A field assessment of high‐resolution aquifer characterization based on hydraulic travel time and hydraulic attenuation tomography

[1] In this study the potential of an inversion approach based on hydraulic travel time and hydraulic attenuation tomography was assessed. Both hydraulic travel time and hydraulic attenuation tomography are based on the transformation of the transient groundwater flow equation into the eikonal equation using an asymptotic approach. The eikonal equation allows the calculation of pressure propagation and attenuation along trajectories, which is computationally efficient. The attenuation and travel time-based inversion approaches are naturally complementary: hydraulic travel times are determined by the hydraulic diffusivity, a combination of hydraulic conductivity and specific storage, whereas the attenuation is determined solely by specific storage. The potential of our hydraulic tomographical approach was investigated at a well-characterized sand and gravel aquifer located in the Leine River valley near Gottingen, Germany. The database for the hydraulic inversion consists of 392 cross-well slug interference tests performed between five wells, in which the positions of the sources (injection ports) and the receivers (observation ports), isolated with double packer systems, were varied between tests. The results have shown that the combination of hydraulic travel time and hydraulic attenuation tomography allows the reconstruction of the diffusivity and storage distribution in two and three dimensions with a resolution and accuracy superior to that possible with type curve analysis.

[1]  W. Nowak,et al.  Geostatistical inverse modeling of transient pumping tests using temporal moments of drawdown , 2005 .

[2]  Walter A Illman,et al.  Practical Issues in Imaging Hydraulic Conductivity through Hydraulic Tomography , 2008, Ground water.

[3]  Geoffrey C. Bohling,et al.  A field assessment of the value of steady shape hydraulic tomography for characterization of aquifer heterogeneities , 2007 .

[4]  Peter Dietrich,et al.  A travel time based hydraulic tomographic approach , 2003 .

[5]  C. McDermott,et al.  New experimental techniques for pneumatic tomographical determination of the flow and transport parameters of highly fractured porous rock samples , 2003 .

[6]  Akhil Datta-Gupta,et al.  A Streamline Approach for Integrating Transient Pressure Data Into High-Resolution Reservoir Models , 2001 .

[7]  T. D. Streltsova,et al.  Well Testing in Heterogeneous Formations , 1988 .

[8]  James J. Butler,et al.  Pumping tests in networks of multilevel sampling wells: Motivation and methodology , 1999 .

[9]  Wei Li,et al.  Three‐Dimensional Geostatistical Inversion of Flowmeter and Pumping Test Data , 2008, Ground water.

[10]  James J. Butler,et al.  Direct‐Push Electrical Conductivity Logging for High‐Resolution Hydrostratigraphic Characterization , 2003 .

[11]  Akhil Datta-Gupta,et al.  Streamlines, ray tracing and production tomography: generalization to compressible flow , 2000 .

[12]  J. Virieux,et al.  Asymptotic theory for diffusive electromagnetic imaging , 1994 .

[13]  D. W. Vasco,et al.  Interpretation and inversion of low‐frequency head observations , 2006 .

[14]  chia-shyun Chen,et al.  Analysis of Depth‐Dependent Pressure Head of Slug Tests in Highly Permeable Aquifers , 2005, Ground water.

[15]  Walter A. Illman,et al.  Steady-state hydraulic tomography in a laboratory aquifer with deterministic heterogeneity: Multi-method and multiscale validation of hydraulic conductivity tomograms , 2007 .

[16]  A. Green,et al.  Integration of diverse physical-property models: Subsurface zonation and petrophysical parameter estimation based on fuzzy c-means cluster analyses , 2006 .

[17]  Junfeng Zhu,et al.  Laboratory sandbox validation of transient hydraulic tomography , 2007 .

[18]  C. D. McElwee,et al.  A NONLINEAR MODEL FOR ANALYSIS OF SLUG-TEST DATA , 1998 .

[19]  Junfeng Zhu,et al.  Traditional analysis of aquifer tests: Comparing apples to oranges? , 2005 .

[20]  Brian R. Zurbuchen,et al.  Dipole Probe: Design and Field Applications of a Single‐Borehole Device for Measurements of Vertical Variations of Hydraulic Conductivity , 1998 .

[21]  T. Caliński,et al.  A dendrite method for cluster analysis , 1974 .

[22]  Walter A. Illman,et al.  Hydraulic tomography using temporal moments of drawdown recovery data: A laboratory sandbox study , 2007 .

[23]  James J. Butler,et al.  Steady shape analysis of tomographic pumping tests for characterization of aquifer heterogeneities , 2002 .

[24]  K. Karasaki,et al.  Estimation of reservoir properties using transient pressure data: An asymptotic approach , 2000 .

[25]  A. Datta-Gupta,et al.  Rapid inverse modeling of pressure interference tests using trajectory‐based traveltime and amplitude sensitivities , 2006 .

