Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-09T21:58:22.064Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Far Field Flow Uncertainty Analysis for the Palo Duro Basin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

Joseph L. Devary ,
Battelle Battelle ,
William V. HARPER ,
Onwi ONWI ,
Jon F. SYKES  and
John L. WILSON
Joseph L. Devary
Affiliation:
Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Battelle Boulevard,PO Box 999, Richland, Washington, USA,
Battelle Battelle
Affiliation:
Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Battelle Boulevard,PO Box 999, Richland, Washington, USA,
William V. HARPER
Affiliation:
Battelle Project Management Division, 505 King Avenue, Columbus, Ohio, USA,
Onwi ONWI
Affiliation:
Battelle Project Management Division, 505 King Avenue, Columbus, Ohio, USA,
Jon F. SYKES
Affiliation:
Civil Engineering Department, University of Waterloo, CANADA,
John L. WILSON
Affiliation:
INTERA Environmental Consultants, Inc., 11999 Katy Freeway, Suite 610, Houston, Texas, USA
Get access

Abstract

In order to license an underground nuclear waste repository DOE must demonstrate its safety. Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses play a critical role in both performance assessment and licensing. This paper focuses on the application of a variety of techniques to arrive at a comprehensive sensitivity and uncertainty analysis for performance measures relating to ground-water travel in the Wolfcamp aquifer of the Palo Duro Basin (see Figure 1). Scenario analysis is not examined; rather, analysis is based on well understood models for flow in porous media. Both Monte Carlo and first order second moment techniques are utilized to obtain output uncertainties. The approach results in a logical, comprehensive analysis that blends both deterministic and statistical methods. It provides for an extensive screening of the parameters, accounts for parameter and spatial correlations, and quantifies uncertainties for the major performance measures in ground-water travel. The results are useful for both licensing and the identification of additional data needs.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 26: Symposium D – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management VII , 1983 , 397
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Campbell, J. E., Iman, R. L., and Reeves, M., Risk Methodology for Analysis, NUREG/CR-1377, SAND80-0644, Sandia National Laboratory, (1980).Google Scholar
2. Delhomme, J. P., “Spatial Variability and Uncertainty in Groundwater Flow Parameters: A Geostatistical Approach”, Water Resources Research 15 (2), (1979).Google Scholar
3. Dettinger, M. D. and Wilson, J. L., “First Order Analysis of Uncertainty in Numerical Models of Groundwater Flow: Part 1. Mathematical Development”, Water Resources Research, 17 (1), (1981).10.1029/WR017i001p00149Google Scholar
4. Devary, J. L., Permian Potentiometric Analysis, PNL-4738, September 1983, Battelle's Pacific Northwest Laboratory.10.2172/5849329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Devary, J. L. and Doctor, P. G., “Pore Velocity Estimation Uncertainties”, Water Resources Research, 18 (4): 1157–1164 (1982).10.1029/WR018i004p01157Google Scholar
6. Gibbs, A. G., A Perturbation Method for Stochastic Operator Difference Equations, PNL-SA-8409, Battelle's Pacific Northwest Laboratory, (1980).Google Scholar
7. Harper, W. V. and Gupta, S. K., Sensitivity/Uncertainty Analysis of a Borehole Scenario Comparing Latin Hypercube Sampling and Deterministic Sensitivity Approaches, BMI/ONWI-516, Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio, (1983).Google Scholar
8. INTERA Environmental Consultants, Adjoint Sensitivity Theory for Steady State Ground-Water Flow, BMI/ONWI-515, Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio, (1983).Google Scholar
9. Kincaid, C. T., Vail, L. W., and Devary, J. L., Stochastic Groundwater Flow Analysis FY 81 Status Report, PNL 4025, Battelle's Pacific Northwest Laboratory, (1983).Google Scholar
10. Mantoglou, A. and Wilson, J. L., “The Turning Bands Method for Simulation of Random Fields Using Line Generation by a Spectral Method”, Water Resources Research 18 (5), (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Smith, D. A., Bassett, R. L., and Roberts, M. P., “Potentiometric Surface ofthe Wolfcamp Aquifer”, in Geology and Geohydrology of the Palo Duro Basin, Texas Panhandle: A Report on the Progress of Nuclear Waste Isolation Feasibility Studies (1982), Gustaugon, T. C., et al, (Editors) Texas Bureauof Economic Geology, Austin, Texas, (1983).Google Scholar
12. Townley, L. R. and Wilson, J. L., “Conditional Second Moment Analysis of Groundwater Flow: The Cumulative Effects of Transmissivity and Head Measurements.” In Proceedings of the International Conference on Groundwater and Man”, Sydney, Australia (1983).Google Scholar