Follow AQTESOLV on LinkedIn!

Are you a member of the LinkedIn professional network?

If so, please visit the new AQTESOLV LinkedIn page and click the Follow button to receive periodic LinkedIn updates pertaining to aquifer testing and AQTESOLV.

While you are visiting LinkedIn, follow the HydroSOLVE company page and feel free to send me an invitation to connect as well!

Show/Hide Well Data on Plots

When using AQTESOLV to perform visual curve matching on a data set with multiple observation wells, it's often useful to turn off the display of one or more wells and focus your attention on the remaining wells.

To hide observation data for particular wells, choose Edit>Wells and select the wells in the list that you'd like to hide. Right click over the selection and choose Hide Observations.

To turn on the display of hidden observations wells, select the wells to display, right click over the selection and choose Show Observations.

Find more tips on the AQTESOLV website!

Follow AQTESOLV on LinkedIn and Google+!

Checking Your Cooper and Jacob Match

Groundwater hydrologists use the Cooper and Jacob (1946) solution to determine the aquifer properties of a nonleaky confined aquifer using drawdowns measured during a constant-rate pumping test. The approximate method of Cooper and Jacob derives from the Theis (1935) type-curve method when the variable u in the Theis well function, w(u), is sufficiently small (i.e., time is large or radius is small).

AQTESOLV has built-in tools to check the validity of analyses performed with the Cooper and Jacob method and to assist you with visual curve matching. First, you can superimpose on your plot the time when u is less than a critical value. Choose View>Options>Plots tab and check the option for Valid time for Cooper-Jacob approximation (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Check option to display valid time for Cooper and Jacob solution.

Click the Valid Time tab to set the critical value of u (Figure 2). A critical value between 0.01 and 0.05 is typical.

Figure 2. Set critical value of u used to check validity of Cooper and Jacob approximation.

When you activate the valid time option, a dashed vertical line appears on your time-drawdown or composite plot to indicate the time when the Cooper and Jacob approximation meets the critical value of u (Figure 3). The position of the vertical line is a function of T (transmissivity) and S (storage coefficient) as well as radial distance between the pumping and observation wells..

Figure 3. Cooper and Jacob method (blue line) matched to time-drawdown data from constant-rate pumping test (data from Todd 1980). Dashed vertical line indicates time when Cooper and Jacob approximation becomes valid.

The second way that you may evaluate the proper application of the Cooper and Jacob method using AQTESOLV is through derivative analysis. After superimposing the derivative on your semilog plot of drawdown versus time, match the Cooper and Jacob straight line to drawdowns corresponding to the derivative plateau, i.e., during the period of infinite-acting radial flow (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Cooper and Jacob method (blue line) matched to drawdown data during period of infinite-acting radial flow when derivative reaches plateau (red line).

Use these two techniques to obtain more reliable results when using the Cooper and Jacob method. Get AQTESOLV and start applying these powerful tools in your next pumping test interpretation!

Visit the AQTESOLV Knowledge Base to find more tips on the using the software. The AQTESOLV documentation also includes a number of examples illustrating the use of the Cooper and Jacob straight-line method.

We invite you to follow HydroSOLVE on LinkedIn and Google+!

IARF and the Cooper and Jacob Method

Groundwater hydrologists routinely use the pumping test interpretation method of Cooper and Jacob (1946), a straight-line approximation of the Theis (1935) type-curve solution, to estimate the hydraulic properties of nonleaky confined aquifers from drawdown data measured during the period of infinite-acting radial flow (IARF) when drawdown changes linearly with the logarithm of time. One expects to find IARF after the dissipation of early-time phenomena (e.g., wellbore storage) and prior to the advent of late-time effects such as aquifer boundaries.

Consider the well-known Theis solution for a constant-rate pumping test in a nonleaky confined aquifer of infinite extent:

..... (1)

..... (2)

..... (3)

..... (4)

where s is drawdown [L], Q is pumping rate [L³/T], T is transmissivity [L²/T], t is time [T], r is radial distance [L] and S is storage coefficient [-].

