Macrodispersivity and Large-scale Hydrogeologic Variability



Although groundwater velocities vary over a wide range of spatial scales it is generally only feasible to model the largest variations explicitly. Smaller-scale velocity variability must be accounted for indirectly, usually by increasing the magnitude of the dispersivity tensor (i.e. by introducing a so-called macrodispersivity). Most macrodispersion theories tacitly assume that a macrodispersivity tensor which works well when there is only small-scale velocity variability will also work well when there is larger-scale variability. We analyze this assumption in a high resolution numerical experiment which simulates solute transport through a two-scale velocity field. Our results confirm that a transport model which uses an appropriately adjusted macrodispersivity can reproduce the large-scale features of a solute plume when the velocity varies only over small scales. However, if the velocity field includes both small and large-scale components, the macrodispersivity term does not appear to be able to capture all of the effects of small-scale variability. In this case the predicted plume is more well mixed and consistently underestimates peak solute concentrations at all times. We believe that this result can be best explained by scale interactions resulting from the nonlinear transformation from velocity to concentration. However, additional analysis will be required to test this hypothesis.

Key words

macrodispersion multi-scale solute transport. 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams, E. E. and Gelhar, L. W.: 1992, Field study of dispersion in a heterogeneous aquifer: spatial moments analysis, Water Resour. Res. 28 (12), 3293–3308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dagan, G.: 1984, Solute transport in heterogeneous porous formations, J. Fluid Mech. 145, 813–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dagan, G.: 1986: Statistical theory of groundwater flow and transport: pore to laboratory, laboratory to formation and formation to regional scale, Water Resour. Res. 22 (9), 120S–134S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dagan, G.: 1989, Flow and Transport in Porous Formations, Springer-Verlag, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dagan, G.: 1990, Transport in heterogeneous porous formations: spatial moments, ergodicity, and effective dispersion, Water Resour. Res. 26 (6), 1281–1290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Freyberg, D. L.: 1986, A natural gradient experiment on solute transport in a sand aquifer, 2, Spatial moments and the advection and the dispersion of nonreactive tracers, Water Resour. Res. 22 (13), 2031–2046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gelhar, L. W. and Axness, G. L.: 1983, Three-dimensional stochastic analysis of macrodispersion in aquifers, Water Resour. Res. 19 (1), 161–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gelhar, L. W.: 1986, Stochastic subsurface hydrology from theory to applications, Water Resour. Res. 22 (9), 135S–145S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gelhar, L. W.: 1993 Stochastic Subsurface Hydrology, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  10. Hess, K. M., Wolf, S. H. and Celia, M. A.: 1992, Large-scale natural gradient tracer test in sand and gravel, Cape Cod, Massachusetts, 3, Hydraulic conductivity and calculated macrodispersivities, Water Resour. Res. 28 (8), 2011–2027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Indelman, P. and Rubin, Y.: 1996, Solute transport in nonstationary velocity fields, Water Resour. Res. 32 (5), 1259–1267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kitanidis, P. K.: 1994, The concept of dilution index, Water Resour. Res. 30 (7), 2011–2026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McKay, D. M., Freyberg, D. C., Roberts, P. V. and Cherry, J. A.: 1986, A natural gradient experiment on solute transport in a sand aquifer, 1, Approach an overview of plume movement, Water Resour. Res. 22 (13), 2017–2030.Google Scholar
  14. Neuman, S. P., Winter, C. L. and Newman, C. M.: 1987, Stochastic theory of field-scale Fickian dispersion in anisotropie porous media, Water Resour. Res. 23 (3), 453–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Papoulis, A.: 1984, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  16. Rajaram, H. and McLaughlin, D.: 1990, Identification of large-scale spatial trends in hydrologic data, Water Resour. Res. 26 (10), 2411–2423.Google Scholar
  17. Rajaram, H. and Gelhar, L. W.: 1991a, Three dimensional spatial moment analysis of the Borden tracer test, Water Resour. Res. 27 (6), 1239–1251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rehfeldt, K. R., Boggs, J. M. and Gelhar, L. W.: 1992, Field study of dispersion in heterogeneous aquifer, 3, Geostatistical analysis of hydraulic conductivity, Water Resour. Res. 28 (12), 3309 - 3324.Google Scholar
  19. Ruan, F.: 1997, A numerical investigation of solute plumes in nested multi-scale porous media, PhD thesis, Mass. Instit. Tech., Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  20. Ruan, F. and McLaughlin, D. B.: 1998, An efficient multivariate random field generator using the fast fourier transform, Advances Water Resour. 21 (5), 385–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ruan, F. and McLaughlin, D. B.: 1999, An investigation of Eulerian-Lagrangian methods for solving heterogeneous advection-dominated transport problems, Water Resour. Res. (in press).Google Scholar
  22. Rubin Y. and Seong, K.: 1986, Investigation of flow and transport in certain cases of nonstationary conductivity fields, Water Resour. Res. 30 (11), 2901–2911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sudicky, E. A.: 1986, A natural gradient experiment on solute transport in a sand aquifer: spatial variability of hydraulic conductivity and its role in the dispersion process, Water Resour. Res. 22 (13), 2069–2082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ralph M. Parsons Laboratory, Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Applications ResearchSchlumberger GeoQuestHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations