Jump to content
GMS, SMS, and WMS User Forum

Saubhagya Singh

Members
  • Content Count

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Saubhagya Singh

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 12/23/1991

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    saubhagya.rathore

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Atlanta (GA), USA
  • Interests
    Research Interests:
    - Groundwater Modelling
    - Numerical simulation using FDM and Mesh-free technique
    - Fate and Transport of Contaminants in Sub-surface Flows
    - Numerical and Analytical Modelling of Transport Processes
    - Seawater Intrusion
    - Numerical and Analytical Modelling of Density Driven Flows

    My hobbies include playing frisbee, horse-riding, mentoring people, listening Sufi and Marwari folk music

Recent Profile Visitors

4,815 profile views
  1. Dear Forum Members, I am trying to perform Monte-Carlo simulation in a vertical slice of the aquifer (x-z plane). I want to generate around 100 realizations of the spatially-correlated hydraulic-conductivity random field in 2D (x-z plane). Then I want to solve flow and transport for each realization and analyze the ensemble of results. I explored options in GMS and this is what I found out (correct me if I am wrong): 1) Stochastic Modeling Option: It is not possible to generate 2D field (spatially varying K values) using this option. 2) Interpolation using 2D Scatter Point To
  2. Good Morning Forum Members, Is it possible to import a 2D (x-z plane) K field for a vertical slice of a heterogeneous aquifer? Or my only option is to paste layer-by-layer values in the LPF package? Thank You Saubhagya
  3. Ah! Now "Rewetted" makes sense to me. Don't know how I missed that haha! Thank you so much!
  4. The figure in my previous comment shows the result when no rewetting was required as initial heads were equal to the higher boundary-head. But in the case where I have initial heads equal to lower boundary-head, the cells near the higher-head boundary never get wetted. I will try some more combinations of wetting parameters.
  5. Hi Michael, Thank you for your answer. Yes, I also think that. I did not have rewetting on. However, I tried various combinations of rewetting parameters but nothing helped. Finally, I had initial heads set to higher boundary-head, which then did not require rewetting and it worked (Figure attached). However, do you have any suggestion how can I have rewetting enabled? I used the wetting parameter as low as 0.01 still rewetting did not happen.
  6. Here is an example of a single-density flow width domain length as 53 cm, hydraulic conductivity as 20 cm/min and boundary heads as 21 cm and 22 cm. Theoretical calculation based on Darcy's law yields 8.11 cm^2/min, however, the flow budget in the model described below shows 7.9186 cm^2/min as the flow near the inland boundary which is exactly the value we would obtain if we consider a confined aquifer of thickness 21 cm and other parameters same as above. This suggests that flow budget does not account for the flow above the elevation equal to the lower boundary head. Also, there are not velo
  7. Dear community members, I am trying to numerically evaluate the discharge in an unconfined coastal aquifer with a constant head as the inland boundary. After performing SEAWAT simulation, the flow rate value in the flow-budget for any cross-section close to the inland boundary reflects only the flow below the sea-level. I also confirmed this by plotting velocity-vector plot, in which there were no velocities plotted in the region above the sea-level and below the water table. I have attached the picture for clarity. Is there a way I can get the total value of the freshwater discharge in t
×
×
  • Create New...