Search USGSSearch

USGS · pp1679

A theory for modeling ground-water flow in heterogeneous media

Abstract

Construction of a ground-water model for a field area is not a straightforward process. Data are virtually never complete or detailed enough to allow substitution into the model equations and direct computation of the results of interest. Formal model calibration through optimization, statistical, and geostatistical methods is being applied to an increasing extent to deal with this problem and provide for quantitative evaluation and uncertainty analysis of the model. However, these approaches are hampered by two pervasive problems: 1) nonlinearity of the solution of the model equations with respect to some of the model (or hydrogeologic) input variables (termed in this report system characteristics) and 2) detailed and generally unknown spatial variability (heterogeneity) of some of the system characteristics such as log hydraulic conductivity, specific storage, recharge and discharge, and boundary conditions. A theory is developed in this report to address these problems. The theory allows construction and analysis of a ground-water model of flow (and, by extension, transport) in heterogeneous media using a small number of lumped or smoothed system characteristics (termed parameters). The theory fully addresses both nonlinearity and heterogeneity in such a way that the parameters are not assumed to be effective values. The ground-water flow system is assumed to be adequately characterized by a set of spatially and temporally distributed discrete values, ?, of the system characteristics. This set contains both small-scale variability that cannot be described in a model and large-scale variability that can. The spatial and temporal variability in ? are accounted for by imagining ? to be generated by a stochastic process wherein ? is normally distributed, although normality is not essential. Because ? has too large a dimension to be estimated using the data normally available, for modeling purposes ? is replaced by a smoothed or lumped approximation y?. (where y is a spatial and temporal interpolation matrix). Set y?. has the same form as the expected value of ?, y 'line' ? , where 'line' ? is the set of drift parameters of the stochastic process; ?. is a best-fit vector to ?. A model function f(?), such as a computed hydraulic head or flux, is assumed to accurately represent an actual field quantity, but the same function written using y?., f(y?.), contains error from lumping or smoothing of ? using y?.. Thus, the replacement of ? by y?. yields nonzero mean model errors of the form E(f(?)-f(y?.)) throughout the model and covariances between model errors at points throughout the model. These nonzero means and covariances are evaluated through third and fifth-order accuracy, respectively, using Taylor series expansions. They can have a significant effect on construction and interpretation of a model that is calibrated by estimating ?.. Vector ?.. is estimated as 'hat' ? using weighted nonlinear least squares techniques to fit a set of model functions f(y'hat' ?) to a. corresponding set of observations of f(?), Y. These observations are assumed to be corrupted by zero-mean, normally distributed observation errors, although, as for ?, normality is not essential. An analytical approximation of the nonlinear least squares solution is obtained using Taylor series expansions and perturbation techniques that assume model and observation errors to be small. This solution is used to evaluate biases and other results to second-order accuracy in the errors. The correct weight matrix to use in the analysis is shown to be the inverse of the second-moment matrix E(Y-f(y?.))(Y-f(y?.))', but the weight matrix is assumed to be arbitrary in most developments. The best diagonal approximation is the inverse of the matrix of diagonal elements of E(Y-f(y?.))(Y-f(y?.))', and a method of estimating this diagonal matrix when it is unknown is developed using a special objective function to compute 'hat' ?. When considered to be an estimate of f

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Richard L. Cooley. 2004. A theory for modeling ground-water flow in heterogeneous media. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1679

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Resurvey of the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon dam sites in Grand Canyon National Park—Changes in sediment storage and evidence supporting the occurrence of bedrock incision through the mid-20th century

The Bureau of Reclamation developed an extensive plan for a network of dams, water tunnels, and hydropower plants in and around Grand Canyon, Arizona, in the 1940s through 1960s. The two largest of these planned dams were the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon Dams on the Colorado River. Though these dams were ultimately never built, Reclamation conducted extensive topographic, bathymetric, and subsurface exploration work at the sites proposed for these dams in the 1940s and 1950s. Resurveys of these dam sites were conducted between 1998 and 2021 to determine the changes in sediment storage at these dam sites caused by the upstream construction and operation of Glen Canyon Dam and by the recession of Lake Mead, the reservoir impounded by Hoover Dam. The resurveys of the Marble Canyon dam sites indicate that the post-1950s changes in sediment storage at these dam sites are broadly consistent with flux-based estimates of voluminous sand erosion from Marble Canyon since the 1963 closure of Glen Canyon Dam. These resurveys also suggest that the pre-dam longitudinal variation in sediment thickness over bedrock played a key role in determining the locations of the sand erosion induced by Glen Canyon Dam; more sand eroded from locations where more sand was present in the 1950s. The resurvey of the Bridge Canyon dam sites indicates that the Colorado River’s incision of the Lake Mead delta is regulated both by bed-sediment grain size and downstream hydraulic controls. Finally, analyses of bed-sediment thickness and sedimentological data at the dam sites, and observations of bed scour and gravel transport, suggest that sufficient bedrock was exposed to allow bedrock incision during commonly recurring pre-dam snowmelt floods that entrained small boulders into transport.

Arizona

The eruptive behavior of distributed volcanism forming low shield edifices—A case study of Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field, U.S.A.

Distributed volcanic fields are present in various tectonic settings worldwide, and their characteristics reflect differing influences from magmatic and tectonic processes. In the southwestern United States alone, there are 37 Quaternary distributed volcanic fields. After the primary period of extensional tectonics in the southern Basin and Range 15–5 million years ago, the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field developed in southwestern Arizona between 4 and 1 million years ago. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists primarily of low relief shield volcanoes, a type of distributed volcanism with poorly understood temporal evolution. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field is less than 200 kilometers (km) from the Colorado Plateau, Gulf of California, and southern San Andreas Fault system. This work identifies and examines controls on the emplacement of the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field by documenting shallow and surficial structures as well as eruption characteristics and style through time. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists of 21 volcanoes with a total of 33 vents over an area of about 770 square kilometers (km 2 ). The prominence of low relief shield volcanoes may be explained by ascent of basaltic magmas through thin Basin and Range crust, without much crustal contamination, and low viscosities common to mafic compositions. Typical eruption characteristics involve the construction of low relief shield volcanoes followed by Strombolian fissure eruptions at the summits or near-summit medial areas that produce scoria lapilli, which may weld to form agglomerate. The total lifetime erupted volume of about 4.3 cubic kilometers (km 3 ) represents an average eruptive flux of approximately 2x10 -3 km 3 per thousand years (k.y.). This erupted volume is low relative to Neogene basaltic intraplate distributed volcanic fields worldwide, which typically range from 10 -3 to 1 km 3 k.y. -1 . Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field eruptions were likely triggered by intermittent rejuvenation of transient magmatic zones that exist in thinned crust. Instantaneous flux from point sources feeding the lava flows is estimated to be on the order of 10 -1 to 10 cubic meters per second.

Arizona

Capitalization of positional (Lower/Middle/Upper) and temporal (Early/Middle/Late) adjectives in the names of formal chronostratigraphic and geochronologic units of the Phanerozoic

Many authors are understandably confused about the capitalization of the words “lower,” “middle,” “upper,” “early,” and “late.” Where these words are used simply as descriptive adjectives, they should be in lowercase; where they form the first word of a formal chronostratigraphic or geochronologic unit name, they should be in uppercase.

Professional Paper