-
摘要:
解析解模型计算效率高, 被广泛应用于估计含水层涌水量。然而, 这类模型包含许多假设条件, 例如: 含水层是均质的、抽水量是常数、忽略井内水头损失等, 因此被称为均质模型。事实上, 这些假设条件往往得不到满足, 导致结果产生不可忽略的误差, 尤其是非均质巨厚含水层。同时, 均质模型无法估计破碎带的渗透系数与涌水量, 不利于解决隧道施工过程中的水患问题。依托新疆天山胜利隧道项目, 开展了2次抽水试验。基于综合测井数据和钻孔数据建立地质模型; 采用非均质数值模拟方法定量研究超深孔的地下水涌水量。采用第一次抽水试验的观测数据率定模型中的参数, 采用第二次抽水试验的观测数据验证模型与率定后参数的合理性。模型反演了破碎带、完整花岗岩和较完整花岗岩的渗透系数, 分别为0.000 93, 0.000 5, 0.000 3 m/d; 预测了总涌水量与破碎带的涌水量, 分别为14.80, 10.46 m3/h, 其中破碎带的涌水量占总涌水量的70.676%。野外的观测数据表明超深孔抽水试验过程中井筒内存在水头损失。非均质数值模拟模型比均质模型更能解释超深孔抽水试验数据, 均质模型计算的总涌水量结果为18.67 m3/h, 高估了涌水量。在隧道施工过程中, 非均质模型获取的水动力学参数和涌水量更加可靠。
Abstract:Objective The analytical solution model is computationally efficient and widely used to estimate aquifer surges. Analytical solution models are computationally efficient but involving many assumptions, such as that the aquifer is homogeneous, the amount of water pumped is constant, while the head loss in the well is ignored; these models are often referred to as homogeneous models. In fact, these assumptions are often not met, resulting in nonnegligible errors in the results, especially for heterogeneous giant thick aquifers.Meanwhile, the homogeneous model cannot estimate the permeability coefficient and water inflow of the broken zone, which is not conducive to solve the water problem during tunnel construction.
Methods In this study, two pumping tests were carried out on the Shengli Tunnel Project in Tianshan Mountain, Xinjiang. A geological model was established based on comprehensive logging data and borehole data; a heterogeneous numerical simulation method was used to quantitatively investigate the amount of groundwater inflow in bore holes. The parameters in the rate determination model of the observation data of the first pumping test were used, and the rationality of the model and the postrate parameters were verified by the observation data of the second pumping test.
Results The permeability coefficients of the fracture zone, intact granite and relatively intact granite were inverted and were 0.000 93 m/d, 0.000 5 m/d and 0.000 3 m/d, respectively. The total water inflow and the water inflow of the fracture zone were predicted to be 14.80 m3/h and 10.46 m3/h, respectively, of which the water inflow of the broken zone accounted for 70.676% of the total water consumption.
Conclusion Field observations revealed head loss in aan ultradeepbore hole during pumping test. The heterogeneous numerical simulation model can explain the ultradeep hole pumping test data better than the homogeneous model, and the total water inflow calculated by the homogeneous model is 18.67 m3/h, which overestimates the water inflow. During tunnel construction, the hydrodynamic parameters and water inflow obtained by the heterogeneous model are more reliable.
-
Key words:
- aquifer /
- heterogeneity /
- pumping test /
- groundwater /
- ultradeep pore /
- water inflow
-
图 4 不同深度第一次降深观测值与模拟值拟合结果
Figure 4. First drawdown between the observed and simulated data at different depths
图 5 第二次抽水试验观测值与模拟值最佳拟合结果
Figure 5. Best fitting between the observation from the second pumping test and the simulated data
表 1 2号竖井0~700 m基岩完整性统计
Table 1. Bedrock integrity statistics for No.2 vertical well
深度/m 厚度/m 完整度 岩性 [68.80, 74.90) 6.10 较破碎 中风化花岗闪长岩 [74.90, 96.00) 21.10 较破碎 中风化花岗岩 [96.00, 116.50) 20.50 较破碎 中风化花岗闪长岩 [116.50, 154.00) 37.50 较破碎 中风化花岗岩 [154.00, 174.00) 20.00 破碎 中风化花岗岩 [174.00, 199.00) 25.00 较完整 中风化花岗岩 [199.00, 232.00) 33.00 破碎 中风化花岗岩 [232.00, 238.00) 6.00 极破碎 中风化花岗闪长岩 [238.00, 247.10) 9.10 较破碎 中风化花岗岩 [247.10, 250.90) 3.80 较破碎 中风化花岗闪长岩 [250.90, 282.90) 32.00 较破碎 中风化花岗岩 [282.90, 291.60) 8.70 较破碎 微风化闪长岩 [291.60, 328.10) 36.50 较完整 微风化花岗岩 [328.10, 377.20) 49.10 较破碎 微风化花岗岩 [377.20, 381.60) 4.40 较破碎 微风化闪长岩 [381.60, 411.30) 29.70 较完整 微风化花岗岩 [411.30, 441.30) 30.00 较破碎 微风化闪长岩 [441.30, 452.30) 11.00 较完整 微风化闪长岩 [452.30, 459.00) 6.70 较完整 微风化花岗岩 [459.00, 469.00) 10.00 较完整 微风化闪长岩 [469.00, 475.20) 6.20 较完整 微风化花岗岩 [475.20, 491.70) 16.50 完整 微风化花岗闪长岩 [491.70, 594.00) 102.30 较完整 微风化花岗岩 [594.00, 642.40) 48.40 完整 微风化花岗岩 [642.40, 649.00) 6.60 破碎 微风化花岗岩 [649.00, 656.40) 7.40 完整 微风化花岗岩 [656.40, 665.00) 8.6 较破碎 微风化闪长岩 [665.00, 700.00] 35 较完整 微风化花岗岩 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 采用非均质模型和均质模型反演的巨厚含水层主要水文地质参数
Table 2. Estimated hydraulic parameters of the giant thick aquifer by the heterogeneous model and homogeneous model
深度/m 分层情况 Kr, i/(m·d-1) Kz, i/(m·d-1) Ss, i Sy, i 非均质模型 [68.80, 174.00) 破碎带 0.000 93 0.000 093 0.000 01 0.15 [174.00, 199.00) 较完整花岗岩 0.000 50 0.000 050 0.000 01 [199.00, 291.60) 破碎带 0.000 93 0.000 093 0.000 01 [291.60, 328.10) 较完整花岗岩 0.000 50 0.000 050 0.000 01 [328.10, 381.60) 破碎带 0.000 93 0.000 093 0.000 01 [381.60, 411.30) 较完整花岗岩 0.000 50 0.000 050 0.000 01 [411.30, 441.30) 破碎带 0.000 93 0.000 093 0.000 01 [441.30, 475.20) 较完整花岗岩 0.000 50 0.000 050 0.000 01 [475.20, 491.70) 完整花岗岩 0.000 30 0.000 030 0.000 01 [491.70, 594.00) 较完整花岗岩 0.000 50 0.000 050 0.000 01 [594.00, 642.40) 完整花岗岩 0.000 30 0.000 030 0.000 01 [642.40, 649.00) 破碎带 0.000 93 0.000 093 0.000 01 [649.00, 656.40) 完整花岗岩 0.000 30 0.000 030 0.000 01 [656.40, 665.00) 破碎带 0.000 93 0.000 093 0.000 01 [665.00, 700.00] 较完整花岗岩 0.000 50 0.000 050 0.000 01 均质模型 [68.80, 700.00] 均质含水层 0.000 59 0.000 059 0.000 01 0.15 注：Ss, i, Kr, i, Kz, i分别为第i层含水层的储水系数、水平向渗透系数和垂向渗透系数；Sy, i为弹性给水度
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 涌水量预测结果
Table 3. Estimated water inflow
深度/m 分层情况 涌水量/(m3·h-1) 总涌水量/(m3·h-1) [68.8, 174.0) 破碎带 3.731 14.80 [174.0, 199.0) 较完整花岗岩 0.275 [199.0, 291.6) 破碎带 3.242 [291.6, 328.1) 较完整花岗岩 0.402 [328.1, 381.6) 破碎带 1.868 [381.6, 411.3) 较完整花岗岩 0.327 [411.3, 441.3) 破碎带 1.080 [441.3, 475.2) 较完整花岗岩 0.373 [475.2, 491.7) 完整花岗岩 0.330 [491.7, 594.0) 较完整花岗岩 1.125 [594.0, 642.4) 完整花岗岩 0.968 [642.4, 649.0) 破碎带 0.238 [649.0, 656.4) 完整花岗岩 0.155 [656.4, 665.0) 破碎带 0.301 [665.0, 700.0] 较完整花岗岩 0.385
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] LI Y, ZHOU Z, ZHUANG C, et al. Non-Darcian effect on a variable-rate pumping test in a confined aquifer[J]. Hydrogeology Journal, 2020, 28(8): 2853-2863. doi: 10.1007/s10040-020-02223-w [2] LIN Y C, YEH H D. An analytical model with a generalized nonlinear water transfer term for the flow in dual porosity media induced by constant-rate pumping in a leaky fractured aquifer[J]. Water Resources Research, 2021, 57(8): e2020WR029186. doi: 10.1029/2020WR029186 [3] XIAO L, YE M, XU Y, et al. A simplified solution using Izbash's equation for non-Darcian flow in a constant rate pumping test[J]. Groundwater, 2019, 57(6): 962-968. doi: 10.1111/gwat.12886 [4] YANG S Y, YEH H D, CHIU P Y. A closed form solution for constant flux pumping in a well under partial penetration condition[J]. Water Resources Research, 2006, 42(5): 277-286. [5] ZHENG G, HA D, LOAICIGA H, et al. Estimation of the hydraulic parameters of leaky aquifers based on pumping tests and coupled simulation/optimization: Verification using a layered aquifer in Tianjin, China[J]. Hydrogeology Journal, 2019, 27(8): 3081-3095. doi: 10.1007/s10040-019-02021-z [6] THEIS C V. The relation between the lowering of the Piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using groundwater storage[J]. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 1935, 16(2): 483-504. [7] HANTUSH M S, JACOB C E. Non-steady radial flow in an infinite leaky aquifer[J]. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 1955, 36(1): 95-100. doi: 10.1029/TR036i001p00095 [8] HANTUSH M S. Modification of the theory of leaky aquifers[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 1960, 65(11): 3713-3725. doi: 10.1029/JZ065i011p03713 [9] HANTUSH M S. Flow to wells in aquifers separated by a semipervious layer[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 1967, 72(6): 1709-1720. doi: 10.1029/JZ072i006p01709 [10] PAPADOPULOS I S. COOPER JR H. Drawdown in a well of large diameter[J]. Water Resources Research, 1967, 3(1): 241-244. doi: 10.1029/WR003i001p00241 [11] LIN Y C, YANG S Y, FEN C S, et al. A general analytical model for pumping tests in radial finite two-zone confined aquifers with Robin-type outer boundary[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2016, 540: 1162-1175. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.07.028 [12] LIN Y C, YEH H D. A lagging model for describing drawdown induced by a constant-rate pumping in a leaky confined aquifer[J]. Water Resources Research, 2017, 53(10): 8500-8511. doi: 10.1002/2017WR021115 [13] LIN Y C, HUANG C S, YEH H D. Analysis of unconfined flow induced by constant rate pumping based on the lagging theory[J]. Water Resources Research, 2019, 55(5): 3925-3940. doi: 10.1029/2018WR023893 [14] CHEN C, ZHANG W, HONG Z, et al. New semi-analytical model for an exponentially decaying pumping rate with a finite-thickness skin in a leaky aquifer[J]. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 2020, 25(8): 04020037-04020037. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001956 [15] 陈晨, 文章, 梁杏, 等. 江汉平原典型含水层水文地质参数反演[J]. 地球科学, 2017, 42(5): 727-733. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX201705007.htmCHEN C, WEN Z, LIANG X, et al. Estimation of hydrogeological parameters for representative aquifers in Jianghan Plain[J]. Earth Science, 2017, 42(5): 727-733. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX201705007.htm [16] 李霞, 文章, 梁杏, 等. 基于解析法和数值法的非稳定流抽水试验参数反演[J]. 地球科学, 2017, 42(5): 743-750. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX201705009.htmLI X, WEN Z, LIANG X, et al. Aquifer parameter estimation of transient pumping test based on analytical and numerical methods[J]. Earth Science, 2017, 42(5): 743-750. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX201705009.htm [17] 魏世毅, 万军伟, 孙伟, 等. 考虑井储效应的双重介质单孔抽水非稳定流解析模型[J/OL]. 地球科学, http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/42.1874.P.20220314.0958.003.html .WEI S Y, WAN J W, SUN W, et al. Analytical model of unsteady flow for single-hole pumping in dual media considering well storage effect[J/OL]. Earth Science,http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/42.1874.P.20220314.0958.003.html . (in Chinese with English abstract)[18] 吴三元, 白革学. 水文地质勘探深孔施工工艺[J]. 西部探矿工程, 2006(4): 194. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XBTK200604095.htmWU S Y, BAI G X. Construction technology for ultra deep holes in hydrogeological exploration[J]. West-China Exploration Engineering, 2006(4): 194. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XBTK200604095.htm [19] 张家军, 雷艳. 水文地质超深孔抽水试验工艺技术探索[J]. 探矿工程(岩土钻掘工程), 2015, 42(5): 40-45. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TKGC201505010.htmZHANG J J, LEI Y. Technical exploration of pumping test process in deep hydrogeological hole[J]. Exploration Engineering (Rock & Soil Drilling And Tunneling), 2015, 42(5): 40-45. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TKGC201505010.htm [20] 何金. 矿山水文地质超深孔抽水试验工艺技术探索[J]. 世界有色金属, 2019(15): 129-130. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-COLO201915079.htmHE J. Technical exploration of deep-hole pumping test in mine hydrogeology[J]. World Nonferrous Metals, 2019(15): 129-130. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-COLO201915079.htm [21] WANG Q R, ZHAN H B. The effect of intra-wellbore head losses in a vertical well[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2017, 548: 333-341. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.02.042 [22] MEYER J R, PARKER B L, CHERRY J A. Characteristics of high-resolution hydraulic head profiles and vertical gradients in fractured sedimentary rocks[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2014, 517: 493-507. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.05.050 [23] ZHENG G, ZHANG T, DIAO Y. Mechanism and countermeasures of preceding tunnel distortion induced by succeeding EPBS tunnelling in close proximity[J]. Computers and Geotechnics, 2015, 66: 53-65. doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.01.008 [24] 王晓燕, 李文鹏, 安永会, 等. 抽水试验中不同位置自动水位计响应数据应用分析[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2022, 49(3): 57-64. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SWDG202203006.htmWANG X Y, LI W P, AN Y H, et al. An analysis of automatic water level monitors data at different positions in a pumping test[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2022, 49(3): 57-64. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SWDG202203006.htm [25] 罗明明, 周宏, 郭绪磊, 等. 峡口隧道间歇性岩溶涌突水过程及来源解析[J]. 地质科技通报, 2021, 40(6): 246-254. doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2021.0054LUO M M, ZHOU H, GUO X L, et al. Process and source analysis of intermittent karst water inrush in Xiakou Tunnel[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2021, 40(6): 246-254. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2021.0054 [26] 黄康, 孙蓉琳, 袁淑卿, 等. 抽水组数和先验信息对估算三维非均质含水层渗透系数的影响[J]. 地球科学, 2022, 47(2): 689-699. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX202202024.htmHUANG K, SUN R l, YUAN S Q, et al. Effect of number of pumping tests and prior information on hydraulic conductivity estimation of three-dimensional heterogeneous aquifer[J]. Earth Science, 2022, 47(2): 689-699. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX202202024.htm [27] 齐跃明, 吴佳欣, 王旭升, 等. 变径抽水井降深和涌水量关系的混合井模型[J]. 地质科技通报, 2023, 42(4): 65-74. doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.tb20220699QI Y M, WU J X, WANG X S, et al. Mixed-well model of the relation between drawdown and water inflow in a pumping well with variable-diameter[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2023, 42(4): 65-74. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.tb20220699 [28] 李善禄, 吴永斌. 天山胜利隧道地下水系统划分及涌水量计算方法研究[J]. 交通世界, 2022(13): 80-83. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JTSJ202213029.htmLI S L, WU Y B. Research on groundwater system division and water inflow calculation method of Tianshan Shengli tunnel[J]. TranspoWorld, 2022(13): 80-83. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JTSJ202213029.htm [29] BOULTON N S. Analysis of data from non-equilibrium pumping tests allowing for delayed yield from storage[J]. Ice Proceedings, 2015, 26(3): 469-482. [30] NEUMAN S P. Theory of flow in unconfined aquifers considering delayed response of the water table[J]. Water Resources Research, 1972, 8(4): 1031-1045. -
下载:
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 164
- PDF下载量: 87
- 被引次数: 0
