2016
DOI: 10.1002/2016wr018973
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Connectivity, permeability, and channeling in randomly distributed and kinematically defined discrete fracture network models

Abstract: A major use of DFN models for industrial applications is to evaluate permeability and flow structure in hardrock aquifers from geological observations of fracture networks. The relationship between the statistical fracture density distributions and permeability has been extensively studied, but there has been little interest in the spatial structure of DFN models, which is generally assumed to be spatially random (i.e., Poisson). In this paper, we compare the predictions of Poisson DFNs to new DFN models where… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
122
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 144 publications
(125 citation statements)
references
References 86 publications
2
122
0
Order By: Relevance
“… We did not discuss the application of percolation theory, CPA, and the EMA to characterization of fractures and fracture networks, and modeling of their flow and transport properties, as the problems need a review of their own. We do, however, point out that much progress has been made (see, for example, Darcel et al, ; de Dreuzy et al, ; Davy et al, , ; Ebigbo et al, ; Maillot et al, ; Pyrak‐Nolte & Nolte, ). Much of the progress has been reviewed by Meakin and Tartakovsky (), Adler and Thovert (), Sahimi (), Rutqvist and Tsang (), and Adler et al ().Meakin and Tartakovsky address complications to modeling flow and transport in porous media due to complex geometries, density contrasts of the fluids, and dynamic changes in contact angles.…”
Section: Possible Future Directions For Application Of Percolation Thmentioning
confidence: 82%
“… We did not discuss the application of percolation theory, CPA, and the EMA to characterization of fractures and fracture networks, and modeling of their flow and transport properties, as the problems need a review of their own. We do, however, point out that much progress has been made (see, for example, Darcel et al, ; de Dreuzy et al, ; Davy et al, , ; Ebigbo et al, ; Maillot et al, ; Pyrak‐Nolte & Nolte, ). Much of the progress has been reviewed by Meakin and Tartakovsky (), Adler and Thovert (), Sahimi (), Rutqvist and Tsang (), and Adler et al ().Meakin and Tartakovsky address complications to modeling flow and transport in porous media due to complex geometries, density contrasts of the fluids, and dynamic changes in contact angles.…”
Section: Possible Future Directions For Application Of Percolation Thmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…In , Sf is the nonisolated fracture surface area, and V is the total size of the domain. While P32* provides a compact value that can be compared across networks, it is also useful when compared to the amount of the domain that is actively flowing within a single network, which can be measured using the flow channeling density indicator dQ (Maillot et al, ): dQ=1V·(false∑fSf·Qf)2false(fSf·Qf2false). …”
Section: Velocity Field and Particle Trajectory Observationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effects of these multiple scales on the fluid velocity field within the fracture network are borne witness in the breakthrough curves (BTCs) of dissolved chemicals transported by the flow. For example, fluid flow channeling, where a majority of flow occurs in a subregion of the domain, is well documented in both field experiments (Abelin et al, , ; Rasmuson & Neretnieks, ) and in numerical simulations (de Dreuzy et al, ; Frampton & Cvetkovic, ; Hyman et al, ; Maillot et al, ). Transport in fractured media commonly exhibits non‐Gaussian (anomalous) behavior.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%