Ir al menú de navegación principal Ir al contenido principal Ir al pie de página del sitio
ACI Avances en Ciencias e Ingenierías

SECCIÓN C: INGENIERÍAS

Vol. 11 Núm. 2 (2019)

Influence of the scale range width on the determination of the hydraulic conductivity and effective porosity. The case of a porous aquifer in southern Italy

DOI
https://doi.org/10.18272/aci.v11i2.296
Enviado
mayo 25, 2016
Publicado
2019-05-14

Resumen

Abstract

The importance of a law that, for an assigned porous medium, gives the variability of the hydraulic conductivity with the effective porosity is well known. Commonly this variability is represented by a power law at different scales, especially those of laboratory and field. Often it can be useful to have a scaling law valid for a single scale range, comprising both those of laboratory and field. Therefore investigation about the reliability of the laws representing the scaling behavior in the various intervals to which reference was made could be suitable.

The purpose of this study is to provide evidence about the reliability of the scaling laws for laboratory, field and global (laboratory plus field) scaling ranges, verifying consistency with the expected proportionality between hydraulic conductivity and effective porosity for each of these. This verification was carried out using power-type scaling laws to two and four parameters respectively, and performing suitable moving averages of original data sets, in an attempt to reduce the inevitable measurement uncertainties. The experimental results, obtained with reference to the confined aquifer of Montalto Uffugo test field, show that there are no significant differences between the scaling laws considered and highlight the need to reduce the measurement uncertainties, which weigh heavily on the reliability of scaling laws.

 

Keywords: Scaling law; Hydraulic conductivity; Effective porosity; Laboratory measurement, Field measurement.

 

INFLUENCIA DE LA AMPLITUD DEL INTERVALO DE ESCALA EN LA DETERMINACIÓN DE LA CONDUCTIVIDAD HIDRÁULICA Y LA POROSIDAD EFECTIVA. EL CASO DE UN ACUÍFERO POROSA DEL SUR DE ITALIA

 

La importancia de una ley que, para un dado medio poroso, describa la variabilidad de la conductividad hidráulica en función de la porosidad efectiva es bien conocida. Frecuentemente esta variabilidad está representada por una ley de potencia a diferentes escalas, especialmente las de laboratorio y de campo. A menudo es útil tener una ley de escalamiento válida para un cierto rango de escala incluyendo los de laboratorio y campo. Por esta razón, es oportuno investigar la confiabilidad de las leyes que representan este comportamiento de escalamiento en los diferentes intervalos a los cuales típicamente se hace referencia. El propósito de este estudio es proporcionar evidencia sobre la confiabilidad de las leyes de escalamiento para intervalos de escala válidos para laboratorio, campo y globales (laboratorio + campo), verificando la consistencia con la proporcionalidad esperada entre la conductividad hidráulica y la porosidad efectiva para cada uno de estos. Esta verificación se llevó a cabo utilizando leyes de escalamiento de potencia para dos y cuatro parámetros respectivamente, y tratando de reducir las inevitables incertidumbres de medición. Los resultados experimentales obtenidos con referencia al acuífero confinado del campo de prueba Montalto Uffugo, muestran que no hay diferencias significativas entre las leyes de escalamiento consideradas y se destaca la necesidad de reducir las incertidumbres de medición, las cuales tienen un alto peso sobre la fiabilidad de las leyes de escala.

 

Palabras clave: ley de escalamiento; Conductividad hidráulica; porosidad efectiva; mediciones de laboratorio, medición de campo.

 

