Comparison of numerical methods for simulating strongly nonlinear and heterogeneous reactive transport problems—the MoMaS benchmark case

Abstract

Although multicomponent reactive transport modeling is gaining wider application in various geoscience fields, it continues to present significant mathematical and computational challenges. There is a need to solve and compare the solutions to complex benchmark problems, using a variety of codes, because such intercomparisons can reveal promising numerical solution approaches and increase confidence in the application of reactive transport codes. In this contribution, the results and performance of five current reactive transport codes are compared for the 1D and 2D subproblems of the so-called easy test case of the MoMaS benchmark (Carrayrou et al., Comput Geosci, 2009, this issue). This benchmark presents a simple fictitious reactive transport problem that highlights the main numerical difficulties encountered in real reactive transport problems. As a group, the codes include iterative and noniterative operator splitting and global implicit solution approaches. The 1D easy advective and 1D easy diffusive scenarios were solved using all codes, and, in general, there was a good agreement, with solution discrepancies limited to regions with rapid concentration changes. Computational demands were typically consistent with what was expected for the various solution approaches. The differences between solutions given by the three codes solving the 2D problem are more important. The very high computing effort required by the 2D problem illustrates the importance of parallel computations. The most important outcome of the benchmark exercise is that all codes are able to generate comparable results for problems of significant complexity and computational difficulty.Keywords MoMaS · Benchmark · Code intercomparison · Numerical methods for reactive transport · Direct substitution approach (DSA) · Differential and algebraic equations (DAE) · Sequential iterative approach (SIA) · Sequential noniterative approach (SNIA) 484 Comput Geosci (2010) 14:483-502

Diel plant water use and competitive soil cation exchange interact to enhance NH4 + and K+ availability in the rhizosphere

“…The mechanical dispersion coefficient (D mech ) scales with soil moisture (θ) according to : D mech ¼ αq θ , where α is dispersivity and q is the Darcy flux. The MIN3P code, including the radial formulation, has been thoroughly tested and benchmarked (Carrayrou et al 2010;Mayer and MacQuarrie 2010;Marty et al 2015;Rasouli et al 2015;Steefel et al 2015).…”

HYTEC results of the MoMas reactive transport benchmark

“…In 2006, the MoMaS research group proposed a suite of exercises to test reactive transport models [1][2][3] 1 . The major objective of the benchmark is to provide more efficient numerical methods and mathematical resolution schemes in order to improve reactive transport models, in particular for applications in the domain of deep underground radioactive waste disposal.…”

Implementation and evaluation of permeability-porosity and tortuosity-porosity relationships linked to mineral dissolution-precipitation

“…For simulations involving porosity evolution, this is only possible for problems with a limited set of reactions and subject to simplifying assumptions [8][9][10]. However, considering the complex nature of realistic reactive transport problems, model verification by means of code intercomparisons through well-defined benchmarks is in many cases the only practical method [11]. This paper presents and analyzes the results of an intercomparison involving five reactive transport codes (i.e., CrunchFlow, HP1, MIN3P, PFlotran, and TOUGHRE-ACT) used for the investigation of six hypothetical scenarios to evaluate formulations and implementations for permeability-porosity and tortuosity-porosity relationships.…”