1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 9, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 9 Number 2
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Beside the water content, petrophysical nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) techniques in the lab and in boreholes as well as in the field, provide estimates of the hydraulic conductivity of water saturated sediments and rocks. In the vadose zone, the hydraulic conductivity is a function of the water saturation. Regarding the characterization of the vadose zone, the magnetic resonance sounding (MRS) method is expected to have great potential. However, so far, the petrophysical relationship of the hydraulic properties under partial saturation conditions and the NMR parameters in the Earth’s magnetic field is not fully understood. In this study, laboratory NMR experiments in the Earth’s field (EFNMR) are performed in comparison to conventional high field NMR (HFNMR). Sand‐filled columns were used to generate partially saturated conditions by simulating capillary fringes (grain sizes from fine to coarse). We investigate the ability of both NMR techniques to determine the residual water content and the dependency of the NMR relaxation times on the water saturation degree. We note that EFNMR measurements tend to underestimate the residual water content due to long measurement dead times. Furthermore, it shows that the HFNMR relaxation time , as a function of the saturation, behaves according to the Brooks‐Corey model that describes the water retention function and thus allows for the prediction of the relative hydraulic conductivity ,. The EFNMR relaxation time as a function of the saturation degree differs from the Brooks‐Corey expectation due to the influence of the dephasing relaxation rate that is, in general, responsible for the difference of and . We assume that the dephasing relaxation rate itself, when induced by internal magnetic field gradients, depends on the water saturation. We introduce a model that accounts for this dependency with a weighting factor for the dephasing relaxation rate, given as a power law of the saturation degree. The model enables the description of as a function of the water saturation and thus provides the estimation of from . We compare the NMR based predictions with the functions estimated from gravity induced outflow experiments at the columns. The results are in agreement within half a decade for every sand sample of the study. In principle, the suggested approach can be applied for estimating by MRS measurements in the vadose zone. We discuss the potential and limitations of this approach for MRS.

© European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers © 2011 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2010055
2010-08-01
2024-04-18

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2010055
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BirdN.R.A., PrestonA.R., RandallE.W., WhalleyW.R. and WhitmoreA.P.2005. Measurement of the size distribution of water‐filled pores at different matric potentials by stray field nuclear magnetic resonance. European Journal of Soil Science56, 135–143.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. BorgiaG.C., BrownR.J.S. and FantazziniP.1998. Uniform‐penalty inversion of multiexponential decay. Journal of Magnetic Resonance132, 65–77.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BoucherM., CostabelS. and YaramanciU.2011. The detectability of water by NMR considering the instrumental dead time – A laboratory analysis of unconsolidated materials. Near Surface Geophysics9 (this issue).
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BrooksR.H. and CoreyA.T.1964. Hydraulic properties of porous media. Hydrology Paper 3, Colorado State University.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. ChenS., LiawH.‐K. and WatsonA.T.1994. Measurements and analysis of fluid saturation‐dependent NMR relaxation and line broadening in porous media. Magnetic Resonance Imaging12, 201–202.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. CoatesG.R., XioaL. and PrammerM.G.1999. NMR Logging Principles and Applications.Halliburton Energy Services.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. DunnK.J., BergmannD.J. and LaTorracaG.A.2002. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance: Petrophysical and Logging Applications, Handbook of Geophysical Exploration.Pergamon.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. van GenuchtenM.T.1980. A closed‐form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal44, 892–898.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. HammeckerC., BarbieroL., BoivinP., MaeghtJ.L. and DiaeE.H.B.2004. A geometrical pore model for estimating the microscopical pore geometry of soil with infiltration measurements. Transport in Porous Media54, 193–219.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. HaverkampR., LeijF.J., FuentesC., SciortinoA. and RossP.J.2005. Soil water retention: I. Introduction of a shape index. Soil Science Society of America Journal69, 1881–1890.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. HertzogR.C., WhiteT.A. and StraleyC.2007. Using NMR decay‐time measurements to monitor and characterize DNAPL and moisture in subsurface porous media. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics12, 293–306.