This study utilizes GMS MODFLOW software to model the groundwater in the Birjand area of South Khorasan, Iran, where water scarcity is a significant issue due to arid conditions. The model, calibrated with various observed data, aims to assess groundwater status, informing more accurate management and planning for local water resources. Results indicate a concerning decline in groundwater levels over the last three decades, reaching a critical point for water supply sustainability.

1. CEEN 5355 Modflow

2. 1
Abstract:
Adding water requests, particularly in parched andsemi-bone-dry districts, persistently convolute
groundwater money chests as the main trustworthy water cash safes in these locales.
Groundwater mathematical displaying can be considered as a viable instrument for supportable
activity of restricted accessible groundwater. This study plans to display the Birjand spring
utilizing GMS MODFLOW groundwater inflow demonstrating programming to cover the
groundwater status in the Birjand area. The obtained data from the Regional Water Company of
South Khorasan (RWCSK) are controlled by a few published reports due to the lack of reliable
data necessary to run the model. To obtain pragmatic outcomes, the spring limit conditions are
bettered in the laid out conceptual framework by applying genuine/field conditions. The
observed data are used seven times to calibrate the model parameters, including the hydraulic
conductivity, using a semi-transient approach. For model execution assessment, mean mistake(
ME), mean outright blunder( MAE), and root mean square blunder( RMSE) are determined. The
consequences of the model are in great concurrence with the noticed information and in this way,
the model can be utilized for concentrating on the water position changes in the spring.
Furthermore, the outcomes can assist with watering experts for more exact and reasonable
preparation and activity of groundwater money chests in the Birjand locale.
Introduction:
Groundwater is a significant hotspot for drinking water, farming and modern purposes in parched
and semi-dry locales. Around 94.8% of Iran has a bone-dry and semi-parched environment with
low precipitation and high evapotranspiration rate and along these lines, faces water shortage
[1,2]. It is assessed that around 98.7% of freshwater is accessible as groundwater [3]. Because of
less weakness to contamination and high unwavering quality, groundwater assets are normally
liked for drinking water supply [4]. Groundwater is many times not impacted by transient dry
season and in this way, can be considered as a solid drinking water asset. However, because
aquifers are not visible like surface waters, it is difficult to gain precise knowledge of them [5].
Groundwater models are the spines of water asset arranging and the executives in (semi) bone-
dry regions [6]. Numerical modeling is now regarded as an essential instrument for analyzing
groundwater resources [7]. For the most part, in groundwater models, a worked on numerical
portrayal of a groundwater framework is tackled by a PC program [8]. These models need
assortments of data — including topography, hydrogeology, hydrology, climatology, geology,
and so forth — to reenact the amount/nature of the groundwater assets [9]. In any case, gathering
such data, particularly in non-industrial nations, is a test and experiences a serious level of
vulnerability [10]. Nature of the info information in groundwater models altogether affects the
model outcomes. At the end of the day, to obtain the precise outcomes, exact information ought
to be ingested in the model [11]. Appropriately, the information ought to be quality controlled
and have the expected goal. Groundwater in the Birjand plain in South Khorasan, Iran, is
measured using a three-dimensional, block-centered (cell-centered), steady-state, finite

3. 2
difference model called MODFLOW (McDonald and Harbaugh, [12]). As of late, GMS:
MODFLOW model (Groundwater Displaying Framework) has been effectively evolved and
distributed in an enormous number of groundwater quantitative and subjective examinations as a
result of its basic techniques, measured program design, and separate bundles to determine
extraordinary hydrogeological issues
[10,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30]. This model, with a graphical UI
(GUI), can be incorporated with geographic data framework (GIS) to give a proper visual
climate to groundwater assets assessment and the board [15]. MODFLOW is viewed as a
worldwide norm for mimicking and anticipating groundwater conditions and
groundwater/surface-water connections [31]. Although MODFLOW has been used for the
Birjand Plain in some publications, the actual conditions—such as source/sink relationships,
recharges, extractions, return flows, soil coverage, and so on—have not been taken into account
in depth. To fill these accessible holes in the writing and past examinations directed about
Birjand spring, the limit conditions as well as the info boundaries in the model have been
improved to diminish the predisposition of the recreated boundaries like water powered head
conveyance in the spring. To arrive at this point, the restricted accessible information are
explored and applied in the model actually. Because of the absence of required information time
series (like head and stream), a semi-transient methodology is applied to align the boundaries. In
the GMS: MODFLOW, there are just two principal approaches including consistent state and
transient. Utilizing a semi-transient methodology permits thought of the progressions of the
boundaries in the review time span. The quality of the available data and measurements is the
focus of the current study. Then, at that point, these information are ready to use in the
mathematical model of Birjand spring. The data for the mathematical model of the aquifer were
obtained from the Regional Water Company of South Khorasan (RWCSK). Also, the limit states
of the model are modified by the accessible data. Utilizing the deliberate qualities, the expected
boundaries in the model are aligned utilizing a semi-transient technique. Results demonstrate the
way that the pre-arranged model can be utilized in Birjand spring examinations and for
expectations of the spring conditions under various advancement situations in the district.
Material and Method:
As per Iran Water Assets The board Organization (IWRMC) [32], the quantity of profound and
semi-profound wells used for extricating groundwater has been expanded as displayed in Figure
1. It ought to be noticed that the shown quantities of wells in Figure 1 incorporate just the
approved wells that have been authorized for abuse. Sadly, the absolute number of groundwater
extricating wells (either with permit or without one) in the nation is a lot higher than the
accessible numbers in Figure 1. For the review district, the circumstance is something very
similar. In Figure 2, the utilization of groundwater in various purposes in South Khorasan area is
shown. In this region, groundwater is the primary source of water for all uses.

4. 3
Figure 1. The number of deep and semi-deep wells, qanats, and springs in the period of 2003 to 2016 in
Iran [32].
Figure 2. Percentage of groundwater use in different sections in South Khorasan province [33].

5. 4
Birjand watershed, which incorporates the Birjand plain and the Birjand spring, is situated in
scope and longitude of 32°36′ N to 33°8′ N and 58°41′ E to 59°44′ E, separately. Figure 3 depicts
the study region's location. The Birjand aquifer is in an area with a dry climate. The base, most
extreme, and the typical temperatures recorded for the period 1989-2017 are −7.6, 38.3, and 16.6
°C, separately. There is no perennial stream in this region because of the region's aridity—the
average annual precipitation is estimated to be 158 millimeters. The incline of the ground surface
bit by bit diminishes from the eastern part westward. The western pieces of the review region are
practically level as displayed in Figure 3. The length of Birjand spring is around 55.0 km and the
width in the center is around 6.0 km. The typical long haul temperatures in the eastern and
western pieces of the Birjand watershed are around 14 and 16 °C, separately. Likewise, the
typical long haul yearly precipitation in the easternmost part is around 160 mm, while in the
westernmost piece of the ideal region is around 120 mm. The watershed's easternmost (2200
mm) and westernmost (3400 mm) regions experience the watershed's minimum and maximum
annual evaporation, respectively. Because of over-double-dealing of Birjand spring through both
approved and unapproved wells in the review region, this spring has been proclaimed a denied
spring. Around 80% of groundwater release in the review region happens through profound and
semi-profound wells and the rest happens through springs and qanats [34].
Figure 3. Location of Birjand watershed and Birjand Aquifer in South Khorasan Province, Iran [35].

6. 5
The groundwater level in Birjand plain, as most diverse areas in Iran, are continuing to decrease
since of long pull dry spells and extraordinary extraction, especially by the agribusiness region.
North of a 30-year time outline from 1987 to 2018, the typical month to month groundwater
level has dropped from 1354.22 m to 1340.51 m (i.e., drawdown around 14.0 m). It suggests that
the water level in Birjand spring, as the vital wellspring of water supply within the city of
Birjand, has declined each year by a typical of around 0.45 m all through the course of later a
long time (Figure 4). Hence, the all out setback of the Birjand groundwater store has been 193.63
million cubic meters (MCM) with a normal annually lack of 6.45 MCM. This circumstance
illustrates a severe water emergency within the Birjand plain [36].
Figure 4. Groundwater hydrograph of Birjand Plain during a 30-year period.
The Birjand aquifer is unconfined, and in light of climate change, unconfined aquifers in arid and
semi-arid regions are more vulnerable than aquifers in wet or rainy regions. The reason for this is
that droughts in areas that are arid or semi-arid exacerbate the condition of the aquifer by
reducing aquifer recharge [37]. This variable, alongside different factors, for example, populace
development and expanding request, prompts a persistent lessening in groundwater assets here.
Examining the land guides of the Birjand plain region shows that the Birjand spring structure
thoroughly is connected with the quaternary development, dating from the quaternary time
frame. The quaternary time frame started around more than quite a while back and go on today,
and is, as a matter of fact, the freshest land period. As a result, the Birjand aquifer as a whole is

7. 6
made up of young deposits from a geological perspective (Figure 5). The youthful quaternary
stores incorporate residue that are disintegrated and kept by waterways around here and are by
and large coarse-grained rock material. It is important to note that, out of all the lithological units
in the Birjand watershed, the young quaternary deposits that cover the entire aquifer have the
highest percentage (around 25%).
Figure 5. Birjand watershed geological map.

8. 7
Groundwater Modeling
Understanding a groundwater system commonly requires exhausting a far reaching number of
exploratory wells, infiltrating, and siphoning tasks, and directing different geophysical tests and
a game plan of long haul tests, which are expensive and tedious. Incredibly, inside the ponder
locale, particularly barely any field tasks and outlines have been done and hence, demonstrating
the groundwater stream through a logical show can uncommonly guarantee. Several groundwater
modeling programs were developed on the basis of various strategies. The first celebrated
models (GUIs) are Visual Separated Three-Layered Limited Contrast Stream Illustrate (Visual
MODFLOW) [38], Restricted Part Subsurface Stream Structure (FEFLOW) [39], Groundwater
Displaying System (GMS) [40], and so forth. FEFLOW, which involves the restricted part
procedure for demonstrating, and GMS and Visual MODFLOW are the preeminent common PC
program groups associated in groundwater considers
[14,19,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52]. The GMS program could be a graphical client
interface for various groundwater models like FEMWATER, SEEP2D, SEAM3D, MT3DMS,
MODFLOW (with various groups), RT3D, MODPATH, MODAEM, and SEAWAT. In this
contemplate, the MODFLOW show has been decided because of its tall efficiency and its wide
use in groundwater ponders. This show mirrors the stream in three estimations using restricted
differentiation methodology for both consistent state and short lived conditions. The
MODFLOW mathematical show is created in view of the mix of two fundamental conditions —
the Darcy condition and the rule of safeguarding of mass, or mass change.
Where 𝐾𝑥𝑥, 𝐾𝑦𝑦 and 𝐾𝑧𝑧 are water powered conductivity coefficients (L/T) in x, y, and z
bearings, individually; h is the weight head (L); 𝑆𝑠 is particular capacity (1/L); and W is
recharge/discharge rate per unit volume (1/T). The environment is unconfined, isotropic, and
heterogeneous (𝐾𝑥𝑥=𝐾𝑦𝑦=𝐾𝑧𝑧=𝐾), and subsequently, the overseeing condition based on
Dupuit presumptions [53] in two-dimensional frame can be composed as
Where Sy is the particular surrender (dimensionless).
Due to the need of long-term checking information for observational/operational wells, sums of
inflow/outflow to/from the Birjand aquifer are obscure and so, the reenactments are constrained
to steady-state conditions. In spite of the fact that applying the steady-state groundwater model

9. 8
simulation in Birjand aquifer could be a constrained choice, we are attempting to consider the
real-world conditions within the modeling.
Groundwater Conceptual Show of Birjand Aquifer
The primary and most imperative step in groundwater modeling is developing the conceptual
demonstrate of the groundwater framework [54], which represent a disentangled form of the
genuine aquifer framework. Due to the complexity of the hydrogeological framework, as well as
the need of data within the think about locale, the conceptual show and its structure is connected
agreeing to the accessible information [55]. Setting up the groundwater conceptual demonstrate
within the consider locale endures from numerous challenges counting:
Need of satisfactory information and fragmented data around the physical properties of alluvial
stores of plain, which is the most store of groundwater;
Need of satisfactory and exact insights and data on meteorological and climatic parameters and
other parameters within the consider zone for evaluating the water adjust components;
Need of adequate perception wells and other perceptions within the region;
Need of exact and satisfactory insights and criteria on the strategy and extent of utilization of
Birjand groundwater asset;
Need of sufficient exploratory wells within the study plain to get it the physical and geometric
characteristics of the aquifer;
Error in piezometer recorded values;
Need of adequate pumping tests within the consider range and so, need of adequate data on the
hydrodynamic coefficients of the aquifer;
Need of adequate understanding of the water powered behavior of an aquifer's encompassing
arrangements and their relationship with the aquifer, and the ensuing need of appropriate and
exact definition of boundary conditions;
Need of adequate data on the pressure driven associations between surface water (e.g., waterway
or lake) and groundwater assets;
Need of adequate data for calculating agrarian, urban, and mechanical backwaters;
The diverse steps for creating the conceptual model of the Birjand aquifer are depicted in Figure
6.

10. 9
Figure 6. Flowchart of the building the conceptual model of Birjand aquifer.
The spring not entirely settled by the RWCSK information. A far reaching study (e.g., lithology
and geography studies) has been finished in this examination to have the option to display the
spring limits (i.e., spring math) precisely in the model [35,56,57,58,59,60,61,62]. The base limit
(i.e., the bedrock in the spring) is likewise resolved utilizing the restricted accessible geophysical
review (geoelectrical soundings) did in Birjand Plain in 1971 (Figure 7).

11. 10
Figure 7. Location of geoelectrical soundings in Birjand aquifer.
To characterize the sinks and sources in the spring model, the positions and measures of
withdrawals/releases from each well ought still up in the air. There are 187 siphoning/extricating wells
with kept information in the review region which are applied in the model (Figure 9). The well information
are gotten from RWCSK and their quality are controlled prior to bringing in to the model. Of the all out
wells utilized in the model, 26 wells are utilized for drinking water and sterilization, 9 wells for animals, 26
wells for industry and administrations, 119 wells for farming, and 7 for different purposes.
Figure 8. Location of pumping and observation wells (piezometers) in Birjand aquifer. P1, P2, P3, and P4
are for selected piezometers to check the groundwater level changes at the end of calibration and
verification processes.

12. 11
Boundary Conditions
The overseeing conditions of the groundwater stream are fathomed utilizing the limited
distinction approach. This requires that the boundary and introductory conditions of the issue are
portrayed in subtle elements within the demonstrate [63]. The groundwater budget components
of the Birjand aquifer given by RWCSK are displayed in Table 1. This budget can display a great
see of the by and large status of sinks and sources within the aquifer.
In past considers, diverse sorts of boundary conditions have been utilized in Birjand aquifer.
Within the show think about, we are attempting to apply exact aquifer input/output boundaries
utilizing geographical overviews and adj. symbolism through the Google Soil Professional
computer program.
To discover the real-world conditions, a comprehensive examination of the adjoining regions of
the aquifer, geographical conditions, lithology maps, the sort of soils, and geology of the region
has been done. At last, by utilizing this information, the lateral input boundaries or sidelong
energize are defined within the demonstrate as takes after:
Within the northeast portion of the aquifer, there's an trade of groundwater between Birjand and
Marak aquifers (Figure 6). The groundwater stream course in this range is from the Marak
aquifer towards Birjand aquifer (the water levels are higher within the outlet of the Marak
aquifer) with the stream rate of almost 3.56 million cubic meters per year.
The moment input boundary region to the Birjand aquifer found within the south as appeared in
Figure 10. The southern parts of the Birjand aquifer have the most elevated rises of the arrive
structure within the adjoining zones of the Birjand aquifer. In expansion, there are alluvial fans
as unconsolidated sedimentary stores in these parts which, due to having soak inclines, can
revive the aquifer amid the precipitation.
There's another sidelong input boundary within the northwest of the aquifer, which looks like a
camel bump. In this range, there's a expansive fan-shaped alluvial cone that has been washed out
or dissolved over the a long time from tall heights and dispersed in a huge area with a perimeter
of approximately 17.5 km, as shown in Figure 11. Precipitation over this alluvial cone streams
through indicated ways and after that enters into this endless range and joins the Birjand aquifer.
Lithology, as well as soil sort and soil surface examinations within the consider locale are
recognized the fourth input boundary. In Figure 6, the southern portion of the aquifer and from
the central side towards the west of the aquifer, geographically are shaped from overwhelmingly
sandstone, siltstone, phyllite, slate, and minor limestone, which have exceptionally moo
penetrability. As a result, due to the reality that water cannot enter quickly, it gets to be runoff

13. 12
and streams downstream, and enters as before long because it enters the aquifer's alluvial zone,
causing the aquifer recharge. The moderately tall slant in this range, which speeds up the runoff
from precipitation, as well as the presence of a huge mountain above this rock that has normal
precipitation over the Birjand plain, are a few components that offer assistance to energize the
aquifer. The remove between the second and fourth major input zones (both of which are found
within the southern portion of the Birjand aquifer) basically isn't considered as an input boundary
since there are relatively moo heights and slight/gentle slopes between these raised areas within
the southern portion. In other words, within the range between these two inputs, the stone
structure is distant from the aquifer boundary. Due to aridity of this locale (tall
evapotranspiration and little precipitation), the sum of water that enters in this region isn't
transported to the Birjand aquifer.
There's another input boundary within the northern regions of the Birjand aquifer. There are two
huge alluvial fans in this region, with a tip remove of about 7.2 km (Figure 12) and at the base,
these are found completely inside the aquifer boundary and their separate is decreased by about
half. These alluvial fans construct a place for entering the runoffs to the aquifer and recharging it.
Within the upstream portion of the proper (eastern) alluvial fan, there are a few human activities,
such as leveling the ground, developing a little soil dam, and cultivating. Hence, input flows
from this side can be disregarded and considered as a no-flow boundary. Be that as it may, the
upstream of the cleared out alluvial fan (western) remains nearly for all intents and purposes
undisturbed without any impressive human exercises
Figure 09. Topography of the Birjand watershed which includes the Birjand aquifer. The numbers
represent the elevation in m.s.l.

14. 13
Figure 10. Large alluvial fan as an input boundary or lateral recharge, located in the northwest of Birjand
aquifer. The blue line shows the groundwater lateral recharge way.
In the model, the five primary input regions that were previously specified are regarded as
determined head limit or Dirichlet/first-type limit conditions. Since there are no water-driven
relationships between the spring and its neighbors, the remaining limits are regarded as either
Neumann/second-type limit conditions or no-stream limits (Figure 11).

15. 14
Figure 11. Boundary conditions of the model.
Model Parameters
One of the foremost critical parameters in a groundwater demonstrate is pressure driven conductivity. The
water powered conductivity values can be calculated based on the transmissivity values (T) gotten from
the pumping tests utilizing the condition
𝐾 = 𝑇/𝐵
where K speaks to pressure driven conductivity (m/d); T is transmissivity (m2/d); and B appears the
thickness of the aquifer immersion layer (the contrast between groundwater level and bedrock level in
each point) (m). At last, utilizing reverse remove weighting (IDW) introduction strategy in GMS, an inexact
beginning esteem of the aquifer water powered conductivity is gotten.
Calculating the aquifer revive often is one of the foremost challenging issues in groundwater ponders.
Concurring to Table 1, the full sum of aquifer recharge—including the infiltration of precipitation, surface
runoff, rural, drinking, and industry wastewaters—is about 40.74 MCM per year. In this ponder, this sum
of coordinate energize dispersed within the aquifer conceptual demonstrate based on the arrive utilize
outline.
Computational Framework Show
The estimate of computing frameworks influences the groundwater model's yield. Figure 14
outlines the reliable 250 × 250 m even plane framework cell measure in this consider, with each
cell's stature rise to to the alluvial profundity at that area (i.e., the contrast between earth's surface
and bedrock levels). There are 224 columns and 79 lines within the modeling network. 13,608
inert framework cells (all cells exterior the aquifer are inert) and 4088 dynamic lattice cells (all
cells interior the aquifer are active) make up the overall number of network cells, 17,696.

16. 15
Figure 12. 3-D grid created by GMS: MODFLOW for Birjand groundwater model.
Result:
Model Alignment
There are by and large two sorts of alignment process; the first is an experimentation cycle that
ought to be physically changed over and over alignment boundaries. Because it can provide the
modeler with a lot of information about the site being modeled as well as how parameter changes
affect various areas of the model and types of observations, this method can be considered a
fundamental first step in history matching [65]. The subsequent sort is mechanized boundary
assessment which much of the time can align the model rapidly. GMS contains a point of
interaction to the referenced alignment called Irritation (Boundary Assessment) [66]. Bother
alignment can be acted in two ways including zonal and pilot point. The principal approach (i.e.,
zonal) is the most well-known one [67] and is applied in this review. For alignment, the pressure
driven head information of 11 perception wells or piezometers in the review district is imported
to display. Utilizing the experimentation approach, endeavors are made to limit the distinctions
among determined and noticed head values. The nature of the adjustment is assessed utilizing
some lists including mean blunder (ME), mean outright mistake (MAE), and root mean square
blunder (RMSE) as indicated by the situations.

17. 16
Where n is the quantity of piezometers; ho and hc show noticed/estimated and
determined/recreated head values (m), individually. Estimation of the previously mentioned
measurement files is valuable in assessing the value of the adjustment [68]. It ought to be noticed
that the GMS programming gives ME, MAE, and RMSE values for each model run. Since both
positive and negative residuals are utilized in computation, ME worth ought to be near zero for a
decent alignment. MAE is a measure of the average error in the model that is calculated using the
absolute error values (only positive values). The sum of the squared differences between the
heads that are measured and those that are simulated is referred to as the root mean square error
(RMSE) or standard deviation (RMSD), and since steady state results are used in calibration, the
RMSE and RMSD are equivalent. Outlier residuals have a negative impact on RMSE's
robustness. As a result, the RMSE typically outweighs the MAE. Alignment of the model is
performed for consistent state in this study in light of the fact that the time series of groundwater
stream are obscure. Rather than transient adjustment, a semi-transient adjustment approach is
applied for Birjand spring. Along these lines, alignment of the model is done for occasional
information of the review time frame (around 7 years) as summed up in Table 2. The
fundamental justification for picking a season as a period step is that the groundwater level
changes in all perception wells were unimportant during a season. The normal groundwater
levels in every piezometer during each season were thought of and placed to the model. The
model can continue to be used after the study period because of the good agreement between the
input data, the calibrated parameters, and the assumption.

18. 17
Figure 13. Distribution of hydraulic conductivity values in Birjand aquifer.
Figure 14. The results of semi-transient calibration of the model, Birjand groundwater level changes as
well as observed and calculated head values for the four selected piezometers include (a) piezometer 1;
(b) piezometer 2; (c) piezometer 3; and, (d) piezometer 4, over a period of about 7 years as seasonal.
Model Evaluation
After the alignment cycle, the pre-arranged model ought to be assessed to demonstrate the model
is solid in various circumstances. In this segment, the aligned boundaries for the latest time
(spring 2018) is picked for assessing the model outcomes. As displayed in Table 3, the
arrangement between the consequences of the model and the estimations is promising for the two
boundaries including water powered conductivity (K) and re-energize (R) and thus, for the
model. Like the alignment segment, the groundwater level changes in similar four chose

19. 18
piezometers for model assessment north of 7 years are displayed in Figure 17. Every red point
addresses how much the head contrast and has a place with a spring time of a particular year that
is determined next to each point. P1, P2, P3, and P4 are the chosen piezometers as displayed .
Figure 15. Difference between observed and calculated head values in four selected piezometers include
(a) piezometer 1; (b) piezometer 2; (c) piezometer 3; and, (d) piezometer 4, at the end of model
verification for a 7-year period.
Conclusion
Over-double-dealing of the groundwater assets in many fields in Iran is normal, and proceeding
with the current strain on these very valuable sources will prompt the event of extreme hopeless
water pressure in the country. In this review, the Birjand spring in South Khorasan region, Iran is
explored where the groundwater is the fundamental wellspring of water supply. The study area
has been thoroughly explained. One of the significant objectives of this study is to work on the
exactness of the spring model and to beat the information lack, particularly in the info limits. To
do this, a semi-transient methodology has been utilized to examine the spring model during a
timeframe. Coupling MODFLOW with ArcGIS utilizing GMS strong programming permits us to

20. 19
recreate the groundwater stream in the ideal region. We identified a gap in the literature due to a
significant difference and disagreement in the boundary conditions considered in previous
Birjand region studies. In the current examination, the thorough concentrate in the Birjand locale
caused a few significant enhancements in the Birjand spring model, particularly in limit
conditions. The model adjustment is finished utilizing consistent state and semi-transient
methodologies. The spring model was researched for 29 seasons and the outcome introduced.
Likewise, four piezometers were chosen haphazardly from various pieces of the spring to
thoroughly showing the groundwater level changes in the whole region. To measure the
dependability of the model, some assessment files — including mean mistake, mean outright
blunder, and root mean square blunder — are determined. As indicated by these lists, the
exhibition of the model is promising. The methodology was utilized in this review (i.e., semi-
transient alignment) can be applied for different districts with a comparative issue as well as
comparable condition. The discoveries of this study can work on the situation with groundwater
asset the board in the Birjand district and add to the supportable advancement of this essential
asset.
Reference:
1. Sattari, M.T.; Mirabbasi, R.; Sushab, R.S.; Abraham, J. Prediction of Level in Ardebil Plain
Using Support Vector Regression and M5 Tree Model. Groundwater 2018, 56, 636–646.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Khalili, K.; Tahoudi, M.N.; Mirabbasi, R.; Ahmadi, F. Investigation of spatial and temporal
variability of precipitation in Iran over the last half century. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk
Assess. 2016, 30, 1205–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Rejani, R.; Jha, M.K.; Panda, S.N.; Mull, R. Simulation modeling for efficient groundwater
management in balasore coastal basin, India. Water Resour. Manag. 2008, 22, 23–50. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]
4. van Engelenburg, J.; Hueting, R.; Rijpkema, S.; Teuling, A.J.; Uijlenhoet, R.; Ludwig, F. Impact
of Changes in Groundwater Extractions and Climate Change on Groundwater-Dependent
Ecosystems in a Complex Hydrogeological Setting. Water Resour. Manag. 2018, 32, 259–272.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
5. Izady, A.; Abdalla, O.; Joodavi, A.; Chen, M. Groundwater Modeling and Sustainability of a
Transboundary Hardrock–Alluvium Aquifer in North Oman Mountains. Water 2017, 9, 161.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Uddameri, V.; Singaraju, S.; Karim, A.; Gowda, P.; Bailey, R.; Schipanski, M. Understanding
Climate-Hydrologic-Human Interactions to Guide Groundwater Model Development for