[26]  Shuyun Liu,et al.  Effectiveness of hydraulic tomography: Sandbox experiments , 2001 .

[27]  James J. Butler,et al.  Hydraulic tests in highly permeable aquifers , 2004 .

[28]  Peter Dietrich,et al.  An inversion strategy for hydraulic tomography: Coupling travel time and amplitude inversion , 2007 .

[29]  S. C. Young,et al.  Development And Application Of Borehole Flowmeters For Environmental Assessment , 1993 .

[30]  Velimir V. Vesselinov,et al.  Three‐dimensional numerical inversion of pneumatic cross‐hole tests in unsaturated fractured tuff: 1. Methodology and borehole effects , 2001 .

[31]  S. P. Neuman,et al.  Three‐dimensional numerical inversion of pneumatic cross‐hole tests in unsaturated fractured tuff: 2. Equivalent parameters, high‐resolution stochastic imaging and scale effects , 2001 .

[32]  Albert Tarantola,et al.  Inverse problem theory - and methods for model parameter estimation , 2004 .

[33]  J. J. Butler,et al.  The Design, Performance, and Analysis of Slug Tests , 1997 .

[34]  Frieder Häfner,et al.  Wärme- und Stofftransport , 1992 .

[35]  James J. Butler,et al.  Slug tests in partially penetrating wells , 1994 .

[36]  Peter Dietrich,et al.  Identification of the permeability distribution in soil by hydraulic tomography , 1995 .

[37]  Frieder Häfner,et al.  Wärme- und Stofftransport : mathematische Methoden , 1992 .

[38]  Groundwater flow near vertical recirculatory wells: effect of skin on flowgeometry and travel times with implications for aquifer remediation , 1999 .

[39]  M. Eppstein,et al.  Optimal 3-D traveltime tomography , 1998 .

[40]  J. MacQueen.  Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations , 1967 .

[41]  P. Gilbert.  Iterative methods for the three-dimensional reconstruction of an object from projections. , 1972, Journal of theoretical biology.

[42]  James J. Butler,et al.  The use of slug tests to describe vertical variations in hydraulic conductivity , 1994 .

[43]  Tian-Chyi J. Yeh,et al.  Characterization of aquifer heterogeneity using transient hydraulic tomography , 2004 .

[44]  A. Wilhelms,et al.  Application and implication of horizontal well geochemistry , 2001, Petroleum Geoscience.

[45]  P. Dietrich,et al.  Integrated analysis and interpretation of cross-hole P- and S-wave tomograms: a case study , 2009 .

[46]  Michael D. Knoll,et al.  Multivariate analysis of cross‐hole georadar velocity and attenuation tomograms for aquifer zonation , 2004 .

[47]  John M Healey,et al.  Analysis of Slug Tests in Formations of High Hydraulic Conductivity , 2003, Ground water.

[48]  Fred J. Molz,et al.  Borehole Flowmeter Application in Fluvial Sediments: Methodology, Results, and Assessment , 1997 .

[49]  Martin Sauter,et al.  Cross-well slug interference tests: An effective characterization method for resolving aquifer heterogeneity , 2010 .

[50]  Daryl R. Tweeton,et al.  3DTOM, Three-Dimensional Geophysical Tomography , 1996 .

[51]  Jonathan D. Istok,et al.  Aquifer Testing: Design and Analysis of Pumping and Slug Tests , 1991 .

[52]  Junfeng Zhu,et al.  Sequential aquifer tests at a well field, Montalto Uffugo Scalo, Italy , 2007 .

[53]  Jiangtao Cheng,et al.  Comparison of Early and Late Travel Times of Pressure Pulses Induced by Multilevel Slug Tests , 2009 .

[54]  T. Yeh,et al.  Hydraulic tomography: Development of a new aquifer test method , 2000 .

[55]  W. Li,et al.  Two‐dimensional characterization of hydraulic heterogeneity by multiple pumping tests , 2007 .

[56]  Peter Dietrich,et al.  Direct Push-Technologies , 2006 .

[57]  Junfeng Zhu,et al.  Comparison of aquifer characterization approaches through steady state groundwater model validation: A controlled laboratory sandbox study , 2010 .

[58]  Hiromitsu Saegusa,et al.  Hydraulic tomography in fractured granite: Mizunami Underground Research site, Japan , 2009 .

[59]  Brian R. Zurbuchen,et al.  Dynamic interpretation of slug tests in highly permeable aquifers , 2002 .

[60]  T. Yeh,et al.  Analysis of hydraulic tomography using temporal moments of drawdown recovery data , 2006 .

[61]  Vedat Batu.  Aquifer Hydraulics: A Comprehensive Guide to Hydrogeologic Data Analysis , 1998 .