1984
DOI: 10.1029/wr020i008p01116
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Flow to a Partially Penetrating Well in a Double‐Porosity Reservoir

Abstract: Analysis of flow in a fractured porous reservoir forms the basis for investigations of chemical and energy transport in such media. Numerical models are often employed to analyze these geohydrologic systems. In this paper a well hydraulics problem is solved using the Laplace transformation and the double‐porosity concept. The transient solution is obtained by numerical inversion of the Laplace transform. Solutions to slug test problems indicate that the head response due to fracturing is distinct from the resp… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
61
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 106 publications
(62 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
61
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Others are those depicting: linear/pseudoradial flow (Gringarten et al (1975)) for single vertical and horizontal fractures (SVF and SHF); pseudo-equilibrium and delayed yield effects (Boulton 1954;Neuman 1972 andStrelsova 1976); generalized radial flow in single-and double-porosity fractured aquifers (Barker 1988); and leaky aquifers (Hantush (1960) and Moench (1985) . Dual-porosity responses have been described by Moench (1984) and Dougherty and Babu (1984); however, Odeh (1965) and Carlson (1999) have indicated that they may be scale dependent.…”
Section: Analytical Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Others are those depicting: linear/pseudoradial flow (Gringarten et al (1975)) for single vertical and horizontal fractures (SVF and SHF); pseudo-equilibrium and delayed yield effects (Boulton 1954;Neuman 1972 andStrelsova 1976); generalized radial flow in single-and double-porosity fractured aquifers (Barker 1988); and leaky aquifers (Hantush (1960) and Moench (1985) . Dual-porosity responses have been described by Moench (1984) and Dougherty and Babu (1984); however, Odeh (1965) and Carlson (1999) have indicated that they may be scale dependent.…”
Section: Analytical Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The AQTESOLV ® software for analysis of aquifer tests (Hydrosolve, Inc. 2007) uses a modified version of the deconvolution methods contained in Birsoy and Summers (1980) that allows automated fitting of type curves to step-test data. Application of the modified Dougherty-Babu (1984) solution to the data from the uncorrected (b = 43.1 m or the drawdown to the first major water-bearing fracture) steptest data produced fairly good results, with a sum of squared residuals (RSS), where a residual is the difference between the observed and simulated value, of 0.437 m 2 and a mean of 0.016 m; and, at the last rate of 382 L/min, a well efficiency of 95% and well loss of 0.2 m. The best fit to the data, however, was achieved by correcting the data for the effects of dewatering, using a b value of 17.5 m. This produced a RSS of 0.106 m 2 and a mean of 0.002 m; and, at 382 L/min, a well efficiency of 100% and a well loss of 0.0 m.…”
Section: Emmitsburg Wellmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Early related works were Bredehoeft et al (1966), Cooper et al (1967), and Bouwer and Rice (1976) with regard to the groundwater problems and Carslaw and Jaeger (1959, p. 342) in a heat conduction problem. Dougherty and Babu (1984) developed an analytical model to investigate the flow in a double-porosity reservoir. The transient solution for slug-test problems considering well partial penetration, wellbore effect, and skin effect was derived by utilizing numerical inversion of Laplace transform.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%