HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by El-Kadi, A. I. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by El-Kadi, A. I. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by El-Kadi, A. I. Related Collections Variably Saturated Fluid Flow Soil Hydrology Site-Specific Analysis

Validity of the Generalized Richards Equation for the Analysis of Pumping Test Data for a Coarse-Material Aquifer

Department of Geology and Geophysics and Water Resources Research Center, 1680 East-West Road, University of Hawai‘i at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822

View larger version (40K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Map of the site showing locations of the pumped and monitoring wells (modified from Moench et al., 2001).

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Numerical accuracy of three different mesh sizes for the model VS2D.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Effective well-pumping rate as estimated from Eq. [12].

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Soil-water characteristic functions for data from Mace et al. (1998), Moench (2003), and this paper.

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Comparison of solutions of the generalized Richards equation that utilized the van Genuchten and Brooks and Corey functions.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Results for simulations and the measured drawdowns at early time for well F505-032: (a) Case 1 vs. Case 5, (b) Cases 2 and 3 vs. Case 5, (c) Cases 4 and 6 vs. Case 5.

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Results for simulations and the measured drawdowns for the duration of the aquifer test for well F377-037. The figure compares between the results of Cases 5, 7, and 8.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Results for simulations and the measured drawdowns for the duration of the aquifer test for monitoring cluster F504: (a) well F504-032, (b) well F504-060, and (c) well F504-080. The figure compares between the results of Cases 5 and 8.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Results for simulations and the measured drawdowns for the duration of the aquifer test for monitoring cluster F505: (a) well F505-032, (b) well F505-059, and (c) well F505-080. The figure compares between the results of Cases 5 and 8.

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Example results for simulations and the measured drawdowns for the duration of the aquifer test for three monitoring points where no early test data exist: (a) well F434-060, (b) well F450-061, and (c) well F383-129. The figure compares between the results of Cases 1, 5, and 8.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 11. Results for simulations and the measured drawdowns for the duration of the aquifer test for the pumping well (Case 5).