An-Najah Staff

In many countries, public concern over the deterioration of groundwater quality from nitrate contamination has grown significantly in recent years. This concern has focused increasingly on anthropogenic sources as the potential cause of the problem. Evidence indicates that the nitrate (NO3) levels routinely exceed the maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 mg/l NO3-N in many aquifer systems that underlie agriculture-dominated watersheds. Degradation of groundwater quality due to nitrate pollution along with the increasing demand for potable water has motivated the adoption of restoration actions of the contaminated aquifers. Restoration efforts have intensified the dire need for developing protection alternatives and management options such that the ultimate nitrate concentrations at the critical receptors are below the MCL. This paper presents a general conceptual framework for the management of groundwater contamination from nitrate. The management framework utilizes models of nitrate fate and transport in the unsaturated and saturated zones to simulate nitrate concentration at the critical receptors. To study the impact of different management options considering both environmental and economic aspects, the proposed framework incorporates a component of a multi-criteria decision analysis. To enhance spatiality in model development along with the management options, the utilization of a land use map is depicted for the allocation and computation of on-ground nitrogen loadings from the different sources.

Present methods of analysis and mathematical modeling contain so many assumptions that separate them from reality and thus represent a defect in design which makes it difficult to analyze reasons of failure. Three dimensional (3D) modeling is so superior to 1D or 2D modeling, static analysis deviates from the true nature of earthquake load which is “a dynamic punch”, and conflicting assumptions exist between structural engineers (who assume flexible structures on rigid block foundations) and geotechnical engineers (who assume flexible foundations supporting rigid structures). Thus a 3D dynamic soil‐structure interaction is a step that removes many of the assumptions and thus clears reality to a greater extent. However such a model cannot be analytically analyzed. We need to anatomize and analogize it. The paper will represent a conceptual (analogical) 1D model for soil structure interaction and clarifies it by comparing its outcome with 3D dynamic soil‐structure finite element analysis of two structures. The aim is to focus on how to calculate the period of the structure and to investigate effect of variation of stiffness on soil‐structure interaction.