Predicting Well Yields —
Authors: CPG P. F. Patchick 
Published: July 2006

Two case histories are presented which illustrate that by analyzing drill cuttings or bailed samples, by knowing total depth of a test hole and position of the static water level, and by studying the driller's log, not only can a well's yield be predicted—but also drawdown may be predicted for any well in advance of a pumping test.

The estimation of specific capacity (gpm/ft of drawdown) is invaluable in well design, particularly in the United States, where drilling contractors work rapidly and efficiently. Knowledge of probable specific capacity can aid in recommending proper screen length, diameter, slot width, and setting. It will enable cost estimates for proper pump size to be made, for casing requirements to be determined, and also for ultimate well diameter and depth to be determined. Test‐pump setting can also be anticipated.

Case History No. 1 illustrates the above techniques, and how a new well was drilled, developed, designed, and completed adjacent to a poorly designed and equipped water well. The new well proved to be nine times more efficient (i. e., “better”) than the old well. Reasons for this improvement are shown, and the two wells are compared and contrasted.

Case History No. 2 shows data from a constant‐rate pumping test following calculation of a well's specific capacity using estimates of aquifer permeability. Analysis of dynamic water‐level recovery measurements resulted in a transmissibility of 16,150 gpd/ft compared to an estimated 16,000 gpd/ft from a visual inspection of sand analysis grading curves. The well's specific capacity was estimated to be between 8.4 and 8.9 gpm/ft of drawdown. The measured specific capacity was 8.35 gpm/ft with an efficiency of 85 percent. Actual permeability was 230 gpd/ft compared to the estimated 228 gpd/ft2!

Six figures are included showing well construction details, sieve analysis curves, a semi‐log plot of recovery measurements obtained during an aquifer pumping test, and graphic representations of approximate permeabilities for granular materials ranging from clay/silt to fine gravel. Six tables give characteristics of samples recovered from two test wells, permeability estimates of the disturbed samples, approximate permeabilities of various granular materials, and specific capacities for 100 percent effective water wells with varying diameters, coefficients of storage, and pumping periods. Three photographs further illustrate the principles enumerated.

The methods described can give acceptable results (although they may not be as spectacular as the two detailed case histories) if sound judgement is used; if local conditions are somewhat known; if sampling methods are described; and if the procedures are not abused by expecting extreme accuracy. A reasonable estimate, or perhaps, just a close scientific “guesstimate” is all that should be hoped for by the hydrogeologist and his client in predicting well yields. But these techniques are a great advance over the

“forked peach stick” philosophy still used for similar purposes by pseudo‐scientists in the United States and foreign countries (although no cases where a dowser or “water witch” has successfully predicted drawdown in addition to yield have come to the attention of the writer).

The data in this report are derived from approximately 500 wells or more designed by the author in 26 States and in many locations abroad. Rather good success has been obtained regarding close correlation between estimated and measured specific capacities from a variety of geologic environments and aquifer parameters.