharge in x = 0:
𝑄𝑄 1 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
= 𝐾𝐾 �− + �
𝑏𝑏 2 𝐾𝐾 𝐾𝐾
𝑄𝑄 1 1.1574 . 10−8 . 400

= − 1.1574 . 10−4 �−0 + �
𝑏𝑏 2 1.1574 . 10−4
= -4,6296.10-6 m 3/s/m
= 4,6296.10-6 m 3/s/m (kearah kiri)

6. Unconfined aquifer
H1
φ
D H2
Data:
H1 = 15 m, H2 = 10 m, D = 7 m, L = 100 m, K = 10-5 m/s
Compute:
b. Discharge through the embankment
Answer:
Laplace equation,
𝜕𝜕 2 𝜑𝜑 𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕
=0 ⇒ = 𝐴𝐴 ⇒ 𝜑𝜑= 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Boundary condition:
𝑥𝑥 = 0 ⇒ 𝜑𝜑= 𝐻𝐻1 ⇒ 𝐻𝐻1 = 𝐵𝐵
𝑥𝑥 = 𝐿𝐿 ⇒ 𝜑𝜑= 𝐻𝐻2 ⇒ 𝐻𝐻2 = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 + 𝐻𝐻1
𝐻𝐻2 − 𝐻𝐻1
𝐴𝐴 =
𝐿𝐿

10 − 15
𝜑𝜑 = 𝑥𝑥 + 15 ⇒ 𝜑𝜑= −0.015𝑥𝑥 + 15
100
b. Discharge
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐻𝐻2 − 𝐻𝐻1 𝐻𝐻1 − 𝐻𝐻2

𝑄𝑄 = −𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 = −𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿
15 − 10
𝑄𝑄 = 1. 10−5 . 1.7 = 3.50 . 10−6 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
100

7. Unconfined aquifer with variable thickness
H1
φ
H2
D1 D2
L
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
Answer:
a. Discharge through the embankment
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕
3−2
𝐷𝐷 = 2 + 𝑥𝑥 = 2 + 0.01𝑥𝑥
100
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 𝑄𝑄
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 (2 + 0.01𝑥𝑥 ) 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 𝑞𝑞
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 𝑏𝑏
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 −𝑞𝑞
𝑞𝑞 = −𝐾𝐾 (2 + 0.01𝑥𝑥 ) ⇒ 𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 = 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕 𝐾𝐾 (2 + 0.01𝑥𝑥 )
Solution by integration:
𝜑𝜑 == 𝑞𝑞. 1. 10−7 . 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 (2 + 0.01𝑥𝑥 ) + 𝐶𝐶

Boundary condition:
𝑥𝑥 = 0 ⇒ 𝜑𝜑1 = 𝐻𝐻1 = 8 = 𝑞𝑞. 1. 10−7 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙2 + 𝐶𝐶
𝑥𝑥 = 100 ⇒ 𝜑𝜑2 = 𝐻𝐻2 = 6 = −𝑞𝑞. 1. 10−7 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙3 + 𝐶𝐶
φ1 – φ2:
3
2 = 𝑞𝑞. 1. 10−7 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � �
2
𝒒𝒒 = 𝟒𝟒. 𝟗𝟗𝟗𝟗 . 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏−𝟕𝟕 𝒎𝒎𝟑𝟑⁄𝒔𝒔
Substitute q:
8 = −𝑞𝑞. 1. 10−7 . 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙2 + 𝐶𝐶 ⇒ 𝐶𝐶 = 11.42
Substitute C:
𝜑𝜑 = −𝑞𝑞. 1. 10−7 . 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 (2 + 0.01𝑥𝑥 ) + 𝐶𝐶
So the flow line equation will be:
𝝋𝝋 = −𝟒𝟒. 𝟗𝟗𝟗𝟗 . 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏−𝟕𝟕. 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍(𝟐𝟐 + 𝟎𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎) + 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏. 𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒

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 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 = 2πrh (5.1)
The hydraulic gradient is:
𝑑𝑑ℎ
𝑖𝑖 = (5.2)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Discharge of inflow when the water levels in the well remain stationary (Darcy’s Law)
V = Ki (5.3)
Q = KiA (5.4)
Substituting for Eqn (1) and (2) for (3), the rate inflow across the cylindrical
surface is:
𝑑𝑑ℎ
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐾𝐾 2π𝑟𝑟ℎ (5.5)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
 The equation for discharge outflow from pumping is:
(𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝒘𝒘 )
𝑸𝑸 = 𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅 (5.8)
𝑹𝑹
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � �
𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
 The equation for permeability of soil is:
𝑸𝑸 𝑹𝑹
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.8𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅(𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝒘𝒘 )
𝟐𝟐 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
where,
H : depth of water outside of aquifer layer
hw : depth of water at face of pumping well
R : radius of outside of aquifer layer
rw : radius of pumped well

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 h
r1
r
r2
Fig. 5.2. Pumping in unconfined aquifer
Area of cylinder of piezometric h and radius r: A = 2πrh
𝑑𝑑ℎ
The hydraulic gradient is: 𝑖𝑖 =
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Darcy’s Law: V = Ki and Q = KiA
Substituting, so the rate inflow across the cylindrical surface is:
𝑑𝑑ℎ
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐾𝐾 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋ℎ (5.9)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Rearranging the terms, so:

𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋
= ℎ𝑑𝑑ℎ
𝑟𝑟 𝑄𝑄
The equation for permeability of soil is:
𝑸𝑸 𝒓𝒓𝟐𝟐
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.12𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅�𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏 � 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
The equation for discharge outflow from pumping is (Fig, 5.2):
Dupuit-Thiem Formula for the full penetration well in free aquifer:
𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏
𝑸𝑸 = 𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅 𝒓𝒓 (5.12)
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � 𝟐𝟐�
𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
where,
Q : discharge of pumping
D : thickness of aquifer layer
r1 r2 : distance from well to observation well 1 and 2 respectively
h1 h2 : 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.).
Darcy’s law:
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑄𝑄 = 2𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾ℎ (5.13)
𝑑𝑑ℎ
dr/dh = tgα (5.14)
𝑄𝑄 = 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋ℎ. tgα (5.15)

