Investigation of hydraulic parameters in unconsolidated sediments: A comparison of methods;Bestimmung von hydraulischen Parametern in Lockergesteinen: Ein Vergleich unterschiedlicher Feldmethoden

Grundwasser

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 57-67

  Brauchler, Ralf ^a   Hu, Rui ^b   Hu, Linwei ^b   Ptak, Thomas ^b  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Direct Push; Hydraulic tomography; Multi level slug tests; Short term pumping tests

Indexed keywords

AQUIFER; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIFFUSION; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; MEASUREMENT METHOD; PUMPING; RECONSTRUCTION; SEDIMENT ANALYSIS; TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 84861763771     PISSN: 1430483X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00767-011-0185-6     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Bohling, G. C., Zhan, X., Butler, J. J. Jr., Zheng, L.: Steady shape analysis of tomographic pumping tests for characterization of aquifer heterogeneous. Water Resour. Res. 38(12), 1324 (2002).
2. Bohling, G. C., Butler, J. J. Jr., Zhan, X., Knoll, M. D.: A field assessment of the value of steady shape hydraulic tomography for characterization of aquifer heterogeneities. Water Resour. Res. 43(5), W05430 (2007).
3. Boman, G. K., Molz, F. J., Boonec, K. D.: Borehole flowmeter application in fluvial sediments: Methodology, results, and assessment. Ground Water 35(3), 443-450 (1997).
4. Brauchler, R., Liedl, R., Dietrich, P.: A travel time based hydraulic tomographic approach. Water Resour. Res. 39(12), 1370 (2003).
5. Brauchler, R., Cheng, J.-T., Dietrich, P., Everett, M., Johnson, B., Liedl, R., Sauter, M.: An inversion strategy for hydraulic tomography: Coupling travel time and amplitude inversion. J. Hydrol. 345(3-4), 184-198 (2007).
6. Brauchler, R., Hu, R., Vogt, T., Al-Halbouni, D., Heinrichs, T., Ptak, T., Sauter, M.: Cross-well slug interference tests: An effective characterization method for resolving aquifer heterogeneity. J. Hydrol. 384(1-2), 33-45 (2010).
7. Brauchler, R., Hu, R., Dietrich, P., Sauter, M.: A field assessment of high-resolution aquifer characterization based on hydraulic travel time and hydraulic attenuation tomography. Water Resour. Res. 47, W03503 (2011).
8. Butler, J. J. Jr.: The Design, Performance, and Analysis of Slug Tests. Lewis Pub., 252 S. (1998).
9. Butler, J. J. Jr., Bohling, G. C., Hyder, Z., McElwee, C. D.: The use of slug tests to describe vertical variations in hydraulic conductivity. J. Hydrol. 156(1-4), 137-162 (1994).
10. Butler, J. J. Jr., Garnett, E. J., Healey, J. M.: Analysis of slug tests in formations of high hydraulic conductivity. Ground Water 41(5), 620-630 (2003).
11. Butler, J. J. Jr., Dietrich, P., Wittig, V., Christy, T.: Characterizing hydraulic conductivity with the Direct-Push permeameter. Ground Water 45(4), 409-419 (2007).
12. Cheng, J., Brauchler, R., Everett, M. E.: Comparison of early and late travel times of pressure pulses induced by multilevel slug tests. Eng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech. 3(4), 529-541 (2009).
13. Christy, C. D., Christy, T. M., Wittig, V.: A percussion probing tool for the direct sensing of soil conductivity. In: Proceedings of the 8th National Outdoor Action Conference, Westerville, Ohio. National Ground Water Association, S. 381-394 (1994).
14. Cooper, H. H., Jacob, C. E.: A generalized graphical method for evaluation formation constants and summarizing well-field history. Trans. - Am. Geophys. Union 27(4), 526-534 (1946).
15. Danielson, R. E., Sutherland, P. L.: Porosity. In: Klute, A. (Hrsg.) Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods; Agronomy Monograph, Bd. 9, American Soc. of Agronomy, S. 443-461 (1986).
16. Datta-Gupta, A., Kulkarni, K. N., Yoon, S., Vasco, D. W.: Streamlines ray tracing and production tomography: Generalization to compressible flow. Pet. Geosci. 7, 75-86 (2001).
17. Diem, S., Vogt, T., Hoehn, E.: Räumliche Charakterisierung der hydraulischen Leitfähigkeit in alluvialen Schotter-Grundwasserleitern: Ein Methodenvergleich. Grundwasser 15(4), 241-251 (2010).
18. Dietrich, P., Leven, C.: Direct push technologies. In: Kirsch, R. (Hrsg.) Groundwater Geophysics, S. 321-340. Springer, Berlin (2006).
19. Dietrich, P., Butler, J. J. Jr., Faiß, K.: A rapid method for hydraulic profiling in unconsolidated formations. Ground Water 46(2), 323-328 (2008).
