Denim Umeshkumar Anajwala

You choose the method by clicking the corresponding radio button in the regionalization dialog. The variogram computation for Kriging is fixed. If you need to modify the variogram, I'd recommend to do the interpolation in external geostatistical software, create a raster with many points and 'import' the values back to FEFLOW, using simple inverse distance weighting with only onei neighbor.

Yes, the multi-layered well acts like a 1-dimensional discrete element with a very high conductivity. If the well abstraction/injection is low, it can happen that the flow from one layer/slice to another one exceeds the abstraction. In this case, I would recommend to turn off the multi-layer well option for the whole model and insert discrete elements manually with realistic properties of the well pipe. This will avoid a vast overestimation of these flows between the layers.

Dear Loic,
yes, there is indeed a bug. We will fix that. In case of any bug you observe in a recent FEFLOW version we would be grateful if you could sent an e-mail to support@dhi-wasy.de.

Thank you!
Kind regards
Wolfram

Dear George,

(1) you have to use a sufficient mesh-resolution (in the order of the well diameter), but also a sufficient resolution in the vertical direction (enough slices). In most cases an automatic time-stepping is adviseable, too.
(2) This is correct. The free-and moveable surface will go down if a well is located on it and not fall dry.

Kind regards
Wolfram

Dear Søren,

the DFE source term refers to the unit (complete written) m^3/(m^3 d). It is a volumetric source.
However, in case of an axis symmetric FEFLOW model, it is a good approach to use a DFE which has to be located where the x-coordinate is zero. Ideally at the outermost left boundary. This DFE should be connected to a 4th kind boundary condition at the lowest point of the 'borehole'.

Any areal conditions in an axis symmetric model lead to cylindrical configurations. Which are usually unwanted.

Kind regards
Wolfram

Hello,

I would like to calculate a river pool water balance assessment within a FEFLOW model (essentially an ephemeral lake).

I would like to account volume, which will relate to level (based on the lake area).  Seepage rate from the lake to GW will depend on lake stage and local GW level (like a type 2 boundary with lake level as head).  There will also be removals via evaporation from the lake surface.  When the lake dries up, it should no longer leak to GW.

Is there a way of doing this inside FEFLOW?  I am aware this can be done externally (post-process), but this requires an iterative approach, which I would like to avoid.  I see there is a lake IFM module.. would this be the solution?

Regards,
Blair.

In confined parts of the model storage compressibility is used, in phreatic parts both storage parameters are applied (but storativity will have the much higher influence).

Can you please try the same thing with the latest patch version 5.405? There was a bug related to conductivity units (bug 20 in http://feflow.info/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=588.0;attach=89), sometimes leading to changed / scaled conductivities in the files also.

The .trp format has to have an 'END' statement at the end of the file. Maybe this is missing in your file.

No, the 3D observation point module does not use names for the boreholes.