MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211566823

POSIVA groundwater flow measuring techniques

2000· article· en· W3211566823 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A Oehberg, P. Rouhiainen

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicEngineering and Material Science Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoreholeFlow measurementInflowVolumetric flow rateDilutionOutflowEnvironmental scienceFlow (mathematics)ThermistorGroundwater flowInstrumentation (computer programming)ThermalHydrology (agriculture)GeologyGroundwaterGeotechnical engineeringMechanicsAquiferEngineeringElectrical engineeringMeteorologyPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Posiva Oy has carried out site characterisation for the final disposal of spent nuclear fuel in Finland since 1987. To meet the demanding needs to measure the hydraulic parameters in bedrock Posiva launched development of new flowmeter techniques including measuring methods and equipment in co-operation with PRG-Tec Oy. The techniques have been tested and used in the ongoing site investigations in Finland, in the underground Hard Rock Laboratory (HRL) at Aespoe in Sweden and in URL in Canada. The new methods are called difference flow and transverse flow methods. The difference flow method includes two modes, normal and detailed flow logging methods. In the normal mode the flow rate measurement is based on thermal pulse and thermal dilution methods, in the detailed logging mode only on thermal dilution method. The measuring ranges for flow rate with thermal pulse and dilution methods are 0.1-10 ml/min and 2-5000 ml/min, respectively. The difference flow method(normal mode) for small flows (0.1-10 ml/min) is based on measuring the pulse transit time and direction of a thermal pulse in the sensor. For high flows (2-5000 ml/min) the method is based on thermal dilution rate of a sensor. Direction is measured with monitoring thermistors. Inflow or outflow in the test interval is created due to natural or by pumping induced differences between heads in the borehole water and groundwater around the borehole. The single point resistance (and the temperature of borehole water) measurement is carried out simultaneously with the difference flow measurements, both in normal and detailed flow logging modes, while the tool is moving. The result is utilised for checking the exact depth of the tool. As the result a continuous log is obtained from which single fractures can be detected. The transverse flowmeter is able to measure the groundwater flow across a borehole. A special packer system guides the flow through the flow sensors. Four inflatable seals between conventional packers divide the test section into four sectors. The length of the test section between the inflatable packers is two metres. Flow guides are available at the moment for boreholes with diameters 56 mm and 76 mm. The flow sensors operate using a thermal pulse principle. The flow sensors must be calibrated for the acquisition of quantitative information. The sensitivity of the instrument is better than 1 ml/in (millilitre per hour) for the flow across a borehole which corresponds to a flux value of about 2 10-9 m/s. In addition to the flow rate determination across the borehole, the system also makes it possible to determine the approximate direction of flow across the borehole. Both methods have been used to determine hydraulic connections between adjacent boreholes by measuring flow responses in a borehole caused by pumping in another borehole. The suite offered by the Posiva Flow Log tools includes also Electric Conductivity (EC) measurements from the fracture-specific water in the borehole test section. It has been found convenient to conduct EC measurements in connection with the detailed flow logging. In this way hydraulically conductive fractures can be located during the same logging phase as EC values are attained from the most conductive fractures. The results of both the EC and the detailed flow logging measurements give valuable information for the determination of groundwater sampling points. The objective of EC measurement is to determine the distribution of the content of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in the groundwater. The detailed flow logging makes it possible to stop on a fracture and to measure there as long as the water volume within the test section is flushed well enough to get a reliable EC reading. EC readings are measured from fractures with higher flow rates than the pre-set limit. In this report all groundwater flow techniques developed by Posiva are presented including the methods and different logging tools. Some background on the interpretation as well as case measurements and results are also given. (orig.)

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicEngineering and Material Science ResearchFrench-language works237,207