20. Einarson, M. D., Cherry, J. A.: A new multilevel groundwater monitoring system using multichannel tubing. Ground Water Monit. Remediat. 22(4), 52-65 (2002).
21. Fetter, W.: Applied Hydrology. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 691 S. (1994).
22. Gee, G. W., Bauder, J. W.: Particle-size analysis. In: Klute, A. (Hrsg.) Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Agronomy Monograph, Bd. 9, American Soc. of Agronomy, S. 383-411 (1986).
23. Gilbert, P.: Iterative methods for three-dimensional reconstruction of an object from projections. J. Theor. Biol. 36(1), 105-117 (1972).
24. Gottlieb, J., Dietrich, P.: Identification of the permeability distribution in soil by hydraulic tomography. Inverse Probl. 11(2), 353-360 (1995).
25. Hantush, M. S.: Hydraulic of wells. In: Chow, V. T. (Hrsg.) Advances in Hydroscience. Academic Press, New York, S. 281-442 (1964).
26. He, Z., Datta-Gupta, A., Vasco, D. W.: Rapid inverse modeling of pressure interference tests using trajectory-based traveltime and amplitude sensitivities. Water Resour. Res. 42, W03419 (2006).
27. Hvorslev, M. J.: Time lag and soil permeability. In: Ground water observations, U. S. Army Corps of Eng. Waterways Exper. Sta. Bull 36 (1951).
28. Hu, R.: Hydraulic tomography: a new approach coupling hydraulic travel time, attenuation and steady shape inversions for high-spatial resolution aquifer characterization. Hochschulschrift: Göttingen, Univ., Diss., 116 S. (2011).
29. Hu, R., Brauchler, R., Herold, M., Bayer, P.: Hydraulic tomography analogue study: Coupling travel time and steady shape inversion. J. Hydrol. 409(1-2), 350-362 (2011). doi: 10. 1016/j. jhydrol. 2011. 08. 031.
30. Illman, W. A., Liu, X., Craig, A.: Steady-state hydraulic tomography in a laboratory aquifer with deterministic heterogeneity: Multi-method and multiscale validation of hydraulic conductivity tomograms. J. Hydrol. 341(3-4), 222-234 (2007).
31. Illman, W. A., Liu, X., Takeuchi, S., Yeh, T. J., Ando, K., Saegusa, H.: Hydraulic tomography in fractured granite: Mizunami Underground Research site, Japan. Water Resour. Res. 45, W01406 (2009).
32. Illman, W. A., Zhu, J., Craig, A. J., Yin, D.: Comparison of aquifer characterization approaches through steady state groundwater model validation: A controlled laboratory sandbox study. Water Resour. Res. 46, W04502 (2010).
33. Kabala, Z. J.: The dipole flow test: A new single borehole test for aquifer characterization. Water Resour. Res. 29(1), 99-107 (1993).
34. Klute, A., Dirksen, C.: Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity: Laboratory methods. In: Klute, A. (Hrsg.) Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Physical Mineralogical Methods. Agronomy Monograph, Bd. 9, American Soc. of Agronomy, S. 687-734 (1986).
35. Kulkarni, K. N., Datta-Gupta, A., Vasco, D. W.: A streamline approach to integrating transient pressure data into high resolution reservoir models. In: SPE European Petroleum Conference, 24-25 October 2000, Paris, France. SPE Journal, 6(3) (2001).
36. Lessoff, S. C., Schneidewind, U., Leven, C., Blum, P., Dietrich, P., Dagan, G.: Spatial characterization of the hydraulic conductivity using direct-push injection logging. Water Resour. Res. 46, W12502 (2010).
37. Leven, C., Dietrich, P.: What information can we get from pumping tests? Comparing pumping test configurations using sensitivity coefficients. J. Hydrol. 319(1-4), 199-215 (2006).
38. Li, W., Nowak, W., Cirpka, O. A.: Geostatistical inverse modeling of transient pumping tests using temporal moments of drawdown. Water Resour. Res. 41(8), W08403 (2005).
39. Li, W., Englert, A., Cirpka, O. A., Vanderborght, J., Vereecken, H.: 2-D characterization of hydraulic heterogeneity by multiple pumping tests. Water Resour. Res. 43(4), W04433 (2007).
40. Liu, S., Yeh, T.-C. J., Gardiner, R.: Effectiveness of tomography: Sandbox experiments. Water Resour. Res. 38(4), 000 (2002).
41. Liu, X., Illman, W. A., Craig, A. J., Zhu, J., Yeh, T.-C. J.: Laboratory sandbox validation of transient hydraulic tomography. Water Resour. Res. 43, W05404 (2007).
42. Liu, G., Butler, J. J. Jr., Bohling, G. C., Reboulet, E., Knobbe, S., Hyndman, D. W.: A new method for high-resolution characterization of hydraulic conductivity. Water Resour. Res. 45, W08202 (2009).
43. McDermott, C., Sauter, M., Liedl, R.: New experimental techniques for pneumatic tomographical determination of the flow and transport parameters of highly fractured porous rock samples. J. Hydrol. 278, 51-63 (2003).
