Incorporation of conceptual and parametric uncertainty into radionuclide flux estimates from a fractured granite rock mass

Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment

Volumn 24, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 899-915

  Reeves, Donald M ^a   Pohlmann, Karl F ^b   Pohll, Greg M ^a   Ye, Ming ^c   Chapman, Jenny B ^b  

^a DESERT RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b DESERT RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Alternative model; Contaminant transport; Numerical modeling; Parametric uncertainty; Radionuclides; Rock fractures

Indexed keywords

CALIBRATION TARGETS; CONCEPTUAL MODEL; CONSTANT HEAD; CONTINUUM FLOW; DISCRETE FRACTURE NETWORK; EXPECTED VALUES; FLOW AND TRANSPORT; FLOW MODEL; FLUID FLOW; FLUID FLUXES; FRACTURE DATA; FRACTURE DENSITY; FRACTURE ZONE; GRANITE ROCK; HYDRAULIC GRADIENTS; HYDROSTRATIGRAPHY; INTERCONNECTED NETWORK; MASS EXCHANGE; MASS FLUX; MATRIX; MODEL CONTAMINANT; MONTE CARLO TECHNIQUES; NEVADA TEST SITE; NUCLEAR TESTS; NUMERICAL FLOW; NUMERICAL MODELING; NUMERICAL MODELING APPROACH; PARAMETRIC UNCERTAINTIES; PARTICLE BREAKTHROUGH; PARTICLE METHODS; PARTICLE TRAJECTORIES; RADIONUCLIDE TRANSPORT; RANDOM FRACTURE; RANDOM WALK; RECHARGE PROCESS; ROCK FRACTURES; SCALE MODELS; SITE-SPECIFIC; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS; CALIBRATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FLOW PATTERNS; FLUIDS; FRACTURE; GRANITE; HEAT FLUX; LEAKAGE (FLUID); MONTE CARLO METHODS; RADIOISOTOPES; ROCKS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

BOUNDARY CONDITION; BREAKTHROUGH CURVE; CALIBRATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; FLOW FIELD; FLOW MODELING; FLOW PATTERN; FLUX MEASUREMENT; FRACTURE NETWORK; FRACTURE ZONE; GRANITE; HYDRAULIC FRACTURE; HYDROGEOLOGY; MATRIX; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL MODEL; PARAMETERIZATION; POLLUTANT TRANSPORT; RADIONUCLIDE; RECHARGE; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; VARIANCE ANALYSIS;

NEVADA; NEVADA TEST SITE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77954427651     PISSN: 14363240     EISSN: 14363259     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00477-010-0385-0     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Aban IB, Meerschaert MM, Panorska AK (2006) Parameter estimation methods for the truncated Pareto distribution. J Amer Stat Assoc 101: 270-277.
2. Akaike H (1974) A new look at statistical mdoel identification. IEEE Trans Automat Contr AC-19: 716-722.
3. Andersson J, Dershowitz B, Hermanson J, Meier P, Tullborg E-L, Winberg A (2002) Final report of the TRUE block scale project. 1. Characterization and model development, TR-02-13. Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co. (SKB), Stockholm, Sweden.
4. Ballou L (1979) Field permeability measurements, Waste Isolation Projects: FY 1978, UCRL-50050-78. Lawerence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California.
5. Bandis SC, Makurat A, Vik G (1985) Predicted and measured hydraulic conductivity of rock joints. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on fundamentals of rock joints, Björdkliden, Norway, September 15-20.
6. Bechtel Nevada (2006) A hydrostratigraphic model and alternatives for the groundwater flow and contaminant transport model of Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat-Climax Mine, Lincoln and Nye Counties, Nevada, DOE/NV/11718-1119.
7. Belcher WR (ed) (2004) Death Valley regional ground-water flow system, Nevada and California-hydrgeologic framework and transient ground-water flow model. U. S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5205.
8. Belcher WR, D'Agnese FA, O'Brien GM (2004) Introduction, Chapter A. In: Belcher WR (ed) Death Valley regional ground-water flow system, Nevada and California-hydrgeologic framework and transient ground-water flow model. U. S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5205.
9. Beven KJ, Binley AM (1992) The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol Process 6: 279-298. doi: 10. 1002/hyp. 3360060305.
10. Beven KJ, Freer J (2001) Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modeling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology. Hydrol. Process 6: 279-298.
11. Botros F, Hassan AE, Reeves DM, Pohll G (2008) On mapping fracture networks onto continuum. Water Resour Res 44: WO8435. doi: 10. 1029/2007WR006092.
12. Bowen S, Finnegan DL, Thompson JL, Miller CM, Baca PL, Olivaas LF, Goffrion CG, Smith DK, Goishi W, Esser BK, Meadows JW, Namboodiri N, Wild JF (2001) Nevada Test Site radionuclide inventory 1951-1992, LA-13859-MS. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico.
13. Cook AM, Myer LR, Cook NGW, Doyle FM (1990) The effect of toruosity on flow through a natural fracture, Rock mecdhanics contributions and challenges. In: Hustrulid WA, Johnson GA (eds) Proceedings of the 31st U. S. symposium on rock mechanics. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam.
14. de Dreuzy J-R, Davy P, Bour O (2001) Hydraulic properties of two-dimensional random fracture networks follwoing a power law length distribution. 1. Effective connectivity. Water Resour Res 37(8)2065-2078.
15. Dershowitz WJ, Hermanson S, Follin S, Mauldon M (2000) Fracture intensity measures in 1-D, 2-D, and 3-D at Äspö, Sweden. In: Proceedings of the fourth North American rock mechanics symposium, Pacific Rocks 2000, vol 4, Seattle, Washington, pp 849-853.
16. Doherty J (2000) PEST-model-independent parameter estimation-user's manual, 4th edn. Watermark Numerical Computing.
17. Faure G (1977) Principles of isotope geology. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
18. Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (1996, as amended) Agreed to by the State of Nevada, the U. S. Department of Energy, and the U. S. Department of Defense.
19. Fisher R (1953) Dispersion on a sphere. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A 217: 295-305.
20. Franks SW, Beven KJ, Gash JHC (1999) Multi-objective conditioning of a simple SVAT model. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 4: 477-789.
21. Guimerà J, Carrera J (2000) A comparison of hydrualic and transport parameters measured in low-permeability fractured media. J Contam Hydrol 41: 261-281.
22. Gustafson G, Fransson A (2005) The use of the Pareto distribution for fracture transmissivity assessment. Hydrogeol J. doi: 10. 1007/s10040-005-0440-y.
23. Harbaugh AW, Banta ER, Hill MC, McDonald MG (2000) MODFLOW-2000, the U. S. Geological Survey Modular Ground-Water Model-user guide to modularization concepts and the ground-water flow process. U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-92.
24. Hassan AE, Mohamed MM (2003) On using particle tracking methods to simulate transport in single-continuum and dual continua porous media. J Hydrol 275: 242-260.
25. Hendricks Franssen HJWM, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2002) 3D inverse modelling of groundwater flow at a fractured site using a stochastic continuum model with multiple statistical populations. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 16: 155-174. doi: 10. 1007/s00477-002-0091-7.
26. Hurvich CM, Tsai C-L (1989) Regression and time series model selection in small sample, Biometrtika 76: 99-104.
