Measurement Scale, Network Sampling Scale, and Groundwater Model Parameters

The scales at which model parameters are measured with local field tests distributed on a sampling network are examined. Two scales are defined to characterize the problem: (1) the measurement scale associated with the resolution of a single field test, and (2) the network scale, associated with the separation between samples on a network. Using a spatial filtering approach, it is shown that a network of measurements can only resolve a larger-scale component of a parameter field. The smaller-scale component of the parameter field not seen by measurements, here called the subgrid component, can only vary on scales larger than the measurement scale and smaller than the network scale. These unobserved subgrid scales give rise to the so-called closure problem and consequent modeling errors. When a significant proportion of the parameter variability is contained in the subgrid scales, not only will the closure problem be significant, but aliasing errors will also pollute the estimate of the large-scale component of the parameter field. These concepts are illustrated by performing simple analytical and numerical calculations.

[1]  James R. Carr.  Application of spatial filter theory to kriging , 1990 .

[2]  E. Wood,et al.  A distributed parameter approach for evaluating the accuracy of groundwater model predictions: 1. Theory , 1988 .

[3]  G. Marsily,et al.  An Automatic Solution for the Inverse Problem , 1971 .

[4]  B. Mohanty,et al.  Spatial analysis of hydraulic conductivity measured using disc infiltrometers , 1994 .

[5]  John H. Cushman,et al.  On Measurement, Scale, and Scaling , 1986 .

[6]  J. D. Bredehoeft,et al.  Response of a finite-diameter well to an instantaneous charge of water. Paper No. H-21 , 1966 .

[7]  R. Beckie,et al.  A numerical method to characterize the averaging process invoked by a slug test , 1994 .

[8]  John H. Cushman,et al.  On unifying the concepts of scale, instrumentation, and stochastics in the development of multiphase transport theory , 1984 .

[9]  P. Kitanidis.  Parameter Uncertainty in Estimation of Spatial Functions: Bayesian Analysis , 1986 .

[10]  G. Wahba,et al.  A Correspondence Between Bayesian Estimation on Stochastic Processes and Smoothing by Splines , 1970 .

[11]  J. H. Cushman,et al.  Inverse methods for subsurface flow: A critical review of stochastic techniques , 1990 .

[12]  J. P. Delhomme,et al.  Spatial variability and uncertainty in groundwater flow parameters: A geostatistical approach , 1979 .

[13]  R. Freeze.  A stochastic‐conceptual analysis of one‐dimensional groundwater flow in nonuniform homogeneous media , 1975 .

[14]  B. Silverman,et al.  Spline Smoothing: The Equivalent Variable Kernel Method , 1984 .

[15]  Peter Craven,et al.  Smoothing noisy data with spline functions , 1978 .

[16]  Ricardo A. Olea,et al.  Sampling design optimization for spatial functions , 1984 .

[17]  Gedeon Dagan,et al.  Upscaling of permeability of anisotropic heterogeneous formations: 1. The general framework , 1993 .

[18]  Dennis McLaughlin,et al.  Identification of large-scale spatial trends in hydrologic data. , 1990 .

[19]  W. Jury,et al.  A theoretical study of the estimation of the correlation scale in spatially variable fields: 2. Nonstationary fields , 1987 .

[20]  E. Wood,et al.  The universal structure of the groundwater flow equations , 1994 .

[21]  Yoram Rubin,et al.  A stochastic approach to the problem of upscaling of conductivity in disordered media: Theory and unconditional numerical simulations , 1990 .

[22]  W. Press,et al.  Interpolation, realization, and reconstruction of noisy, irregularly sampled data , 1992 .

[23]  G. S. Watson.  Smoothing and interpolation by kriging and with splines , 1984 .

[24]  Ronald N. Bracewell,et al.  The Fourier Transform and Its Applications , 1966 .

[25]  Yanyong Xiang,et al.  A composite L1 parameter estimator for model fitting in groundwater flow and solute transport simulation , 1993 .

[26]  W. Yeh.  Review of Parameter Identification Procedures in Groundwater Hydrology: The Inverse Problem , 1986 .

[27]  J. L. Brown,et al.  On the error in reconstructing a non-bandlimited function by means of the bandpass sampling theorem , 1967 .

[28]  John L. Wilson,et al.  An approach to estimating hydraulic conductivity spatial correlation scales using geological characteristics , 1989 .

[29]  Philippe C. Baveye,et al.  The Operational Significance of the Continuum Hypothesis in the Theory of Water Movement Through Soils and Aquifers , 1984 .

[30]  Elias Masry,et al.  Alias-free sampling: An alternative conceptualization and its applications , 1978, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[31]  Dean S. Oliver,et al.  The Averaging Process in Permeability Estimation From Well-Test Data , 1990 .

[32]  Abdul J. Jerri.  Error Analysis in Application of Generalizations of the Sampling Theorem , 1993 .

[33]  A. J. Desbarats,et al.  Spatial averaging of hydraulic conductivity under radial flow conditions , 1994 .

[34]  R. Marks.  Introduction to Shannon Sampling and Interpolation Theory , 1990 .

[35]  John L. Wilson,et al.  Architecture of the Sierra Ladrones Formation, central New Mexico: Depositional controls on the permeability correlation structure , 1993 .

[36]  R. Allan Freeze,et al.  Stochastic analysis of steady state groundwater flow in a bounded domain: 2. Two‐dimensional simulations , 1979 .

[37]  J. Delhomme.  Kriging in the hydrosciences , 1978 .

[38]  Eric F. Wood,et al.  On the relationship between kriging and state estimation , 1982 .

[39]  Andre G. Journel,et al.  Geostatistics: Models and tools for the earth sciences , 1986 .

[40]  Fred C. Schweppe,et al.  Uncertain dynamic systems , 1973 .