44. Melville, J. G., Molz, F. J., Guven, O., Widdowson, M. A.: Multilevel slug tests with comparison to tracer data. Ground Water 29(6), 897-907 (1991).
45. Molz, F. J., Morin, R. H., Hess, A. E., Melville, J. G., Guven, O.: The impeller meter for measuring aquifer permeability variations: Evaluation and comparison with other tests. Water Resour. Res. 25(7), 1677-1683 (1989).
46. Molz, F. J., Young, S. C.: Development and application of borehole flowmeters for environmental assessment. Log Anal. 34(1), 13-23 (1993).
47. Peursem, D. V., Zlotnik, V. A., Ledder, G.: Groundwater flow near vertical recirculatory wells: Effect of skin on flow geometry and travel times with implications for aquifer remediation. J. Hydrol. 222(1-4), 109-122 (1999).
48. Peterson, J. E., Paulsson, B. N. P., McEvilly, T. V.: Application of algebraic reconstruction techniques to crosshole seismic data. Geophysics 50, 1566-1580 (1985).
49. Rovey, C. W. II., Niemann, W. L.: Discussion of "Relationship between pumping-test and slug-test parameters: Scale effects or artifact?" by Butler, J. J. Jr. and Healy, J. M. in Ground Water 36(2), 305-313. Ground Water 36(6), 866-867 (1998).
50. Schulmeister, M. K., Butler, J. J. Jr., Healey, J. M., Zheng, L., Wysocki, D. A., McCall, W.: Direct-push electrical conductivity logging for high-resolution hydrostratigraphic characterization. Ground Water Monit. Remediat. 23(3), 52-62 (2003).
51. Straface, S., Yeh, T.-C. J., Zhu, J., Troisi, S., Lee, C. H.: Sequential aquifer tests at a well field. Montalto Uffugo Scalo, Italy. Water Resour. Res. 43, W07432 (2007).
52. Streltsova, T.: Well Testing in Heterogeneous Formations. Exxon Monographs, 413. Wiley, New York (1989).
53. Sudicky, E. A., Huyakorn, P. S.: Contaminant migration in imperfect known heterogeneous groundwater systems. US Natl. Rept. Int. Union Geol. Geophys. 1987-1990. Rev. Geophys. 29, 240-253 (1991).
54. Teutsch, G., Klingbeil, R., Kleineidam, R.: Numerical modeling of reactive transport using aquifer analogue data. In: GQ'98: Groundwater Quality Conference, Tübingen. IAHS Publ. 250, S. 381-390 (1998).
55. Vasco, D. W., Karasaki, K.: Interpretation and inversion of low-frequency head observations. Water Resour. Res. 42, W05408 (2006).
56. Vasco, D. W., Keers, H., Karasaki, K.: Estimation of reservoir properties using transient pressure data: An asymptotic approach. Water Resour. Res. 36(12), 3447-3465 (2000).
57. Vesselinov, V. V., Neumann, S. P., Illmann, W. A.: Three-dimensional numerical inversion of pneumatic cross-hole tests in unsaturated fractured tuff. 1. Methodology. Water Resour. Res. 37(12), 3001-3017 (2001a).
58. Vesselinov, V. V., Neumann, S. P., Illmann, W. A.: Three-dimensional numerical inversion of pneumatic cross-hole tests in unsaturated fractured tuff. 2. Equivalent parameters, high-resolution stochastic imaging and scale effects. Water Resour. Res. 37(12), 3019-3041 (2001b).
59. Virieux, J., Flores-Luna, C., Gibert, D.: Asymptotic theory for diffusive electromagnetic imaging. Geophys. J. Int. 119(3), 857-868 (1994).
60. Wu, C.-M., Yeh, T.-C. J., Zhu, J., Lee, T. H., Hsu, N.-S., Chen, C.-H., Sancho, A. F.: Traditional analysis of aquifer tests: Comparing apples to oranges? Water Resour. Res. 41, W09402 (2005).
61. Yeh, T.-C. J., Liu, S.: Hydraulic tomography: Development of a new aquifer test method. Water Resour. Res. 36(8), 2095-2105 (2000).
62. Young, S. C., Pearson, H. S.: The electromagnetic borehole flowmeter: Description and application. Ground Water Monit. Remediat. 15(2), 138-146 (1995).
63. Zheng, C., Gorelick, S. M.: Analysis of solute transport in flow fields influenced by preferential flowpaths at the decimeter scale. Ground Water 41(2), 142-155 (2003).
64. Zlotnik, V. A., Ledder, G.: Theory of dipole flow in uniform anisotropic aquifers. Water Resour. Res. 32(4), 1119-1128 (1996).
65. Zlotnik, V. A., Zurbuchen, B. R.: Dipole probe: Design and field applications of a single-borehole device for measurements of vertical variations of hydraulic conductivity. Ground Water 36(6), 884-893 (1998).
66. Zlotnik, V., Zurbuchen, B., Ptak, T.: The steady-state dipole-flow test for characterization of hydraulic conductivity statistics in a highly permeable aquifer: Horkheimer Insel site, Germany. Groundwater 39(4), 504-516 (2001).
67. Zhu, J., Yeh, T.-C. J.: Characterization of aquifer heterogeneity using transient hydraulic tomography. Water Resour. Res. 41, W07028 (2005).