Hydraulic conductivity imaging from 3‐D transient hydraulic tomography at several pumping/observation densities
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] E. Sudicky. A natural gradient experiment on solute transport in a sand aquifer: Spatial variability of hydraulic conductivity and its role in the dispersion process , 1986 .
[2] M. Celia,et al. Large-scale natural gradient tracer test in sand and gravel, Cape Cod, Massachusetts, 2, Analysis of spatial moments for a nonreactive tracer , 1991 .
[3] Allan D. Woodbury,et al. The geostatistical characteristics of the borden aquifer , 1991 .
[4] W. W. Wood,et al. Large-Scale Natural Gradient Tracer Test in Sand and Gravel, , 1991 .
[5] Michael A. Celia,et al. Large-scale natural gradient tracer test in sand and gravel, Cape Cod, Massachusetts: 3. Hydraulic c , 1992 .
[6] E. Eric Adams,et al. Field study of dispersion in a heterogeneous aquifer , 1992 .
[7] P. Jussel,et al. Transport modeling in heterogeneous aquifers: 1. Statistical description and numerical generation of gravel deposits , 1994 .
[8] Peter Dietrich,et al. Identification of the permeability distribution in soil by hydraulic tomography , 1995 .
[9] P. Kitanidis. Quasi‐Linear Geostatistical Theory for Inversing , 1995 .
[10] T. Yeh,et al. Hydraulic tomography: Development of a new aquifer test method , 2000 .
[11] Shuyun Liu,et al. Effectiveness of hydraulic tomography: Sandbox experiments , 2001 .
[12] W. Barrash,et al. Hierarchical geostatistics and multifacies systems: Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site, Boise, Idaho , 2002 .
[13] Tian-Chyi J. Yeh,et al. Characterization of aquifer heterogeneity using transient hydraulic tomography , 2004 .
[14] Michael D. Knoll,et al. VSP traveltime inversion: Near‐surface issues , 2004 .
[15] W. Barrash,et al. Significance of porosity for stratigraphy and textural composition in subsurface, coarse fluvial deposits: Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site , 2004 .
[16] Clifford H. Thurber,et al. Parameter estimation and inverse problems , 2005 .
[17] A. W. Harbaugh. MODFLOW-2005 : the U.S. Geological Survey modular ground-water model--the ground-water flow process , 2005 .
[18] Michael D. Knoll,et al. Reflectivity Modeling of a Ground-Penetrating-Radar Profile of a Saturated Fluvial Formation , 2006 .
[19] W. P. Clement,et al. Crosshole Radar Tomography in a Fluvial Aquifer Near Boise, Idaho , 2006 .
[20] Michael D. Knoll,et al. Traveltime inversion of vertical radar profiles , 2006 .
[21] Michael D. Knoll,et al. Investigating the stratigraphy of an alluvial aquifer using crosswell seismic traveltime tomography , 2006 .
[22] Tom Clemo,et al. Field, laboratory, and modeling investigation of the skin effect at wells with slotted casing, Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site , 2006 .
[23] Jacques R. Ernst,et al. Application of a new 2D time-domain full-waveform inversion scheme to crosshole radar data , 2007 .
[24] R. Knight,et al. Improving crosshole radar velocity tomograms: A new approach to incorporating high-angle traveltime data , 2007 .
[25] Cheng-Haw Lee,et al. Time to Change the Way We Collect and Analyze Data for Aquifer Characterization , 2007, Ground water.
[26] Tom Clemo,et al. MODFLOW-2005 Ground-Water Model - User Guide to the Adjoint State Based Sensitivity Process (ADJ) , 2007 .
[27] Wei Li,et al. Three‐Dimensional Geostatistical Inversion of Flowmeter and Pumping Test Data , 2008, Ground water.
[28] A. Bellin,et al. A Bayesian approach for inversion of hydraulic tomographic data , 2009 .
[29] Hiromitsu Saegusa,et al. Hydraulic tomography in fractured granite: Mizunami Underground Research site, Japan , 2009 .
[30] Michael D. Knoll,et al. Capacitive conductivity logging and electrical stratigraphy in a high-resistivity aquifer, Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site , 2009 .
[31] John H. Bradford,et al. Estimating porosity with ground‐penetrating radar reflection tomography: A controlled 3‐D experiment at the Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site , 2009 .
[32] James J. Butler,et al. Inherent Limitations of Hydraulic Tomography , 2010, Ground water.
[33] Peter Dietrich,et al. A field assessment of high‐resolution aquifer characterization based on hydraulic travel time and hydraulic attenuation tomography , 2011 .
[34] M. Cardiff,et al. 3‐D transient hydraulic tomography in unconfined aquifers with fast drainage response , 2011 .
[35] Tian-Chyi J. Yeh,et al. Robustness of joint interpretation of sequential pumping tests: Numerical and field experiments , 2011 .
[36] James Irving,et al. Inversion of Multiple Intersecting High-Resolution Crosshole GPR Profiles for Hydrological Characterization at the Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site , 2011 .
[37] M. Anderson,et al. Foreword: Lessons Learned About Contaminant Hydrogeology from Legacy Research Sites , 2011, Ground water.
[38] Walter A. Illman,et al. Three‐dimensional transient hydraulic tomography in a highly heterogeneous glaciofluvial aquifer‐aquitard system , 2011 .
[39] Bwalya Malama,et al. Information content of slug tests for estimating hydraulic properties in realistic, high-conductivity aquifer scenarios , 2011 .
[40] Peter K. Kitanidis,et al. A field proof‐of‐concept of aquifer imaging using 3‐D transient hydraulic tomography with modular, temporarily‐emplaced equipment , 2012 .
[41] Wolfgang Nowak,et al. Parameter Estimation by Ensemble Kalman Filters with Transformed Data , 2010 .
[42] Division on Earth. Contaminants in the subsurface , 2013 .
[43] Jet-Chau Wen,et al. Joint interpretation of sequential pumping tests in unconfined aquifers , 2013 .
[44] Steven J. Berg,et al. Field Study of Subsurface Heterogeneity with Steady‐State Hydraulic Tomography , 2013, Ground water.
[45] M. Cardiff,et al. Hydraulic Conductivity Distribution from Multi-level Slug Tests and Multivariate Facies Associations in a Conglomeratic Fluvial Aquifer, Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site , 2013 .
[46] P. Kitanidis,et al. Aquifer heterogeneity characterization with oscillatory pumping: Sensitivity analysis and imaging potential , 2013 .