∆2
∆1
∆w
h2 H
h1
hw
rw r1
r2
Ri
∆1 − ∆2
tgα = (5.16)
r2 − r1
For first permanent regime:
𝑄𝑄 = 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝑟𝑟1 ℎ1 . tgα (5.17)
For second permanent regime:
𝑄𝑄 = 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝑟𝑟1 ℎ11 . tgα1 (5.18)
 Dupuit-Thiem equation for the full penetration well in free aquifer:
(𝐡𝐡𝟏𝟏 + 𝐡𝐡𝟐𝟐 )(∆𝟏𝟏 − ∆𝟐𝟐)

𝑸𝑸 = 𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅 𝒓𝒓 (5.20)
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � 𝟐𝟐 �
𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.20𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅(𝐡𝐡𝟏𝟏 + 𝐡𝐡𝟐𝟐 )(∆𝟏𝟏 − ∆𝟐𝟐) 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
where:
∆1 ∆2 : drawdown in observation well 1 and 2 respectively

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.):
𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅(𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝒘𝒘 )
𝑸𝑸 = (5.21)
𝑹𝑹
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � 𝒊𝒊 �
𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
𝑸𝑸 𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.21𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅(𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
If we write hw = (H - ∆w) where ∆ w is the depth of maximum drawdown in the

test well or pumped well so (Castany, 1967):
𝐻𝐻 − ℎ𝑤𝑤 = ∆𝑊𝑊
𝝅𝝅∆𝒘𝒘 𝑲𝑲(𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − ∆𝒘𝒘 )

𝑸𝑸 = (5.22)
𝑹𝑹
𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.22𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅∆ 𝒘𝒘 (𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − ∆𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
where:
Ri : radius of influence
H : depth of water before pumping
∆w : maximum drawdown (on well)

2. Confined aquifer
a. Dupuit (1863)
H
hw D
rw
R
𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑄𝑄 = 𝑉𝑉. 𝐴𝐴 = 𝐾𝐾 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑄𝑄 = 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋
𝑥𝑥
𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄]𝑅𝑅𝑟𝑟𝑤𝑤 = 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋]𝐻𝐻
ℎ 𝑤𝑤
Dupuit (1863) formula for full penetration well on confined aquifer:
𝑯𝑯 − 𝒉𝒉𝒘𝒘
𝑸𝑸 = 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 (5.23)
𝑹𝑹
𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
𝑸𝑸 𝑹𝑹
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.23𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(𝑯𝑯 − 𝒉𝒉 𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
where,
R : radius of influence
H : depth of water outside of aquifer layer
hw : depth of water at face of pumping well

b. Dupuit-Thiem (1906)
1). According to UNESCO (1967)
h1 h2 D
r1
r2
Fig. 5.5. Circular unconfined embankment
𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
Dupuit-Thiem formula for full penetration well on confined aquifer:
𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏
𝑸𝑸 = 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 𝒓𝒓 (5.24)
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � 𝟐𝟐 �
𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.24𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(𝒉𝒉 𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏) 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
where,
h1 h2 : head of water in observation well 1 and 2 respectively

2). According to Castany (1967)
∆2
∆1
h2
h1
D
r1
r2
Dupuit-Thiem equation for the full penetration well in confined aquifer:
(∆𝟏𝟏 − ∆𝟐𝟐)
𝑸𝑸 = 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 𝒓𝒓 (5.25)
𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.25𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(∆𝟏𝟏 − ∆𝟐𝟐) 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
where:
D : thickness of aquifer layer
∆1 ∆2 : drawdown in observation well 1 and 2 respectively

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:
𝑸𝑸 𝑹𝑹
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.8𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅(𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐− 𝒉𝒉𝒘𝒘 )
𝟐𝟐 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
o Without observation well and with drawdown data:

𝑸𝑸 𝑹𝑹
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � 5.22𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅∆𝒘𝒘 (𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − ∆𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
b). Confined aquifer:
𝑸𝑸 𝑹𝑹
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.23𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(𝑯𝑯 − 𝒉𝒉𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
2). Pumping in unlimited aquifer
a). Unconfined aquifer:

𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.21𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅(𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
o Without observation well and with drawdown data:

𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.22𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅∆𝒘𝒘 (𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − ∆𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘

o With one observation well and with piezometric head data:
𝑸𝑸 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.12𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅�𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝒘𝒘 � 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
o With one observation well and with drawdown data:

𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.22𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅∆𝒘𝒘 (𝟐𝟐𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏 − ∆𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.20𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅(𝒉𝒉𝒘𝒘 + 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏)(∆𝒘𝒘 − ∆𝟏𝟏 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
o With two observation wells data and piezometric head data:

𝑲𝑲 = 𝟐𝟐 𝟐𝟐 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 �𝒓𝒓 � (5.12𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅�𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏 � 𝟏𝟏
o With two observation wells and drawdown data:
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.20𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅(𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏 + 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐)(∆𝟏𝟏 − ∆𝟐𝟐) 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
b). Confined aquifer:

𝑸𝑸 𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 𝑸𝑸 𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.24𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(𝑯𝑯 − 𝒉𝒉𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐. ∆𝐰𝐰 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
o With one observation well and with piezometric head data:

𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.24𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏 − 𝒉𝒉𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
o With one observation well and with drawdown data:

𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.25𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(∆𝐰𝐰 − ∆𝟏𝟏) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
o With two observations well and piezometric head data:

𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.24𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏) 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
o With two observations well and drawdown data:
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.25𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(∆𝟏𝟏 − ∆𝟐𝟐) 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
(∆ 𝟏𝟏 − ∆𝟐𝟐)
𝑸𝑸 = 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 𝒓𝒓 (5.25)
𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏

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
h H
h1
D
hw
rw
r1
r
Ri
Case 1: (hw > D)
𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏
𝑸𝑸 = 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 𝒓𝒓 (5.26)
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � 𝟐𝟐 �
𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.26𝑎𝑎)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏) 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
This equation is like mention above.

