Evaluating Geological Model Uncertainty Caused by Data Sufficiency – Using Groundwater Flow and Land Subsidence Modeling as the Example

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：274

、訪客IP：3.145.201.71

姓名

阮國強(Quoc Cuong Nguyen) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

應用地質研究所

論文名稱

(Evaluating Geological Model Uncertainty Caused by Data Sufficiency – Using Groundwater Flow and Land Subsidence Modeling as the Example)

相關論文

★ 水文地質概念模型差異對污染傳輸模擬之影響	★ 2016美濃地震引致嘉南平原與屏東平原地下水文特性變化研究
★ 台灣西南部因地下水開發與構造活動引致地層下陷之研究	★ 序率熱–水–力全耦合模式在相依參數條件下之交互作用行為探討
★ 整合河床出入滲試驗與數值模擬探討東港溪流域地下水與河川交換量季節特徵	★ A Three-Step Time-Series Method for Assessing the Barometric Efficiency in the Donggang River Watershed, Taiwan
★ Assessment of future climate change impacts on streamflow and groundwater by hydrological modeling in the Choushui River Alluvial Fan, Taiwan	★ 以水-力耦合模式探討不同複雜度地質模型對地層下陷模擬之影響—以雲林地區為例
★ Investigation on the Influences of Various Complexity of Hydrogeological Models on Pore Water Pressure Buildup Triggered by Seismic Wave Propagation	★ 異質性水文地質模型於地下水數值模擬之應用——以臺北盆地為例
★ 發展耦合HMC數值模式以探討地質模型複雜度對海水入侵與地層下陷的影響：以台灣屏東平原為例	★ Spatiotemporal Variations of the Skeletal Specific Storage in Choushui River Aquifer System, Taiwan

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

地層下陷是無聲的災害是近年在世界上受到多許多的關注，特別在人口稠密與眾多建設的區域。學習與預測地層下陷的速度以及釐清土體壓縮的因素已景有許多的研究與認知。然而，現有的文獻中較少討論地質模型不確定性對地層下陷的影響評估。本研究使用 GMS 這套商業軟體來模擬地下水流與地層下陷來評估地質不確定性。在沙克爾頓計畫中，建立一個合成模型並假設此模型為初始模型。以地質知識、不同數量的鑽孔資料以及考慮鑽井與地電阻實驗的複合資料，此三種條件來發展並建立數個三維地質模型並運用三維暫態地下水流模式(MODFlOW)與下陷模式(SUB)發展與模擬。透過計算原始模型的均方跟誤差(RMSE)與決定係數來比較與評估不同地質模型所產生的結果，從結果上可以得知，想比於以不同數量的鑽井數所建立的模型於使用地電阻校正後的鑽井資料所產生的結果會有最好的結果。結果還顯現了，規定的邊界條件限制了邊界附近的下陷量，水力傳導系數的值顯著的影響地層下陷時的遲滯效。根據這些結果，地質學家們，可考慮將地球物理的實驗結果搭配鑽井資料來做為評估地質模型建構的方針，以降低地值模型對特定地區所產生的不確定性。

摘要(英)

Land subsidence is a silent hazard that currently attracted great noticed around the world, especially in populated and large building areas. Studying and predicting land subsidence rate and understanding the factors that cause soil compaction are widely studied and understood. However, the uncertainty in the geological model which largely affects land subsidence assessment is less considered in literature. This study used a commercial software, Groundwater Modeling System (GMS), to operate groundwater flow and land subsidence simulations for the assessment of the geological model uncertainty caused by various conditions of data sufficiency. A synthetic geological model, constructed by the Shackleton project, was adopted as the original model. Three scenarios as whether including geological knowledge, different numbers of boreholes, and a combination of the borehole data and the resistivity tomographic data (provided by the Shackleton project) were considered to build new 3D geological models.
Transient groundwater flow models (MODFLOW) and subsidence models (SUB) were developed and simulated based on the constructed geological models. The numerical results from these geological models were compared to that of the original model by using the root mean square error (RMSE) and coefficient of determination (R-squared). The results showed that using the resistivity tomographic data with the cokriging correction of borehole data was the best case. The results also indicated that the prescribed boundary condition constrains the subsidence quantity around that boundary, as well as the value of hydraulic conductivity
significantly affects the delay behavior in land
subsidence calculation. Based on these results, geologists can assess the appropriate stratagem for geological model construction and consider combining the geophysical results with borehole data to mitigate the uncertainties of the geological model to a specific study area.

關鍵字(中)

★ 地質模型不確定性
★ 資料充足性
★ 地質知識
★ 鑽井數目
★ 融合地物資料
★ 地層下陷

關鍵字(英)

★ Geological model uncertainty
★ Data sufficiency
★ Geological knowledge
★ Borehole number
★ Geophysical data assimilation
★ Land subsidence

論文目次

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT viii
摘要 ix
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS x
TABLE OF CONTENTS xi
LIST OF FIGURES xiv
LIST OF TABLES xviii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Literature review 1
1.1.1 Geological model uncertainty 1
1.1.2 Groundwater flow and land subsidence modeling 5
1.2 Objective 5
1.3 Introduction to the adopted data in Shackleton project 6
1.4 Flowchart of the study 7
CHAPTER 2. METHODOLOGY 10
2.1 The generating algorithm of the synthetic geological model 10
2.2 Numerical model 12
2.2.1 Governing equation of groundwater flow 12
2.2.2 Source and sink 13
2.2.3 Governing equation of land subsidence 13
2.3 Horizon ID method 15
2.4 Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) method 16
2.5 Error calculation 18
CHAPTER 3. GEOLOGICAL MODEL AND SIMULATED MODEL 19
3.1 Synthetic geological model 19
3.2 Numerical model settings 22
3.3 Simulated geological models 24
3.3.1 Simulated geological model using borehole data 26
3.3.2 Simulated geological model using ERT data 32
CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 36
4.1 Results for the synthetic geological model 36
4.1.1 Analyzing the delay behavior of clay materials into the model based on hydraulic conductivity 36
4.1.2 The pumping well and pumping rate of the synthetic geological model 38
4.1.3 Calculated groundwater level and land subsidence results of the original synthetic geological model 39
4.2 Numerical simulation results for simulated geological models using the borehole data 41
4.2.1 Calculated groundwater level and land subsidence results for the simulated geological models using borehole cross-sections directly 41
4.2.2 Calculated groundwater level and land subsidence results for the simulated geological model using horizon ID method and corrected by geological knowledge 44
4.3 Simulated model using ERT data 47
4.4 Calculated land subsidence results of the simulated model using ERT directly 47
4.4.1 Calculated land subsidence results of the simulated model using ERT and corrected by the borehole data 47
4.5 Model uncertainty assessment 49
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 55
5.1 Conclusions 55
5.2 Suggestions 56
REFERENCES 57
APPENDIX 61

