Variations in hydraulic conductivity with scale of measurement during aquifer tests in heterogeneous, porous carbonate rocks

Schulze‐Makuch, Dirk; Cherkauer, Douglas S.

doi:10.1007/s100400050145

Cited by 84 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As Rovey and Cherkauer (1995) point out, hydraulic conductivity generally increases with test radius, because with a larger test radius the chance to encounter high-conductivity zones in a heterogeneous medium increases. Schulze-Makuch and Cherkauer (1998) found that hydraulic conductivity estimates increased during individual aquifer tests as the volume of aquifer impacted increased. Therefore, they concluded that scale-dependency of hydraulic conductivity is not related to the measurement method, but to the existence of high-conductivity zones within a low-conductivity matrix.…”

Section: Measurement Scalesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Measuring methods for groundwater – surface water interactions: a review

Kalbus

Reinstorf

Schirmer

2006

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

628

349

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.Interactions between groundwater and surface water play a fundamental role in the functioning of riparian ecosystems. In the context of sustainable river basin management it is crucial to understand and quantify exchange processes between groundwater and surface water. Numerous well-known methods exist for parameter estimation and process identification in aquifers and surface waters. Only in recent years has the transition zone become a subject of major research interest; thus, the need has evolved for appropriate methods applicable in this zone. This article provides an overview of the methods that are currently applied and described in the literature for estimating fluxes at the groundwater -surface water interface. Considerations for choosing appropriate methods are given including spatial and temporal scales, uncertainties, and limitations in application. It is concluded that a multi-scale approach combining multiple measuring methods may considerably constrain estimates of fluxes between groundwater and surface water.

show abstract

Section: Measurement Scalesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Measuring methods for groundwater – surface water interactions: a review

Kalbus

Reinstorf

Schirmer

2006

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

628

349

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, several authors [85][86][87][88][89][90] have reported observations of anomalies of transport behavior and scale effects that are difficult to explain with traditional multi-Gaussian models of heterogeneity. To explain the observation that the values of the permeabilities estimated at various scales apparently increase with the dimension of the sample (from laboratory experiment to regional scale models), Sánchez-Vila et al [9] constructed a series of models with different degrees of connectivity and computed their equivalent conductivities.…”

Section: The Importance Of Connectivity On Flow and Transportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Connectivity metrics for subsurface flow and transport

Renard

Allard

2013

Advances in Water Resources

340

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tUnderstanding the role of connectivity for the characterization of heterogeneous porous aquifers or reservoirs is a very active and new field of research. In that framework, connectivity metrics are becoming important tools to describe a reservoir. In this paper, we provide a review of the various metrics that were proposed so far, and we classify them in four main groups. We define first the static connectivity metrics which depend only on the connectivity structure of the parameter fields (hydraulic conductivity or geological facies). By contrast, dynamic connectivity metrics are related to physical processes such as flow or transport. The dynamic metrics depend on the problem configuration and on the specific physics that is considered. Most dynamic connectivity metrics are directly expressed as a function of an upscaled physical parameter describing the overall behavior of the media. Another important distinction is that connectivity metrics can either be global or localized. The global metrics are not related to a specific location while the localized metrics relate to one or several specific points in the field. Using these metrics to characterize a given aquifer requires the possibility to measure dynamic connectivity metrics in the field, to relate them with static connectivity metrics, and to constrain models with those information. Some tools are already available for these different steps and reviewed here, but they are not yet routinely integrated in practical applications. This is why new steps should be added in hydrogeological studies to infer the connectivity structure and to better constrain the models. These steps must include specific field methodologies, interpretation techniques, and modeling tools to provide more realistic and more reliable forecasts in a broad range of applications.

show abstract

“…Small-scale tests are usually performed on rock cores with diameters less than 0.1 m, resulting in average hydraulic conductivity values of less than 1 m/day. Hydraulic conductivity testing of karst aquifers in wells or boreholes with typical lengths of 1 to 10s of meters produces hydraulic conductivity values in the range of 1 to 100 m/day (Rovey 1994, Schulze-Makuch andCherkauer 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%