Case 2: (hw < D)
𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅(𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − 𝑫𝑫𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝒘𝒘 )

𝑸𝑸 = (5.27)
𝑹𝑹
𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (5.27𝑎𝑎)
𝝅𝝅(𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − 𝑫𝑫 𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝒘𝒘 ) 𝒓𝒓𝒘𝒘
4. Correction to flow line
Real curve
h h+h’
Theoretic curve
a. Castany (1967) implemented Dupuit (1868) equation:
For the lateral flow:
𝐻𝐻 2 − (ℎ + ℎ′ )2
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐾𝐾
2𝑅𝑅
𝒙𝒙
𝒚𝒚𝟐𝟐 − (𝒉𝒉 − 𝒉𝒉′ )𝟐𝟐 = [𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − (𝒉𝒉 − 𝒉𝒉′ )𝟐𝟐] (5.28)
𝑹𝑹
For the free aquifer and parallel flow:
𝐻𝐻 2 − (ℎ + ℎ′ )2
𝑄𝑄 = 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋
𝑅𝑅
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � �
𝑟𝑟

𝒙𝒙
𝟐𝟐
𝒚𝒚 − (𝒉𝒉 − 𝒉𝒉 ′ )𝟐𝟐 𝟐𝟐
= [𝑯𝑯 − (𝒉𝒉 − 𝒉𝒉 ′ )𝟐𝟐] 𝒓𝒓 (5.28𝑎𝑎)
𝑹𝑹
𝒓𝒓
b. Ehrenberger (1928)
′
(𝑯𝑯 − 𝒉𝒉)𝟐𝟐
𝒉𝒉 = 𝟎𝟎, 𝟓𝟓 (5.29)
𝑯𝑯
c. Vodgeo Institut (1954)
𝒉𝒉′ = 𝟎𝟎, 𝟓𝟓(𝑯𝑯 − 𝒉𝒉)𝟐𝟐,𝟐𝟐 (5.30)
d. Iokutaro Kano (1939)
𝑸𝑸
𝒉𝒉′ = 𝑪𝑪 (5.31)
𝒉𝒉
0,324 < C < 1,60
e. Vibert (1949)
𝒉𝒉′ = 𝟎𝟎, 𝟓𝟓 ��𝑹𝑹𝟐𝟐 + 𝟒𝟒𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝑹𝑹� (5.32)

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)
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = 𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑(𝑯𝑯 − 𝒉𝒉)√𝑲𝑲 (5.33)

where,
Ri : radius of depletion (m)

H – h : drawdown (m)
K : permeability (m/s)
b. H.Cambefort (in Castany, 1967)
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = 𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓 𝟒𝟒�𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝒊𝒊 (5.34)

where,

H : drawdown (m)
Ki : permeability (m/s)
c. I. Choultse (in Castany, 1967)
𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = � (5.35)
𝒎𝒎𝒆𝒆
where,
me : porosity of soil
T : duration of pumping (s or h)
H : drawdown (m)
K : permeability (m/s or m/h)

d. I.P. Koussakine (in Castany, 1967)
𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = 𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒� (5.36)
𝒎𝒎𝒆𝒆
where,
K : permeability (m/s)
T : duration of pumping (hour)
e. Dupuit
1). Lateral flow :
1). Dupuit (in Castany, 1967)
𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏 − 𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = 𝑲𝑲𝑲𝑲 (5.37)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐
2). Castany (1967)
𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏 − 𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = 𝑲𝑲𝑲𝑲 (5.38)
𝑸𝑸
2). Radial flow (in Castany, 1967):
 Using Darcy’s Law, Castany (1967) proposed an equation:
𝑄𝑄
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = + 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 (5.39)
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (𝐻𝐻 2 − ℎ2 )
 Sunjoto tried to improve above formula as:
𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅 (𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐)

𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = + 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍
𝑸𝑸
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅(𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐 )

= 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 � �
𝑟𝑟 𝑸𝑸

𝟏𝟏 𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅(𝑯𝑯𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐 )
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = . 𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆 � � (5.40)
𝒓𝒓 𝑸𝑸
where,
r : radius of observation well location (m)
Q : discharge (m3/h)
H : drawdown (m)
K : permeability (m/h)
h : height of water on observation well (m)
f. Some authors (in Castany, 1967)
𝑸𝑸
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = � (5.41)
𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅
where,
Ri : radius of influence (L)

Q : rate of pumping (L/T3)
I : precipitation intensity (debit/L2/T)
g. Kozen (in Bogomolov et Silin-Bektchoutine (1955)
𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏 𝒒𝒒𝒒𝒒
𝑹𝑹𝒊𝒊 = � � (5.42)
𝝁𝝁 𝝅𝝅

h. G.V. Bogomolov (in Castany, 1967)
Table 5.1. Coefficient of permeability and Radius of depletion

Aquifer material Granulometric Coefficient of Well Radius of
fraction Permeability discharge Depletion
(mm) (m/day) (m3/hour) (m)
Clay sand 0,01-0,05 0,500-1,000 0,100-0,300 65
Fine sand 0,01-0,05 1,500-5,000 0,200-0,400 65
Clay sand in small 0,10-0,25 10,00-15,00 0,500-0,800 75
grains
Sand in small grains 0,10-0,25 20,00-25,00 0,800-1,700 75
Clay sand in medium 0,25-0,50 20,00-25,00 1,600-10,00 100
grains
Sand in medium grains 0,25-0,50 35,00-50,00 15,00-20,00 100
Clay sand in big grains 0,50-1,00 35,00-40,00 20,00-25,00 100
Sand in big grains 0,50-1,00 60,00-75,00 40,00-50,00 125
Gravels - 100,0-125,0 75,00-100,0 150
Note: drawdown 5-6 meter