21. 20
Southern High Plains. J. Contemp. Water Res. Educ. 2017, 162, 79–99. [Google Scholar]
[CrossRef] [Green Version]
7. Khadri, S.F.R.; Pande, C. Ground water flow modeling for calibrating steady state using
MODFLOW software: A case study of Mahesh River basin, India. Model. Earth Syst.
Environ. 2016, 2, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
8. Reilly, T.E.; Harbaugh, A.W. Guidelines for Evaluating Ground-Water Flow Models; US
Geological Survey, Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5038; USGS: Reston, VA, USA, 2004.
9. Rapantova, N.; Tylcer, J.; Vojtek, D. Numerical modelling as a tool for optimisation of ground
water exploitation in urban and industrial areas. Procedia Eng. 2017, 209, 92–99. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Hogeboom, R.H.J.; van Oel, P.R.; Krol, M.S.; Booij, M.J. Modelling the Influence of
Groundwater Abstractions on the Water Level of Lake Naivasha, Kenya Under Data-Scarce
Conditions. Water Resour. Manag. 2015, 29, 4447–4463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green
Version]
11. Baalousha, H. Fundamentals of groundwater modelling. In Groundwater: Modelling,
Management and Contamination; Konig, L.F., Weiss, J.L., Eds.; Nova Science Publishers, Inc.:
New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 149–166. ISBN 9781604568325. [Google Scholar]
12. McDonald, M.G.; Harbaugh, A.W. A Modular Three-Dimensional Finite-Difference Ground-
Water Flow Model; U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 83–875; US Geological Survey:
Reston, VA, USA, 1988.
13. Panagopoulos, G. Application of MODFLOW for simulating groundwater flow in the Trifilia
karst aquifer, Greece. Environ. Earth Sci. 2012, 67, 1877–1889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
14. Kushwaha, R.K.; Pandit, M.K.; Goyal, R. MODFLOW Based Groundwater Resource Evaluation
and Prediction in Mendha Sub-Basin, NE Rajasthan. J. Geol. Soc. India 2009, 74, 449–458.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
15. Wang, S.; Shao, J.; Song, X.; Zhang, Y.; Huo, Z.; Zhou, X. Application of MODFLOW and
geographic information system to groundwater flow simulation in North China Plain,
China. Environ. Geol. 2008, 55, 1449–1462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
16. Abdulla, F.A.; Al-Khatib, M.A.; Al-Ghazzawi, Z.D. Development of groundwater modeling for
the Azraq Basin, Jordan. Environ. Geol. 2000, 40, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Gurwin, J.; Lubczynski, M. Modeling of complex multi-aquifer systems for groundwater
resources evaluation—Swidnica study case (Poland). Hydrogeol. J. 2005, 13, 627–639. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Lutz, A.; Thomas, J.M.; Pohll, G.; McKay, W.A. Groundwater resource sustainability in the
Nabogo Basin of Ghana. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 2007, 49, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
19. Jingli, S.; Ling, L.; Yali, C.; Zhaoji, Z. Groundwater Flow Simulation and its Application in
Groundwater Resource Evaluation in the North China Plain, China. Acta Geol. Sin. Engl.
Ed. 2013, 87, 243–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
20. Pisinaras, V.; Petalas, C.; Tsihrintzis, V.A.; Karatzas, G.P. Integrated modeling as a decision-
aiding tool for groundwater management in a Mediterranean agricultural watershed. Hydrol.
Process. 2013, 27, 1973–1987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. Katpatal, Y.B.; Pophare, A.M.; Lamsoge, B.R. A groundwater flow model for overexploited
basaltic aquifer and Bazada formation in India. Environ. Earth Sci. 2014, 72, 4413–4425.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

