CE374L HW 6 Solution Pump Test 2019 PDF

Homework 6 Spring 2019 CE374L
1. Prob. 4.4.5. Drawdown was measured during a pumping test in a confined aquifer at
frequent intervals in an observation well 200 ft from a well that was pumped at a constant
rate of 66.84 ft3/min (500 gpm). The data for this pump test is listed below. Determine T
and S for this aquifer using the Theis curve overlay method.
Drawdown
Time (min) (ft)
1 0.05
2 0.22
3 0.4
4 0.56
5 0.7
7 0.94
10 1.2
20 1.8
40 2.5
100 3.4
300 4.5
1000 5.6
4000 7
Solution:
Step 1. Plot the t-vs-s data on log-log graph.

Step 2. Superimpose the data plot on the 1/u-vs-W(u) plot (blue line) and align data (red points).
This study source was downloaded by 100000823171538 from CourseHero.com on 10-05-2023 07:09:09 GMT -05:00 1
https://www.coursehero.com/file/40098721/CE374L-HW-6-Solution-Pump-Test-2019pdf/
Step 3. Select a match point and determine the values (where s=drawdown):
One possible match point (@ yellow star): W(u) = 1, s = 1 ft, 1/u = 1, t = 2 min
Step 4. Determine T
𝑸
𝒔= 𝑾(𝒖)
𝟒𝝅𝑻
𝑸 𝟔𝟔. 𝟖𝟒 𝐟𝐭𝟑/𝐦𝐢𝐧
𝑻= 𝑾(𝒖) = (𝟏) = 𝟓. 𝟑𝟐 𝒇𝒕𝟐 /𝒎𝒊𝒏
𝟒𝝅𝒔 𝟒𝝅(𝟏 𝒇𝒕)
Step 5. Determine S
𝟒𝑻𝒕𝒖 𝟒(𝟓. 𝟑𝟐 𝒇𝒕𝟐 /𝒎𝒊𝒏)(𝟐 𝒎𝒊𝒏)(𝟏)

𝑺= 𝟐 = 𝟐
= 𝟏. 𝟎𝟔𝐱𝟏𝟎−𝟑
𝒓 ( 𝟐𝟎𝟎 𝒇𝒕 )
2. Prob. 4.4.6. For the time-drawdown data listed below for a confined aquifer, calculate T
and S using Jacob’s approximation. After computing T and S, check to see that the basic
assumptions of this approximation are satisfied. For the values of T and S that you
computed, after how many minutes of pumping would Jacob’s approximation be valid?
The discharge is Q = 1,500 gpm and the radius is r = 300 ft.
Drawdown Drawdown
Time (min) (ft) Time (min) (ft)
1 0.45 50 2.3
2 0.74 60 2.34
3 0.91 80 2.5
4 1.04 100 2.67
6 1.21 200 2.96
8 1.32 400 3.25
10 1.45 600 3.41
30 2.02 800 3.5
40 2.17 1000 3.6
1440 3.81
Solution:
Step 1. Plot the data log(t)-vs-s on semi-log graph

Step 2. Fit a straight line to the data.
ΔS
One log cycle

in time
Step 3. Find t 0 = 0.42 min (using equation of line at y=0 to solve for x)
Step 4. Find s for times one log cycle apart:
s = 2.56 – 1.48 ft = 1.08 ft for t1 = 10 min. and t2 = 100 min

(us equation of line from linear regression of data to get exact values of s at 10 and 100 min.)
Step 5. Compute T
𝟐. 𝟑𝑸 𝟐. 𝟑(𝟐𝟖𝟖𝟕𝟓𝟎) 𝒇𝒕𝟐 𝒇𝒕𝟐

𝑻= = = 𝟒𝟖𝟗𝟑𝟒 𝑶𝑹 𝟑𝟑. 𝟗𝟖
𝟒𝝅∆𝒔 𝟒𝝅(𝟏. 𝟎𝟖) 𝒅𝒂𝒚 𝒎𝒊𝒏
Step 6. Compute S
𝒇𝒕𝟐
𝟐. 𝟐𝟓𝑻𝒕𝟎 ) (𝟎. 𝟒𝟐 𝒎𝒊𝒏)
𝟐. 𝟐𝟓 (𝟑𝟑. 𝟗𝟖
𝒎𝒊𝒏
𝑺= = = 𝟑. 𝟓𝟕𝒙𝟏𝟎−𝟒
𝒓𝟐 (𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝒇𝒕)𝟐
Step 7. Check assumption (at 1440 min – problem did not state which time to check).
𝒓𝟐 𝑺 (𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝒇𝒕)𝟐 (𝟑. 𝟓𝟕𝒙𝟏𝟎−𝟒 )