VI. FRESH AND SALINE WATER BALANCE
1. Basic equation
Badon Ghyben (1888) and Herzberg (1901),
precipitation
ground surface
Δh groundwater surface
sea level
boundary area of saline

hf fresh water water and fresh water
hs
saline water
Fig. 6.1. Schematic of cross section circular homogenous, isotropic and porous island.
𝝆𝝆𝒔𝒔 − 𝝆𝝆𝒇𝒇
∆𝒉𝒉 = 𝒉𝒉𝒔𝒔 � � (6.3)
𝝆𝝆𝒇𝒇
Normal condition:
Sea water ρs = 1.025 tmass/m 3 = 1,025 kgmass /m3

} so: ∆𝒉𝒉 = 𝟏𝟏�𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒
𝒔𝒔
Fresh water ρf = 1.00 tmass /m3 = 1,000 kgmass /m3

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):
2𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 2
𝑧𝑧 2 = +� � (6.4)
∆𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 ∆𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌
The corresponding shape for the water table is given by:
2∆𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 1⁄2
ℎ𝑓𝑓 = � � (6.5)
(𝜌𝜌 + ∆𝜌𝜌)𝐾𝐾
The width xo of the submarine zone through which fresh water discharges
into the sea can be obtained for z=0,
𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌
𝑥𝑥𝑜𝑜 = − (6.6)
2∆𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌

The depth of the interface beneath the shoreline zo, occurs where x = 0 so
that:
𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌
𝑧𝑧𝑜𝑜 = − (6.7)
∆𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌
3. Upconing
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)

According to Todd (1980) using Dupuit assumption and Ghyben-Herzberg relation, the
upconing is:
𝑸𝑸
𝒛𝒛 = (6.8)
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(∆𝝆𝝆⁄𝝆𝝆𝒔𝒔)
Comment:
Compare 2πd of this equation to the shape factor of Sunjoto (2002) F = 2πR
Base on Forchheimer (1930) principle, Sunjoto proposes that the upconing is:
𝑄𝑄
𝑧𝑧 = 𝝆𝝆𝒔𝒔 − 𝝆𝝆𝒇𝒇 (6.9)
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 � �
𝝆𝝆𝒇𝒇
Usually:
o Sea water ρs = 1,000 kgmass /m3 = 1.00 tmass/m 3
o Fresh water ρf = 1,000 kgmass /m3 = 1.00 tmass/m 3
And for the security take z/d < 0.50

4. Drawdown versus Built up
a. Theory of Dupuit-Thiem
pump axis level Q

𝑸𝑸γ (𝑯𝑯 + 𝑺𝑺)
𝑷𝑷 =
gs
H 𝜼𝜼
gwl
S
h
Drawdown due to h1
pumping
r1 𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � �
𝝅𝝅(𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 𝟐𝟐 )
− 𝒉𝒉𝟏𝟏 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
r2
Fig.6.3. Schematic of pumping
• Discharge (Dupuit-Thiem) base on Darcy’s Law:
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � � (6.11)
𝝅𝝅�𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 − 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏� 𝒓𝒓𝟏𝟏
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) η : pump efficiency
Q : discharge (m3/s) K : coefficient of permeability (m/s)
γ : specific weight of water h1 : piezometric of observation well 1
(9.81 kN/m3) h2 : piezometric of observation well 2
H : gap of groundwater level to pump axis (m) r1 : radius of observation well 1
S : drawdown (m) r2 : radius of observation well 2
• From the above legends and schematic (Fig. 6.3) so the Power:
𝑸𝑸γ (𝑯𝑯 + 𝑺𝑺)

𝑷𝑷 = (6.12)
𝜼𝜼
b. Theory of Forhheimer (1930)
𝑸𝑸 = 𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭
t1 h1
t2 h2
𝝅𝝅𝑹𝑹𝟐𝟐 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍
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:
𝝅𝝅𝑹𝑹𝟐𝟐 𝒉𝒉𝟐𝟐
𝑲𝑲 = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 (6.13)
where,
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

c. Theory of Sunjoto (1988)
Q
H
Q/FK
K
Built up due to
recharging 𝑸𝑸 = 𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭
H
𝑸𝑸 −𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭
𝑯𝑯 = �𝟏𝟏 − 𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆 � ��
𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅𝟐𝟐
K 0 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:
𝑸𝑸 = 𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 (6.14)
• Sunjoto (1988) formula:
𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 𝑸𝑸 −𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭
𝑸𝑸 = 𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐 𝑯𝑯 = �𝟏𝟏 − 𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆 � �� (6.15)
−𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅𝟐𝟐
�𝟏𝟏 − 𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆 � ��
𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅𝟐𝟐
This formula (6.14) when duration T is infinite so the equation will become Q = FKH
(see Fig. 6.5)

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

−𝑸𝑸
𝑺𝑺 = −𝑯𝑯 = (6.16)
𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭
b). Unsteady flow condition

−𝑸𝑸 −𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭
𝑺𝑺 = −𝑯𝑯 = �𝟏𝟏 − 𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆 � �� (6.17)
𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 𝝅𝝅𝝅𝝅𝟐𝟐
(negative sign means that the direction is opposite and in this case downward)
where,
S : drawdown (m)
H : depth of water on the hole/well (m)
Q : discharge through the well (m3/s)
F : shape factor (m)
K : coefficient of permeability (m/s)
T : duration of flow (s)
R : radius of pipe/well (m)

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: ρf = 1,000 kg/m3 or γ f = 9.81 kN/m 3 and saline water: ρs = 1,025 kg/m3 or γ 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
5.00 m 6.50 m
-5.00
S
23.00 m
18.00 m
-28.00
-4
K=4.70*10
Fig.6.6. Pumping data
• Shape factor installed:
2 × π × 18 + 2 × π × 0.225 × 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙2
𝐹𝐹 = = 25.95 𝑚𝑚
2
18 + 2 × 0.225 � 18
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2 × 0.225 2 × 0.225

• The drawdown of 1 pump installed:
𝑄𝑄 0.1667
𝑆𝑆 = ⇒ 𝑆𝑆 = = 13.667 𝑚𝑚
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 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
𝑆𝑆 = = 𝟑𝟑. 𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒 𝑚𝑚
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
𝑧𝑧 = = 136,40 𝑚𝑚
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.

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 it’s 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: ρs = 1,025 kg/m 3 or
γ 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 γ H / η 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).
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹ℎ (6.18)
Pumping power is discharge multiplied by specific weight of water multiplied by

hydraulic head divided by efficiency of pump system.
𝑄𝑄γ𝐻𝐻
𝑃𝑃 = (6.19)
𝜂𝜂
According to Sunjoto (2008), when drawdown of pumping is equal to hydraulic head

the equation becomes:
𝑄𝑄2 γ
𝐹𝐹 = (6.20)
𝜂𝜂𝜂𝜂𝜂𝜂

where,
Q : discharge (m3/s)
F : shape factor of well (m)
H : hydraulic head of pumping (m)
P : power (kN.m/s)
γ : specific weight of water (kN/m3)
η : 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
𝐹𝐹𝑛𝑛 = = 47,29 𝑚𝑚
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=2πR (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 π 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.

Q 4 Φ 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 π 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 π x R = 2 x 2 x π x 0,225 = 2,827 m
This system was installed 2 pumps of 16.00 KW

Q
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:
2π𝐿𝐿 + 2π𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅2
𝐹𝐹 = (6.22)
𝐿𝐿 + 2𝑅𝑅 � 𝐿𝐿 2
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2𝑅𝑅 2𝑅𝑅
where,
F : shape factor of pipe (m)
R : radius of pipe (m)
L : porous length (m)
So shape factor (6.22):

2 × π × 6 + 2 × π × 0,15 × 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙2
𝐹𝐹 = = 10,326 𝑚𝑚
2
6 + 2 × 0,15 � 6
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2 × 0,15 2 × 0,15
• This system was installed 1 pumps of 1x3.00 KW

Q
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:
𝑓𝑓 = 4√𝑏𝑏 × 𝑏𝑏 (6.23)
𝑓𝑓 = 4√6 × 6 = 24 𝑚𝑚, 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝑓𝑓 = 3,77 𝑚𝑚

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 π = 7,50 m.
• When Rectangular form the sides are (6.23):
𝑓𝑓 = 4√𝑏𝑏 × 𝑏𝑏 = 47,29 ⇒ 𝑏𝑏 = 11,83 𝑚𝑚 ∞ 12 𝑚𝑚

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 × π × 16 + 2 × π × 0,225 × 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙2
𝐹𝐹 = 2 × = 2 × 23,726 = 47,452 𝑚𝑚
2
16 + 2 × 0,225 � 16
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2 × 0,225 2 × 0,225
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.

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
Φ 10 cm
3.0 4.00
Fig.6.11. Horizontal perforated pipes
1). Shape factor of concrete cylinder is (6.21):

F1 = 2 x π x 1,50 = 9,42 m

2). Shape factor of perforated pipes is (6.22):
2 × π × 4 + 2 × π × 0,05 × 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙2
𝐹𝐹2 = 5 × = 5 × 5,769 = 28,845 𝑚𝑚
2
4 + 2 × 0,05 � 4
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2 × 0,05 2 × 0,05
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

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 & Klaer’s Methode (1956)
𝑸𝑸 = 𝒏𝒏 ∗ 𝝅𝝅 ∗ 𝑳𝑳𝟐𝟐 ∗ 𝑾𝑾 (6.24)
where,
Q : discharge (m 3/s)
n : number of pipe
L : length of pipe (m)
W : flow velocity (m/s)
ℎ 3
𝑊𝑊 = 𝐾𝐾 ∗ 𝑖𝑖 = 𝐾𝐾 ∗ = 10−3 ∗ = 0.001 𝑚𝑚 ⁄𝑠𝑠
𝑙𝑙 3
Discharge of 8 pore pipes:
𝑄𝑄 = 8 × 𝜋𝜋 × 42 × 0,001 = 0.402285 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
b. Spiridonoff & Hantush’s Method (1964)
𝑸𝑸 = 𝒏𝒏 ∗ 𝑺𝑺𝒗𝒗 ∗ 𝑨𝑨𝒇𝒇 ∗ 𝒉𝒉 (6.25)

where,
Sv : specific yield aquifer of sand and gravel (Sv = 20 %)
Af : total area of pore hole of each pipe (m2)
h : distance between axis of pipe to groundwater level (m)
D : diameter of pipe (m)

Total area of pore holes of each pipe:
1 1
𝐴𝐴𝑓𝑓 = ∗ 𝜋𝜋 ∗ 𝐷𝐷 2 ∗ 𝑛𝑛𝑓𝑓 = × 𝜋𝜋 × 0.0032 × 162 = 0.114557 𝑚𝑚 2
4 4
Distance between axis of HPP to groundwater level: h= 3 m
Discharge of 8 pipes:
𝑄𝑄 = 8 × 0.20 × 0.114557 × 3 = 0.549874 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
c. Nasjono’s Method (2002)
𝑨𝑨𝒇𝒇 𝒉𝒉 𝟎𝟎.𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐
𝑸𝑸 = 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏. 𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒 � ∗ � ∗ 𝑲𝑲 ∗ 𝑳𝑳 ∗ 𝑫𝑫 (6.26)
𝑳𝑳 ∗ 𝑫𝑫 𝒍𝒍
where,
Af : total area of pore hole of each pipe (m2)
h : distance between axis of pipe to groundwater level (m)
l : distance of flow (m)
Discharge of 8 pore pipes:
0.114557 3 0.2366
𝑄𝑄 = 148.41 × � × � × 10−3 × 32 × 0.30 = 0.102159 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
4 × 0.3 3
d. Das, Saha, Rao dan Uththmanthan’s Method (2009)
• The assumption of pores clogging is 50%