22. 21
22. Chakraborty, S.; Maity, P.K.; Das, S. Investigation, simulation, identification and prediction of
groundwater levels in coastal areas of Purba Midnapur, India, using MODFLOW. Environ. Dev.
Sustain. 2019, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. Jang, C.S.; Chen, C.F.; Liang, C.P.; Chen, J.S. Combining groundwater quality analysis and a
numerical flow simulation for spatially establishing utilization strategies for groundwater and
surface water in the Pingtung Plain. J. Hydrol. 2016, 533, 541–556. [Google Scholar]
[CrossRef]
24. Bushira, K.M.; Hernandez, J.R.; Sheng, Z. Surface and groundwater flow modeling for
calibrating steady state using MODFLOW in Colorado River Delta, Baja California,
Mexico. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 2017, 3, 815–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
25. Habel, S.; Fletcher, C.H.; Rotzoll, K.; El-kadi, A.I. Development of a model to simulate
groundwater inundation induced by sea-level rise and high tides in Honolulu, Hawaii. Water
Res. 2017, 114, 122–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. Xu, X.; Huang, G.; Qu, Z.; Pereira, L.S. Using MODFLOW and GIS to Assess Changes in
Groundwater Dynamics in Response to Water Yellow River Basin. Water Resour.
Manag. 2011, 25, 2035–2059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
27. Lachaal, F.; Mlayah, A.; Bédir, M.; Tarhouni, J.; Leduc, C. Implementation of a 3-D
groundwater flow model in a semi-arid region using MODFLOW and GIS tools: The
Zéramdine–Béni Hassen Miocene aquifer system (east-central Tunisia). Comput.
Geosci. 2012, 48, 187–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
28. El-Zehairy, A.A.; Lubczynski, M.W.; Gurwin, J. Interactions of artificial lakes with groundwater
applying an integrated MODFLOW solution. Hydrogeol. J. 2018, 26, 109–132. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]
29. Xue, S.; Liu, Y.; Liu, S.; Li, W.; Wu, Y.; Pei, Y. Numerical simulation for groundwater
distribution after mining in Zhuanlongwan mining area based on visual MODFLOW. Environ.
Earth Sci. 2018, 77, 400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
30. Chatterjee, R.; Jain, A.K.; Chandra, S.; Tomar, V.; Parchure, P.K.; Ahmed, S. Mapping and
management of aquifers suffering from over-exploitation of groundwater resources in Baswa-
Bandikui watershed, Rajasthan, India. Environ. Earth Sci. 2018, 77, 157. [Google Scholar]
[CrossRef]
31. United States Geological Survey (USGS). MODFLOW and Related Programs. Available
online: https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/modflow-and-related-
programs?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects (accessed on 14 March
2019).
32. Iran Water Resources Management Company. Available online: https://www.wrm.ir (accessed
on 23 April 2019).
33. Regional Water Company of South Khorasan. The National Program on Controlling the
Groundwater Exploitation; Regional Water Company of South Khorasan: Birjand, Iran, 2019.
[Google Scholar]
34. Noor, H. Analysis of Groundwater Resource Utilization and Their Current Condition in
Iran. Iran. J. Rainwater Catchment Syst. 2017, 5, 29–38. (In Persian) [Google Scholar]
35. Sadeghi-Tabas, S.; Akbarpour, A.; Pourreza-Bilondi, M.; Samadi, S. Toward reliable calibration
of aquifer hydrodynamic parameters: Characterizing and optimization of arid groundwater
system using swarm intelligence optimization algorithm. Arab. J. Geosci. 2016, 9, 719. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]

23. 22
36. Javan, J.; Fal-Soleiman, M. Water Crisis and Importance of Water Productivity in Agriculture in
Dry Area of Iran (Case Study: Birjand Plain). Geogr. Dev. Iran. J. 2008, 6, 115–138. (In Persian)
[Google Scholar]
37. Sherif, M.M.; Singh, V.P. Effect of climate change on sea water intrusion in coastal
aquifers. Hydrol. Process. 1999, 13, 1277–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
38. Waterloo Hydrogeologic Company. Available
online: https://www.waterloohydrogeologic.com/resources/visual-modflow-flex-
resources/introduction-groundwater-modeling-with-visual-modflow (accessed on 2 March
2019).
39. Diersch, H.-J.G. FEFLOW: Finite Element Modeling of Flow, Mass and Heat Transport in
Porous and Fractured Media; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin, Germany, 2013.
[Google Scholar]
40. Owen, S.J.; Jones, N.L.; Holland, J.P. A Comprehensive Modeling Environment for the
Simulation of Groundwater Flow and Transport. Eng. Comput. 1996, 12, 235–242. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]
41. Karimi, L.; Motagh, M.; Entezam, I. Modeling groundwater level fluctuations in Tehran aquifer:
Results from a 3D unconfined aquifer model. Groundw. Sustain. Dev. 2019, 8, 439–449.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
42. Nan, T.; Li, K.; Wu, J.; Yin, L. Assessment of groundwater exploitation in an aquifer using the
random walk on grid method: A case study at Ordos, China. Hydrogeol. J. 2018, 26, 1669–1681.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
43. Su, X.; Yuan, W.; Du, S.; Cui, G.; Bai, J.; Du, S. Responses of groundwater vulnerability to
groundwater extraction reduction in the Hun River Basin, northeastern China. Hum. Ecol. Risk
Assess. 2017, 23, 1121–1139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
44. Meredith, E.; Blais, N. Quantifying irrigation recharge sources using groundwater
modeling. Agric. Water Manag. 2019, 214, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
45. Qiu, S.; Liang, X.; Xiao, C.; Huang, H.; Fang, Z.; Lv, F. Numerical simulation of groundwater
flow in a River Valley Basin in Jilin Urban Area, China. Water 2015, 7, 5768–5787. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]
46. Roy, P.K.; Roy, S.S.; Giri, A.; Banerjee, G.; Majumder, A.; Mazumdar, A. Study of impact on
surface water and groundwater around flow fields due to changes in river stage using
groundwater modeling system. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2015, 17, 145–154. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]
47. Sobeih, M.M.; El-Arabi, N.E.; Helal, E.E.D.Y.; Awad, B.S. Management of water resources to
control groundwater levels in the southern area of the western Nile delta, Egypt. Water
Sci. 2017, 31, 137–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
48. Moridi, A.; MajdzadehTabatabaie, M.R.; Esmaeelzade, S. Holistic Approach to Sustainable
Groundwater Management in Semi- arid Regions. Int. J. Environ. Res. 2018, 12, 347–355.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
49. Hashemi, H.; Berndtsson, R.; Kompani-Zare, M. Steady-State Unconfined Aquifer Simulation of
the Gareh-Bygone Plain, Iran. Open Hydrol. J. 2012, 6, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
50. Malekinezhad, H.; Banadkooki, F.B. Modeling impacts of climate change and human activities
on groundwater resources using MODFLOW. J. Water Clim. Chang. 2017, 9, 156–177. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]

