2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2013.03.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing the validity of a lower-dimensional representation of fractures for numerical and analytical investigations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We refer to Berre et al (2018) for a comprehensive review. Although the low-dimensional representation is widely used, these models may be inaccurate (Grillo et al 2012;Heße et al 2013). Some validity criteria can be found in Stichel (2014).…”
Section: Fracturesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We refer to Berre et al (2018) for a comprehensive review. Although the low-dimensional representation is widely used, these models may be inaccurate (Grillo et al 2012;Heße et al 2013). Some validity criteria can be found in Stichel (2014).…”
Section: Fracturesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is noted that a smaller linear system is solved locally, as in (17), for every cluster as compared to the hybrid-grid method because of lower-dimensional fracture cells. Matrix-matrix fluxes and matrix-fracture fluxes in (19) and fracture-fracture fluxes in (33) can be determined separately in parallel and assembled into the coupled linear system (39). We note that for triangular elements the CVD-MPFA scheme is symmetric positive definite (SPD) for quadrature q = 2/3 [30] and thus for the equi-dimensional(2D) case where the fracture is gridded by triangular cells the linear system is SPD.…”
Section: Global Linear Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additional assumptions made by this model include: 1) Aquifers exhibit horizontal flow; 2) Capillary pressure is negligible resulting in a sharp fluid interface; 3) CO 2 plume thickness at any given location is assumed to be the maximum plume thickness from all sources in the aquifer; 4) Pressure response from sources and sinks are superimposed in each aquifer; and 5) the injectivity of the formation remains constant. Several of these processes are important [9,11,13,15,17,22,26] and should be included [6,16,23,39] when model accuracy is more important that efficiency (e.g. during final project design).…”
Section: The Estimating Leakage Semi-analytically (Elsa) Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%