4.7 Article

Particle tracking model of bimolecular reactive transport in porous media

期刊

WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH
卷 46, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2009WR009017

关键词

-

资金

  1. Israel Science Foundation [575/08]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We use a particle tracking approach to analyze the dynamics that control bimolecular reactive transport (A + B -> C) in porous media. Particle transitions are governed by spatial and temporal distributions to account for the transport within a continuous time random walk framework. Particle tracking simulations are compared to measurements from a laboratory experiment of bimolecular reactive transport in a constant flow field. The simulations capture the experimental sequence of evolving C particle profiles using a marginally Fickian temporal distribution to quantify the particle transitions. The first profile is a fit with the model parameters, and subsequent ones are predictions. The rate of production of reaction product C over time is found to follow a power law. At early times after the injection of A particles into a uniform distribution of B particles, the strong contact and reaction between A and B particles induces the formation of a spatial void between the reactants. At longer times, the production of C is nearly constant and depends on the fluctuations of velocities of reactant particles that can surmount the void. We probe the behavioral dependence of the A, B, and C spatial profiles on the spectra of velocity fluctuations of the reactants. The latter are generated by different temporal distributions, namely, a decaying exponential distribution, which is equivalent to advective-dispersive (Fickian) transport, and the truncated power law with degrees of non-Fickian behavior, which is characteristic of transport in heterogeneous media. We demonstrate that the C profile exhibits subtle dynamics because of competition between the dispersion (spreading of the plumes) of A and B and the (power law) production rate.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据