# Simplified Calculation Method for Active Anti-Floating of Elliptical Basements by Relief Wells
## 5 Conclusions  
Combined with the conformal mapping, a simplified calculation method was proposed for the multi-well system of an elliptical pit under the condition of IDPR anti-floating. This solves the problem whereby the existing calculation method focuses on the circular pit under the condition of uniformly distributed wells; the principle of calculation is clear and easy to understand, and the process is simple. The results of the calculations were compared with those of the finite element calculations to validate the reasonableness of the simplified calculation method. The following conclusions were drawn:  
1. For the elliptical pit, it is transformed into a unit circle by conformal mapping, and after obtaining the equivalent coordinates after the transformation, the seepage field of the pit is solved by combining with the resistance coefficient method, so as to obtain the simplified calculation method for the multi-well system of the elliptical pit.
2. By comparing the results of the simplified calculation method with the seepage field distribution obtained from finite element calculations, as well as the total flow rate and head, it is observed that the seepage field distribution inside the pit is nearly identical. This demonstrates the high accuracy of the simplified calculation method for the multi-well system of elliptical pits under IDPR conditions. Furthermore, the simplified calculation method was successfully applied to real-world engineering cases. By comparing the results of the simplified calculation with both the finite element calculations and the actual measured data, the reasonableness and practicality of the simplified calculation method were further validated.
3. This simplified calculation method is suitable for sites with relatively uniform soil thickness and permeability, such as sites with artificial hydrophobic layers, but its accuracy needs to be further improved for sites with large variations in soil distribution.  
Conceptualization, G.L. and F.Y.; methodology, G.L. and F.Y.; software, H.L.; validation, H.C. and H.P.; formal analysis, F.Y.; data curation, F.Y. and H.L.; writing-original draft preparation, F.Y.; writing-review and editing, H.P.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51978282, No. 52308343, No. 52308353) and the Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation (Grant No. 2023A1515011571, No. 2023A1515011683, No. 2019A1515110837).  
Not applicable.  
Figure 13: Comparison of seepage field distributions on the inside of the cut-off wall: **(a)** Seepage field obtained from simplified calculations; **(b)** seepage field obtained from finite element calculations.  
**Data Availability Statement:** The data presented or analyzed in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to engineering and construction requires confidentiality.  
**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome.