Lyell Collection

Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Clarke, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology; 1979; v. 12; issue.2; p. 134;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.QJEG.1979.012.02.08
© 1979 Geological Society of London

Letter to the Editor

The analysis and planning of step drawdown tests: a clarification

L. Clarke

Resources Division, Water Research Centre, , 45 Station Road, Henley-on- Thames, Oxfordshire, RG9 1BW.

I have received letters from Mr D. M. Milne and Dr P. F. Worthington pointing out an error in the application of the analytical methods in this paper, (published in 1977 in Q. Jl Engng Geol. 12, 125–143). I would therefore like to take this opportunity to clarify the matter.

The source of the error lies in the use of mixed time-units in the evaluation of the storage coefficient S. Time is given in minutes while the discharge rates are given in m3/day throughout the paper. These units, if applied consistently throughout an analysis, will give correct values for the various well-loss equations and the aquifer transmissivity. The value of the storage coefficient, however, will be 1440 times too great.

The storage coefficient is obtained (p. 139) by the evaluation of the equation:

The discharge rates used in obtaining a and T in this equation are expressed in m3/day. However, a is derived through Figs. 4 and 5 using the specific drawdown at unit time, t = 1 minute, in order to remove the expression (b log t) from (a + b log t) (p. 132). The units in this equation above have to be made consis-tent with this derivation and the equation therefore becomes:

where 1440 = number of minutes in one day.

This procedure was carried out in the original paper in order to get the storage coefficient in Table 2 but was not adequately explained in the text.

It is possible to remove the source of

...

This 250-word extract was created in the absence of an abstract.