GROUNDWATER MODELLING:
Download
1 / 20

GROUNDWATER MODELLING: FROM GEOLOGY TO HYDROGEOLOGYAlfonso Rivera - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 595 Views
  • Uploaded on

GROUNDWATER MODELLING: FROM GEOLOGY TO HYDROGEOLOGY Alfonso Rivera Chief Hydrogeologist Geological Survey of Canada GSA Annual Meeting Denver, CO, USA October 28-31 2007. GROUNDWATER MODELLING: FROM GEOLOGY TO HYDROGEOLOGY. OUTLINE Modelling

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'GROUNDWATER MODELLING: FROM GEOLOGY TO HYDROGEOLOGYAlfonso Rivera' - Melvin


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Slide1 l.jpg

GROUNDWATER MODELLING:

FROM GEOLOGY TO HYDROGEOLOGY

Alfonso RiveraChief Hydrogeologist

Geological Survey of Canada

GSA Annual Meeting

Denver, CO, USA

October 28-31 2007


Groundwater modelling from geology to hydrogeology l.jpg
GROUNDWATER MODELLING: FROM GEOLOGY TO HYDROGEOLOGY

OUTLINE

  • Modelling

  • Geology mapping-Groundwater modelling links

  • Approaches to Groundwater Modelling

  • Examples of Models developed by the GSC

  • Groundwater Analysis & Simulation types

  • Towards an integrated hydrogeological approach

  • Summary and Conclusions


Modelling l.jpg
MODELLING

So what do we mean?

Modelling is a very broad term; we have:

  • Geological Models

  • Conceptual Models

  • Hydrogeological models

  • Mathematical models

  • Analytical models

  • Numerical models

  • Deterministic models

  • Stochastic models


Geology mapping groundwater modelling links l.jpg
Geology Mapping-Groundwater Modelling Links

  • Groundwater investigations depend on the process of developing aconceptualflow model as a precursor to developing amathematicalmodel

  • … leading to the development of a numerical approximation model

  • Assumptionsmade in the development of the conceptualmodel

  • depend heavily on thegeologicalframework (or model) defining

  • the aquifer

Thus, the link between geological mapping and groundwater

Modelling is the building of a conceptual model


Geology mapping groundwater modelling links5 l.jpg

Hydrogeological model

Geological survey

Conceptual Model

Hydrogeologist

Geologist

Geology Mapping-Groundwater Modelling Links


Overview of the hydrogeological modelling process l.jpg

Geological model

Define Objective

Conceptual Model

Mathematical Model

Numerical Formulation

Analytical

Solution

Pre-

Processing

Computer Program

Code verified?

no

Code

Solution

yes

Field data

Model design

Calibration

Comparison

with

Field Data

Modelling/

Simulation

Verification

Prediction

Presentation of results

Post-

Processing

Field data

Postaudit

Overview of the Hydrogeological Modelling Process


Approaches to groundwater modelling l.jpg
Approaches to Groundwater Modelling

The flow of GW through fractured rock aquifers is modelled using one of two types of conceptual models:

  • Equivalent Porous Medium (EPM)

    If the length scale of interest is large compared with the scale of heterogeneities, such as fracture lengths

  • Discrete Fractured Network (DFN)

    When the structure of the rock is highly heterogeneous on the scale of interest

    The structure of the rock is described in terms of statistics of the fracture sets, i.e., fracture density and orientation



Approaches to groundwater modelling9 l.jpg
Approaches to Groundwater Modelling

Types of approaches, models

  • Equivalent Porous Medium (EPM)

  • Discrete Fractured Network (DFN)

  • A combination of the two

(Serco, 2000)


Slide10 l.jpg

G, Hg

G

G

G, Hg

G, Hg

G

G, Hg

G

Hg

G, Hg

Hg

Hg

G

G

Hg

G, Hg

Hg

Hg

Hg

G

Example of Methodology for Developing Conceptual and numerical models

(Rivera et al., 2001)


Slide11 l.jpg

Examples of Models

developed by the GSC


Groundwater analysis simulations types l.jpg
Groundwater Analysis & Simulations Types

  • Two different “schools” of groundwater scientists developing the science of hydrogeology:

    • fundamental hydrogeologists, and

    • environmental hydrogeologists.

