NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

18-Env-A3 Geotechnical and Hydrogeological Engineering · May 2017

Question 5 of 6: Well Hydraulics in an Unconfined Aquifer

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

National Exams — May 2017 — 04-Env-A3 / Geotechnical & Hydrogeological Engineering. 3 hours duration; open book exam, any non-communicating calculator permitted. FIVE (5) questions constitute a complete exam paper (the first five as they appear in the answer book are marked, 20 marks each, 100 marks total); all six printed questions are solved below for completeness.

Reference texts. Braja M. Das, Principles of Geotechnical Engineering (9th ed.) — weight–volume relations, seepage/flow nets, grain-size analysis, consolidation and slope-stability chapters; Craig & Knappett, Craig's Soil Mechanics (8th ed.) — cross-reference for flow-net theory and the Method of Fragments; Freeze & Cherry, Groundwater (1979) — Darcy's law and the Dupuit–Thiem equation for radial flow to a well.

Question 5: Well Hydraulics in an Unconfined Aquifer (20 marks)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Given.

Given data
QuantitySymbolValue
Radius of influence$R$2000 m
Undisturbed saturated thickness at $R$$H$6 m
Hydraulic conductivity$k$2 cm/s = 1728 m/day
Pumping rate$Q$500 m³/day
Observation distances$r_1,r_2$50 m, 500 m

Find. (a) drawdown $s_1$, $s_2$ at $r_1=50$ m and $r_2=500$ m; (b) travel time for a conservative tracer between $r_1$ and $r_2$.

Approach. Use the Thiem/Dupuit equation for steady unconfined radial flow between each observation point and the known boundary condition at $R$, then integrate the radial seepage (interstitial) velocity from the Thiem head field to get travel time.

  1. Part (a) — drawdown via the unconfined Thiem equation. Between the boundary ($h=H$ at $r=R$) and any point $r$: $$h(r)=\sqrt{H^2-\frac{Q}{\pi k}\ln\frac{R}{r}}\ ,\qquad s(r)=H-h(r).$$ $$h(50)=\sqrt{36-\frac{500}{\pi(1728)}\ln\frac{2000}{50}}=\sqrt{36-0.3397}=5.9716\ \text{m}\ \Rightarrow\ \boxed{s_1=2.84\ \text{cm}}.$$ $$h(500)=\sqrt{36-\frac{500}{\pi(1728)}\ln\frac{2000}{500}}=\sqrt{36-0.1277}=5.9894\ \text{m}\ \Rightarrow\ \boxed{s_2=1.07\ \text{cm}}.$$
  2. Part (b) — travel time. The radial seepage (interstitial) velocity at distance $r$ is $v(r)=\dfrac{Q}{2\pi r\,h(r)\,n_e}$, so the travel time between $r_1$ and $r_2$ is $$t=\int_{r_1}^{r_2}\frac{2\pi n_e\,r\,h(r)}{Q}\,dr.$$ Because the drawdown is tiny across this range ($h\approx H=6$ m throughout, varying by <0.03 m), this integrates essentially in closed form as $$t\approx\frac{\pi n_e H\left(r_2^2-r_1^2\right)}{Q}=\frac{\pi(0.30)(6)(500^2-50^2)}{500}=\boxed{2792\ \text{days}\ (7.65\ \text{yr})},$$ confirmed to within 0.3% by numerically integrating with the exact (non-constant) $h(r)$.
Check: the exam gives no effective porosity for the aquifer sand, so $n_e=0.30$ is assumed here (typical for a uniform, isotropic clean sand, per Freeze & Cherry Table 2.4). Travel time scales linearly with $n_e$ — e.g. a looser $n_e=0.35$ sand would give ≈3257 days instead.
impermeable original water table (H = 6 m) drawdown curve (vert. exagg.) Q = 500 m³/d r₁=50 m r₂=500 m unconfined sand aquifer, k = 2 cm/s, R = 2 km
Fig. Q5 — unconfined well with drawdown curve (vertically exaggerated for visibility — true drawdown is a few centimetres).
QuantityValue
Drawdown at $r_1=50$ m2.84 cm
Drawdown at $r_2=500$ m1.07 cm
Travel time, $r_1\to r_2$ (assumed $n_e=0.30$)2792 days (7.65 yr)