Identification of groundwater flow parameters using reciprocal data from hydraulic interference tests

Marinoni, Marianna; Delay, Frédérick; Ackerer, Philippe; Riva, Mònica; Guadagnini, Alberto

doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.05.019

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We applied “gradient” and “gradient‐free” optimization modules available in COMSOL for parameter estimation. We considered Levenberg–Marquardt (LM) and Nelder–Mead Simplex (NM) optimizers in respect of gradient and gradient‐free methods respectively (Pan and Wu 1998; Pujol 2007; Barati 2011; Marinoni et al 2016; Hu 2018; Klepikova et al 2020).…”

Section: Materials and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of Gradient and Gradient‐Free Optimizers in Transient Hydraulic Tomography

Chintala,

Kambhammettu,

Harmya

2023

Groundwater

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sub‐surface characterization in fractured aquifers is challenging due to the co‐existence of contrasting materials namely matrix and fractures. Transient hydraulic tomography (THT) is proved to be an efficient and robust technique to estimate hydraulic (Km, Kf) and storage (Sm, Sf) properties in such complex hydrogeologic settings. However, performance of THT is governed by data quality and optimization technique used in inversion. We assessed the performance of gradient and gradient‐free optimizers with THT inversion. Laboratory experiments were performed on a two‐dimensional, granite rock (80 cm x 45 cm x 5 cm) with known fracture pattern. Cross‐hole pumping experiments were conducted at 10 ports (located on fractures), and time‐drawdown responses were monitored at 25 ports (located on matrix and fractures). Pumping ports were ranked based on weighted signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) computed at each observation port. Noise‐free, good quality (SNR > 100) datasets were inverted using Levenberg Marquardt: LM (gradient) and Nelder Mead: NM (gradient‐free) methods. All simulations were performed using a coupled simulation‐optimization model. Performance of the two optimizers is evaluated by comparing model predictions with observations made at two validation ports that were not used in simulation. Both LM and NM algorithms have broadly captured the preferential flow paths (fracture network) via K and S tomograms, however LM has outperformed NM during validation () Our results conclude that, while method of optimization has a trivial effect on model predictions, exclusion of low quality (SNR ≤ 100) datasets can significantly improve the model performance.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Section: Materials and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of Gradient and Gradient‐Free Optimizers in Transient Hydraulic Tomography

Chintala,

Kambhammettu,

Harmya

2023

Groundwater

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the work by Jahns, the inverse problem was solved using a regression problem (minimization of an objective function with a Gauss-Newton algorithm) based on a cost function as the quadratic norm of the vector of residuals (i.e., the squared difference between computed and measured heads). The number of zones was increased during the identification procedure and the reliability of the parameters was discussed in detail, addressing nonuniqueness due to Lorentz reciprocity in flow [see, e.g., Delay et al, 2011, Marinoni et al, 2016 and correlations between parameters. Jahns [1966] provided also computation times: 20 min for the estimation of 10 parameters with a 20 × 20 grid and 25 time steps.…”

Section: Zonation Parameterizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of aquifer heterogeneity through inverse methods

Ackerer¹,

Carrera²,

Delay³

2024

Comptes Rendus. Géoscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper underlines the contributions of Ghislain de Marsily (GdM) to the identification of aquifers heterogeneity using inverse methods mainly for modeling subsurface flow. Inverse methods require an objective function to express the goodness of fit of the chosen model, a parameterization to describe the spatial distribution of model parameters, and a minimization algorithm. The resulting inverse problem, which consists in seeking model parameters' values that render model outputs close to the observations, is usually unstable. GdM developed seminal ideas for the two key inversion issues that are: to stabilize the inverse problem through regularization, and to parameterize it to reproduce the natural heterogeneity of the subsurface with a limited number of parameters. GdM conducted pioneering works that are the basis of current parameterization methods relying upon adaptive zonation and/or interpolation based on pilot points. We take here the opportunity to highlight the GdM's contributions inspiring currently used techniques.

show abstract

“…Characterizing subsurface and groundwater flow is performed by collecting data from several techniques, including hydraulic tests, thermal experiments and electrical measurements (e.g., [1][2][3][4]), and inverting this data with the most appropriate inversion strategies (e.g., [5][6][7][8]). Among all these methods, the most-used method is the pumping test, which gives global estimates of the hydraulic properties of the system and provide information on its transient behavior when interpreting the data with transient-flow solutions (e.g., [9][10][11][12]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Models and Interpretation Methods for Single-Hole Flowmeter Experiments

Lods

Roubinet

2023

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subsurface and groundwater flow characterization is of great importance for various environmental applications, such as the dispersion of contaminants and their remediation. For single-hole flowmeter measurements, key characteristics, such as wellbore storage, skin factor heterogeneities, and variable pumping and aquifer flow rates, have a strong impact on the system characterization, whereas they are not fully considered in existing models and interpretation methods. In this study, we develop a new semi-analytical solution that considers all these characteristics in a physics-based consistent manner. We also present two new interpretation methods, the Double Flowmeter Test with Transient Flow rate (DFTTF) and the Transient Flow rate Flowmeter Test (TFFT), for interpreting data collected during single and multiple pumping tests, respectively. These solution and methods are used as follows. (i) The impact of wellbore storage, transient pumping rate, and property heterogeneities on the interpretation of data collected during single pumping tests are studied over 49 two-aquifer cases. (ii) The effect of the skin factor heterogeneity on transmissivity and storativity estimates, as well as the variability range of the (non-unique) corresponding solutions, are analyzed for the interpretation of multiple-pumping experiments. The results presented in this work show the importance of the various properties and processes that are considered, and the need for the new models and methods that are provided.

show abstract

Identification of groundwater flow parameters using reciprocal data from hydraulic interference tests

Cited by 9 publications

References 47 publications

Performance of Gradient and Gradient‐Free Optimizers in Transient Hydraulic Tomography

Performance of Gradient and Gradient‐Free Optimizers in Transient Hydraulic Tomography

Identification of aquifer heterogeneity through inverse methods

Models and Interpretation Methods for Single-Hole Flowmeter Experiments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About