Skip to main content

Comparison of Three Groundwater Models with Finite Element Methods for Groundwater Head Simulation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Recent Advances in Civil Engineering (ICC IDEA 2023)

Abstract

The goal of the study was to contrast three groundwater models that use the finite element approach to simulate groundwater head prediction, SUTRA, FEMWATER, and FEFLOW. With an area of 60 km2, the research area is the micro watershed in the Cheyyar River basin. The primary lithological unit in the studied area is charnockite, which is accompanied by the Gneiss complex in the foothill region. The aquifer systems are made out of weathered rock and cracks. The surface water accessible has eight large water basins and little canals for drainage. The majority of the study area is covered by agriculture, with certain areas of the western, northern, and southern regions having some forest cover. For irrigation, groundwater is utilised. The research area's border conditions, aquifer thickness and lateral extents, aquifer hydrogeological features, drainage and water bodies, elevation, the position of wells, and other topographical and hydrogeological data are all included. Operational data, such as pumping and recharging rates, and meteorological data, such as local precipitation, runoff, and water balance. The model’s input is prepared and given the beginning condition, such as the groundwater level relative to mean sea level. The research area is transformed into a conceptual model, where the required volume of space is established, including the lateral and vertical expansion of modelling volume. The finite element solution method is used to solve the space volume formed by the mesh. Three models—SUTRA, FEMWATER, and FEFLOW—perform the finite element solution. The monthly time step simulated groundwater heads for the years 2021 and 2022. Groundwater level measurements are used to validate the model once it has been calibrated for the hydrogeological parameters. With R2 values of 0.72, 0.78, and 0.8 for the SUTRA, FEMWATER, and FEFLOW models, all three models perform well when computing the groundwater heads contours. The validation demonstrates that FEFLOW works best with simulations of groundwater heads.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Gaur S, Johannet A, Graillot D, Omar PJ (2021) Modeling of groundwater level using artificial neural network algorithm and WA-SVR model. In: Groundwater resources development and planning in the semi-arid region, pp 129–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68124-1_7

  2. Gebere A, Kawo NS, Karuppannan S, Hordofa AT, Paron P (2021) Numerical modeling of groundwater flow system in the Modjo River catchment, Central Ethiopia. Model Earth Syst Environ 7:2501–2515. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40808-020-01040-0

  3. Berehanu B, Ayenew T, Azagegn T, Berehanu B, Ayenew T, Azagegn T (2017) Challenges of groundwater flow model calibration using MODFLOW in Ethiopia: with particular emphasis to the Upper Awash River Basin. J Geosci Environ Prot 5:50–66. https://doi.org/10.4236/GEP.2017.53005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mabrouk M, Jonoski A, Oude Essink GHP, Uhlenbrook S (2019) Assessing the fresh–saline groundwater distribution in the Nile delta aquifer using a 3D variable-density groundwater flow model. Mdpi.Com. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11091946

  5. Serrano R, Guadagnini L, Riva M, Giudici M (2014) Impact of two geostatistical hydro-facies simulation strategies on head statistics under non-uniform groundwater flow. J Hydrol (Amst). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022169413008251. Accessed 2 Mar 2023

  6. Nourani V, Mousavi S (2016) Spatiotemporal groundwater level modeling using hybrid artificial intelligence-meshless method. J Hydrol (Amst). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022169416300646. Accessed 2 Mar 2023

  7. Rezaei M, Mousavi SF, Moridi A, Eshaghi Gordji M, Karami H (2021) A new hybrid framework based on integration of optimization algorithms and numerical method for estimating monthly groundwater level. Arab J Geosci 14. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12517-021-07349-Z

  8. Jiao JJ, Tang Z (1999) An analytical solution of groundwater response to tidal fluctuation in a leaky confined aquifer. Water Resour Res 35:747–751. https://doi.org/10.1029/1998WR900075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhou Y, Li W (2011) A review of regional groundwater flow modeling. Geosci Front. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S167498711100020X. Accessed 2 Mar 2023

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the department of Civil Engineering, SRM Institute of Science and Technology for providing facilities for conducting the study. Also thank DHI for providing support on running FEFLOW model.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vishnuvardan Narayanamurthi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Narayanamurthi, V., Ramasamy, A. (2024). Comparison of Three Groundwater Models with Finite Element Methods for Groundwater Head Simulation. In: Reddy, K.R., Ravichandran, P.T., Ayothiraman, R., Joseph, A. (eds) Recent Advances in Civil Engineering. ICC IDEA 2023. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 398. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6229-7_41

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6229-7_41

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-6228-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-6229-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics