Land Subsidence Due to Groundwater Exploitation in Unconfined Aquifers: Experimental and Numerical Assessment with Computational Fluid Dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Land subsidence is a global challenge that enhances the vulnerability of aquifers where climate change and driving forces are occurring simultaneously. To comprehensively analyze this issue, integrated modeling tools are essential. This study advances the simulation of subsidence using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD); it assessed the effects of exploitation and recharge of groundwater on the vertical displacement of coarse and fine sands in a laboratory-scale aquifer. A model was developed by integrating the Navier–Stokes equations to study the groundwater flow and Terzaghi’s law for the vertical displacement of sands. The boundary conditions used were Dirichlet based on the changes in the hydraulic head over time. The specific storage coefficient was used to calibrate the model. The findings confirmed that subsidence occurs at slower rates in soil with fine sands with average particle diameters of 0.39 mm than in coarse sands with average particle diameters of 0.67 mm. The maximum discrepancy between the experimental and the numerical reaffirms that CFD platforms can be used to simulate subsidence dynamics and potentially allow the simultaneous simulation of other dynamics. Concluding remarks and recommendations are highlighted considering the up-to-date advances and future work to improve the research on subsidence in unconfined aquifers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".