4.5 Article

Reactive particle-tracking solutions to a benchmark problem on heavy metal cycling in lake sediments

Journal

JOURNAL OF CONTAMINANT HYDROLOGY
Volume 234, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2020.103642

Keywords

Lagrangian modeling; Particle methods; Imperfect mixing; Diffusion-reaction equation; Heavy metal cycling

Funding

  1. US Army Research Office [W911NF-18-1-0338]
  2. National Science Foundation [EAR-1351625, EAR-1417145, DMS-1614586]
  3. DOE Office of Science [DE-SC0019123]
  4. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0019123] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Geochemical systems are known to exhibit highly variable spatiotemporal behavior. This may be observed both in non-smooth concentration curves in space for a single sampling time and also in variability between samples taken from the same location at different times. However, most models that are designed to simulate these systems provide only single-solution smooth curves and fail to capture the noise and variability seen in the data. We apply a recently developed reactive particle-tracking method to a system that displays highly complex geochemical behavior. When the method is made to most closely resemble a corresponding Eulerian method, in its unperturbed form, we see near-exact match between solutions of the two models. More importantly, we consider two approaches for perturbing the model and find that the spatially-perturbed condition is able to capture a greater degree of the variability present in the data. This method of perturbation is a task to which particle methods are uniquely suited and Eulerian models are not well-suited. Additionally, because of the nature of the algorithm, noisy spatial gradients can be highly resolved by a large number of mobile particles, and this incurs negligible computational cost, as compared to expensive chemistry calculations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available