Checking for missing content type metadata ...
This resource contains content types with missing metadata required to make it public or discoverable. Show missing content type metadata.
Click on the edit button ( ) below to edit this resource.
Checking for non-preferred file/folder path names (may take a long time depending on the number of files/folders) ...
This resource contains some files/folders that have non-preferred characters in their name. Show non-conforming files/folders.
This resource contains content types with files that need to be updated to match with metadata changes. Show content type files that need updating.
| Authors: |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Owners: |
|
This resource does not have an owner who is an active HydroShare user. Contact CUAHSI (help@cuahsi.org) for information on this resource. |
| Type: | Resource | |
| Storage: | The size of this resource is 1.6 KB | |
| Created: | Feb 08, 2023 at 1:47 p.m. (UTC) | |
| Last updated: | Mar 09, 2026 at 8:42 p.m. (UTC) | |
| Citation: | See how to cite this resource |
| Sharing Status: | Public |
|---|---|
| Views: | 2740 |
| Downloads: | 308 |
| +1 Votes: | Be the first one to this. |
| Comments: | No comments (yet) |
Abstract
This paper demonstrates that analytic element models have potential as powerful screening tools that can facilitate or improve calibration of more complicated finite-difference and finite-element models. We demonstrate how a two-dimensional analytic element model was used to identify errors in a complex three-dimensional finite difference model caused by incorrect specification of boundary conditions. An improved finite-difference model was developed using boundary conditions developed from a far-field analytic element model. Calibration of a revised finite-difference model was achieved using fewer zones of hydraulic conductivity and lake bed conductance than the original finite-difference model, Calibration statistics were also improved in that simulated base-flows were much closer to measured values. The improved calibration is due mainly to improved specification of the boundary conditions made possible by first solving the far-field problem with an analytic element model.
Subject Keywords
Coverage
Spatial
Content
Additional Metadata
| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1745-6584.1998.tb02108.x |
| Depth | 53 |
| Scale | 11 - 101 km² |
| Layers | 5 |
| Purpose | Scientific investigation (not related to applied problem) |
| GroMoPo_ID | 244 |
| IsVerified | True |
| Model Code | MODFLOW |
| Model Link | https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.1998.tb02108.x |
| Model Time | 1991 |
| Model Year | 1998 |
| Model Authors | Hunt, RJ; Anderson, MP; Kelson, VA |
| Model Country | United States |
| Data Available | Report/paper only |
| Developer Email | rjhunt@usgs.gov; andy@geology.wisc.edu; vkelson@indiana.edu |
| Dominant Geology | Unconsolidated sediments |
| Developer Country | USA |
| Publication Title | Improving a complex finite-difference ground water flow model through the use of an analytic element screening model |
| Original Developer | No |
| Additional Information | Paper shows that analytical element models can be initially used to improve complex finite-difference models. |
| Integration or Coupling | None of the above |
| Evaluation or Calibration | Dynamic water levels |
| Geologic Data Availability | No |
How to Cite
This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Comments
There are currently no comments
New Comment