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. IoannidisM.A., ChatzisI., LemaireC. and PerunarkilliR.2006. Unsaturated hydraulic conductivity from nuclear magnetic resonance measurements. Water Resource Research42, W07201.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. KeatingK. and KnightR.2007. A laboratory study to determine the effect of iron oxides on proton NMR measurements. Geophysics72, E27–E32.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. KeatingK. and KnightR.2008. A laboratory study of the effect of magnetite on NMR relaxation rates. Journal of Applied Geophysics66, 188–196.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. KenyonW.E.1997. Petrophysical principles of applications of NMR logging. The Log Analyst38, 21–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. KleinbergR.L.1996. Utility of NMR T2 distributions, connection with capillary pressure, clay effect, and determination of the surface relaxivity parameter ρ2 . Magnetic Resonance Imaging14, 761–767.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. KutilekM. and NielsonD.R.1994. Soil Hydrology.Catena Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. LegchenkoA., BaltassatJ.‐M., BeauceA. and BernardJ.2002. Nuclear magnetic resonance as a geophysical tool for hydrogeologists. Journal of Applied Geophysics50, 21–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. LegchenkoA., VouillamozJ.‐M. and RoyJ.2009. Magnetic resonance sounding in inhomogeneous Earth’s magnetic field. Proceedings of 4th International Workshop on MRS, Grenoble, France, Expanded Abstracts.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. LubczynskiM. and RoyJ.2003. Hydrogeological interpretation and potential of the new magnetic resonance sounding (MRS) method. Journal of Hydrology283, 19–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. MatteaC., KimmichR., ArdeleanI., WonorahardjoS. and FarrherG.2004. Molecular exchange dynamics in partially filled microscale and nanoscale pores of silica glasses studied by field‐cycling nuclear magnetic resonance relaxometry. Journal of Chemical Physics121, 10648–10656.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. MohnkeO. and YaramanciU.2005. Forward modelling and inversion of MRS relaxation signals using multi‐exponential decomposition. Near Surface Geophysics3, 165–186.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. MohnkeO. and YaramanciU.2008. Pore size distributions and hydraulic conductivities of rocks derived from magnetic resonance sounding relaxation data using multi‐exponential decay time inversion. Journal of Applied Geophysics66, 73–81.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. MualemY.1976. A new model for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated porous media. Water Resource Research12, 513–522.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. RoyJ. and LubczynskiM.2005. MRS multi‐exponential decay analysis: aquifer pore‐size distribution and vadose zone characterization. Near Surface Geophysics3, 287–298.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. SaxtonK.E. and RawlsW.J.2006. Soil water characteristic estimates by texture and organic matter for hydrologic solutions. Soil Science Society of America Journal70, 1569–1578.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. SimunekJ. and van GenuchtenM.T.1999. Using the Hydrus‐1D and Hydrus‐2D codes for estimating unsaturated soil hydraulic and solute transport parameters. In: Characterization and Measurement of the Hydraulic Properties of Unsaturated Porous Media (eds M.T.van Genuchten , F.J.Leij and L.Wu ), pp. 1523–1536. University of California.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. SimunekJ., HuangK., SejnaM. and van GenuchtenM.T.1998. The HYDRUS‐1D software package for simulating the one‐dimensional movement of water, heat and multiple solutes in variably‐saturated media, version 2.02. Technical Report, Colorado School of Mines.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. VereeckenH.1995. Estimating the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity from theoretical models using simple soil properties. Geoderma65, 81–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. VolokitinY., LooyestijnW.J., SlijkermanW.F.J. and HofmanJ.P.2001. A practical approach to obtain primary drainage capillary pressure curves from NMR core and log data. Petrophysics42, 334–343.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. WalshD.O.2008. Multi‐channel surface NMR instrumentation and software for 1D/2D groundwater investigations. Journal of Applied Geophysics66, 140–150.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. WarrikA.W.2003. Soil Water Dynamics.Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. YaramanciU. and HertrichM.2006. Magnetic resonance sounding. In: Groundwater Geophysics – A Tool for Hydrogeology (ed. R.Kirsch ), pp. 253–273. Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. YaramanciU. and Müller‐PetkeM.2009. Surface nuclear magnetic resonance – A unique tool for hydrogeophysics. The Leading Edge28, 1240–1247.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2010055
Loading
Relative hydraulic conductivity and effective saturation from Earth’s field nuclear magnetic resonance – a method for assessing the vadose zone
Near Surface Geophysics 9, 155 (2011); https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2010055
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2010055
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2010055
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error