Effects of uncertainty of lithofacies, conductivity and porosity distributions on stochastic interpretations of a field scale tracer test

Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment

Volumn 24, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 955-970

  Riva, Monica ^a   Guadagnini, Laura ^a   Guadagnini, Alberto ^a  

^a POLITECNICO DI MILANO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Grain size distribution; Heterogeneity; Monte Carlo modeling; Random composite media; Tracer tests

Indexed keywords

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION; HETEROGENEITY; MONTE CARLO MODELING; RANDOM COMPOSITES; TRACER TESTS;

ALGEBRA; AQUIFERS; GRAIN SIZE AND SHAPE; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; MODELS; MONTE CARLO METHODS; RADIOACTIVE TRACERS; SIZE DETERMINATION; SIZE DISTRIBUTION; SOLUTE TRANSPORT; STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

POROSITY;

AQUIFER; FLOW MODELING; GRAIN SIZE; HETEROGENEITY; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; LITHOFACIES; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL MODEL; POROSITY; SIZE DISTRIBUTION; SOLUTE TRANSPORT; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; TRACER; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

BADEN-WURTTEMBERG; GERMANY; TUBINGEN;

EID: 78249277431     PISSN: 14363240     EISSN: 14363259     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00477-010-0399-7     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Archie GE (1950) Introduction to petrophysics of reservoir rocks. Bull Am Assoc Petrol Geol 34(5): 943-961.
2. Beyer W (1964) Zur Bestimmung der Wasserdurchlässigkeit von Kiesen und Sanden aus der Kornverteilung. Wasserwirtschaft-Wassertechnik (WWT) 14: 165-168 Berlin (Verlag für Bauwesen).
3. Boman GK, Molz FJ, Boone KD (1997) Borehole flometer application in fluvial sediments: methodology, results and assessment. Groundwater 35(3): 443-450.
4. Carman PC (1937) Fluid flow through granular beds. Trans Inst Chem Eng 15: 150.
5. Carman PC (1956) Flow of gases through porous media. Butterworths Scientific Publications, London.
6. Carrier WD (2003) Goodbye, Hazen; Hello, Kozeny-Carman. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 129: 1054-1056.
7. Dagan G (2004) On application of stochastic modeling of groundwater flow and transport. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 18: 266-267. doi: 10. 1007/s04477-004-0191-7.
8. Deutsch CV, Journel AG (1998) GSLIB geostatistical software library and user's guide, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New York.
9. Fernàndez-Garcia D, Illangasekare TH, Rajaram H (2005) Differences in the scale dependence of dispersivity and retardation factors estimated from forced-gradient and uniform flow tracer tests in three-dimensional physically and chemically heterogeneous porous media. Water Resour Res 41(3). doi: 10. 1029/2004WR003523.
10. Freeze RA, Cherry JA (1979) Groundwater. Prentice Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
11. Gégo E, Johnson G, Hankins M (2001) An evaluation of methodologies for the generation of stochastic hydraulic conductivity fields in highly heterogeneous aquifers. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 15: 47-64.
12. Gómez-Hernández JJ, Journel A (1993) Joint simulation of multiGaussian random variables. Geostatistica Tróia '92, vol 1. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp 85-94.
13. Haggerty R, Fleming SW, Meigs LC, McKenna SA (2001) Tracer tests in fractured dolomite 2. Analysis of mass transfer in single-well injection-withdrawal tests. Water Resour Res 37(5): 1129-1142.
14. 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, 121 pp.
15. Hess KM, Wolf SH, Celia MA (1992) Large-scale natural gradient tracer test in sand and gravel, Cape Cod, Massachusetts 3. Hydraulic conductivity variability and calculated macrodispersivities. Water Resour Res 28(8): 2011-2027.
16. Hu BX, He C (2006) Using sequential self-calibration method to estimate a correlation length of a log-conductivity field conditioned upon a tracer test and limited measured data. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 21: 89-96.
17. Hu BX, Meerschaert MM, Barrash W, Hyndman DW, He C, Li X, Guo L (2009) Examining the influence of heterogeneous porosity fields on conservative solute transport. J Contam Hydrol doi: 10. 1016/j. jconhyd. 2009. 06. 001.
18. Huang C, Hu BX, Li X, Ye M (2008) Using data assimilation method to calibrate a heterogeneous conductivity field and improve solute transport prediction with an unknown contamination source. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. doi: 10. 1007/s00477-008-0289-4.
19. Hufschmied P (1986) Estimation of three-dimensional statistically anisotropic hydraulic conductivity field by means of single well pumping tests combined with flowmeter measurements. Hydrogeologie 2: 163-174.
