Modeling Transport in Transient Ground-Water Flow: An Unacknowledged Approximation

Abstract. During unsteady or transient ground-water flow, the fluid mass per unit volume of aquifer changes as the potentiometric head changes, and solute transport is affected by this change in fluid storage. Three widely applied numerical models of two-dimensional transport partially account for the effects of transient flow by removing terms corresponding to the fluid continuity equation from the transport equation, resulting in a simpler governing equation. However, fluid-storage terms remaining in the transport equation that change during transient flow are, in certain cases, held constant in time in these models. For the case of increasing heads, this approximation, which is unacknowledged in these models'documentation, leads to transport velocities that are too high, and increased concentration at fluid and solute sources. If heads are dropping in time, computed transport velocities are too low. Using parameters that somewhat exaggerate the effects of this approximation, an example numerical simulation indicates solute travel time error of about 14 percent but only minor errors due to incorrect dilution volume. For horizontal flow and transport models that assume fluid density is constant, the product of porosity and aquifer thickness changes in time: initial porosity times initial thickness plus the change in head times the storage coefficient. This formula reduces to the saturated thickness in unconfined aquifers if porosity is assumed to be constant and equal to specific yield. The computational cost of this more accurate representation is insignificant and is easily incorporated in numerical models of solute transport.     

Monitoring and Mathematical Modeling of Contaminated Ground-Water Plumes in Fluvial Environments

Ground-water monitoring to delineate a contaminant plume in fluvial hydrostratigraphic units often is uncertain. Fluvial deposits consist typically of interbedded layers of sands, silts and clays, with buried stream channel deposits of sands or gravels. The channel deposits are often interpreted erroneously to be discontinuous between test holes and in cross section due to their sinuosity. Erroneous conclusions pertaining to the areal continuity of these geometrically complex deposits are inevitable unless the investigator thoroughly understands the depositional environment(s). The hydraulic conductivity of buried stream channel deposits may be several orders of magnitude higher than the matrix materials in which they are enclosed. The higher hydraulic conductivity of buried stream channel deposits has potentially significant ramifications with respect to ground-water monitoring to delineate the geometry of a contaminant plume migrating through these deposits. Ground-water monitoring at uranium mill waste disposal sites located in fluvial environments began on a significant scale in about 1977. A uranium mill tailing disposal site located in such an environment in central Wyoming is among the first sites monitored. Thirty-seven monitor wells were constructed at the site to delineate a seepage plume originating from one of the tailing ponds. This case history illustrates the need for a detailed under—standing of the hydrostratigraphy at a waste disposal site in order to interpret the meaning of ground-water quality data effectively. Water quality data from monitor wells located on a hit or miss basis often are misleading. The hydrostratigraphic horizon from which a water quality sample is collected must be well defined before the sample analyses can be interpreted quantitatively.