Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Groundwater modelling using an analytic element method and finite difference method: An insight into Lower Ganga river basin

  • Published:
Journal of Earth System Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Groundwater flow modelling provides the water flow dynamics for the estimation and prediction of groundwater movement and its condition in the aquifer. The modelling helps for the management of the groundwater resources under various hydrological and anthropogenic stresses. In this paper, a modelling exercise was performed using the analytic element method (AEM) and finite difference method (FDM) for the part of Ganga river basin which includes the Varanasi district. Further compression was performed to understand the limitations and benefits of both AEM and FDM based on ease of model development, data requirement and their performances. The groundwater model was developed for the transient state condition based on data for the year 2004–2017. The results show that for most of the observed wells, the difference between the observed head and the simulated head is found in the 90% confidence level. It is found that the AEM does not require a fixed boundary condition which makes the development of the conceptual model less complicated. In the FDM, pumping wells are approximately located and averaged over the cell which becomes a cause of the inaccurate location of the wells. It is found that model development in the AEM is less complicated compared to the FDM. It can be concluded that in some cases AEM-based modelling is more accurate as compared to FDM-based flow modelling. This study can be very helpful for groundwater professionals in deciding the best suitable method for their study area and to avoid the complexity of the model.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen R G, Pereira L S, Raes D and Smith M 1998 Crop evapo-transpiration: Guidelines for computing crop water requirements; FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, Rome, Italy.

  • Bakker M 2004 Transient analytic elements for periodic Dupuit–Forchheimer flow; Adv. Water Resour. 27 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker M, Anderson E I, Olsthoorn T N and Strack O D L 1999 Regional groundwater modeling of the Yucca Mountain site using analytic elements; J. Hydrol. 226(3) 167–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandilla K W, Igor J and Alan J R 2007 A new algorithm for analytic element modeling of large-scale groundwater flow; Adv. Water Resour. 30(3) 446–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett G D 1976 Introduction to ground-water hydraulics; Techniques of water-resources investigations of the United States Geological Survey, Book 3, Chapter B2, 172 p.

  • Cherkauer D S 2004 Quantifying ground water recharge at multiple scales using PRMS and GIS; Groundwater 42 97–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csoma R 2001 The analytic element method for groundwater flow modeling; Period Polytech.-Civ. 45(1) 43–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elango L and Sivakumar C 2008 Regional simulation of a groundwater flow in coastal aquifer, Tamil Nadu, India; In: Groundwater Dynamics in Hard Rock Aquifers, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 234–242.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gaur S, Mimoun D and Graillot D 2011 Advantages of the analytic element method for the solution of groundwater management problems; Hydrol. Process. 25(22) 3426–3436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorelick S M 1984 A review of distributed parameter groundwater management modeling methods; Water Resour. Res. 19(2) 305–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haitjema H M, Kelson V A and Luther K H 2000 Analytic element modelling of ground-water flow and high performance computing; Environmental Research Brief EPA/600/S-00/001/, US Environmental Protection Agency.

  • Hargreaves G H and Allen R G 2003 History and evaluation of Hargreaves evapotranspiration equation; J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 129(1) 53–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt R J, Anderson M P and Kelson V A 1998 Improving a complex finite difference groundwater flow model through the use of analytic element screening model; Groundwater 36(6) 1011–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraemer S R, Haitjema H M and Kelson V A 2004 Working with WhAEM2000: A source water assessment for a glacial outwash well field; Vincennes, Indiana, US EPA, Office of Research and Development Report EPA/600/R-00/022, US EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.

  • Maheswaran R, Khosa R, Gosain A K, Lahari S, Sinha S K, Chahar B R and Dhanya C T 2016 Regional scale groundwater modelling study for Ganga River basin; J. Hydrol. 541 727–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matott L S, Rabideau A J and Craig J R 2006 Pump-and-treat optimization using analytic element models; Adv. Water Resour. 29(5) 760–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mclane C 2012 AnAqSim: Analytic element modeling software for multi-aquifer, transient flow NGWA; Groundwater 50(1) 2–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Modi P N 1998 Water supply engineering, Standard Book House, Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obuobie E 2008 Estimation of groundwater recharge in the context of future climate change in the White Volta River Basin, West Africa (Ecology and Development Series No. 62).

  • Olsthoorn T N 1999 A comparative review of analytic and finite difference models used at the Amsterdam water supply; J. Hydrol. 226(3) 139–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omar P J, Soni R, Shivhare N, Dikshit P K S, Dwivedi S B and Gaur S 2017 Groundwater modelling study for Kashi Vidya Peeth, Varanasi, UP, India; In: 7th international groundwater conference on ‘Groundwater Vision 2030: Water Security, Challenges & Climate Change Adaptation’, NIH Roorkee & CGWB India.

  • Priestley C H B and Taylor R J 1972 On the assessment of surface heat flux and evaporation using large-scale parameters; Mon. Weather Rev. 100(2) 81–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strack O D L 1989 Groundwater Mechanics; Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strack O D L 1999 Principles of the analytic element method; J. Hydrol. 226 128–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strack O D L 2003 Theory and applications of the analytic element method; Rev. Geophys. 41(2) 1005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vetrimurugan E, Elango L and Rajmohan N 2013 Sources of contaminants and groundwater quality in the coastal part of a river delta; Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 10(3) 473–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Department of Civil Engineering, IIT (BHU) Varanasi, India. We are also thankful to our lab staff of the department, who spent extra time helping us for the field survey. We highly appreciate the efforts of anonymous reviewer for his constructive comments to improve the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi, India

    Padam Jee Omar, Shishir Gaur, S B Dwivedi & P K S Dikshit

Authors
  1. Padam Jee Omar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shishir Gaur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S B Dwivedi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P K S Dikshit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Padam Jee Omar.

Additional information

Communicated by N V Chalapathi Rao

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Omar, P.J., Gaur, S., Dwivedi, S.B. et al. Groundwater modelling using an analytic element method and finite difference method: An insight into Lower Ganga river basin. J Earth Syst Sci 128, 195 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-019-1225-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-019-1225-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation