Abstract
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.
Subject
Water Science and Technology,Aquatic Science,Geography, Planning and Development,Biochemistry
Reference112 articles.
1. Further Discussion on the Influence Radius of a Pumping Well: A Parameter with Little Scientific and Practical Significance That Can Easily Be Misleading
2. Bemaling van Bouwputten;Janssen,2003
3. Grondwaterzakboekje;Bot,2016
4. Geactualiseerd Richtlijnenboek Milieueffectrapportage–Basisrichtlijnen per Activiteitengroep–Landbouwdieren;Willems,2009
5. Richtlijnen Bemalingen Ter Bescherming van Het Milieu,2019
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献