Accounting for spatially variable resolution in electrical resistivity tomography through field-scale rock-physics relations

Geophysics

Volumn 71, Issue 4, 2006, Pages

  Singha, Kamini ^a   Moysey, Stephen ^b  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CLEMSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Inverse problems; Rocks; Terrestrial electricity

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY; INVERSE PROBLEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; ROCKS; TOMOGRAPHY; TRANSPORT PROPERTIES;

ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY TOMOGRAPHY; ROCK-PHYSICS RELATIONSHIPS; SALINE TRACER; SOLUTE CONCENTRATIONS; TERRESTRIAL ELECTRICITY;

GEOPHYSICS;

ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY; INVERSE PROBLEM; ROCK; SPATIAL RESOLUTION; TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 33748076475     PISSN: 00168033     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1190/1.2209753     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Archie, G. E., 1942, The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir characteristics: Transactions of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers, 146, 54-62. tae TAIMAF 0096-4778
2. Day-Lewis, F. D., K. Singha, and A. M. Binley, 2005, Applying petrophysical models to radar traveltime and electrical-resistivity tomograms: Resolution-dependent limitations: Journal of Geophysical Research, 110, B08206. http://dx.doi.org/08210.01029/02004JB003569. jgr JGREA2 0148-0227 10.1029/2004JB003569
3. Deutsch, C. V., and A. G. Journel, 1992, GSLIB: Geostatistical Software Library and User's Guide: Oxford University Press, Inc.
4. Harbaugh, A. W., and M. G. McDonald, 1996, User's documentation for MODFLOW-96, an update to the U. S. Geological Survey Modular Finite-Difference Ground-Water Flow Model.
5. Hess, K. M., S. H. Wolf, and M. A. Celia, 1992, Large-scale natural gradient tracer test in sand and gravel, Cape Cod, Massachusetts, 3, Hydraulic conductivity variability and calculated macrodispersivities: Water Resources Research, 28, 2011-2027. wre WRERAQ 0043-1397 10.1029/ 92WR00668
6. Keller, G. V., and F. C. Frischknecht, 1966, Electrical methods in geophysical prospecting: Pergamon Press, Inc.
7. Kemna, A., J. Vanderborght, B. Kulessa, and H. Vereekenght, 2002, Imaging and characterisation of subsurface solute transport using electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) and equivalent transport models: Journal of Hydrology, 267, 125-146.
8. Moysey, S., K. Singha, and R. Knight, 2005, A framework for inferring field-scale rock physics relationships through numerical simulation: Geophysical Research Letters, 32, L08304. http://dx.doi.org/08310.01029/ 02004GL022152. gpr GPRLAJ 0094-8276 10.1029/2004GL022152
9. Rea, J., and R. Knight, 1998, Geostatistical analysis of ground-penetrating radar data: A means of describing spatial variation in the subsurface: Water Resource Research, 34, 329-339. wre WRERAQ 0043-1397 10.1029/97WR03070
10. Topp, G. C., J. L. Davis, and A. P. Annan, 1980, Electromagnetic determination of soil water content: Measurements in coaxial transmission lines: Water Resource Research, 16, 574-582. wre WRERAQ 0043-1397
11. Vanderborght, J., A. Kemna, H. Hardelauf, and H. Vereecken, 2005, Potential of electrical resistivity tomography to infer aquifer transport characteristics from tracer studies: A synthetic case study: Water Resource Research, 41, W06013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/ 2004WR003774.
12. Zheng, C., and P. P. Wang, 1999, MT3DMS: A modular three-dimensional multispecies model for simulation of advection, dispersion and chemical reactions of contaminants in groundwater systems; documentation and user's guide: U. S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.