• The assumption Af is 20% the surface area of pipe
𝑸𝑸 = 𝒏𝒏�𝝅𝝅 ∗ 𝑳𝑳 ∗ 𝑫𝑫 ∗ 𝑨𝑨𝒇𝒇 � ∗ 𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓% ∗ 𝑽𝑽 (6.27)

where,
Af : total area of pore hole of each pipe (m2) ⇒ = 20 % area of pipe
V : flow velocity in the pipe (m/s) ⇒ V = 0.50 cm/s=0.005 m/s
Discharge of 8 pipes:
𝑄𝑄 = 8 × (𝜋𝜋 × 4 × 0.30 × 20%) × 50% × 0.005 = 0.150857 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
e. Sunjoto’s 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):
𝑸𝑸 = 𝑭𝑭 ∗ 𝑲𝑲 ∗ 𝑯𝑯 (6.28)
where,
F : shape factor of pipe or well (m) ⇒ Table 8.1.
H : hydraulic head (m)
R : radius of well or pipe (m)
T : 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):
𝟐𝟐π𝑳𝑳 + 𝟐𝟐π𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹
𝑭𝑭𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔 = (6.29)
𝑳𝑳 + 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 � 𝑳𝑳 𝟐𝟐
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � + � � + 𝟏𝟏�
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐

2 × π × 32 + 2 × 𝜋𝜋 × 0.15 × 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙2
𝐹𝐹6𝑏𝑏 = = 37.58047 𝑚𝑚
2
32 + 2 × 0,15 � 32
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2 × 0,15 2 × 0,15
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:
𝑄𝑄1 = 𝐹𝐹 ∗ 𝐾𝐾 ∗ 𝐻𝐻 = 37.58047 × 10−3 × 3 = 0.112743 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
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:

𝐹𝐹4𝑏𝑏 = 2 ∗ π ∗ 𝑅𝑅 = 2 × π × 2 = 12.566371 𝑚𝑚
Discharge through the well base:

𝑄𝑄 = 𝐹𝐹 ∗ 𝐾𝐾 ∗ 𝐻𝐻 = 𝑄𝑄 = 12.566371 × 10−3 × 3 = 0.037699 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
Total discharge is:

𝑄𝑄2 = (0.112474 + 0.037699 ) = 0.150441 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
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):
𝟐𝟐π𝑳𝑳 + 𝟐𝟐π𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓 2 × π × 4 + 2 × 𝜋𝜋 × 0.15 × 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙2

𝐹𝐹6𝑏𝑏 = = = 20.99929 𝑚𝑚 3⁄𝑠𝑠
2 2
𝐿𝐿 + 2𝑅𝑅 � 𝐿𝐿 4+2×2 � 4
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1� 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2𝑅𝑅 2𝑅𝑅 2×2 2×2

Discharge through the well base :
𝑄𝑄 = 𝐹𝐹 ∗ 𝐾𝐾 ∗ 𝐻𝐻 = 𝑄𝑄 = 20.99929 × 10−3 × 3 = 0.062999 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
Total discharge is:
𝑄𝑄3 = (0.112474 + 0.037699 + 0.062999 ) = 0.213172 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑠𝑠
Table 8.6. Comparison of the result

No. Method Discharges (m 3/s)
1 Mikel & Klaer (1956) 0.402285
2 Spiridonoff & Hantush 0.549874

(1964)
3 Nasjono (2002) 0.102159
4 Das, Saha, Rao & 0.150857

Uththmanthan (2009)
5 Sunjoto (1988; 2002) 𝑄𝑄1 = 0.112474 𝑄𝑄2 = 0.150441 𝑄𝑄3 = 0.213172

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:
∞
𝑄𝑄 𝑒𝑒 −𝑢𝑢 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑄𝑄
𝑠𝑠 = � − 𝑊𝑊 (𝑢𝑢 ) (7.1)
4𝝅𝝅𝑇𝑇 𝑢𝑢 4𝝅𝝅𝑇𝑇
𝑢𝑢
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:

𝑸𝑸 𝒖𝒖𝟐𝟐 𝒖𝒖𝟑𝟑 𝒖𝒖𝟒𝟒
𝒔𝒔 = �−𝟎𝟎. 𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓 − 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 𝒖𝒖 + 𝒖𝒖 − + − ∗…� (7.2)
𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒 𝟐𝟐. 𝟐𝟐! . 𝟑𝟑! 𝟒𝟒. 𝟒𝟒!
where,
𝑟𝑟 2 𝑆𝑆
𝑢𝑢 = (7.3)
4𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇
The storage coefficient is

4𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇
𝑆𝑆 = (7.4)
𝑟𝑟 2 ⁄𝑡𝑡
The exponential integral W(u) = -Ei(-u) can be represented by the series below and
the values is tabulated in Table 7.1.

𝒖𝒖𝟐𝟐 𝒖𝒖𝟑𝟑 𝒖𝒖𝟒𝟒
𝑾𝑾(𝒖𝒖) = −𝟎𝟎. 𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓 − 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 𝒖𝒖 + 𝒖𝒖 − + − ∗… (7.5)
𝟐𝟐. 𝟐𝟐! . 𝟑𝟑! 𝟒𝟒. 𝟒𝟒!
Table 7.1. Values of W(u) for Values of u
u 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0
×1 0.219 0.049 0.013 0.0038 0.0011 0.00036 0.00012 0.000038 0.000012
×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

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 s r2/t t s r2/t t s r2/t

2 2 2
(min) (m) m /min (min) (m) m /min (min) (m) m /min
0 0 ∞ 8 0,53 450 60 0,90 60
1 0,20 3600 10 0,57 360 80 0,93 45
1,5 0,27 2400 12 0,60 300 100 0,96 36
2 0,30 1800 14 0,63 257 120 1,00 30
2,5 0,34 1440 18 0,67 200 150 1,04 24
3 0,37 1200 24 0,72 150 180 1,07 20
4 0,41 900 30 0,76 120 210 1,10 17
5 0,45 720 40 0,81 90 240 1,12 15
6 0,48 600 50 0,85 72 - -
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:
𝑄𝑄 2500 (1.00)
𝑇𝑇 = 𝑊𝑊 (𝑢𝑢 ) = = 1110 𝑚𝑚 2 ⁄𝑑𝑑
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 4𝜋𝜋 (0.18)
4𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 4(1110)(1 x 10−2 )