viewed = 415 times

Citas

  1. Clauser, C. 1992. Permeability of crystalline rocks. EOS, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 73:233Y238.
  2. Sánchez-Villa, X., J. Carrera, and Girardi J. P., 1996. Scale effects in transmissivity. J. Hydrol. 183:1Y22.
  3. Butler, J. J. Jr. and Healey, J.M., 1998. "Relationship between pumping test and slug-test parameters: scale effect or artifact?" Ground Water, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 305-313.
  4. Giménez, D., Rawls, W. J. and Lauren, J. G. 1999. "Scaling properties of saturated hydraulic conductivity in soil," Geoderma, vol. 88, no. 3-4, pp. 205-220.
  5. Neuman, S. P., and V. Di Federico. 2003. "Multifaceted nature of hydrogeologic scaling and its interpretation". Rev. Geophys. 41:4.1Y4.31.
  6. Martinez-Landa, L. and Carrera, J., 2005. "An analysis of hydraulic conductivity scale effects in granite (Full-scale Engineered Barrier Experiment (FEBEX), Grimsel, Switzerland)," Water Resources Research, vol. 41, no. 3.
  7. Illman W. A., 2006. "Strong field evidence of directional permeability scale effect in fractured rock," Journal of Hydrology, vol. 319, no. 1-4, pp. 227-236.
  8. Fallico C., Vita M. C., De Bartolo S. and Straface S., 2012. "Scaling Effect of the Hydraulic Conductivity in a Confined Aquifer". Soil Science, vol. 177(6): 385-391.
  9. Vesselinov V. V. and Neuman S. P., 2001. "Numerical inverse interpretation of single-hole pneumatic tests in unsaturated fractured tuff," Ground Water, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 685-695.
  10. Illman W. A., 2005. "Type curve analyses of pneumatic single-hole tests in unsaturated fractured tuff: direct evidence for a porosity scale effect" Water Resources Research, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 1-14.
  11. Le Borgne T., Bour O.,. Paillet F. L and Caudal J.-P., 2006. "Assessment of preferential flow path connectivity and hydraulic properties at single-borehole and cross-borehole scales in a fractured aquifer," Journal of Hydrology, vol. 328, no. 1-2, pp. 347-359.
  12. Fallico C., De Bartolo S., Troisi S. and Veltri M., 2010. "Scaling analysis of hydraulic conductivity and porosity on a sandy medium of an unconfined aquifer reproduced in the laboratory". Geoderma. 160:3Y12.
  13. Jiménez-Martínez J., Longuevergne L., Le Borgne T., Davy P., Russian A. and Bour O., 2013. "Temporal and spatial scaling of hydraulic response to recharge in fractured aquifers: Insights from a frequency domain analysis," Water Resources Research, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 3007-3023.
  14. Serra O., 1984. "Fundamentals of Well Log Interpretation", Vol. 1: The Acquisition of Logging Data, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  15. Ahuja L. R., Naney J. W., Green R. E. and Nielsen D. R., 1984. "Macroporosity to characterize spatial variability of hydraulic conductivity and effects of land management" Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 699-702.
  16. Franzmeier D. P., 1991. "Estimation of hydraulic conductivity from effective porosity data for some Indiana soils," Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1801-1803.
  17. Timlin D. J., Ahuja L. R., Pachepsky Y., Williams R. D., Gimenez D. and Rawls W., 1999. "Use of Brooks-Corey parameters to improve estimates of saturated conductivity from effective porosity," Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 1086-1092.
  18. Flint L. E. and Selker J. S., 2003. "Use of porosity to estimate hydraulic properties of volcanic tuffs," Advances in Water Resources, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 561-571.
  19. Hantush M. S., 1964. "Hydraulics of wells". In Chow, V.T., Vol. 1, ed. Advances in Hydroscience. Academic Press, New York, 281-433.
  20. Aimrun W., Amin M. S. M. and Eltaib S. M., 2004. "Effective porosity of paddy soils as an estimation of its saturated hydraulic conductivity," Geoderma, vol. 121, no. 3-4, pp. 197-203
  21. Carrera J., 1993. "An overview of uncertainties in modelling groundwater solute transport" Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, vol. 13, no. 1-4, pp. 23-48.
  22. Schulze-Makuch D. and Cherkauer D. S., 1997. "Method developed for extrapolating scale behavior," Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, vol. 78, no. 13, 3, 7 pages.
  23. Mallants D., Mohanty B. P., Vervoort A. and Feyen J., 1997. "Spatial analysis of saturated hydraulic conductivity in a soil with macropores," Soil Technology, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 115-131
  24. Knudby C. and Carrera J., 2006. "On the use of apparent hydraulic diffusivity as an indicator of connectivity," Journal of Hydrology, vol. 329, no. 3-4, pp. 377-389.
  25. Pacheco F.A.L., Landim P.M.B. and Szocs T., 2015. "Bridging hydraulic diffusivity from aquifer to particle-size scale: a study on loess sediments from southwest Hungary". Hydrological Sciences Journal, vol. 60, no. 2, pp.: 269-284.
  26. Zlotnik V.A., Zurbuchen B.R., Ptak, T. Teutsch, G., 2000. "Support volume and scale effect in hydraulic conductivity: experimental aspects". In: Zhang, D., Winter, C.L. (Eds.), Theory Modeling and Field Investigation in Hydrogeology: A Special Volume in Honor of Shlomo P. Neuman's 60th Birthday. Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap., 348. Boulder, Colorado, pp. 191-213.
  27. Alyamani M. S. and Sen Z., 1993. "Determination of hydraulic conductivity from complete grain-size distribution curves," Ground Water, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 551-555.
  28. Regalado C. M. and Muñoz-Carpena R., 2004. "Estimating the saturated hydraulic conductivity in a spatially variable soil with different permeameters: a stochastic Kozeny-Carman relation," Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 189-202.
  29. Odong J., 2007. "Evaluation of empirical formulae for determination of hydraulic conductivity based on grain-size analysis," The Journal of American Science, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 54-60.
