4.7 Article

Groundwater flow characterization of an ophiolitic hard-rock aquifer from cross-borehole multi-level hydraulic experiments

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
卷 589, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125152

关键词

Ophiolitic aquifer; Cross-borehole hydraulic test; Multi-level packer pumping experiment; Heterogeneous hydrosystems; Hydraulic property estimation; Variable flow-rate model

资金

  1. International Continental Scientific Drilling Program
  2. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation [2014-3-01]
  3. U.S. NSF [NSF-EAR-1516300]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ophiolitic formations play a critical role in the groundwater resource of numerous countries and areas. Previous studies show that the structural heterogeneities of these rocks, coming from the presence of both different lithological units and multi-scale discontinuities, result in complex hydrogeological features that are not well characterized yet. In particular, there is a need for understanding how these heterogeneities impact the hydrodynamic properties of ophiolitic aquifers and the highly variable chemical composition of the water. To this end, we conduct various kinds of pumping experiments between two boreholes 15 m apart in the ophiolitic formation of the Batin (BA1) site in the wadi Tayin massif of the Sultanate of Oman. Cross-borehole open pumping experiments, as well as multi-level pumping and monitoring hydraulic tests, are performed in conductive zones that were identified from temperature and flowmeter data, but also in low-permeability zones requiring to manage very low pumping flow rates. The collected data are interpreted with a model implementing non-integral flow dimension, leakage and time-dependent pumping flow rates. The considered modeling concepts and the estimated hydrogeological properties show that the multi-directional structural heterogeneities of ophiolitic aquifers are key features that must be considered in future hydrogeological models because they drive the hydraulic responses of these systems.

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