Estimation of hydraulic conductivity from borehole flowmeter tests considering head losses

Journal of Hydrology

Volumn 281, Issue 1-2, 2003, Pages 115-128

  Zlotnik, Vitaly A ^a   Zurbuchen, Brian R ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality   (United States)

Author keywords

Aquifer testing; Borehole flowmeter; Head losses; Hydraulic conductivity; Stream function

Indexed keywords

BOREHOLES; ESTIMATION; FLOWMETERS; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY;

BOREHOLE FLOWMETER TESTS;

HYDROLOGY;

AQUIFER; BOREHOLE; FLOWMETER; HEAD (PRESSURE); HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY;

AQUIFER CHARACTERIZATION; BOREHOLE; FLOWMETER; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; HYDRAULIC HEAD;

EID: 0142022668     PISSN: 00221694     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00204-X     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (25)

1. Arnold, K.B., 1997. Calibration of an electromagnetic borehole flowmeter in an artificial well without a packer. Masters thesis, Clemson University.
2. Bear, J., 1972. Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media, Elsevier, New York, 764 pp.
3. Boman, G.K., Molz, F.J., Boone, K.D., 1997. Borehole flowmeter application in fluvial sediments: methodology, results, and assessment. Ground Water 35 (3), 443-450.
4. Cole, K., Zlotnik, V., 1994. Modification of Dagan's numerical method for slug and packer test interpretation. In: Peters, A., et al. (Eds.), Computational Methods in Water Resources X, vol. 1. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 719-726.
5. Dinwiddie, L.C., Foley, N.A., Molz, F.J., 1999. In-well hydraulics of the electromagnetic borehole flowmeter. Ground Water 37 (2), 305-315.
6. Foley, N.A., 1997. Pressure distribution around an electromagnetic borehole flowmeter in an artificial well. Masters thesis, Clemson University.
7. Fox, R.W., McDonald, A.T., 1992. Introduction to Fluid Mechanics, Wiley, New York, 829 pp.
8. Hamming, R.W., 1962. Numerical Methods for Scientists and Engineers, McGraw-Hill, New York.
9. Hess, A.E., 1986. Identifying hydraulic conductive fractures with a slow-velocity borehole flowmeter. Can. Geotech. J. 23, 69-78.
10. Hufschmied, P., 1986. Estimation of three-dimensional statistically anisotropic hydraulic conductivity field by means of single well pumping test combined with flowmeter measurements. Hydrogeologie 2, 163-174.
11. Javandel, I., Witherspoon, P.A., 1969. A method of analyzing transient fluid flow in multilayered aquifers. Water Resour. Res. 5, 856-869.
12. Molz, F.J., Young, S.C., 1993. Development and application of borehole flowmeters for environmental assessment. Log Anal. 3, 13-23.Jan.-Feb..
13. Molz, F.J., Morin, R.H., Hess, A.E., Melville, J.G., Güven, O., 1989. The impeller meter for measuring aquifer permeability variations: evaluations and comparisons with other tests. Water Resour. Res. 25 (7), 1677-1686.
14. Paillet, F.L., Hess, A.E., Cheng, C.H., Hardin, E.L., 1987. Characterization of fracture permeability with high-resolution vertical flow measurements during borehole pumping. Ground Water 25 (1), 28-40.
15. Rehfeldt, K.R., Hufschmied, P., Gelhar, L.W., Schaefer, M.E., 1989. The borehole flowmeter technique for measuring hydraulic conductivity variability. Report No. EN 6511, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.
16. Ruud, N.C., Kabala, Z.J., 1997. Response of a partially penetrating well in a heterogeneous aquifer: integrated well-face flux vs. uniform well-face flux boundary conditions. J. Hydrol. 194, 76-94.
17. Ruud, N.C., Kabala, Z.J., Molz, F.J., 1999. Evaluation of flowmeter-head loss effects in the flowmeter test. J. Hydrol. 224, 55-63.
18. Young, S.C., 1995. Characterization of high-K pathways by borehole flowmeter and tracer tests. Ground Water 33 (2), 311-318.
19. Young, S.C., 1998. Impacts of positive skin effects on borehole flowmeter tests in a heterogeneous granular aquifer. Ground Water 36(1), 67-75.
20. Young, B.C., Pearson, H.S., 1995. The electromagnetic borehole flowmeter: description and application. Ground Water Monitor. Rev. 15 (4), 138-147.
21. Zlotnik, V., Ledder, G., 1994. Effect of boundary conditions on dipole flow. In: Peters, A., et al. (Eds.), Computational Methods in Water Resources X, vol. 2. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 907-914.
22. Zlotnik, V., Ledder, G., 1996. Theory of dipole flow in uniform anisotropic aquifers. Water Resour. Res. 32 (3), 1119-1128.
23. Zlotnik, V.A., McGuire, V.L., 1998. Multi-level slug tests in highly permeable formations. 2. Hydraulic conductivity identification, method verification, and field applications. J. Hydrol. 204, 283-296.
24. Zlotnik, V.A., Zurbuchen, B.R., 2003. Field study of hydraulic conductivity in a heterogeneous aquifer: comparison of single-borehole measurements using different instruments. Water Resour. Res., 39 (4), 1101, doi: 10.1029/2002WR001415.
25. Zurbuchen, B.R., Zlotnik, V.A., Butler, J.J. Jr., 2002. Dynamic interpretation of slug tests in highly permeable aquifers. Water Resour. Res. 38 (3), doi: 10.1029/2000WR000197.