High resolution imaging of vadose zone transport using crosswell radar and seismic methods

摘要

The summary and conclusions are that overall the radar and seismic results were excellent. At the time of design of the experiments we did not know how well these two methods could penetrate or resolve the moisture content and structure. It appears that the radar could easily go up to 5, even 10 meters between boreholes at 200 Mhz and even father (up to 20 to 40 m) at 50 Mhz. The seismic results indicate that at several hundred hertz propagation of 20 to 30 meters giving high resolution is possible. One of the most important results, however is that together the seismic and radar are complementary in their properties estimation. The radar being primarily sensitive to changes in moisture content, and the seismic being primarily sensitive to porosity. Taken in a time lapse sense the radar can show the moisture content changes to a high resolution, with the seismic showing high resolution lithology. The significant results for each method are: Radar: (1) Delineated geological layers 0.25 to 3.5 meters thick with 0.25 m resolution; (2) Delineated moisture movement and content with 0.25 m resolution; (3) Compared favorably with neutron probe measurements; and (4) Penetration up to 30 m. Radar results indicate that the transport of the riverwater is different from that of the heavier and more viscous sodium thiosulfate. It appears that the heavier fluids are not mixing readily with the in-situ fluids and the transport may be influenced by them. Seismic: (1) Delineated lithology at .25 m resolution; (2) Penetration over 20 meters, with a possibility of up to 30 or more meters; and (3) Maps porosity and density differences of the sediments. Overall the seismic is mapping the porosity and density distribution. The results are consistent with the flow field mapped by the radar, there is a change in flow properties at the 10 to 11 meter depth in the flow cell. There also appears to be break through by looking at the radar data with the denser sodium thiosulfate finally penetrating the barrier, but not the river water. The radar and seismic data imply that the fluid property differences (density, viscosity, surface tension) between the river water and the sodium thiosulfate do make a difference in flow characteristics.