𝑆𝑆 = = = 0.000206
𝑟𝑟 2 ⁄𝑡𝑡 216,000

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

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:

𝑄𝑄 𝑟𝑟 2 𝑆𝑆
𝑠𝑠 = �−0.5772 − 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � (7.6)
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 4𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇
Rewriting and changing to decimal logarithms, this reduce to:

2.30𝑄𝑄 2.25𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇
𝑠𝑠 = 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 2 (7.7)
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 𝑟𝑟 𝑆𝑆
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)

2.30𝑄𝑄 2.25𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑜
0= 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 (7.8)
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 𝑟𝑟 2 𝑆𝑆
Fig. 7.2. Cooper-Jacob method for solution of the non equilibrium equation
and it follows:

2.25𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑜
=1 (7.9)
𝑟𝑟 2 𝑆𝑆
resulting in:
2.25𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑜
𝑆𝑆 = (7.10)
𝑟𝑟 2
And value for T can be obtained by noting that if t/to = 10, then log t/to = 1, there
for replacing s by Δs, where Δs is the draw down difference per log cycle of t and
equation becomes:
2.30𝑄𝑄
𝑇𝑇 =
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋
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
min = 2.70 .10-4 day are read. Then,

2.30𝑄𝑄 2.30(2500)
𝑇𝑇 = = = 1090 𝑚𝑚 2 ⁄𝑑𝑑
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 4𝜋𝜋 (0.40)
and,
2.25𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑜 2.25(1090)(2.70 . 10−4 )
𝑆𝑆 = =
𝑟𝑟 2 (60)2

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:
𝑠𝑠
= 𝐹𝐹 (𝑢𝑢 ) (7.11)
∆𝑠𝑠
or,
𝑠𝑠 𝑊𝑊 (𝑢𝑢 )𝑒𝑒 𝑢𝑢
= (7.12)
∆𝑠𝑠 2.30
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)

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,
𝑄𝑄 2500 (2.75)
𝑇𝑇 = 𝑊𝑊 (𝑢𝑢 ) = = 1160 𝑚𝑚 2 ⁄𝑑𝑑
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 4𝜋𝜋 (0.47)
4𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 4(1160)(4.2 x 10−3 )(0.038)

𝑆𝑆 = = = 0.000206
𝑟𝑟 2 (60)2
Fig. 7.4. Chow method for solution of the non equilibrium equation

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

Using Theis principle that the residual drawdown s’ can be given as,
𝑄𝑄
𝑆𝑆 = [𝑊𝑊 (𝑢𝑢 ) − 𝑊𝑊 (𝑢𝑢′)] (7.13)
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋
where,
𝑟𝑟 2 𝑆𝑆 𝑟𝑟 2 𝑆𝑆
𝑢𝑢 = 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑢𝑢 ′ = (7.14)
4𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 4𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡 ′
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:

𝟐𝟐. 𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑 𝒕𝒕
𝒔𝒔′ = 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 ′ (7.15)
𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒 𝒕𝒕
And the transmissivity becomes:
2.30𝑄𝑄
𝑇𝑇 = (7.16)
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋′
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 and∆s’ = 0.40 m is determined,
then:
2.30𝑄𝑄 2.30(2500)
𝑇𝑇 = = = 1140 𝑚𝑚 3 ⁄𝑑𝑑
4𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋′ 4𝜋𝜋 (0.40)

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

Table 7.3. Recovery test data, pump shut down at 240 min (after Todd, 1980)
t’ t t/t’ S’
min min m
1 241 241 0.89
2 242 121 0.81
3 243 81 0.76
5 245 49 0.68
7 247 35 0.64
10 250 25 0.56
15 255 17 0.49
20 260 13 0.55
30 270 9 0.38
40 280 7 0.34
60 300 5 0.28
80 320 4 0.24
100 340 3.4 0.21
140 380 2,7 0.17
180 420 2.3 0.14

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
𝑯𝑯 = �𝟏𝟏 − 𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆 � �� (8.1)
𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 π𝑹𝑹𝟐𝟐
• Filled material well
𝑯𝑯′ = �𝟏𝟏 − 𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆 � �� (8.2)
𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 nπ𝑹𝑹𝟐𝟐
where:
H : depth of hollow well (L)
H’ : depth of filled material well (L)
F : shape factor (L)
T : dominant duration of precipitation (T)
R : radius of well (L)
Q : inflow discharge (L3/T), dan Q = C I A
C : runoff coefficient of roof ( )
I : precipitation intensity (L/T)
A : roof area (L2)
n : porosity of filled material ( )

Formula Development of Shape Factors
a. Ellipse
Basic equation of ellipse (LaRue et Risi, 1960. Mathématiques Intermediaires):
𝑥𝑥 2 𝑦𝑦 2
+ =1
𝑎𝑎 2 𝑏𝑏2
Theoreme:
𝑥𝑥 2 = 𝑦𝑦 2 + 𝑧𝑧 2 (8.3)
ae
y b e : excentrisity of ellipse and e < 1
a and b positive
z a
Fig. 8.1. Ellipse
b. Basic equation of radial flow
H
dh
H1
L’ Ho dr
R0
Fig. 8.2. Cross section of aquifer between two impermeable layers
Boundary condition:
Y = Ho → x = Ro
Y = H1 → x=R
Darcy’s Law (1856)
𝑑𝑑ℎ
𝑉𝑉 = 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑖𝑖 =
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑄𝑄 = 𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑉𝑉 = 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋′
2𝜋𝜋𝐿𝐿′ 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 ∶ 𝑄𝑄 = (8.4)
𝑅𝑅
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑜𝑜
𝑅𝑅
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:
𝑄𝑄 𝑡𝑡
𝐾𝐾(𝐻𝐻 − ℎ) = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴ℎℎℎℎℎℎℎℎℎ
� �ℎ (8.5)
2π𝑡𝑡 𝑎𝑎
𝑄𝑄 𝑡𝑡 𝑡𝑡 2
𝐾𝐾(𝐻𝐻 − ℎ) = 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + �1 + � � �
2π𝑡𝑡 𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎
2π𝑡𝑡𝐾𝐾 (𝐻𝐻 − ℎ)
𝑄𝑄 =
𝑡𝑡 𝑡𝑡 2
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + �1 + � � �
𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎
When t = L, a = R so:
𝟐𝟐π𝑳𝑳
𝑭𝑭 = (8.6)
𝑳𝑳 𝑳𝑳 𝟐𝟐
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � + �𝟏𝟏 + � � �
𝑹𝑹 𝑹𝑹

