Skip to Main Content

The estimation performance of the proposed methods finally was analyzed with field data previously utilized by Cooper et al. (1967). In these test data, 7.6 cm of well and casing radius was used to measure the slug responses of a 63-sec-long test. The initial head of the aquifer was reported as 0.336 m and the initial excess head in the well was 0.896 m. Applying TSM and AMM, T values were estimated as 4.909 and 4.738 cm2/s, respectively. Similarly, S values for TSM and AMM were 1.174 × 10−3 and 1.473 × 10−3, respectively. Table 3 summarizes the estimation results and the performance of the implemented methods used in the comparison. According to Table 3, the estimation capability of the proposed TSM and AMM is as high as the available techniques in the literature.

Table 3

Real field data analysis

Aquifer parameters
Drawdown comparision
MethodT (cm2/s)SR2RMSESIMAE
Proposed TSM (η1 = 0.5, η2 = 0.25) 4.9090 1.1740 × 10−3 0.9990 0.0091 0.0266 0.0071 
Proposed AMM (η1 = 0.5, η2 = 0.25) 4.7380 1.4730 × 10−3 0.9990 0.0095 0.0279 0.0077 
Cooper et al. (1967), curve match 5.3000 1.0000 × 10−3 0.9983 0.0116 0.0355 0.0098 
Batu (1998), curve match 5.2500 1.0000 × 10−3 0.9984 0.0101 0.0305 0.0082 
Singh (2007)  7.9890 1.0000 × 10−5 0.9991 0.0190 0.0561 0.0136 
Peres et al. (1989), semilog 4.8000      
Aquifer parameters
Drawdown comparision
MethodT (cm2/s)SR2RMSESIMAE
Proposed TSM (η1 = 0.5, η2 = 0.25) 4.9090 1.1740 × 10−3 0.9990 0.0091 0.0266 0.0071 
Proposed AMM (η1 = 0.5, η2 = 0.25) 4.7380 1.4730 × 10−3 0.9990 0.0095 0.0279 0.0077 
Cooper et al. (1967), curve match 5.3000 1.0000 × 10−3 0.9983 0.0116 0.0355 0.0098 
Batu (1998), curve match 5.2500 1.0000 × 10−3 0.9984 0.0101 0.0305 0.0082 
Singh (2007)  7.9890 1.0000 × 10−5 0.9991 0.0190 0.0561 0.0136 
Peres et al. (1989), semilog 4.8000      

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal