Sensitivity Analysis of a Combined Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport Model Using Local-Grid Refinement: A Case Study

Combining groundwater flow models with solute transport models represents a common challenge in groundwater resources assessments and contaminant transport modeling. Groundwater flow models are usually constructed at somewhat larger scales (involving a coarser discretization) to include natural boundary conditions. They are commonly calibrated using observed groundwater levels and flows (if available). The groundwater solute transport models may be constructed at a smaller scale with finer discretization than the flow models in order to accurately delineate the solute source and the modeled target, to capture any heterogeneity that may affect contaminant migration, and to minimize numerical dispersion while still maintaining a reasonable computing time. The solution that is explored here is based on defining a finer grid subdomain within a larger coarser domain. The local-grid refinement (LGR) implemented in the Modular 3D finite-difference ground-water flow model (MODFLOW) code has such a provision to simulate groundwater flow in two nested grids: a higher-resolution sub-grid within a coarse grid. Under the premise that the interface between both models was well defined, a comprehensive sensitivity and uncertainty analysis was performed whereby the effect of a parameter perturbation in a coarser-grid model on transport predictions using a higher-resolution grid was quantified. This approach was tested for a groundwater flow and solute transport analysis in support of a safety evaluation of the future Belgian near-surface radioactive waste disposal facility. Our reference coarse-grid groundwater flow model was coupled with a smaller fine sub-grid model in two different ways. While the reference flow model was calibrated using observed groundwater levels at a scale commensurate with that of the coarse-grid model, the fine sub-grid model was used to run a solute transport simulation quantifying concentrations in a hypothetical well nearby the disposal facility. When LGR coupling was compared to a one-way coupling, LGR was found to provide a smoother flow solution resulting in a more CPU-efficient transport solution. Parameter sensitivities performed with the groundwater flow model resulted in sensitivities at the head observation locations. These sensitivities identified the recharge as the most sensitive parameter, with the hydraulic conductivity of the upper aquifer as the second most sensitive parameter in regard to calculated groundwater heads. Based on one-percent sensitivity maps, the spatial distribution of the observations with the highest sensitivities is slightly different for the upper aquifer hydraulic conductivity than for recharge. Sensitivity analyses were further performed to assess the prediction scaled sensitivities for hypothetical contaminant concentrations using the combined groundwater flow and solute transport models. Including all pertinent parameters into the sensitivity analysis identified the hydraulic conductivity of the upper aquifer as the most sensitive parameter with regard to the prediction of contaminant concentrations.