27. Isherwood D, Harrar J, Raber E (1982) Characterization of Climax granite ground water, UCRL-53309. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA.
28. Kashyap RL (1982) Optimal choice of AR and MA parts in autoregressive moving models. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 4: 99-104.
29. Kemeny J, Post R (2003) Estimating three-dimensional rock discontinuity orientation from digitial images of fracture traces. Comput Geosci 29: 65-77.
30. LaBolle E, Fogg G, Thompson AFB (1996) Random-walk simulation of solute transport in heterogeneous porous media: local mass-conservation and implementation methods. Water Resour Res 32: 583-593.
31. LaBolle E, Quastel J, Fogg G, Gravner J (2000) Diffusion processes in composite porous media with their integration by numerical walks: generalizated stochastic differential equations with discontinuous coefficients. Water Resour Res 36: 651-662.
32. Liu HH, Bodvarsson GS, Pan L (2000) Determination of particle transfer in random walk methods for fractured porous media. Water Resour Res 36: 707-713.
33. Mardia KV, Jupp PE (2000) Directional statistics. Wiley, New York.
34. Munier R (2004) Statistical analysis of fracture data adopted for modeling discrete fracture networks-version 2. Rep. R 04-66. Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management, Co. (SKB). Stockholm, Sweden.
35. Murray WA (1980) Permeability testing of fractures in Climax stock granite, NTS. In: Repository sealilng field testing workshop, Santa Fe, New Mexico, September 18-19.
36. Murray WA (1981) Geohydrology of the Climax stock granite and surrounding rock formations, NTS, UCRL-53138. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA.
37. Neuman SP (2003) Maximum likelihood Bayesian averaging of uncertain model predictions. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 17: 291-305. doi: 10. 1007/s00477-003-0151-7.
38. Paillet FL (1988) Flow modeling and peremability estimation using borehole flow logs in heterogeneous fractured formations. Water Resour Res 34(5): 997-1010.
39. Pohlmann K, Pohll G, Chapman J, Hassan AE, Carroll R, Shirley C (2004) Modeling to support groundwater contaminant boundaries for the Shoal underground nuclear test. Desert Research Institute, Division of Hydrologic Sciences Publication No. 45184.
40. Pohlmann K, Ye M, Reeves D, Zavarin M, Decker D, Chapman J (2007) Modeling of groundwater flow and radionuclide transport at the Climax mine sub-CAU, Nevada Test Site, DOE/NV/26383-06. Nevada Site Office, National Nuclear Security Administration, U. S. Department of Energy, Las Vegas, NV.
41. Reeves DM, Benson DA, Meerschaert MM (2008a) Transport of conservative solutes in simulated fracture networks. 1. Synthethic data generation. Water Resour Res 44: W05401. doi: 10. 1029/2007WR006069.
42. Reeves DM, Benson DA, Meerschaert MM, Scheffler H-P (2008b) Transport of conservative solutes in simulated fracture networks. 2. Ensemble solute transport and the correspondence to operator-stable limit distributions. Water Resour Res 44: W05410. doi: 10. 1029/2008WR006858.
43. Reeves DM, Benson DA, Meerschaert MM (2008c) Influence of fracture statistics on advective transport and implications for geologic repositories. Water Resour Res 44: W08405. doi: 10. 1029/2007WR006179.
44. Renshaw CE (1999) Connectivity of joint networks with power law length distributions. Water Resour Res 35(9): 2661-2670.
45. Russell CE, Minor T (2002) Reconnaissance estimates of recharge based on an elevation-dependent cloride mass-balance approach, DOE/NV11508-37. Nevada Site Office, National Nuclear Security Administration, U. S. Department of Energy, Las Vegas, NV.
46. Schwarz G (1978) Estimating the dimension of a model. Annu Stat 6(2): 461-464.
47. Stigsson M, Outters N, Hermanson J (2001) Äspö Hard Rock Laboratory, Prototype repository hydraulic DFN model no. 2, IPR-01-39. Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co. (SKB), Stockholm, Sweden.
48. U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) (2000a) United States Nuclear Tests, July 1945 through September 1992, DOE/NV-209 (Rev. 15). Nevada Operations Office.
49. U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) (2000b) Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. DOE/NV-659. Nevada Operations Office.
50. Vrugt JA, ter Braak CJF, Gupta HV, Robinson BA (2008) Equifinality of formal (DREAM) and informal (GLUE) Bayesian approaches in hydrologic modeling. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. doi: 10. 1007/s00477-008-0274-y.
51. Wood ATA (1994) Simulation of the Von Mises distribution. Commun Stat-Sim 23(1): 157-164.
52. Ye M, Pohlmann KF, Chapman JB (2008) Expert elicitation of recharge model probabilities for the Death Valley regional flow system. J Hydrol 354: 102-115. doi: 10. 1016/j. jhydrol. 2008. 03. 001.
53. Ye M, Pohlmann KF, Chapman JB, Pohll GM, Reeves DM (2010) A model-averaging method for assessing groundwater conceptual model uncertainty. Ground Water. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1745-6584. 2009. 00633. x.
54. Yow JL (1984) Geologic structure mapping database, Spend Fuel Test-Climax, Nevada Test Site, DE85006267.