24. 23
51. Jalut, Q.H.; Abbas, N.L.; Mohammad, A.T. Management of groundwater resources in the Al-
Mansourieh zone in the Diyala River Basin in Eastern Iraq. Groundw. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 6, 79–
86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
52. He, X.; Sonnenborg, T.O.; Jørgensen, F.; Høyer, A.-S.; Møller, R.R.; Jensen, K.H. Analyzing the
effects of geological and parameter uncertainty on prediction of groundwater head and travel
time. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 17, 3245–3260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green
Version]
53. Dupuit, J. Études Théoriques et Pratiques sur le Mouvement des Eaux Dans les Canaux
Découverts et à Travers les Terrains Perméabls, 2nd ed.; Dunod: Paris, France, 1863. [Google
Scholar]
54. Pholkern, K.; Saraphirom, P.; Cloutier, V.; Srisuk, K. Use of Alternative Hydrogeological
Conceptual Models to Assess the Potential Impact of Climate Change on Groundwater
Sustainable Yield in Central Huai Luang Basin, Northeast Thailand. Water 2019, 11, 241.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
55. Poeter, E.; Anderson, D. Multimodel Ranking and Inference in Ground Water Modeling. Ground
Water 2005, 43, 597–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
56. Hamraz, B.S.; Akbarpour, A.; Bilondi, M.P.; Tabas, S.S. On the assessment of ground water
parameter uncertainty over an arid aquifer. Arab. J. Geosci. 2015, 8, 10759–10773. [Google
Scholar] [CrossRef]
57. Sadeghi-Tabas, S.; Samadi, S.Z.; Akbarpour, A.; Pourreza-Bilondi, M. Sustainable groundwater
modeling using single- and multi-objective optimization algorithms. J. Hydroinform. 2017, 19,
97–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
58. Kalantari, M.; Akbarpour, A.; Khatibinia, M. Numerical Modeling of Groundwater Flow in
Unconfined Aquifer in Steady State with Isogeometric Method. Modares Civ. Eng. J. 2018, 18,
195–206. (In Persian) [Google Scholar]
59. Hassanpour, M.; Khozeymehnezhad, H. Placement of nutrient wells for artificial nutrition and
improvement of aquifer quality in Birjand plain using treated wastewater. Health 2018, 4, 215–
226. (In Persian) [Google Scholar]
60. Mohtashami, A.; Akbarpour, A.; Mollazadeh, M. Development of two-dimensional groundwater
flow simulation model using meshless method based on MLS approximation function in
unconfined aquifer in transient state. J. Hydroinform. 2017, 19, 640–652. [Google Scholar]
[CrossRef] [Green Version]
61. Roozbahani, A.; Ebrahimi, E.; Banihabib, M.E. A Framework for Ground Water Management
Based on Bayesian Network and MCDM Techniques. Water Resour. Manag. 2018, 32, 4985–
5005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
62. Kardan Moghadam, H.; Banihabib, M.E.; Javadi, S. Quantitative Sustainability Analysis of
Aquifer System (Case Study: South Khorasan—Birjand Aquifer). J. Water Soil 2018, 31, 1587–
1601. (In Persian) [Google Scholar]
63. Batu, V. Numerical Flow and Solute Transport Modeling in Aquifers. In Applied Flow and
Solute Transport Modeling in Aquifers: Fundamental Principles and Analytical and Numerical
Methods; CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2006; pp. 215–344. ISBN
9780849335747. [Google Scholar]
64. Regional Water Company of South Khorasan. Quantifying the Water Resources in Birjand
Region, Report Version 3; Regional Water Company of South Khorasan: Birjand, Iran, 2017.
[Google Scholar]

25. 24
65. Anderson, M.P.; Woessner, W.W.; Hunt, R.J. APPLIED GROUNDWATER MODELING:
Simulation of Flow and Advective Transport, 2nd ed.; Academic Press, Elsevier: New York, NY,
USA, 2015; ISBN 9780120581030. [Google Scholar]
66. GMS 10.4 Tutorial: MODFLOW—Automated Parameter Estimation; Aquaveo: Provo, Utah,
UT, USA, 2018.
67. XMS Wiki: Online Help for GMS, SMS, and WMS. Available
online: https://www.xmswiki.com/wiki/GMS:Parameters#Parameterizing_the_model (acces
sed on 25 April 2019).
68. Thangarajan, M. Groundwater Flow and Mass Transport. Modeling: Theory and Application;
Capital Publishing Company: New Delhi, India, 2007; ISBN 9788185589619. [Google Scholar]