20. Kasenow M (2002) Determination of hydraulic conductivity from grain size analysis. Water Resources Publications, LLC, Highlands Ranch, CO, pp 47-84.
21. Kozeny J (1927) Uber kapillare leitung des wassers im boden: Sitzungsber [On capillary flow of water in soil], vol 136. Sitz Ber Akad Wiss Wien, Vienna, pp 271-306.
22. LaBolle EM, Fogg GE, Tompson AFB (1996) Random-walk simulation of transport in heterogeneous porous media: local mass-conservation problem and implementation methods. Water Resour Res 32(3): 583-593.
23. Martac E, Ptak T (2003) Data sets for transport model calibration/validation, parameter upscaling studies and testing of stochastic transport models/theory. Report D16 of project "stochastic analysis of well-head protection and risk assessment-W-SAHaRA", EU contract EVK1-CT-1999-00041. Dipartimento Ingegneria Idraulica, Ambientale, Infrastrutture Viarie, Rilevamento, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy.
24. McQueen J (1967) Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. 5th Berkeley symposium on mathematics, statistics and probability, vol 1. pp 281-298.
25. Molz FJ, Morin RH, Hess AE, Melville JG, Güven O (1989) The impeller meter for measuring aquifer permeability variations: evaluations and comparison with other test. Water Resour Res 25: 1677-1683.
26. Morin RH (2006) Negative correlation between porosity and hydraulic conductivity in sand-and-gravel aquifers at Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA. J Hydrol 316: 43-52.
27. Neuman S (2004) Stochastic groundwater models in practice. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 18: 268-270. doi: 10. 1007/s00477-004-0192-6.
28. Neuman SP, Blattstein A, Riva M, Tartakovsky DM, Guadagnini A, Ptak T (2007) Type curve interpretation of late-time pumping test data in randomly heterogeneous aquifers. Water Resour Res 43: W10421. doi: 10. 1029/2007WR005871.
29. Odong J (2007) Evaluation of empirical formulae for determination of hydraulic conductivity based on grain-size analysis. Journal of American Science 3(3): 54-60.
30. Ptak T, Teutsch G (1994) A comparison of investigation methods for the prediction of flow and transport in highly heterogeneous formations. In: Dracos TH, Stauffer F (eds) Transport and reactive processes in aquifers. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 157-164.
31. Ptak T, Piepenbrink M, Martac E (2004) Tracer tests for the investigation of heterogeneous porous media and stochastic modelling of flow and transport--a review of some recent developments. J Hydrol 294: 122-163.
32. Rehfeldt KR, Hufschmied P, Gelhar LW, Shafer ME (1989) Measuring hydraulic conductivity with the borehole flowmeter. EPRI Top Rep EN-6511. Electr Power Res Inst, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
33. Riva M, Guadagnini L, Guadagnini A, Ptak T, Martac E (2006) Probabilistic study of well capture zones distribution at the Luswiesen field site. J Contam Hydrol 88: 92-118.
34. Riva M, Guadagnini A, Fernandez-Garcia D, Sanchez-Vila X, Ptak T (2008) Relative importance of geostatistical and transport models in describing heavily tailed breakthrough curves at the Lauswiesen site. J Contam Hydrol 101: 1-13.
35. Sack-Kühner B (1996) Einrichtung des Naturmeßfeldes "Lauswiesen Tübingen", Erkundung der hydraulischen Eigenschaften, Charakterisierung der Untergrundheterogenität und Vergleich der Ergebnisse unterschiedlicher Erkundungsverfahren. Diplomarbeit im Fachbereich Geowissenschaften der Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen, 96 Abb., 21 Tab., 147 S.
36. Salamon P, Fernàndez-Garcia D, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2006) A review and numerical assessment of the random walk particle tracking method. J Contam Hydrol 87(3-4): 277-305.
37. Salamon P, Fernàndez-Garcia D, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2007) Modeling tracer transport at the MADE site: the importance of heterogeneity. Water Resour Res 43: W08404. doi: 10. 1029/2006WR005522.
38. Sanchez-Vila X, Guadagnini A, Carrera J (2006) Representative hydraulic conductivities in saturated groundwater flow. Rev Geophys 44: RG3002. doi: 10. 1029/2005RG000169.
39. Stauffer TB, Manoranjan VS (1994) The use of grain-size analysis with limited field data to study hydraulic conductivity variability. Avation Space Environ Med 65(5): A125-A130.
40. Vuković M, Soro A (1992) Hydraulics and water wells: theory and application. Water Resources Publications, Highlands Ranch, CO, USA. 1143 Hydrogeology.
41. Wen XH, Gómez-Hernández JJ (1996) The constant displacement scheme for tracking particles in heterogeneous aquifers. Ground Water 34(1): 135-142.
42. Winter CL, Tartakovsky DM, Guadagnini A (2003) Moment differential equations for flow in highly heterogeneous porous media. Surv Geophys 24(1): 81-106.
43. Wolf SH, Celia MA, Hess KM (1991) Evaluation of hydraulic conductivities calculated from multiport-permeameter measurements. Ground Water 29(4): 516-525.