The Cooper and Jacob method approximates the Theis well function, w(u), by truncating the infinite series in (4) after the first two terms:

..... (5)

The approximation in (5) assumes that u is small, i.e., t is large and r is small. It is precisely when (5) is valid that infinite-acting radial flow is identified from drawdown data.

How small should u be for (5) to be valid? The threshold for IARF (i.e., when Cooper and Jacob becomes valid) is often given as u ≤ 0.05 (Driscoll 1986) or u ≤ 0.01 (Kruseman and de Ridder 1994); however, we can see for ourselves when (5) is valid by plotting w(u) versus 1/u (dimensionless drawdown versus dimensionless time) on semilog axes and looking for a constant logarithmic derivative plateau (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Theis (1935) solution (blue curve) plotted as w(u) versus 1/u on semilog axes. Logarithmic derivative shown by red curve.

It is evident from Figure 1 that the slope of the drawdown and the value of the derivative are each essentially constant when 1/u ≥ 50. Hence, when u ≤ 0.02, the Cooper and Jacob approximation of the Theis well function is safe to use. Figure 1 demonstrates just how useful derivative analysis can be for the detection of the IARF regime.

Visit Aquifer Testing 101 to learn more about pumping test interpretation with more examples of infinite-acting radial flow.

Follow HydroSOLVE on LinkedIn and Google+!

Infinite-Acting Radial Flow Regime

At the outset of interpreting a pumping test, an important feature to detect in the response data is infinite-acting radial flow. During infinite-acting radial flow, steady pumping in a nonleaky confined aquifer of infinite extent produces late-time drawdown that changes with the logarithm of time since pumping began. Infinite-acting behavior occurs after wellbore storage effects have dissipated and before the influence of aquifer boundaries. One may observe this flow regime by plotting the familiar Theis (1935) solution on semilog axes (Figure 1); at late time, a graph of dimensionless drawdown, w(u), versus dimensionless time, 1/u, plots as a straight line and the logarithmic derivative is constant.

 

Figure 1. Infinite-acting radial flow in a nonleaky confined aquifer illustrated with Theis (1935) solution (dimensionless drawdown and dimensionless derivative shown by blue and red curves, respectively).

This late-time behavior of the Theis model is well known to groundwater hydrologists. The period of infinite-acting radial flow is the basis for the tried-and-true Cooper and Jacob (1946) method which one may use to find the transmissivity and storage coefficient of a nonleaky confined aquifer by matching a straight line to late-time drawdown data from a constant-rate pumping test plotted on semilog axes.

A derivative plot is very useful for detecting the infinite-acting radial flow regime under steady pumping conditions. One starts by looking for a derivative plateau (constant derivative) to tentatively identify infinite-acting radial flow. For example, the response data from a constant-rate pumping test shown in Figure 2 suggest that infinite-acting radial flow conditions are present after approximately 30 minutes of pumping once the derivative stabilizes.

Figure 2. Derivative plot of drawdown (squares) and derivative (crosses) measured in an observation well during constant-rate pumping test in a nonleaky confined aquifer (Walton 1962).

Note that the derivative plateau in Figure 2 exhibits some noise; derivative fluctuation at the plateau is common in the application of derivative analysis, but the presence of a near-constant derivative in this example is clear and corresponds to the emergence of a well-defined straight line in the drawdown data.

The foregoing results suggest that the derivative plot is an indispensable tool for aquifer test interpretation; however, the mere existence of a derivative plateau does not immediately confirm infinite-acting radial flow conditions. For example, an aquifer limited by a no-flow boundary can produce a constant derivative that is not diagnostic of the infinite-acting radial flow regime. In such a situation, geologic mapping of lithologic contacts, faults and other low-permeability features would be invaluable in making a correct interpretation.

Visit Aquifer Testing 101 for a catalog of derivative plot signatures with more examples of infinite-acting radial flow in pumping tests.

Follow HydroSOLVE on LinkedIn!

