A NONLINEAR MODEL FOR ANALYSIS OF SLUG-TEST DATA

While doing slug tests in high-permeability aquifers, we have consistently seen deviations from the expected response of linear theoretical models. Normalized curves do not coincide for various initial heads, as would be predicted by linear theories, and are shifted to larger times for higher initial heads. We have developed a general nonlinear model based on the Navier-Stokes equation, nonlinear frictional loss, non-Darcian flow, acceleration effects, radius changes in the well bore, and a Hvorslev model for the aquifer, which explains these data features. The model produces a very good fit for both oscillatory and nonoscillatory field data, using a single set of physical parameters to predict the field data for various initial displacements at a given well. This is in contrast to linear models which have a systematic lack of fit and indicate that hydraulic conductivity varies with the initial displacement. We recommend multiple slug tests with a considerable variation in initial head displacement to evaluate the possible presence of nonlinear effects. Our conclusion is that the nonlinear model presented here is an excellent tool to analyze slug tests, covering the range from the underdamped region to the overdamped region.

[1]  A nonlinear equation for groundwater entry into well screens , 1989 .

[2]  James J. Butler,et al.  Improving the quality of parameter estimates obtained from slug tests , 1996 .

[3]  H. Bouwer,et al.  A slug test for determining hydraulic conductivity of unconfined aquifers with completely or partially penetrating wells , 1976 .

[4]  Consideration of Total Energy Loss in Theory of Flow to Wells , 1979 .

[5]  M. J. Hvorslev Time lag and soil permeability in ground-water observations , 1951 .

[6]  Estimation of subglacial hydraulic properties from induced changes in basal water pressure: a theoretical framework for borehole-response tests , 1993 .

[7]  Satya P. Garg,et al.  Rational Design of Well Screens , 1971 .

[8]  G. Pinder,et al.  Analysis of Well‐Aquifer Response to a Slug Test , 1985 .

[9]  Salamon Eskinazi,et al.  Vector mechanics of fluids and magnetofluids , 1967 .

[10]  C. McElwee Sensitivity Analysis of Ground-Water Models , 1987 .

[11]  Garth van der Kamp,et al.  Determining aquifer transmissivity by means of well response tests: The underdamped case , 1976 .

[12]  Characterizing vertical distribution of horizontal hydraulic conductivity in an unconfined sand and gravel aquifer using double packer slug tests , 1995 .

[13]  S. Irmay On the theoretical derivation of Darcy and Forchheimer formulas , 1958 .

[14]  W. Durand Dynamics of Fluids , 1934 .

[15]  Vitaly A. Zlotnik,et al.  Multi-level slug tests in highly permeable formations : 1. Modification of the Springer-Gelhar (SG) model , 1998 .

[16]  Kenneth L. Kipp,et al.  Type Curve Analysis of Inertial Effects in the Response of a Well to a Slug Test , 1985 .

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

[18]  Gary R. Chirlin,et al.  A Critique of the Hvorslev Method for Slug Test Analysis: The Fully Penetrating Well , 1989 .

[19]  J. Barker,et al.  A Simple Theory For Estimating Well Losses: With Application To Test Wells In Bangladesh , 1992 .

[20]  A damped wave equation for groundwater flow , 1992 .

[21]  H. J. Ramey,et al.  Non-Darcy Flow in Wells With Finite-Conductivity Vertical Fractures , 1982 .