Electrical imaging at the large block test—Yucca Mountain, Nevada

Abstract A monolithic block of densely welded tuff was excavated from a site on Fran Ridge near Yucca Mountain, Nevada so that coupled thermohydrological processes could be studied in a controlled, in situ experiment. A series of heaters were placed in a horizontal plane about 3 m from the top of the 3 m×3 m×4.5-m high block. Temperatures were measured at many points within and on the block surface and a suite of other measurements were taken to define the thermal and hydrologic response. Electrical resistance tomography (ERT) was used to map two-dimensional images of moisture content changes along four planes in the block. The ERT images clearly delineate the drying and wetting of the rockmass during the 13 months of heating and subsequent 6 months of cool down. The main feature is a prominent dry zone that forms around the heaters then gradually disappears as the rock cools down. Other features include linear anomalies of decreasing moisture content, which are fractures dehydrating as the block heats up. There are also examples of compact anomalies of wetting. Some of these appear to be water accumulation in fractures, which are draining condensate from the block. Others may be rainwater entering a fracture at the top of the block. During cool-down, a general rewetting is observed although this is less certain because of poor data quality during this stage of the experiment.

[1]  H. Vinegar,et al.  Induced polarization of shaly sands , 1984 .

[2]  John G. Webster,et al.  An Impedance Camera for Spatially Specific Measurements of the Thorax , 1978, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[3]  D. Oldenburg,et al.  Inversion of induced polarization data , 1994 .

[4]  Willis J. Tompkins,et al.  Comparing Reconstruction Algorithms for Electrical Impedance Tomography , 1987, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[5]  E. C. Thomas,et al.  Electrical Conductivities in Shaly Sands-I. The Relation Between Hydrocarbon Saturation and Resistivity Index; II. The Temperature Coefficient Of Electrical Conductivity , 1974 .

[6]  R. J. Lytle,et al.  Impedance camera: A system for determining the spatial variation of electrical conductivity , 1978 .

[7]  W. Daily,et al.  Cross-borehole resistivity tomography , 1991 .

[8]  Andrew Binley,et al.  ERT monitoring of environmental remediation processes , 1996 .

[9]  W. Daily,et al.  The effects of noise on Occam's inversion of resistivity tomography data , 1996 .

[10]  D C Barber,et al.  Fast reconstruction of resistance images. , 1987, Clinical physics and physiological measurement : an official journal of the Hospital Physicists' Association, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Medizinische Physik and the European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics.

[11]  Y. Sasaki RESOLUTION OF RESISTIVITY TOMOGRAPHY INFERRED FROM NUMERICAL SIMULATION , 1992 .

[12]  Thomas A. Buscheck,et al.  Hydrological properties of Topopah Spring tuff: Laboratory measurements , 1987 .

[13]  K. A. Dines,et al.  Analysis of electrical conductivity imaging , 1981 .

[14]  Jeffery J. Roberts,et al.  Electrical properties of partially saturated Topopah Spring Tuff: Water distribution as a function of saturation , 1997 .

[15]  D. Isaacson Distinguishability of Conductivities by Electric Current Computed Tomography , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[16]  D. G. Wilder,et al.  Large block test status report , 1997 .

[17]  M. Neuman,et al.  Impedance computed tomography algorithm and system. , 1985, Applied optics.

[18]  C. Swift,et al.  INVERSION OF TWO‐DIMENSIONAL RESISTIVITY AND INDUCED‐POLARIZATION DATA , 1978 .

[19]  Alan C. Tripp,et al.  Two-dimensional resistivity inversion , 1984 .