Contribution to head loss by partial penetration and well completion: implications for dewatering and artificial recharge wells

Abstract

A wide variety of well drilling techniques and well completion methods is used in the installation of dewatering and artificial recharge wells for the purpose of construction dewatering. The selection of the optimal well type is always a trade-off between the overall costs of well completion and development, the optimal well hydraulics of the well itself, the hydraulic impact of the well on its surroundings, and the required operational life span of the well. The present study provides an analytical framework that can be used by dewatering and drilling companies to quantify the contribution to head loss of typical dewatering and artificialrecharge well configurations. The analysis shows that the placement of partially penetrating wells in high-permeability layers could promote the use of quick and cheap installation of naturally developed wells using jetting or straight-flush rotary drilling. In high-permeability layers, such wells can be favorable over wells completed with filter pack, which require extensive well development to remove the fines from the filter cake layer. The amount of total head loss during discharge/recharge at a volumetric rate of 20 m 3 /h per meter of filter length, into or from a gravely aquifer layer, is reduced by factors of 3-4 while using naturally developed well types instead of well types completed with a filter pack that contains a filter cake layer due to borehole smearing.

Evaluating Flow Distribution in a Multiaquifer Recharge Well Using an In Situ Flowmeter

“…This range and maximum values are consistent with previous studies utilizing impeller flowmeters in high‐capacity pumping wells in which maximum Re values varied from 420,000 to 650,000 in single‐screened wells (Gossell et al 1999 and Newhouse et al 2005, respectively) and from 440,000 to 610,000 in multiple‐screen wells (Hanson et al 2003 and Fakhreddine et al 2020, respectively). Head loss due to divergent flow before reaching each screen during recharge could potentially introduce error into the reading at the top of the screen (Houben 2015; van Lopik et al 2021).…”

Using multiple partially-penetrating wells (MPPWs) to improve the performance of high-temperature ATES systems: Well operation, storage conditions and aquifer heterogeneity

“…The extent of the vertical flow component around the PPW depends on the aquifer characteristics and the length of the well screen (e.g. Tügel et al, 2016;Van Lopik et al, 2021). Especially for scenarios where infiltration and abstraction occur solely in the low-permeability layers of 10 m/d, the required well heads are high.…”

“…For determining proper well dimensions of each PPW in a heterogeneous aquifer, the implications for well hydraulics, risks of additional head loss by potential well clogging, as well as associated pumping costs need to be assessed while considering a MPPW configuration (e.g. Houben, 2015;Van Lopik et al, 2021). Screening PPWs in low-permeability layers comes at a price of higher well heads and pumping costs (Table 7) and might result in higher clogging risks due to deep-bed filtration of fines in finer sand layers.…”