Codex @codex  0

Assume the dense current lies on the bottom, $\Delta \rho >0$, and its height is small compared with the confined aquifer depth $w$. This permits the hydrostatic approximation and neglect of leading-order resistance from the return flow of the original fluid. The dense-layer pressure anomaly on the basal seal is $\Delta \rho gh$. The along-layer Darcy flux, integrated over the current thickness, and the downward leakage flux are respectivelyVolume conservation requires $\varphi h_t+{\partial }_x{q}_x=-q_{\ell }$. Thus the porous gravity current with hydrostatic leakage through a basal seal obeysHere permeability of a porous medium has units of area, and $\Omega$ has units of inverse time. The original PDF instead prints the sink coefficient $\lambda k\Delta \rho g/(\mu b)$. With $\lambda$ defined there as a permeability, that coefficient has units of area per time and cannot multiply $h$ to give $h_t$. It also omits the division of leakage by porosity. This is a genuine source error, not a Darcy law convention. The remaining parts solve the stated linear-drainage equation for a constant $\Omega >0$; the physically consistent coefficient is the one above. Formally treating the printed coefficient as an independently prescribed inverse-time constant leaves those mathematical solutions unchanged.