Field, laboratory, and modeling investigation of the skin effect at wells with slotted casing, Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site

Understanding and quantification of wellbore skin improves our ability to accurately measure or estimate hydrologic parameters with tests at wells such as pumping tests, flowmeter tests, and slug tests. This paper presents observations and results from a series of field, laboratory, and modeling tests which, together, explain the source of wellbore skin at wells at a research wellfield and which support estimation of skin thickness (ds) and skin hydraulic conductivity (Ks). Positive wellbore skin effects were recognized at wells in the shallow, unconfined, coarse-grained fluvial aquifer at the Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site (BHRS). Well development efforts at the BHRS removed residual drilling fines but only marginally reduced the skin effect. Likely causes for the remaining wellbore skin effect were examined; partial clogging of screen slots with sand is consistent with field observations and can account for the magnitude of wellbore skin effect observed. We then use the WTAQ code (Barlow and Moench, 1999) with a redefinition of the term for delayed observation well response to include skin effects at observation wells (in addition to pumping wells) in order to analyze aquifer tests at the BHRS for average Ks values at individual wells. Systematic differences in Ks values are recognized in results at pumping (Ks_Q) and observation (Ks_obs) wells: larger values are seen at observation wells (average Ks_obsZ0.0023 cm/s) than pumping wells. Two possible causes are recognized for the occurrence of higher Ks values at observation wells than pumping wells: (1) flow diversion between aquifer layers on approach to a pumping well with positive skin; and (2) larger portion offlow passing through lower-K zones in the heterogeneous aquifer near the pumping well than the observation wells due to strongly radially convergent flow near the pumping well. For the wellaquifer system at the BHRS, modeling analyses of drawdown vs time at observation wells provide better Ks estimates than those from pumping wells. q 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

[1]  W. Barrash,et al.  Hierarchical geostatistics and multifacies systems: Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site, Boise, Idaho , 2002 .

[2]  H. J. Ramey,et al.  Short-Time Well Test Data Interpretation in the Presence of Skin Effect and Wellbore Storage , 1970 .

[3]  Allen F. Moench,et al.  Double‐Porosity Models for a Fissured Groundwater Reservoir With Fracture Skin , 1984 .

[4]  Steven C. Young.  Impacts of Positive Skin Effects on Borehole Flowmeter Tests in a Heterogeneous Granular Aquifer , 1998 .

[5]  Tom Clemo,et al.  Inversion of Borehole Flowmeter Measurements Considering Well Screen Clogging and Skin , 2003 .

[6]  D. B. Thompson,et al.  Structures and textures in Triassic braided stream conglomerates (‘Bunter’ Pebble Beds) in the Sherwood Sandstone Group, North Staffordshire, England , 1983 .

[7]  S. P. Neuman,et al.  Prediction of steady state flow in nonuniform geologic media by conditional moments: Exact nonlocal , 1993 .

[8]  S. P. Neuman.  Analysis of Pumping Test Data From Anisotropic Unconfined Aquifers Considering Delayed Gravity Response , 1975 .

[9]  A. Desbarats.  Spatial averaging of transmissivity in heterogeneous fields with flow toward a well , 1992 .

[10]  Tom Clemo,et al.  Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site (Bhrs): Objectives, Design, Initial Geostatistical Results , 1999 .

[11]  Denis R. LeBlanc,et al.  A Statistical Evaluation of Formation Disturbance Produced by Well‐Casing Installation Methods , 1988 .

[12]  J. S. Y. Wang,et al.  Validity of cubic law for fluid flow in a deformable rock fracture. Technical information report No. 23 , 1979 .

[13]  D. T. Snow.  ROCK FRACTURE SPACINGS, OPENINGS, AND POROSITIES , 1968 .

[14]  S. C. Young,et al.  Borehole flowmeters: field application and data analysis , 1994 .

[15]  W. Barrash,et al.  DESIGN OF RESEARCH WELLFIELD FOR CALIBRATING GEOPHYSICAL METHODS AGAINST HYDROLOGIC PARAMETERS , 1998 .

