← All summaries · 05 Critical Head

Consolidation is a diffusion problem

When the aquifer head drops, the edges of an interbed feel the new lower pressure immediately, but the interior does not. Pore pressure inside the clay equilibrates by Terzaghi's one-dimensional consolidation equation — a diffusion equation:

\[ \frac{\partial h'}{\partial t} = \frac{K'_v}{S'_s}\,\frac{\partial^2 h'}{\partial z^2} = c_v\,\frac{\partial^2 h'}{\partial z^2} \] \(h'\) = head inside the aquitard · \(K'_v\) = vertical hydraulic conductivity · \(S'_s\) = specific storage · \(c_v\) = consolidation coefficient

Compaction tracks the average dissipation of excess pore pressure across the bed — the degree of consolidation U, which rises from 0 toward 1 over a characteristic time set by how thick and how tight the clay is.

The time constant

The single number that governs the lag:

\[ \tau = \frac{S'_s\,H^2}{K'_v} = \frac{H^2}{c_v} \] \(H\) = drainage path length = \(b'/2\) (doubly draining) or \(b'\) (singly draining)

Because τ scales with the square of thickness, doubling an interbed quadruples its equilibration time. A thick aquitard can take decades to centuries to fully compact.

Interactive: how long compaction takes

Inputs

Consolidation coefficient cv ft²/d
Time constant τ (Tv = 1) yr
Time to 50% compaction yr
Time to 90% compaction yr
Time to 99% compaction yr
Figure 1. Degree of consolidation (fraction of ultimate compaction) vs. time after an instantaneous head drop, from the Terzaghi 1-D solution U(Tv) = 1 − Σ (2/M²)·exp(−M²Tv). The dashed line is the ultimate compaction the bed will eventually reach; the curve is how it gets there. The dotted vertical line marks the time constant τ. Increase thickness or decrease K′v and watch the approach stretch from years to centuries — the essence of residual (delayed) compaction.
Why the lag matters for management
Committed subsidence

It's already in the pipe

If heads have been low, thick interbeds are still equilibrating. Even if pumping stopped today, the remaining excess pore pressure would continue to drain and the land would keep sinking for years — subsidence already "committed."

Diagnostic lag

Compaction trails heads

Extensometer records show compaction continuing during seasonal head recovery, because the deep interior of thick clays is still draining. This phase lag is itself a signature used to estimate cv and bed thickness.

Helm's model

The basis of simulation

Helm (1975, 1976) coupled this 1-D drainage process with stress-dependent storage to reproduce the Pixley and other San Joaquin records — the lineage behind today's MODFLOW SUB packages (page 09).

Singly vs. doubly draining

An interbed sandwiched between two aquifers drains from both faces, so its drainage path is only half its thickness (\(H = b'/2\)). A clay that drains to sand on one side and bedrock on the other drains from one face (\(H = b'\)). Since \(\tau \propto H^2\), a singly draining bed takes four times as long as the same bed draining both ways.

Equilibrium vs. transient compaction

For thin interbeds (small τ), compaction effectively keeps pace with head changes — the "instantaneous" assumption used in simple storativity calculations. For thick aquitards (large τ), compaction is strongly transient and must be modeled with the diffusion equation. The ratio of pumping-stress timescale to τ tells you which regime you're in.

Doubly draining thin beds: minutes to months. Thick central-valley clay sequences: many decades.

Key references

  1. Terzaghi, K. (1943). Theoretical Soil Mechanics. Wiley (one-dimensional consolidation theory).
  2. Helm, D.C. (1975). One-dimensional simulation of aquifer system compaction near Pixley, California: 1. Constant parameters. Water Resources Research 11(3): 465–478.
  3. Helm, D.C. (1976). One-dimensional simulation of aquifer system compaction near Pixley, California: 2. Stress-dependent parameters. Water Resources Research 12(3): 375–391.
  4. Riley, F.S. (1969). Analysis of borehole extensometer data from central California. In Land Subsidence, IAHS Publication 89, Vol. 2, p. 423–431.
  5. Sneed, M. (2001). Hydraulic and mechanical properties affecting ground-water flow and aquifer-system compaction, San Joaquin Valley, California. USGS Open-File Report 01-35.
  6. Hoffmann, J., Leake, S.A., Galloway, D.L. & Wilson, A.M. (2003). MODFLOW-2000 ground-water model — user guide to the Subsidence and Aquifer-System Compaction (SUB) package. USGS Open-File Report 03-233.