2021
DOI: 10.1007/s40808-021-01203-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A systematic review on integrated surface–subsurface modeling using watershed WASH123D model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They claimed that numerical groundwater modeling is a better alternative to costly aquifer pumping tests for describing aquifer response to external loads. Guevara et al [79,80] studied three mathematical models to represent variable-density groundwater flow simulations in a systematic investigation.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They claimed that numerical groundwater modeling is a better alternative to costly aquifer pumping tests for describing aquifer response to external loads. Guevara et al [79,80] studied three mathematical models to represent variable-density groundwater flow simulations in a systematic investigation.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These geological features provide useful hints related to groundwater flow and contribution. There are 14 observation wells inside the study area as shown in Figure 1 [25].…”
Section: Study Area Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An unconfined and three confined aquifers, namely, F1 (layer 1), F2, F3-1 and F3-2 (layer 4), were identified from shallow to 200 m depth as shown in Figure 2. [25].…”
Section: Study Area Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation