An approximate analytical solution of Richards equation with finite boundary
 Xi Chen^{1} and
 Ying Dai^{2}Email author
Received: 14 June 2017
Accepted: 25 October 2017
Published: 9 November 2017
Abstract
We apply a series expansion technique to estimate the water content distribution and front position in finite boundary conditions. We derive an approximate analytical solution of the Richards equation (RE) for the horizontal infiltration problem. The solution is suitable for arbitrary hydraulic diffusivity in water infiltration. Compared with the finite element method, two examples in power law diffusivity and van Genuchten model are shown to test the accuracy of present approximation.
Keywords
MSC
1 Introduction
In these years, Heaslet and Alksne technique [4], perturbation technique [5], traveling wave method [6], and series method [7–10] are used to obtain an analytical solution of RE with semiinfinite boundaries. Fourier transformation, separation of variables [11, 12], and other approaches [13–19] are applied for some linear or linearized RE with finite boundaries (2). Nevertheless, there are few approximate analytical solutions of equations (1)(3) that can illustrate the longtime behavior for water infiltration in constant moisture content boundary conditions of equation (2), especially when the hydraulic diffusivity is an arbitrary function of θ. Our goal is deriving an approximate analytical solution of equations (1)(3).
Motivated by the methods and approaches mentioned, we focus on analyzing the water infiltration varying from a transient state to steady one and try to approximate the changes of water profile. By a series expansion technique we construct an approximate solution about space variable x and water profile to approximate the water content distribution for arbitrary diffusivity in RE. In addition, we analyze the relationship of time variable t and θ in a definite space coordinate.
2 Wetting front analysis
The solid lines in Figure 1 show the process of water infiltration varying from a transient flow to steady one. In this section, we construct an approximate analytical solution to simulate the infiltrate process.
3 Numerical simulation
In this section, two examples are shown to confirm the accuracy of the present method.
Example 1
(Powerlaw model)

\(n=1\): \(U _{1}=0.1445249313\).

\(n=2\): \(U _{1}=0.1667699993\), \(U _{2}=3.374544704\times10^{4}\).

\(n=3\): \(U _{1}=0.1571011460\), \(U _{2}=3.178898137\times10^{4}\), \(U _{3}=8.78800083\times10^{7}\).

\(n=4\): \(U _{1}=0.1620248146\), \(U _{2}=3.278527209\times10^{4}\), \(U _{3}=9.921998925\times10^{7}\), \(U_{4}=3.797520062\times10^{9}\).

\(n=5\): \(U _{1}=0.1589918636\), \(U _{2}=3.217156285\times10^{4}\), \(U _{3}=9.214216339\times10^{7}\), \(U_{4}=3.620798276\times10^{9}\), \(U_{5}=1.360893606\times10^{11}\).
Results of θ obtained from the FEM and fifthorder approximation
ϕ (mm/min ^{ 1/2 } )  Present method  FEM  Relative error (%) 

36.3899  0.5001  0.5  0.02 
20.1946  0.55  0.54266  1.353 
18.1551  0.6  0.594696  0.892 
14.8670  0.7  0.69924  0.109 
11.2396  0.8  0.8007  −0.087 
6.5490  0.9  0.900045  −0.005 
0  1  1  0 
The results of θ obtained from the present method and the FEM in \(\pmb{x_{{d}}=9\mbox{ mm}}\)
t (min)  Present method  FEM  Relative error (%) 

0.1276  0.505193  0.5027  0.4959 
0.2169  0.550959  0.562178  −1.9956 
0.2794  0.62067  0.6319  −1.7772 
0.3149  0.65244  0.6587  −0.9504 
0.3666  0.692165  0.69494  −0.3993 
0.4685  0.742965  0.743  −0.0047 
0.5337  0.76222  0.7638  −0.2069 
0.5765  0.77126  0.7737  −0.3154 
0.6353  0.780382  0.7841  −0.4742 
0.658  0.783064  0.7874  −0.5507 
0.6772  0.785114  0.7897  −0.5807 
Example 2
(van Genuchten model)

\(n=1\): \(U _{1}=3\mbox{,}266.070514\).

\(n=2\): \(U _{1}=3\mbox{,}600.557734\), \(U _{2}=2.796118274\times10^{9}\).
Results of θ obtained from the FEM and secondorder approximation
ϕ (mm/s ^{ 1/2 } )  2ndorder approximation  FEM  Relative error (%) 

0.9316  0.251  0.2529  −0.757 
0.8717  0.255  0.2594  −1.71 
0.8397  0.26  0.2656  −2.097 
0.7651  0.28  0.2853  −1.861 
0.7012  0.3  0.3033  −1.076 
0.483  0.35  0.3499  0.025 
0.3418  0.37  0.3697  0.09 
0  0.4  0.4  0 
We observe that the present approximations are closer to the FEM as order varies from 1 to 2 in Figure 6, and the maximal value of the relative error is −2.097% in 0.8397 mm/min^{1/2} for secondorder approximation in Table 3.
The results of θ obtained from the present method and the FEM in \(\pmb{x_{{d}}=1.5\mbox{ mm}}\)
t (s)  Present method  FEM  Relative error (%) 

3.58233  0.27141  0.2771  −2.05341 
4.211  0.29188  0.2929  −0.34824 
4.97556  0.30889  0.3075  0.452033 
5.2274  0.31535  0.314  0.429936 
6.026  0.32109  0.3208  0.090399 
7.036  0.32607  0.32878  −0.82426 
The present solution shown by dotted line approximates well with the FEM shown by solid lines in time simulation in Figure 9, and the maximum relative error is −2.0534% in Table 4.
4 Conclusion
In this paper, we analyzed the changes of wetting front position and derived an approximate analytical solution of RE with finite boundaries (2). The solid lines in Figure 1 can be approximated by the solution equation (17), which is a series solution. According to equation (17), the series solution in fact is an approximation for semiinfinite boundary with different initial values, which means that the process of water infiltration varying from transient flow to steady one in Figure 1 can be simulated by the solution of semiinfinite problem with a variable initial value. The presented examples for the power law and van Genuchten model demonstrate the accuracy of the present solution by comparing the present results with the results obtained by the FEM.
Declarations
Funding
The research has been supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
Authors’ contributions
Both authors contributed equally in this article. They read and approved the final manuscript.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Authors’ Affiliations
References
 Richards, LA: Capillary conduction of liquids through porous mediums. Physics 1, 318333 (1931) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Witelski, TP: Perturbation analysis for wetting fronts in Richard’s equation. Transp. Porous Media 27, 121134 (1997) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Parlange, JY, Hogarth, WL, Parlange, MB, Haverkamp, R, Barry, DA, Ross, PJ, Steenhuis, TS: Approximate analytical solution of the nonlinear diffusion equation for arbitrary boundary conditions. Transp. Porous Media 30, 4555 (1998) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Parlange, MB, Prasad, SN, Parlange, JY, Romkens, MJM: Extension of the HeasletAlksne technique to arbitrary soil water diffusivities. Water Resour. Res. 28, 27932797 (1992) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Witelski, TP: Motion of wetting fronts moving into partially prewet soil. Adv. Water Resour. 28, 11331141 (2005) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Parlange, JY, Hogarth, WL, Govindaraju, RS, Parlange, MB, Lockington, D: On an exact analytical solution of the Boussinesq equation. Transp. Porous Media 39, 339345 (2000) View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Omidvar, M, Barari, A, Momeni, M, Ganji, DD: New class of solutions for water infiltration problems in unsaturated soils. Geomech. Geoengin. 5, 127135 (2010) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Olsen, JS, Telyakovskiy, AS: Polynomial approximate solutions of a generalized Boussinesq equation. Water Resour. Res. 49, 30493053 (2013) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Chen, X, Dai, Y: Differential transform method for solving Richards’ equation. Appl. Math. Mech. 37, 169180 (2016) View ArticleMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Tracy, FT: Clean two and threedimensional analytical solution of Richards’ equation for testing numerical solvers. Water Resour. Res. 42, 85038513 (2006) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Menziani, M, Pugnaghi, S, Vincenzi, S: Analytical solutions of the linearized Richards equation for discrete arbitrary initial and boundary conditions. J. Hydrol. 332, 214225 (2007) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Hooshyar, M, Wang, DB: An analytical solution of Richards’ equation providing the physical basis of SCS curve number method and its proportionality relationship. Water Resour. Res. 52, 66116620 (2016) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Galvis, J, Ki Kang, S: Spectral multiscale finite element for nonlinear flows in highly heterogeneous media: a reduced basis approach. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 260, 494508 (2014) View ArticleMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Bougherara, B, Giacomoni, J: Existence of mild solutions for a singular parabolic equation and stabilization. Adv. Nonlinear Anal. 4, 123134 (2015) MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Pankavich, S, Michalowski, N: A short proof of increased parabolic regularity. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 4, 521531 (2015) MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Zaki, K, Redwane, H: Nonlinear parabolic equations with blowingup coefficients with respect to the unknown and with soft measure data. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 2016, Article ID 327 (2016) View ArticleMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Wang, HC, Liu, RK: The existence of stationary star solutions for compressible magnetohydrodynamic flows. Bound. Value Probl. 2016, 216 (2016) View ArticleMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Ma, TF, Yan, BQ: Positive global solutions of nonlocal boundary value problems for the nonlinear convection reactiondiffusion equations. Bound. Value Probl. 2017, 9 (2017) View ArticleMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Yang, J, Yu, HX: Sharp threshold for blowup and global existence in a semilinear parabolic equation with variable source. Bound. Value Probl. 2017, 80 (2017) View ArticleMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Parlange, JY, Hogarth, WL, Fuentes, C, Sprintall, J, Haverkamp, R, Elrick, D, Parlange, MB, Braddock, RD, Lockington, DA: Superposition principle for shortterm solutions of Richards equation  application to the interaction of wetting fronts with an impervious surface. Transp. Porous Media 17, 239247 (1994) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Parlange, JY, Hogarth, WL, Fuentes, C, Sprintall, J, Haverkamp, R, Elrick, D, Parlange, MB, Braddock, RD, Lockington, DA: Interaction of wetting fronts with an impervious surfacelonger time behavior. Transp. Porous Media 17, 249256 (1994) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Guariglia, E: Fractional derivative of the Riemann zeta function. In: Cattani, C, Srivastava, HM, Yang, XJ (eds.) Fractional Dynamics, pp. 357368. De Gruyter, Berlin (2015) Google Scholar
 Lockington, D, Parlange, JY, Dux, P: Sorptivity and the estimation of water penetration into unsaturated concrete. Mater. Struct. 32, 342347 (1999) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Hall, C: Water sorptivity of mortars and concretes: a review. Mag. Concr. Res. 41, 5161 (1989) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Van Genuchten, MT: A closedform equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44, 892898 (1980) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Kolditz, O, Gorke, UJ, Shao, H, Wang, W: ThermoHydroMechanicalChemical Processes in Porous Media, pp. 125142. Springer, Berlin (2012) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Rucker, DF, Wrrick, AW, Ferre, TPA: Parameter equivalence for the Gardner and van Genuchten soil hydraulic conductivity functions for steady vertical flow with inclusions. Adv. Water Resour. 28, 689699 (2005) View ArticleGoogle Scholar