Literature DB >> 32978959

Review of Laboratory Scale Models of Karst Aquifers: Approaches, Similitude, and Requirements.

Zargham Mohammadi, Walter A Illman1, Malcolm Field2.   

Abstract

This review focuses on investigations of groundwater flow and solute transport in karst aquifers through laboratory scale models (LSMs). In particular, LSMs have been used to generate new data under different hydraulic and contaminant transport conditions, testing of new approaches for site characterization, and providing new insights into flow and transport processes through complex karst aquifers. Due to the increasing need for LSMs to investigate a wide range of issues, associated with flow and solute migration karst aquifers this review attempts to classify, and introduce a framework for constructing a karst aquifer physical model that is more representative of field conditions. The LSMs are categorized into four groups: sand box, rock block, pipe/fracture network, and pipe-matrix coupling. These groups are compared and their advantages and disadvantages highlighted. The capabilities of such models have been extensively improved by new developments in experimental methods and measurement devices. Newer technologies such as 3D printing, computed tomography scanning, X-rays, nuclear magnetic resonance, novel geophysical techniques, and use of nanomaterials allow for greater flexibilities in conducting experiments. In order for LSMs to be representative of karst aquifers, a few requirements are introduced: (1) the ability to simulate heterogeneous distributions of karst hydraulic parameters, (2) establish Darcian and non-Darcian flow regimes and exchange between the matrix and conduits, (3) placement of adequate sampling points and intervals, and (4) achieving some degree of geometric, kinematic, and dynamic similitude to represent field conditions.
© 2020 National Ground Water Association.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32978959      PMCID: PMC8291341          DOI: 10.1111/gwat.13052

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ground Water        ISSN: 0017-467X            Impact factor:   2.887


  12 in total

1.  Two-dimensional DNAPL migration affected by groundwater flow in unconfined aquifer.

Authors:  Masashi Kamon; Kazuto Endo; Junichi Kawabata; Toru Inui; Takeshi Katsumi
Journal:  J Hazard Mater       Date:  2004-07-05       Impact factor: 10.588

2.  Three-Dimensional Printing: Transformative Technology for Experimental Groundwater Research.

Authors:  Franciszek J Hasiuk; Lee J Florea; Michael C Sukop
Journal:  Ground Water       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 2.671

3.  An integrated numerical and physical modeling system for an enhanced in situ bioremediation process.

Authors:  Y F Huang; G H Huang; G Q Wang; Q G Lin; A Chakma
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2006-04-24       Impact factor: 8.071

4.  NMR imaging of fluid exchange between macropores and matrix in eogenetic karst.

Authors:  Lee J Florea; Kevin J Cunningham; Stephen Altobelli
Journal:  Ground Water       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 2.671

5.  Environmental applications of graphene-based nanomaterials.

Authors:  François Perreault; Andreia Fonseca de Faria; Menachem Elimelech
Journal:  Chem Soc Rev       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 54.564

6.  Estimating preferential flow in karstic aquifers using statistical mixed models.

Authors:  Angel A Anaya; Ingrid Padilla; Raul Macchiavelli; Dorothy J Vesper; John D Meeker; Akram N Alshawabkeh
Journal:  Ground Water       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 2.671

7.  Laboratory analog and numerical study of groundwater flow and solute transport in a karst aquifer with conduit and matrix domains.

Authors:  Jonathan Faulkner; Bill X Hu; Stephen Kish; Fei Hua
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2009-08-21       Impact factor: 3.188

8.  Magnetic Particle Imaging meets Computed Tomography: first simultaneous imaging.

Authors:  Patrick Vogel; Jonathan Markert; Martin A Rückert; Stefan Herz; Benedikt Keßler; Kilian Dremel; Daniel Althoff; Matthias Weber; Thorsten M Buzug; Thorsten A Bley; Walter H Kullmann; Randolf Hanke; Simon Zabler; Volker C Behr
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-09-02       Impact factor: 4.996

Review 9.  Recent Progress of Miniature MEMS Pressure Sensors.

Authors:  Peishuai Song; Zhe Ma; Jing Ma; Liangliang Yang; Jiangtao Wei; Yongmei Zhao; Mingliang Zhang; Fuhua Yang; Xiaodong Wang
Journal:  Micromachines (Basel)       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 2.891

10.  Visualization of spatial and temporal temperature distributions with magnetic particle imaging for liver tumor ablation therapy.

Authors:  J Salamon; J Dieckhoff; M G Kaul; C Jung; G Adam; M Möddel; T Knopp; S Draack; F Ludwig; H Ittrich
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 4.996

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.