𝒖= = = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟏𝟔 < 𝟎. 𝟎𝟏 𝒔𝒐 𝑱𝒂𝒄𝒐𝒃′ 𝒔 𝑨𝒑𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒙. 𝑶𝑲
𝟒𝑻𝒕 𝒇𝒕𝟐
𝟒 (𝟑𝟑. 𝟗𝟖 ) (𝟏𝟒𝟒𝟎 𝒎𝒊𝒏)
𝒎𝒊𝒏
Jacob’s approximation is valid for
𝒓𝟐 𝑺 (𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝒇𝒕)𝟐 (𝟑. 𝟓𝟕𝒙𝟏𝟎−𝟒 )

𝒕≥
𝟒𝑻𝒖
=
𝒇𝒕𝟐
= 𝟐𝟑. 𝟔 𝒎𝒊𝒏 𝑶𝑹 𝟎. 𝟎𝟏𝟔𝟒 𝒅𝒂𝒚𝒔
𝟒 (𝟑𝟑. 𝟗𝟖 𝒎𝒊𝒏 ) (𝟎. 𝟎𝟏)
3. 4.4.7. For the time-drawdown data recorded during the recovery phase of a pump test,
determine the transmissivity of the confined aquifer. The pumping rate is 162.9 ft 3/min
and the pump is shut off at 800 min.
Recovery of test well Recovery of Observation well

Time (min) s (ft) Time (min) s (ft)
800 12.50 800 1.86
803 20.00 805 1.78
808 5.00 810 1.64
813 0.50 815 1.53
820 1.50 820 1.45
880 1.00 825 1.37
940 0.80 830 1.32
995 0.69 840 1.22
1055 0.59 850 1.15
1115 0.51 860 1.09
1175 0.49 870 1.03
1235 0.46 880 0.97
1295 0.38 890 0.94
1360 0.34 900 0.90
1416 0.33 910 0.87
1418 0.33 920 0.85
1527 0.22 980 0.70
1600 0.22 1040 0.61
1100 0.54
1160 0.49
1220 0.46
1280 0.40
1340 0.36
1400 0.36
1460 0.34
1520 0.31
1600 0.29
Solution:
The value of T can be determined using the recovery data of the test well or the observation well.
Values of t/t’ are plotted on semilog paper against the residual drawdowns (see figures below).
Note that the first three data points in the recovery data of the test well are excluded in the
analysis. Q = 162.9 ft3/min
From the above plot of the Test Well data:
s ~ 0.97 ft (per log cycle: in this example from t/t’=2 to t/t’=20) is determined, then,
𝟐. 𝟑𝟎𝑸 𝟐. 𝟑𝟎(𝟏𝟔𝟐. 𝟗 𝐟𝐭𝟑/𝐦𝐢𝐧)

𝑻= = = 𝟑𝟎. 𝟕 𝒇𝒕𝟐 /𝒎𝒊𝒏
𝟒𝝅∆𝒔 𝟒𝝅(𝟎. 𝟗𝟕 𝒇𝒕)
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
Residual Drawdown s'(ft)
1.1
1
1.11 - 0.31 = 0.8 ft
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0
Time Ratio, t/t'
From the above plot of the Observation Well data:
s ~ 0.81 ft (per log cycle) is determined, then,
𝟐. 𝟑𝟎𝑸 𝟐. 𝟑𝟎(𝟏𝟔𝟐. 𝟗 𝐟𝐭𝟑/𝐦𝐢𝐧)

𝑻= = = 𝟑𝟔. 𝟖 𝒇𝒕𝟐 /𝒎𝒊𝒏
𝟒𝝅∆𝒔 𝟒𝝅(𝟎. 𝟖𝟏 𝒇𝒕)
4. 4.6.1. The drawdown versus time data for an observation well 160 feet from the pumping
well of the same aquifer as in Example 4.6.1 (pumping rate Q = 600 ft 3/min, confining
layer thickness b’ = 14 ft) is given below. Use the spreadsheet to estimate the
transmissivity and storage coefficient of the confined aquifer and the hydraulic
conductivity of the aquitard. Compare the results with the answers to Example 4.6.1.
Time (min) Drawdown (ft)

4 2.15
6 2.86
8 3.46
10 3.78
15 4.58
20 5.09
25 5.49
30 5.85
40 6.37
50 6.64
60 6.80
70 6.96
80 7.16
90 7.36
100 7.44
110 7.52
120 7.56
150 7.64
180 7.88
210 7.92
240 7.96
270 7.96
300 7.96
360 7.95
420 7.96
Solution:
Step 1. Plot the t-vs-s data on log-log graph.

Step 2. Superimpose the data plot on the 1/u-vs-W(u, r/B) plot (multiple series due to different
amounts of leakage, represented by different r/B) and align data (red points).
The time-drawdown data are superimposed on the leaky well function curves in the figure.
Comparison shows that the best fit occurs for r/B = 0.2 (B = 160/0.2 = 800).
Step 3. Select a match point and determine the values (where s=drawdown):
The coordinates of the match point are (one example of match point at yellow star):
1/u = 100, W = 1
t = 105 min, s = 2.25 ft
Step 4: Calculate transmissivity, storativity, and hydraulic conductivity of aquitard:

𝒇𝒕𝟑
𝑸 𝟔𝟎𝟎 𝒎𝒊𝒏 𝒇𝒕𝟐 𝒇𝒕𝟐
𝑻= 𝑾= (𝟏) = 𝟐𝟏. 𝟐𝟐 𝑶𝑹 𝟑𝟎𝟓𝟓𝟔. 𝟖
𝟒𝝅𝒔 𝟒𝝅(𝟐. 𝟐𝟓 𝒇𝒕) 𝒎𝒊𝒏 𝒅𝒂𝒚
𝒇𝒕𝟐
𝟒𝑻𝒕𝒖 𝟒 (𝟐𝟏. 𝟐𝟐 𝒎𝒊𝒏) (𝟏𝟎𝟓 𝒎𝒊𝒏)(𝟎. 𝟎𝟏)
𝑺= = = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟓
𝒓𝟐 (𝟏𝟔𝟎 𝒇𝒕)𝟐
𝒓 𝟐 𝒇𝒕𝟐
𝑻𝒃′( )
𝑩 (𝟐𝟏. 𝟐𝟐 𝒎𝒊𝒏) (𝟏𝟒 𝒇𝒕)(𝟎. 𝟐)2 𝒇𝒕 𝒇𝒕
𝑲′ = = = 𝟒. 𝟔𝟒𝒙𝟏𝟎−𝟒 𝑶𝑹 𝟎. 𝟔𝟕
𝒓𝟐 (𝟏𝟔𝟎 𝒇𝒕)𝟐 𝒎𝒊𝒏 𝒅𝒂𝒚
Step 5: Compare to example 4.6.1.
Transmissivity (T) is smaller than in example 4.6.1.

Storativity (S) is very close to that calculated in example 4.6.1.
Aquitard hydraulic conductivity (K’) is larger than calculated in example 4.6.1.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

CE374L HW 6 Solution Pump Test 2019 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

CE374L HW 6 Solution Pump Test 2019 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Homework 6 Spring 2019 CE374L

Step 1. Plot the t-vs-s data on log-log graph.

𝟒𝑻𝒕𝒖 𝟒(𝟓. 𝟑𝟐 𝒇𝒕𝟐 /𝒎𝒊𝒏)(𝟐 𝒎𝒊𝒏)(𝟏)

Step 1. Plot the data log(t)-vs-s on semi-log graph

One log cycle

s = 2.56 – 1.48 ft = 1.08 ft for t1 = 10 min. and t2 = 100 min

𝟐. 𝟑𝑸 𝟐. 𝟑(𝟐𝟖𝟖𝟕𝟓𝟎) 𝒇𝒕𝟐 𝒇𝒕𝟐

𝒓𝟐 𝑺 (𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝒇𝒕)𝟐 (𝟑. 𝟓𝟕𝒙𝟏𝟎−𝟒 )

Jacob’s approximation is valid for

𝒓𝟐 𝑺 (𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝒇𝒕)𝟐 (𝟑. 𝟓𝟕𝒙𝟏𝟎−𝟒 )

Recovery of test well Recovery of Observation well

From the above plot of the Test Well data:

𝟐. 𝟑𝟎𝑸 𝟐. 𝟑𝟎(𝟏𝟔𝟐. 𝟗 𝐟𝐭𝟑/𝐦𝐢𝐧)

From the above plot of the Observation Well data:

s ~ 0.81 ft (per log cycle) is determined, then,

𝟐. 𝟑𝟎𝑸 𝟐. 𝟑𝟎(𝟏𝟔𝟐. 𝟗 𝐟𝐭𝟑/𝐦𝐢𝐧)

Time (min) Drawdown (ft)

Step 1. Plot the t-vs-s data on log-log graph.

Step 4: Calculate transmissivity, storativity, and hydraulic conductivity of aquitard:

Step 5: Compare to example 4.6.1.

Transmissivity (T) is smaller than in example 4.6.1.

You might also like