4.3 Article

Experimental determination of permeability of Neapolitan yellow tuff

Journal

JOURNAL OF VOLCANOLOGY AND GEOTHERMAL RESEARCH
Volume 160, Issue 1-2, Pages 125-136

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2006.09.004

Keywords

Campi Flegrei; hydrothermal systems; resurgent calderas; porous media; hydraulic permeability

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents and discusses the measurement of permeability of Neapolitan Yellow Tuff (NYT) samples obtained in the framework of a study concerning the phenomenon of bradyseism, i.e. the slow vertical movement of soil, in the Campi Flegrei caldera (Campania-Italy). Measurements have been performed under isothermal, non-isothermal and transient non-isothermal conditions using a specifically designed apparatus. Results of measurements of porosity of different samples are also reported. Experimental results in isothermal conditions show that the volume flux through the samples changes linearly with applied pressure. The values of permeability obtained turn out to be independent of the temperature and pressure gradients applied to the samples. This result is consistent with the fact that the permeability is a characteristic of the porous medium, and as such is not affected by temperature and pressure variation, at least in the range examined. The permeability values measured in our laboratories agree quite well with the ones measured in situ by the Agenzia Generale Italiana Petroli (AGIP) during a geothermal exploration of the Campi Flegrei area in 1980. An interesting, still unexplained phenomenon has been detected during transient phases when both pressure and temperature gradients were applied to the samples. The phenomenon consists in an enhancement of volume flux due to heat flux in the transient phase. The extra volume-flux disappears once the steady temperature gradient is reached. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available