Fig. 8.3. Cross section of aquifer under impermeable layer (Dachler, 1936)
d. Well condition 5b of Sunjoto (1989)
Assumption I: 𝐿𝐿′ = 𝐿𝐿 + 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅2

Assumption II: a = Ro – 2(½ 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 ½ 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:

R R
L L
L’=L+Rln2
a. Real b. Theoritic
Fig. 8.4. Cross section of real and theoritic aquifer
1
𝑅𝑅𝑜𝑜 − 2 � 𝐿𝐿 + 𝑅𝑅� = �𝐿𝐿2 + 𝑅𝑅2
2
𝑹𝑹𝒐𝒐 = (𝑳𝑳 + 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐) + √𝑳𝑳𝟐𝟐 + 𝑹𝑹𝟐𝟐 (8.7)
Substitution: (8.7) → (8.4)
2𝜋𝜋 (𝐿𝐿 + 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅2) 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾

𝑄𝑄 =
(𝐿𝐿 + 2𝑅𝑅) + √𝐿𝐿2 + 𝑅𝑅2
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙
𝑅𝑅
2𝜋𝜋 (𝐿𝐿 + 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅2)𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾

𝑄𝑄 =
𝐿𝐿 + 2𝑅𝑅 � 2
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + 1 + �𝐿𝐿�𝑅𝑅 � �
𝑅𝑅
𝟐𝟐π𝑳𝑳 + 𝟐𝟐π𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹
𝑭𝑭𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓 = (8.8)
𝑳𝑳 + 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 � 𝑳𝑳 𝟐𝟐
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � + � � + 𝟏𝟏�
𝑹𝑹 𝑹𝑹
• When R = 1, L = 0 and 𝐿𝐿′ = 𝐿𝐿 + 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅2 so F5b = 3,964 R and this value approach
99% of F3b = 4R (Forchheimer, 1930)

Table 8.2. Assumption I, between real and theorem condition on the tip of well
Dachler (1936) Sunjoto (1989; 2010)

Description Length of permeable wall Length of permeable wall
Real Function Real Function
Condition 1 - - L L
Condition 5b L L L L+ R.ln2
Condition 6b L L L L+ R.ln2
Table 8.3. Assumption II between real and theorem condition on the tip of well
Description Dachler (1936) Sunjoto (1989; 2010)
a = Ro – 4(½ L + R)
Condition 1 - b = 2L
c=R
a = Ro – L a = Ro – 2(½ L + R)
Condition 5b b=L b=L
c=R c=R
a = Ro – ½ L a = Ro – (½ L + R)
Condition 6b b=½L b=½L
c=R c=R

Table 8.4. Flowchart of formula derivation
F
No Condition Shape Factor Reverences when
L=0
3b
Forchheimer 4,000
(1930)
𝐹𝐹3𝑏𝑏 = 4𝑅𝑅
Dachler (1936)
Aravin (1965)
1
𝟐𝟐π𝑳𝑳 2
𝑭𝑭𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓 =
𝟐𝟐
𝑳𝑳 𝑳𝑳
𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � + �� + 𝟏𝟏� Dachler (1936) 0/0
𝑹𝑹 𝑹𝑹
5b
𝐹𝐹5𝑏𝑏 = Sunjoto (2002) 3,964
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅
Harza (1935)
𝐹𝐹4𝑏𝑏 = 5.50𝑅𝑅 Taylor (1948) 5,50
Hvorslev
4b (1951)
3
𝑭𝑭𝟒𝟒 𝒃𝒃 = 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 Sunjoto (2002) 6,283
4
𝟐𝟐π𝑳𝑳
𝑭𝑭𝟔𝟔𝟔𝟔 = 5
𝑳𝑳 𝑳𝑳 𝟐𝟐
6b 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍 � + �� + 𝟏𝟏� Dachler (1936) 0/0
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐
𝐹𝐹6𝑏𝑏 = Sunjoto (2002) 6,283
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 � + � � + 1�
2𝑅𝑅 2𝑅𝑅
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.

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

BahanKuliah PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BahanKuliah PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUBSURFACE HYDROLOGY

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

Post Graduate Program

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM 1

Geohydrology (eng) Hydrogeologie (fr) Hidrogeologi (id)

THE WATER CYCLE

Water storage in the atmosphere

Water storage Sublimation

Snowmelt runoff to stream Condensation

Infiltration Surface runoff

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 2

Water balance on the ground surface is:

Fig 1.2. Water balance on the ground surface

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 3

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

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

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

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM 4

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM 5

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM 6

1). Advantages and Disadvantages of Groundwater

1. Greater water conservation 1. Less hydroelectric power

Table 1.8. Advantages and Disadvantages of subsurface and Surface Reservoirs

Subsurface Reservoirs Surface Reservoirs

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM 7

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

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 8

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.

1). Topographic data

2). Geologic data

3). Hydrologic data

(a). Surface inflow and outflow

(b). Imported and exported water

(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 9

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM 10

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM 11

Prof.Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA-Hydrology of Groundwater-Post Graduate Program JTSL-FT-UGM 12

Qanat is a system of water exploitation which providing of irrigation water in

groundwater table of impervious canal go in the direction of irrigation area (Fig.