Curve Matching With Multiple Observation Wells

When you analyze a pumping test with more than one observation well, AQTESOLV matches one set of aquifer properties to the drawdown data from all of the wells in your data set.

One set of aquifer properties matched to two observation wells from a constant-rate pumping test in an unconfined aquifer with delayed yield.

In the figure shown above, the curve-fitting analysis determines the properties of an unconfined aquifer with delayed yield from the two observation wells displayed on the graph.

Of course, if your data set has multiple observation wells, you may match wells individually or in groups with AQTESOLV as well. To perform visual curve matching on selected wells, choose Wells from the Edit menu to see all of the wells in your data set. Right click over a well in the list and choose Hide Observations to turn off the display of the well; to turn on the display a previously hidden well, choose Show Observations when you right click over a well.

Choose Edit>Wells to add, modify or delete wells from an AQTESOLV data set.

To select more than one well at a time, hold down the Ctrl key when clicking on wells in the list shown above.

AQTESOLV allows you to select which wells to use for automatic curve matching, too. Choose Automatic from the Match menu and click the Active Wells tab. Remove the check next to any well that you wish to ignore during automatic matching.

Choose Match>Automatic>Active Wells to select wells to match with automatic curve matching.

Selections in the Active Wells list shown above only affect the wells used for automatic matching, not the display of well data.

Visit the Support Center and the Knowledge Base at the AQTESOLV website for additional tips and examples.

Analyzing Pumping Tests With Multiple Observation Wells

AQTESOLV allows you to analyze pumping tests with more than one observation well. For example, Figure 1 shows the interpretation of drawdown data recorded in the pumped well and three observations wells during a constant-rate pumping test conducted in a nonleaky confined channel aquifer (near Estevan, Saskatchewan, Canada).

Figure 1. Constant-rate pumping test in nonleaky confined channel aquifer (Walton 1970).

Prior to late-time boundary effects, one observes infinite-acting aquifer conditions in the drawdown response at all wells (Figure 1).

Analysis of multiple observation wells is not limited to nonleaky confined aquifers. In the following figure, we see the analysis of drawdown data from a constant-rate pumping test in a leaky confined aquifer with three observation wells.

Figure 2. Constant-rate pumping test in leaky confined aquifer (USBR 1995).

Interpretation of this test uses the Hantush and Jacob (1955) method for a leaky confined aquifer with incompressible aquitard(s). Prior to the onset of leakage, the aquifer behaves like a nonleaky confined aquifer of infinite extent as shown in Figure 2 by the superimposed Theis (1935) solution (red curve).

We can use AQTESOLV to analyze multi-well tests in phreatic aquifers, too. For example, two  fully penetrating observation wells are used for the interpretation of a constant-rate pumping test in an unconfined aquifer with delayed yield near Gironde, France (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Constant-rate pumping test in unconfined aquifer with delayed yield (Neuman 1975).

Analysis in the example above is performed with the Neuman (1974) method for an anisotropic water-table aquifer with delayed gravity response; one can see from the composite plot how the shape of the drawdown response is affected by radial distance from the pumping well (Figure 3).

Figure 4 shows the interpretation of a multi-well constant-rate pumping test in a double-porosity fractured aquifer using a solution by Moench (1984).

Figure 4. Constant-rate pumping test in double-porosity fractured aquifer (Moench 1984).

In the example above, the blue curve on the composite plot shows the fit to drawdown data from the pumped well while the red curve is matched to observation well data.

In each of the preceding examples, one set of aquifer properties was used to match drawdown data from all observation wells in a data set. At times, however, you may wish to match only a few wells by themselves. You may accomplish this task using either visual or automatic curve matching in AQTESOLV.

Sometimes you start out with only one or two observation wells in a data set and wish to add more wells later. Adding observation wells is easy with AQTESOLV. Choose Wells from the Edit menu and click New to enter data for a new well.

To find worked examples of pumping tests with multiple observation wells, check out the AQTESOLV Help file/manual or visit the Application Gallery at the AQTESOLV web site.