Search Results (3)

Empirical formulas to estimate the radius of influence, such as the Sichardt formula, occasionally appear in studies assessing the environmental impact of groundwater extractions. As they are inconsistent with fundamental hydrogeological principles, the term “radius of influence myth” is used by analogy with the water budget myth. Alternative formulations based on the well-known de Glee and Theis equations are presented, and the contested formula that estimates the radius of influence by balancing pumping and infiltration rate is derived from an asymptotic solution of an analytical model developed by Ernst in 1971. The transient state solution of this model is developed applying the Laplace transform, and it is verified against the finite-difference solution. Examining drawdown and total storage change reveals the relations between the presented one-dimensional radial flow solutions. The assumptions underlying these solutions are discussed in detail to show their limitations and to refute misunderstandings about their applicability. The discussed analytical models and the formulas derived from it to estimate the radius of influence cannot be regarded as substitutes for advanced modeling, although they offer valuable insights on relevant parameter combinations. Full article

To facilitate understanding and calculation, hydrogeologists have introduced the influence radius. This parameter is now widely used, not only in the theoretical calculation and reasoning of well flow mechanics, but also in guiding production practice, and it has become an essential parameter in hydrogeology. However, the reasonableness of this parameter has always been disputed. This paper discusses the nature of the influence radius and the problems of its practical application based on mathematical reasoning and analogy starting from the Dupuit formula and Thiem formula. It is found that the influence radius is essentially the distance in the time–distance problem in physics; therefore, it is a function of time and velocity and is influenced by hydrogeological conditions and pumping conditions. Additionally, the influence radius is a variable and is essentially different from the hydrogeological parameters reflecting the natural properties of aquifers such as the porosity, specific yield, and hydraulic conductivity. Furthermore, the parameterized influence radius violates the continuity principle of fluids. In reality, there are no infinite horizontal aquifers, and most aquifers are replenished from external sources, which is very different from theory. The stable or seemingly stable groundwater level observed in practice is simply a coincidence that occurs under the influence of various practical factors, which cannot be considered to explain the rationality of applying this parameter in production calculations. Therefore, the influence radius cannot be used to evaluate the sustainable water supply capacity of aquifers, nor can it be used to guide the design of groundwater pollution remediation projects, the division of water source protection areas, and the scheme of riverbank filtration wells. Various ecological and environmental problems caused by groundwater exploitation are related to misleading information from the influence radius theory. Generally, the influence radius does not have scientific or practical significance, but it can easily be misleading, particularly for non-professionals. The influence radius should not be used in the sustainable development and protection of groundwater resources, let alone in theoretical models. From the perspective of regional overall planning, the calculation and evaluation of sustainable development and the utilization of groundwater resources should be investigated in a systematic manner. Full article

The application of groundwater relief, i.e., dewatering, ascending wells, drilled upward from the mining tunnel into the overlying aquifer, is common in underground mining engineering. In this study, the seepage characteristics of single ascending partially and fully penetrating relief wells are investigated using a series of laboratory sand-tank experiments and numerical simulations. The seepage characteristics of ascending wells dewatering an overlying aquifer are different from those of conventional pumping wells descending from the ground surface into the underlying aquifer, because of the pronounced influence of the seepage face boundary condition along the seepage boundary of the ascending dewatering well. The seepage face of the ascending well is formed as the well casing remains open and water is discharged under the action of gravity through the well casing. The results of laboratory sand-tank experiments and modeling show that when the degree of penetration of an ascending relief well does not exceed a critical value, the effect of the seepage face cannot be ignored. In particular, the seepage flux increases as the degree of penetration increases following an exponential function, and the relationship between the seepage flux and the well radius can be described using a power law function. The results of numerical simulations are used to develop a series of type curves to evaluate the effects of the critical degree of penetration for different well radii and different aquifer water levels. Modified versions of the Dupuit and Dupuit–Thiem formulae for a single ascending partially well for the degree of penetration less than the critical one for the unconfined, confined, and confined-unconfined aquifers are developed. Full article