Impact of numerical artifact of the forward model in the inverse solution of density‐dependent flow problem

We investigate the effect of computational error on the inversion of a density-dependent flow and transport model, using SEAWAT and UCODE-2005 in an inverse identification of hydraulic conductivity and dispersivity using head and concentration data from a 2-D laboratory experiment. We investigated inversions using three different solution schemes including variation of number of particles and time step length, in terms of the three aspects: the shape and smoothness of the objective function surface, the consequent impacts to the optimization, and the resulting Pareto analyses. This study demonstrates that the inversion is very sensitive to the choice of the forward model solution scheme. In particular, standard finite difference methods provide the smoothest objective function surface; however, this is obtained at the cost of numerical artifacts that can lead to erroneous warping of the objective function surface. Total variation diminishing (TVD) schemes limit these impacts at the cost of more computation time, while the hybrid method of characteristics (HMOC) approach with increased particle numbers and/or reduced time step gives both smoothed and accurate objective function surface. Use of the most accurate methods (TVD and HMOC) did lead to successful inversion of the two parameters; however, with distinct results for Pareto analyses. These results illuminate the sensitivity of the inversion to a number of aspects of the forward solution of the density-driven flow problem and reveal that parameter values may result that are erroneous but that counteract numerical errors in the solution.

[1]  Andres Alcolea,et al.  Inverse problem in hydrogeology , 2005 .

[2]  Clifford I. Voss,et al.  Editor’s message: Groundwater modeling fantasies —part 1, adrift in the details , 2011 .

[3]  William W.-G. Yeh,et al.  Coupled inverse problems in groundwater modeling - 1. Sensitivity analysis and parameter identification. , 1990 .

[4]  S. P. Neuman.  Adaptive Eulerian–Lagrangian finite element method for advection–dispersion , 1984 .

[5]  M. Hill,et al.  A Comparison of Solute‐Transport Solution Techniques and Their Effect on Sensitivity Analysis and Inverse Modeling Results , 2001, Ground water.

[6]  Mohamed El Alaoui Talibi,et al.  Parameters identification in a seawater intrusion model using adjoint sensitive method , 2008, Math. Comput. Simul..

[7]  R. R. Goswami,et al.  Comparison of Numerical Techniques Used for Simulating Variable-Density Flow and Transport Experiments , 2012 .

[8]  C. H. Stewart,et al.  A New Approach to the Two-Dimensional Multiphase Reservoir Simulator , 1966 .

[9]  Brian J. Wagner,et al.  Simultaneous parameter estimation and contaminant source characterization for coupled groundwater flow and contaminant transport modelling , 1992 .

[10]  George Kuczera,et al.  Model smoothing strategies to remove microscale discontinuities and spurious secondary optima in objective functions in hydrological calibration , 2007 .

[11]  S. P. Neuman,et al.  A Eulerian-Lagrangian numerical scheme for the dispersion-convection equation using conjugate space-time grids , 1981 .

[12]  Ashraf H. M. Ghanem,et al.  Impact of desalination plants brine injection wells on coastal aquifers , 2008 .

[13]  Dan Rosbjerg,et al.  Contaminant Transport at a Waste Residue Deposit: 1. Inverse Flow and Nonreactive Transport Modeling , 1996 .

[14]  Mary C. Hill,et al.  UCODE_2005 and six other computer codes for universal sensitivity analysis, calibration, and uncertainty evaluation constructed using the JUPITER API , 2006 .

[15]  L. Lebbe,et al.  Parameter identification for axi-symmetric density-dependent groundwater flow based on drawdown and concentration data , 2005 .

[16]  E. Poeter,et al.  Documentation of UCODE; a computer code for universal inverse modeling , 1998 .

[17]  Jesús Carrera,et al.  Coupled estimation of flow and solute transport parameters , 1996 .

[18]  Arlen W. Harbaugh,et al.  A modular three-dimensional finite-difference ground-water flow model , 1984 .

[19]  John Doherty,et al.  Predictive uncertainty analysis of a saltwater intrusion model using null‐space Monte Carlo , 2011 .

[20]  Andrés Sahuquillo,et al.  Coupled inverse modelling of groundwater flow and mass transport and the worth of concentration data , 2003 .

[21]  N. Sun.  Inverse problems in groundwater modeling , 1994 .

[22]  Dmitri Kavetski,et al.  Numerical troubles in conceptual hydrology: Approximations, absurdities and impact on hypothesis testing , 2011 .

[23]  Forward Model Nonlinearity versus Inverse Model Nonlinearity , 2007, Ground water.

[24]  L. Slooten,et al.  Computational and conceptual issues in the calibration of seawater intrusion models , 2010 .

[25]  Alex S. Mayer,et al.  Development and application of a coupled-process parameter inversion model based on the maximum likelihood estimation method , 1999 .

[26]  M. Clark,et al.  Ancient numerical daemons of conceptual hydrological modeling: 2. Impact of time stepping schemes on model analysis and prediction , 2010 .

[27]  W. B. Shoemaker.  Important Observations and Parameters for a Salt Water Intrusion Model , 2004, Ground water.

[28]  D. W. Peaceman,et al.  Numerical Calculation of Multidimensional Miscible Displacement by the Method of Characteristics , 1964 .

[29]  Paul P. Wang,et al.  MT3DMS: A Modular Three-Dimensional Multispecies Transport Model for Simulation of Advection, Dispersion, and Chemical Reactions of Contaminants in Groundwater Systems; Documentation and User's Guide , 1999 .

[30]  D. L. Peck,et al.  Specific Yield Compilation of Specific Yields for Various Materials , 1967 .

[31]  Christian D. Langevin,et al.  MODFLOW-2000, the U.S. Geological Survey Modular Ground-Water Model--Documentation of the SEAWAT-2000 Version with the Variable-Density Flow Process (VDF) and the Integrated MT3DMS Transport Process (IMT) , 2003 .

[32]  W. Yeh,et al.  Identification of Parameter Structure in Groundwater Inverse Problem , 1985 .

[33]  T. E. Short,et al.  An exact peak capturing and Oscillation‐Free Scheme to solve advection‐dispersion transport equations , 1992 .

[34]  Weixing Guo,et al.  MODFLOW/MT3DMS–Based Simulation of Variable‐Density Ground Water Flow and Transport , 2006, Ground water.

[35]  Gholam Reza Rakhshandehroo,et al.  Inverse modeling of variable-density groundwater flow in a semi-arid area in Iran using a genetic algorithm , 2010 .

[36]  J. Doherty,et al.  Calibration‐constrained Monte Carlo analysis of highly parameterized models using subspace techniques , 2009 .

[37]  C. Voss,et al.  Inverse modeling for seawater intrusion in coastal aquifers: Insights about parameter sensitivities, variances, correlations and estimation procedures derived from the Henry problem , 2006 .