General concepts in Hydrogeology and Geophysics related to MRS

Authors

  • M. Mejías Instituto Geológico y Minero de España
  • J. Plata Instituto Geológico y Minero de España

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21701/bolgeomin.118.3.001

Keywords:

aquifer model, Geophysics, hydrogeological parameters, Magnetic Resonance Sounding, pumping test

Abstract


A tight collaboration between hydrogeologists and geophysicists is necessary to achieve the most appropriate use of Geophysics in Hydrogeology, mainly for planning the geophysical activities in accordance to the hydrogeological target to be investigated and for the interpretation or translation of the geophysical documents into hydrogeological documents. For this collaboration to be fruitful it is of great importance to share a common language allowing communication feasible: geophysicists have to know the fundamentals of the hydrogeological process, and hydrogeologists have to know the fundamentals of geophysical methods. This is the main objective of this paper, where definitions of basic concepts of both disciplines related to Magnetic Resonance Sounding (MRS) are reminded. All surface geophysical methods are actually used in groundwater studies. MRS deserves special attention because of its singularity and novelty: it is the only method able to detect directly the presence of water in the underground. As research is going ahead, MRS reveals also its ability for the evaluation of hydraulic parameters, being nowadays a real alternative to the use of boreholes tests in some circumstances. The other standard surface geophysical methods are valid to determine the geometrical parameters of aquifers, and just in a few cases they allow the evaluation of hydraulic properties. The MRS method is at present limited to the investigation of the first 150 m of depth. Most groundwater catchments areas, at any geological environment, fall within the category of shallow confined or unconfined aquifers; otherwise hydrogeological research in the first 150 m is basic not only from the standpoint of groundwater supply but also for geotechnical and environmental groundwater related studies. The use of MRS can be adapted to any scale of the hydrogeological study. In regional research the main goal is the evaluation of water resources and the acquisition of parameters to make a mathematical model to the aquifer control. To achieve such a model the area in which the aquifer is situated, as well as its recharge and discharge zones, are divided into cells where the flux variables or parameters that characterise the aquifer have to be evaluated. MRS can be used to get part of these parameters adapting the sampling or distance between MRS measurements to the desired scale: cells size of kilometres or hundreds of meters. Local hydrogeological surveys are mainly focused at water extraction for human supply or for agricultural and/or industrial use, requiring a higher resolution in the methodology applied, for which MRS can play again an important role for the best location of sites for well drilling. Evaluation of hydrodynamic parameters from MRS data needs an initial calibration with known reference data, being necessary to fully understand the relation between hydrogeological and MRS parameters, for what a description of the former ones as well as a summary of the hydrological tests for its evaluation, in special of pumping tests, is presented.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Andreo, B., Vías, J., López-Geta, J.A., Carrasco, F., Durán, J.J. y Jiménez, P. 2004. Propuesta metodológica para la estimación de la recarga en acuíferos carbonáticos. Boletín Geológico y Minero, 115 (2), 177-186. (In Spanish).

Barker, J.A. 1988. A generalized radial flow model for hydraulic tests in fractured rocks. Water Resources Research 24(10), 1796-1804. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR024i010p01796

Bernard, J. 2007. Instruments and field work to measure a Magnetic Resonance Sounding. Boletín Geológico y Minero, 118(3), 459-472.

Boulton, N.S. 1954. The drawdown of the water table under non steady conditions near a pumped well in an unconfined aquifer. Proceedings Institute of Civil Engineering 3, 271-281. https://doi.org/10.1680/ipeds.1954.12586

Bourdet, D. 2002. Well test analysis. Elsevier, Amsterdam. 438 pp.

Bourdet, D., Whittle, T.M., Douglas, A.A., Pirard, Y.M. 1983. A new set of type curves simplifies well test analysis. World Oil, may, 95-106.

Cooper, H.H., Jacob, C.E. 1946. A generalized graphical method for evaluating formation constants and summarizing well field history. Transactions American Geophysical Union, 27, 526-534. https://doi.org/10.1029/TR027i004p00526

Custodio, E. and Llamas, M. R. 1996. Hidrología subterránea. Omega, Barcelona 2 vols, 2350 pp. (In Spanish).

Darcy, H. 1856. Les fontaines publiques de la ville de Dijon. Victor Dalmont, Paris,647 pp.

Dupuit, J. 1863. Etudes théoriques et pratiques sur le mouvement des eaux dans les canaux découverts et à travers les terrains perméables. Dunot, Paris, 304 pp. (in French).

Gringarten, A., Ramey, H.J.J., Raghavan, R. 1974. Unsteady-state pressure distributions created by a single infinite conductivity vertical fracture. Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, 14, 347. https://doi.org/10.2118/4051-PA

Hantush, M.S. 1961. Drawdown around partially penetrating well. Proceedings American Society of Civil Engineers, 87, 83-98. https://doi.org/10.1061/JYCEAJ.0000633

Hantush, M. S. and Jacob, C. E. 1955. Nonsteady radial flow in an infinite leaky aquifer. Transactions American Geophysical Union, 36, 95-100. https://doi.org/10.1029/TR036i001p00095

Horne, R. 1995. Modern well test analysis, Petroway Inc., Palo Alto,250 pp.

