Computing and Visualization in Science

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 29–42 | Cite as

Contaminant transport with adsorption and their inverse problems

Regular Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

In Constales et al. (water Resources Res. 39(30), 1303, 2003) dual-well tests are used to reconstruct the flow and dispersion parameters in contaminant transport. A tracer is introduced by the injection well, which is considered to be in steady-state regime with the extraction well. Then, from measurements of the time evolution of the extracted tracer (breakthrough curve) the required model data has been recovered. In Constales et al. (water Resources Res. 39(30), 1303, 2003), a very precise numerical method has been developed for the solution of the direct problem. In Kačur et al. (Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engo. 194(2–5), 479–489, 2005); Remešiková (J. Comp. Appl. Math. 169(1), 101–116, 2004) an extension has been discussed which adds adsorption terms to the model. The inverse problem of determination of sorption isotherms in nonequilibrium mode was solved by a Levenberg–Marquardt iteration method. In the present paper we develop the adjoint system to evaluate the sensitivity of the solution (via the breakthrough curve) on the sorption parameters in equilibrium and nonequilibrium modes. Possible use of the adjoint system in determining the several parameters occuring in the model is a crucial point for iteration methods. The obtained model parameters then can be used in a 3D flow and transport model with adsorption. The numerical experiments we present, justify the used method.

Keywords

Inverse problems Parameter identification Adjoint equation Transport of contaminants Dual-well tests 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barrett J.W. and Knabner P. (1997). Finite element approximation of transport of reactive solutes in porous media. Part 2: error estimates for equilibrium adsorption processes. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 34: 49–72 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bear J. (1972). Dynamics of Fluid in Porous Media. Elsevier, New York Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Constales D., Kačur J. and Malengier B. (2003). A precise numerical scheme for contaminant transport in dual-well flow. Water Resources Res. 39(30): 1303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Constales D., Kačur J. and Van Keer F. (2002). Parameter identification by a single injection-extraction well. Inv. probl. 18: 1605–1620 MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crandall M.G. and Majda A. (1980). The method of fractional steps for conservation laws. Numer. Math. 34: 285–314 MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gelhar L.W. and Collins M.A. (1971). General analysis of longitudinal dispersion in nonuniform flow. Water Resource Res. 7(6): 1511–1521 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hajdjema H.M. (1995). Analytic modelling of groundwater flow. Academic, New York Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kačur, J., Frolkovič, P.: Semi-analytical solutions for contaminant transport with nonlinear sorption in 1D. Preprint 24, Interdis. Zentrum fur Wissens. Rechnen, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kačur J., Malengier B. and Remešíková M. (2005). Solution of contaminant transport with equilibrium and non-equilibrium adsorption. Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 194(2–5): 479–489 MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Karlsen K.H. and Lie K.-A. (1999). An unconditionally stable splitting for a class of nonlinear parabolic equations. IMA J. Numer. Anal. 19(4): 609–635 MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee T.-C. (1998). Applied Mathematics in Hydrogeology. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lockwood, E.H.: Bipolar Coordinates, chap. 25. In: A Book of Curves, pp. 186–190. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1967)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mercado A. (1967). The spreading problem of injected water in a permeability stratified aquifer. Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol. Publ. 72: 23–36 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patankar S.V. (1980). Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow. Taylor & Francis, London MATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pickens J.F. and Grisak G.E. (1981). Scale-dependent dispersion in a stratified granular aquifer. Water Resources Res 17(4): 1191–1211 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Polak E. (1997). Optimization: algorithms and consistent approximations. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg Newyork MATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Remešíková M. (2004). Solution of convection-difffusion problems with non-equilibrium adsorption. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 169(1): 101–116 CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schroth M.H., Istok J.D. and Haggerty R. (2001). In situ evaluation of solute retardation using single-well push-pull tests. Adv. Water Resources 24: 105–117 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Spiegel M.R. (1968). Mathematical Handbook of Formulas and Tables. McGraw Hill, Newyork Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stewart, D.E., Leyk, Z.: Meschach: Matrix computations in C, http://www.math.uiowa.edu/~dstewart/ meschach/Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sun N.-Z. (1996). Mathematical model of groundwater pollution. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg Newyork Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Welly C. and Gelhar L.W. (1971). Evaluation of longitudinal dispersivity from nonuniform flow tracer tests. J. Hydrol. 153: 71–102 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and InformaticsComenius UniversityBratislavaSlovakia
  2. 2.Department of Mathematical Analysis, Research Group NfaM2Ghent UniversityGentBelgium

Personalised recommendations