[16]  A. V. Everdingen,et al.  The Skin Effect and Its Influence on the Productive Capacity of a Well , 1953 .

[17]  J. H. Dane,et al.  Physical Measurements in Subsurface Hydrology , 1991 .

[18]  P. Witherspoon,et al.  A Method of Analyzing Transient Fluid Flow in Multilayered Aquifers , 1969 .

[19]  Paul Michaels,et al.  Use of Principal Component Analysis to Determine Down-Hole Tool Orientation and Enhance SH-Waves , 2001 .

[20]  Paul Michaels.  In Situ Determination of Soil Stiffness and Damping , 1998 .

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

[22]  J. J. Fox.  Analytical Modeling of Fully Penetrating Pumping Tests at the Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site for Aquifer Parameters and Wellbore Skin , 2006 .

[23]  W. Niemann,et al.  Wellskins and slug tests: where's the bias? , 2001 .

[24]  Arlen W. Harbaugh,et al.  Techniques of water-resources investigations of the U , 1988 .

[25]  Eberhard O. Voit,et al.  Understanding through Modeling , 2006 .

[26]  Raymond Siever,et al.  Sand and sandstone , 1972 .

[27]  R. Flores,et al.  Recent Developments in Fluvial Sedimentology , 1987 .

[28]  W. Barrash,et al.  Significance of porosity for stratigraphy and textural composition in subsurface, coarse fluvial deposits: Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site , 2004 .

[29]  Fred J. Molz,et al.  In-Well Hydraulics of the Electromagnetic Borehole Flowmeter , 1999 .

[30]  Allen F. Moench,et al.  Specific Yield as Determined by Type‐Curve Analysis of Aquifer‐Test Data , 1994 .

[31]  J. W. Mercer,et al.  Evaluation of Slug Tests in Wells Containing a Finite-Thickness Skin , 1984 .

[32]  M. Hanna.  Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists , 1927 .

[33]  A. Moench,et al.  Transient Flow to a Large‐Diameter Well in an Aquifer With Storative Semiconfining Layers , 1985 .

[34]  P. Domenico,et al.  Physical and chemical hydrogeology , 1990 .

[35]  Allen F. Moench,et al.  Flow to a well of finite diameter in a homogeneous, anisotropic water table aquifer , 1997 .

[36]  Arlen W. Harbaugh,et al.  MODFLOW-2000, The U.S. Geological Survey Modular Ground-Water Model - User Guide to Modularization Concepts and the Ground-Water Flow Process , 2000 .

[37]  Tom Clemo.  MODFLOW-2000 for Cylindrical Geometry With Internal Flow Observations and Improved Water Table Simulation , 2002 .

[38]  J. F. Ayers,et al.  Aquifer Properties Determined from Two Analytical Solutions , 1998 .

[39]  J. Diard,et al.  Numerical inversion of Laplace transforms.: A useful tool for evaluation of chemical diffusion coefficients in ion-insertion electrodes investigated by PITT , 2007 .

[40]  WTAQ: A Computer Program for Calculating Drawdowns and Estimating Hydraulic Properties for Confined and Water-Table Aquifers , 1999 .

[41]  S. Goldstein.  BOREHOLE RADAR ATTENUATION-DIFFERENCE TOMOGRAPHY DURING THE TRACER / TIME-LAPSE TEST AT THE BOISE HYDROGEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH SITE , 2003 .

[42]  W. P. Clement,et al.  Borehole Radar Attenuation-Difference Tomography During The Tracer/Time-Lapse Test At The Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site , 2003 .

[43]  B. Bluck.  Structure of coarse grained braided stream alluvium , 1979, Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.

[44]  Louis A. Schmittroth,et al.  Numerical inversion of Laplace transforms , 1960, Commun. ACM.

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

[46]  P. Hufschmied,et al.  Measuring hydraulic conductivity with the borehole flowmeter , 1989 .