  30. Song J., Chen X., Cheng C., Wang D., Lackey S. and Xu Z., 2009. "Feasibility of grain-size analysis for determination of vertical hydraulic conductivity of streambeds", J. Hydrol. 375:428-437.
  31. Pliakas F. and Petalas C., 2011. "Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity of Unconsolidated River Alluvium from Permeameter Tests, Empirical Formulas and Statistical Parameters Effect Analysis", Water Resour Manage 25:2877-2899.
  32. Vienken T. and Dietrich P., 2011. "Field evaluation of methods for determining hydraulic conductivity from grain size data," Journal of Hydrology, vol. 400, no. 1-2, pp. 58-71.
  33. Fallico C., 2014. "Reconsideration at field scale of the relationship between hydraulic conductivity and porosity. The case of a sandy aquifer in south Italy". The Scientific World Journal, Vol. 2014, Article ID 537387, 15 pages, http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/537387.
  34. De Bartolo S., Fallico C. and Veltri M., 2013. "A Note on the Fractal Behavior of Hydraulic Conductivity and Effective Porosity for Experimental Values in a Confined Aquifer", The Scientific World Journal, Vol. 2013, Article ID 356753, 10 pages, http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/356753
  35. Fallico C., De Bartolo S., Veltri M. and Severino G., 2016. "On the dependence of the saturated hydraulic conductivity upon the effective porosity through a power law model at different scales". HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, Published online in Wiley Online Library
  36. Bear J. 1979. "Hydraulics of Groundwater". McGraw-Hill, New York.
  37. Vukovic M. and Soro A., 1992. "Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity of Porous Media from Grain-Size Composition". Water Resources Publications, Littleton, Colorado, USA.
  38. Murphy C.P. and Banfield C.F., 1978. "Pore space variability in a sub-surface horizon of two soils". Journal Soil Sci., 29, pp: 156-166.
  39. Sisson J.B. and Wierenga P.J., 1981. Spatial variability of steady-state infiltration rates as a stochastic process". Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 45, pp: 699-704.
  40. Feder J., 1988. Fractals. Plenum, New York.
  41. Rodriguez-Iturbe I., Vogel G.K., Rigon R., Entekhabi D., Castelli F. and Rinaldo A., 1995. "On the spatial organization of soil moisture fields". Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, pp: 2757-2760.
  42. Schulze-Makuch D. and Cherkauer D. S., 1998. "Variations in hydraulic conductivity with scale of measurement during aquifer tests in heterogeneous, porous carbonate rocks," Hydrogeology Journal, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 204-215.
  43. Campbell M. D., Starrett M. S., Fowler J. D. and Klein J. J., 1990. "Slug test and hydraulic conductivity," Ground Water Management, vol. 4, pp. 85-99.
  44. Masch F. D. and Denny K. J., 1996. "Grain size distribution and its effect on the hydraulic conductivity of unconsolidated sands" Water Resources Research, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 665-677.
  45. Cashman P. M. and Preene M., 2001. Groundwater Lowering in Construction. A Practical Guide, Spon, New York, NY, USA.
  46. Kalbus E., Reinstorf F. and Schirmer M., 2006. "Measuring methods for groundwater"”surface water interactions: a review," Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 873-887e
  47. Herzog B.L., Griffin R.A., Stohr C.J., Follmer L.R., Morse W.J. and Su W.J., 1989. "Investigation of Failure Mechanisms and Migration of Organic Chemicals at Wilsonville, Illinois". Ground Water M.R., Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.:82-89.
  48. Butler J. J. Jr., McElwee C. D. and Liu W., 1996. "Improving the quality of parameter estimates obtained from slug tests" Ground Water, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 480-490.
  49. Butler J. J. Jr., 1997. "The Design, Performance, and Analysis of Slug Tests", Kansas Geological Survey"”The University of Kansas, Lewis Publishers.
  50. Shapiro A. M. and Hsieh P. A., 1998. "How good are estimates of transmissivity from slug tests in fractured rock?". Ground Water, Vol. 36(1): 37-48.
  51. Odong J., 2007. "Evaluation of empirical formulae for determination of hydraulic conductivity based on grain-size analysis," The Journal of American Science, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 54-60.
  52. Lambe T.W., 1951. Soil Testing for Engineers, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA.
  53. Danielson R. E. and Sutherland P. L., 1986. "Porosity," in Methods of Soil Analysis"”Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods", Agronomy Monograph no. 9, pp. 443-461, Soil Science Society of America, Madison,Wis, USA.
  54. Ahuja L. R, Cassel D. K., Bruce R. R. and Barnes B. B., 1989. "Evaluation of spatial distribution of hydraulic conductivity using effective porosity data," Soil Science, vol. 148, no. 6, pp 404-411.
  55. Staub M., Galietti B., Oxarango L., Khire M. V. and Gourc J. P., 2009. "Porosity and hydraulic conductivity of MSW using laboratory"”scale tests," in Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop "Hydro-Physico-Mechanics of Landfills", Braunschweig, Germany.
  56. Klute A. and Dirkesen C., 1986. "Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity: laboratory methods," in Methods of Soil Analysis, Part I, Physical and Mineralogical Methods, A. Klute, Ed., American Society of Agronomy, Madison,Wis, USA, 2nd edition.
  57. Fallico C., Mazzuca R. and Troisi S. 2002. "Determination of Confined Phreatic Aquifer Anisotropy", Ground Water. Vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 475 - 480.
  58. Fallico C. and Troisi S., 2003. "Experimental verification of confined phreatic aquifer anisotropy", Proceedings XXX IAHR Congress, 24 - 29 August. Thessaloniki - Greece.
  59. Yevjevich V., 1972. "Stochastic Processes in Hydrology",Water Resources Publications.
  60. .

Artículos más leídos del mismo autor/a