A comparison of estimated and calculated effective porosity |
| |
Authors: | Daniel B Stephens Kuo-Chin Hsu Mark A Prieksat Mark D Ankeny Neil Blandford Tracy L Roth James A Kelsey Julia R Whitworth |
| |
Institution: | (1) Daniel B. Stephens and Associates, Inc., 6020 Academy Road NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109, USA Fax: +505-822-8877 e-mail: dbsteph@dbstephens.com, MX;(2) New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, New Mexico 87801, USA, MX |
| |
Abstract: | Effective porosity in solute-transport analyses is usually estimated rather than calculated from tracer tests in the field
or laboratory. Calculated values of effective porosity in the laboratory on three different textured samples were compared
to estimates derived from particle-size distributions and soil–water characteristic curves. The agreement was poor and it
seems that no clear relationships exist between effective porosity calculated from laboratory tracer tests and effective porosity
estimated from particle-size distributions and soil–water characteristic curves. A field tracer test in a sand-and-gravel
aquifer produced a calculated effective porosity of approximately 0.17. By comparison, estimates of effective porosity from
textural data, moisture retention, and published values were approximately 50–90% greater than the field calibrated value.
Thus, estimation of effective porosity for chemical transport is highly dependent on the chosen transport model and is best
obtained by laboratory or field tracer tests.
Received, March 1997 · Revised, August 1997 · Accepted, August 1997 |
| |
Keywords: | laboratory experiments measurements tracer tests unconsolidated sediments numerical modeling |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|