Permeability Profiles in Granular Aquifers Using Flowmeters in Direct‐Push Wells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerical hydrogeological models should ideally be based on the spatial distribution of hydraulic conductivity (K), a property rarely defined on the basis of sufficient data due to the lack of efficient characterization methods. Electromagnetic borehole flowmeter measurements during pumping in uncased wells can effectively provide a continuous vertical distribution of K in consolidated rocks. However, relatively few studies have used the flowmeter in screened wells penetrating unconsolidated aquifers, and tests conducted in gravel-packed wells have shown that flowmeter data may yield misleading results. This paper describes the practical application of flowmeter profiles in direct-push wells to measure K and delineate hydrofacies in heterogeneous unconsolidated aquifers having low-to-moderate K (10(-6) to 10(-4) m/s). The effect of direct-push well installation on K measurements in unconsolidated deposits is first assessed based on the previous work indicating that such installations minimize disturbance to the aquifer fabric. The installation and development of long-screen wells are then used in a case study validating K profiles from flowmeter tests at high-resolution intervals (15 cm) with K profiles derived from multilevel slug tests between packers at identical intervals. For 119 intervals tested in five different wells, the difference in log K values obtained from the two methods is consistently below 10%. Finally, a graphical approach to the interpretation of flowmeter profiles is proposed to delineate intervals corresponding to distinct hydrofacies, thus providing a method whereby both the scale and magnitude of K contrasts in heterogeneous unconsolidated aquifers may be represented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".