  • Fundamental hydrogeologists study and develop laws and methods to quantify groundwater flow from a theoretical perspective.

  • Environmental hydrogeologists use those laws and methods to study real aquifer systems, that is, geological formations containing and conducting water.

  • The second group is the one that most closely interacts with geologists



Towards an integrated hydrogeological approach l.jpg

Pre-Processors

ISATIS

SVM

GoCAD

MAGICS

FRACMESH

GIS

MAPINFO

RASTELM

Simulators :

Variables

1D

FEFLOW, SUTRA,

GUI/

ESRI

P, C,

P,

2D

y,

q,

t,

N

T,

a,

H, T

MODFLOW,TOUGH,etc.

3D

TRACK

AVS

FED

TECPLOT

MATHLAB

ILLUSTRATOR

PHOTOSHOP

Post-Processors

Towards an integrated hydrogeological approach


Towards an integrated hydrogeological approach15 l.jpg
Towards an integrated hydrogeological approach

  • Pre-processors include information from GIS (MAPINFO) and are used to facilitate data synthesis, analysis, and visualization

  • Simulators aboundin the second phase, but the link with pre-procesors is still lacking to a large degree. Graphical User Interfaces (GUI) have become a necessity in this phase.

  • The third phase, post-processing, has become perhaps the most important part of the modelling process, i.e.,

    • Strong need for understanding GW from water managers and public, thus visualization is a key element in modelling.

    • In the future we should be able to virtually “walk” the client through and inside the simulated aquifer

  • Future: integration of disciplines and processes


Differences and issues l.jpg
Differences and Issues

HM have a very different ontology as compared to geological

models!

Model Boundary conditions:

Dirichlet (specified h or c); Neumann (specified c- or q-gradients); Cauchy (combined)

Medium conditions:

Heterogeneity, Isotropy, Anisotrophy

Porous media, Fractured Media, discrete, EPM, Hybrid

1D, 2D, 3D

Set of parameters:

Hydraulic, Transport, Mechanic, Heat: P, H, C, T, K, Ss, σ, Nα, qi, t

Type of modelling:

Deterministic, stochastic

Coupling:

Hydro-transport (solute transfer); Thermohaline (flow, solute, heat); Hydro-mechanic (subsidence)


Summary l.jpg

We should distinguish:

Geological model --►Conceptual model --► Hydrogeological model

SUMMARY

  • To build a HG Model, you need:

    • A numerical code to solve for a set of equations

    • Discretization of space (FDM, FEM) and time

    • Boundary conditions

    • Initial conditions

    • Set of model parameters, per node, per element or per layer

    • Set of data of the stresses in the system (pumping)

    • Set of data for calibration (heads, conc., subsidence)

If the geological model is wrong, the conceptual model could

be wrong and the HG model will not be successful


Summary18 l.jpg
SUMMARY

  • Thus, geologists and hydrogeologists need to enhance cooperation at all levels:

    • Geologists need to learn to listen to hydrogeologists

    • Hydrogeologists need to ask geologists and learn form their input/insight


Conclusions l.jpg
CONCLUSIONS

  • Increased emphasis in geological mapping and groundwater applications is observed in interrelated disciplines of Earth sciences

  • A clear link between geological mappers and groundwater modelers is still lacking

  • More serious efforts of communication are needed in three interrelated disciplines: geology, hydrogeology and geomatics when dealing with GW models

  • Technology and tools abound but the three domains do not take full advantage to benefit each other


Conclusions20 l.jpg
CONCLUSIONS

  • Most important issues: differences between practitioners, e.g., HM have a very different ontology as compared to GM

  • Integrated and automated platforms for modelling 3D processes in hydrogeology using experts systems and standard ontologies are the future and should be pursued in close cooperation between the three domains


ad