Jacob, C.E. 1947. Drawdown test to determine effective radius of artesian well. Am Soc Civil Eng, Trans. 112, 1047-1064. https://doi.org/10.1061/TACEAT.0006033

Kruseman, G. P. and de Ridder, N. A. 1970. Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test Data. ILRI. publication 47, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 377 pp.

Legchenko, A. 2007. MRS measurements and inversion in presence of EM noise. Boletín Geológico y Minero, 118(3), 489-508.

López-Geta, J.A., Fornés, J.M., Ramos, G. and Villarroya, F. 2006. Groundwater, a natural underground resource. Madrid. IGME, UNESCO, Fundación Marcelino Botín. 107 pp.

Lubczynsky, M.W. and Roy, J. 2003. Hydrogeological interpretation and potential of the new magnetic resonance sounding (MRS) method. Journal of Hydrology 283/1-4, 19-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00170-7

Lubczynsky, M.W. and Roy, J. 2004. Magnetic Resonance Sounding: New Method for Ground Water Assessment. Ground Water vol. 42, 291-303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2004.tb02675.x

Lubczynsky, M. and Roy, J. 2005. MRS contribution to hydrogeological system parametrization. Near Surface Geophysics 3, 131-139. https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2005009

Lubczynski, M.W. and Roy, J. 2007. Use of MRS for hydrogeological system parameterization and modelling. Boletín Geológico y Minero, 118(3), 509-530.

Mejías, M. 2005. Hydraulic testing of low-permeability fractured rocks: methodology and comparative analysis. 7th Hellenic Hydrogeology Conference & 2nd Workshop on the Hydrogeology of Fissured Rocks. Atenas. Stournaras, G.; Pavlopoulos, K. Y Bellos Th. (ed). V. II, 151-158.

Mejías, M., Plata, J.L., Ballesteros, B., López, J. and Marina, M. 2006. Metodología de caracterización de formaciones acuíferas profundas. Aplicación al acuífero Jurásico del Maestrazgo, Castellón. Groundwater in Mediterranean countries. AQUAinMED-06 Málaga, Spain. Hydrogeology and Groundwater series 17: 301-309. [In Spanish].

Papadopulos, I.S., Cooper, H.H.J. 1967. Drawdown in a well of large diameter. Water Resources Research. 3, 241-244. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR003i001p00241

Plata, J.L. 1999. Técnicas convencionales de Geofísica de superficie aplicadas en hidrogeología. Actualidad de las técnicas Geofísicas aplicadas en Hidrogeología. Granada. 21-32 (in Spanish).

Plata, J.L. and Rubio, F.M. 2007. Basic theory of the Magnetic Resonance Sounding Method. Boletín Geológico y Minero, 118(3), 441-458.

Renard, P. 2003, Hytool 1.2 - Users manuals. Technical report. University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland. 9 pp.

Renard, P. 2005a. Quantitative analysis of groundwater field experiments. University of Neuchâtel, 203 pp.

Renard, P. 2005b. The future of hydraulic tests. Hydrogeological Journal 13, 259-262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-004-0406-5

Theis, C.V. 1935. The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using groundwater storage. Transactions American Geophysical Union 2, 519-524. https://doi.org/10.1029/TR016i002p00519

Theis, C.V. 1941. The effect of a well on the flow of a nearby stream. Transactions American Geophysical Union 22, 734-738. https://doi.org/10.1029/TR022i003p00734

Thiem, G. 1906. Hydrologische methoden (Hydrological methods). Gebhardt, Leipzig, 56pp.

Van Everdingen, A.F. 1953. The skin effect and its influence on the productive capacity of a well. Petroleum Transactions, AIME. 198, 171-176. https://doi.org/10.2118/203-G

Villanueva, M. and Iglesias, A. 1984. Pozos y acuíferos. Técnicas de evaluación mediante ensayos de bombeo. Instituto Geológico y Minero de España, Madrid. 426 pp (In Spanish).

Vouillamoz, J.M., Baltassat, J.M., Girard, J.F., Plata, J.and Legchenko, A. 2007. Hydrogeological experience in the use of MRS. Boletín Geológico y Minero, 118(3), 531-550.

Yaramanci, U. and Hertrich, M. 2007. Inversion of Magnetic Resonance Sounding data. Boletín Geológico y Minero, 118(3), 473-488.

Downloads

Published

2007-09-30

How to Cite

Mejías, M., & Plata, J. (2007). General concepts in Hydrogeology and Geophysics related to MRS. Boletín Geológico Y Minero, 118(3), 423–440. https://doi.org/10.21701/bolgeomin.118.3.001

Issue

Section

Articles