Interpretation of a short-duration pumping test in the mixed flow karst system using a three-reservoir model

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Chengpeng Lu (1) (2)
  Longcang Shu (1)
  Zhonghui Wen (1)
  Xunhong Chen (2)
  
• 关键词：Pumping test ; Short ; duration ; Mixed flow karst system (MFKS) ; Three ; reservoir ; Matrix ; Conduit network
• 刊名：Carbonates and Evaporites
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：2 - May 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：28
• 期：1
• 页码：149-158
• 全文大小：415 KB
• 参考文献：1. Atkinson TC (1977) Diffuse flow and conduit flow in limestone terrain in the Mendip Hills, Somerset (Great Britain). J Hydrol 35(1-):93-10 CrossRef
  2. Bakalowicz M (2005) Karst groundwater—a challenge for new resources. Hydrogeol J 13(1):148-60 CrossRef
  3. Barenblatt GI, Zheltov IP, Kochina IN (1960) Basic concepts in the theory of seepage of homogeneous liquids in fissured rocks. J Appl Math Mech 24(5):1286-303 CrossRef
  4. Bauer S, Liedl R, Sauter M (2003) Modeling of karst aquifer genesis—influence of exchange flow. Water Resour Res 39(10):1285. doi:10.1029/2003WR002218 CrossRef
  5. Chen X (1998) Assessment of hydraulic properties in an unconfined alluvial aquifer near Great Island, Nebraska. J Am Water Resour Assoc 34(3):603-16 CrossRef
  6. Debieche TH, Guglielmi Y, Mudry J (2002) Modeling the hydraulical behavior of a fissured-karstic aquifer in exploitation conditions. J Hydrol 257(1-):247-55 CrossRef
  7. Doherty J (2004) PEST—model-independent parameter estimation users manual. Watermark Numerical Computing, Brisbane, Australia. Available for download at http://www.epa.gov/ceampubl/tools/pest/)
  8. Huang YC, Yeh HD (2007) The use of sensitivity analysis in on-line aquifer parameter estimation. J Hydrol 335(3-):406-18 CrossRef
  9. Hunt B (1999) Unsteady stream depletion from ground water pumping. Ground Water 37(1):98-02 CrossRef
  10. Jones WK (1999) Pump tests of wells at the National Training Center near Shepherdstown, West Virginia. In: Palmer AN, Palmer MV, Sasowsky ID (eds) Karst modeling—proceedings of the symposium held February 24 through 27, 1999, Charlottesville, Virginia. Karst Waters Institute Special Publication 5, pp 259-61
  11. Kabala ZJ (2001) Sensitivity analysis of a pumping test on a well with wellbore storage and skin. Adv Water Resour 24(5):483-04 CrossRef
  12. Liedl R, Sauter M, H?ckinghaus D, Clemens T, Teutsch G (2003) Simulation of the development of karst aquifers using a coupled continuum pipe flow model. Water Resour Res 39(3):1057. doi:10.1029/2001WR001206 CrossRef
  13. Liu L, Shu L, Chen X, Oromo T (2010a) The hydrologic function and behavior of the Houzhai underground river basin, Guizhou province, southwestern China. Hydrogeol J 18(2):509-18. doi:10.1007/s10040-009-0518-z CrossRef
  14. Liu L, Shu L, Chen X, Wang E, Oromo T (2010b) Rainfall-driven spring hydrograph modeling in a karstic water system, southwestern China. Water Resour Manag 24(11):2689-701. doi:10.1007/s11269-009-9574-3 CrossRef
  15. Lu C, Shu L, Chen X, Cheng C (2011) Parameter estimation for a karst aquifer with unknown thickness using the genetic algorithm method. Environ Earth Sci 63(4):797-07. doi:10.1007/s12665-010-0751-8 CrossRef
  16. Maréchal JC, Ladouche B, D?rfliger N, Lachassagne P (2008) Interpretation of pumping tests in a mixed flow karst system. Water Resour Res 44(5):W05401. doi:10.1029/2007WR006288 CrossRef
  17. Marsaud B (1997) A method for interpreting pumping tests in karst aquifers. Hydrogeologie 1997(3):31-2
  18. McDonald MG, Harbaugh AW (1988) A modular three-dimensional finite-difference ground-water flow model. US Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resource Investigation, 06-A1
  19. Neuman SP (2005) Trends, prospects and challenges in quantifying flow and transport through fractured rocks. Hydrogeol J 13(1):124-47 CrossRef
  20. Quinlan JF, Ewers RO (1985) Ground water flow in limestone terranes—strategy rationale and procedure for reliable, efficient monitoring of ground water quality in karst areas. In: Proceedings of the Fifth national symposium and exposition on aquifer restoration and ground water monitoring, May 21-4, 1985, Columbus, Ohio. Worthington, Ohio, National Water Well Association, pp 197-34
  21. Singh SK, Mishra GC, Swamee PK, Ojha CS (2002) Aquifer diffusivity and stream resistance from varying stream stage. J Irrigation Drainage Eng 128(1):57-1 CrossRef
  22. Streltsova TD (1988) Well testing in heterogeneous formations. Wiley, New York
  23. Thrailkill J (1985) Flow in a limestone aquifer as determined from water tracing and water levels in wells. J Hydrol 78(1-):123-36 CrossRef
  24. Thrailkill J (1988) Drawdown interval analysis—a method of determining the parameters of shallow conduit flow carbonate aquifers from pumping tests. Water Resour Res 24(8):1423-428. doi:10.1029/WR024i008p01423 CrossRef
  25. Zhang C, Yuan D (2004) Hydrochemical variation of typical karst subterranean stream basin and its relationship with land change. J Chin Soil Water Conserv 18(5):134-37
  
• 作者单位：Chengpeng Lu (1) (2)
  Longcang Shu (1)
  Zhonghui Wen (1)
  Xunhong Chen (2)
  
  1. State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing, 210098, China
  2. School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68583, USA
  
• ISSN：1878-5212

文摘

A new three-reservoir model was proposed to simulate complex groundwater flow in a karst system where a short-duration pumping test was conducted. The pumping test was conducted in the Houzhai underground river basin located in Puding County, Southwest China. Three sinkholes were used as a pumping and observation well network in the pumping test. Water was pumped from one sinkhole located in the local matrix reservoir. The response of hydraulic head to the pumping was observed at the other two sinkholes located in the conduit network reservoir. Maréchal and others (Water Resour Res 44:W05401, 2008) used a two-reservoir model to simulate a long-duration pumping test which provided a good match between the observations and calculations. In this study, a three-reservoir model was developed to represent the local matrix, regional matrix, and conduit network. The regional matrix reservoir was treated as the boundary from which the flow system was recharged. This model can better simulate the site’s hydrogeological conditions. The results show that the observed hydraulic heads agree well with the calculated heads in the conduit network [relative root mean square (rRMS) error?=?3.32?%] and in the local matrix (rRMS?=?8.43?%). The model also calculated the component volumes of groundwater flow, including the exchange among the three reservoirs. The extent of influence of the pumping test was also characterized in the model. Local matrix storage, recharge from the conduit network, and the recharge from the regional matrix account for about 10.46, 61.28 and 28.26?% of the groundwater pumpage, respectively. The appropriate rate and duration of pumping can be estimated using the calibrated model for the water resources management.