參考文獻

REFERENCES
[1] Refsgaard, J.C., et al. "A framework for dealing with uncertainty due to model structure error," Advances in water resources, Vol 29, 11, 2006, 1586-1597.
[2] Neuman, S.P. "Maximum likelihood Bayesian averaging of uncertain model predictions," Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, Vol 17, 5, 2003, 291-305.
[3] Bredehoeft, J.D. "The conceptualization model problem—surprise," Hydrogeology Journal, Vol 13, 1, 2005, 37-46.
[4] Refsgaard, J.C., et al. "Review of strategies for handling geological uncertainty in groundwater flow and transport modeling," Advances in Water Resources, Vol 36, 2012, 36-50.
[5] Rojas, R., Feyen, L., and Dassargues, A. "Conceptual model uncertainty in groundwater modeling: Combining generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation and Bayesian model averaging," Water Resources Research, Vol 44, 12, 2008.
[6] Carrera, J., et al. "Inverse problem in hydrogeology," Hydrogeology Journal, Vol 13, 1, 2005, 206-222.
[7] Bredehoeft, J.D. "From models to performance assessment: The conceptualization problem," Groundwater, Vol 41, 5, 2003, 571-577.
[8] Højberg, A.L. and Refsgaard, J.C. "Model uncertainty–parameter uncertainty versus conceptual models," Water Science Technology, Vol 52, 6, 2005, 177-186.
[9] Gong, W., et al. "Stratigraphic uncertainty modelling with random field approach," Computers Geotechnics, Vol 125, 2020, 103681.
[10] Lelliott, M., Cave, M., and Wealthall, G. "A structured approach to the measurement of uncertainty in 3D geological models," Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology Hydrogeology, Vol 42, 1, 2009, 95-105.
[11] Ajami, N.K., Duan, Q., and Sorooshian, S. "An integrated hydrologic Bayesian multimodel combination framework: Confronting input, parameter, and model structural uncertainty in hydrologic prediction," Water resources research, Vol 43, 1, 2007.
[12] Liu, X., et al. "Ground subsidence characteristics associated with urbanization in East China analyzed with a Sentinel-1A-based InSAR time series approach," Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, Vol 78, 6, 2019, 4003-4015.
[13] Fan, Y., et al. "Parameter uncertainty and temporal dynamics of sensitivity for hydrologic models: A hybrid sequential data assimilation and probabilistic collocation method," Environmental Modelling & Software, Vol 86, 2016, 30-49.
[14] Vrugt, J.A., et al. "Improved treatment of uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: Combining the strengths of global optimization and data assimilation," Water resources research, Vol 41, 1, 2005.
[15] Moradkhani, H., et al. "Uncertainty assessment of hydrologic model states and parameters: Sequential data assimilation using the particle filter," Water resources research, Vol 41, 5, 2005.
[16] Troldborg, L., The influence of conceptual geological models on the simulation of flow and transport in Quaternary aquifer systems. 2004, GEUS Copenhagen, Denmark.
[17] Dubus, I.G., Brown, C.D., and Beulke, S. "Sources of uncertainty in pesticide fate modelling," Science of the Total Environment, Vol 317, 1-3, 2003, 53-72.
[18] Poeter, E. and Anderson, D. "Multimodel ranking and inference in ground water modeling," Groundwater, Vol 43, 4, 2005, 597-605.
[19] Harrar, W.G., Sonnenborg, T.O., and Henriksen, H.J. "Capture zone, travel time, and solute-transport predictions using inverse modeling and different geological models," Hydrogeology Journal, Vol 11, 5, 2003, 536-548.
[20] Buizza, R., et al. "Report on the operational use of EPS, to forecast severe weather and extreme events," World Meteorological Organization, Vol 2001.
[21] Georgakakos, K.P., et al. "Towards the characterization of streamflow simulation uncertainty through multimodel ensembles," Journal of hydrology, Vol 298, 1-4, 2004, 222-241.
[22] Butts, M.B., et al. "An evaluation of the impact of model structure on hydrological modelling uncertainty for streamflow simulation," Journal of hydrology, Vol 298, 1-4, 2004, 242-266.
[23] County, C. Pilot project on establishment of methodology for zonation of groundwater vulnerability. in Proceedings from seminar on groundwater zonation. 2000. Danish: County of Copenhagen.
[24] Deng, Z., et al. "Land subsidence prediction in Beijing based on PS-InSAR technique and improved Grey-Markov model," GIScience Remote Sensing, Vol 54, 6, 2017, 797-818.
[25] Bitelli, G., et al. "Radar interferometry-based mapping of the present land subsidence along the low-lying northern Adriatic coast of Italy," Land Subsidence, Associated Hazards and the Role of Natural Resources Development, Proceedings of EISOLS, Vol 2010, 279-286.
[26] Buckley, S.M., et al. "Land subsidence in Houston, Texas, measured by radar interferometry and constrained by extensometers," Journal of geophysical research: solid earth, Vol 108, B11, 2003.
[27] Chen, B., et al. "Characterization and causes of land subsidence in Beijing, China," International Journal of Remote Sensing, Vol 38, 3, 2017, 808-826.
[28] Erkens, G., et al. "Sinking coastal cities," Proceedings of the International Association of Hydrological Sciences, Vol 372, 2015, 189.
[29] Minderhoud, P., et al. "Impacts of 25 years of groundwater extraction on subsidence in the Mekong delta, Vietnam," Environmental Research Letters, Vol 12, 6, 2017, 064006.
[30] Galloway, D.L., Jones, D.R., and Ingebritsen, S.E., Land subsidence in the United States, 1182, US Geological Survey.1999.
[31] Wu, J.C., et al. "Numerical simulation of land subsidence induced by groundwater overexploitation in Su-Xi-Chang area, China," Environmental Geology, Vol 57, 6, 2009, 1409-1421.
[32] Tzampoglou, P. and Loupasakis, C. "Numerical simulation of the factors causing land subsidence due to overexploitation of the aquifer in the Amyntaio open coal mine, Greece," HydroResearch, Vol 1, 2019, 8-24.
[33] Jafari, F., Javadi, S., and Karimi, N. Forecasting of subsidence due to groundwater over exploitation using MODFLOW and interferometry technique in Radar imagery. in 36th IAHR World Congress, Netherlands. 2015.
[34] Gorelick, S.M. "A review of distributed parameter groundwater management modeling methods," Water Resources Research, Vol 19, 2, 1983, 305-319.
[35] Rejani, R., et al. "Simulation modeling for efficient groundwater management in Balasore coastal basin, India," Water Resources Management, Vol 22, 1, 2008, 23.
[36] Rajabi, M.M. and Ketabchi, H. "Uncertainty-based simulation-optimization using Gaussian process emulation: application to coastal groundwater management," Journal of Hydrology, Vol 555, 2017, 518-534.
[37] Parhizkar, S., et al. "Predicting water level drawdown and assessment of land subsidence in Damghan aquifer by combining GMS and GEP models," Geopersia, Vol 5, 1, 2015, 63-80.
[38] Zhuang, C.H., Dong, J.J., and Tian, Y.M., Geological uncertainty and societal risk: the perspectives of engineering, environment, and geohazards, in Midterm Report of Shackleton Program, Ministry of Science and Technology. 2020, MOST108-2638-E-008-001-MY2: Taiwan.
[39] Fournier, A., Fussell, D., and Carpenter, L. "Computer rendering of stochastic models," Communications of the ACM, Vol 25, 6, 1982, 371-384.
[40] Ewin, C., Visualization of the Diamond Square Algorithm. 2015.
[41] McDonald, M.G. and Harbaugh, A.W., A modular three-dimensional finite-difference ground-water flow model: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water Resources Investigations, 6, U.S. Geological Survey.1988.
[42] Rushton, K.R. and Redshaw, S.C., Seepage and groundwater flow: Numerical analysis by analog and digital methods, John Wiley & Sons Incorporated.1979.
[43] Harbaugh, A.W., et al. "MODFLOW-2000, the U.S. geological survey modular ground-water model-user guide to modularization concepts and the ground-water flow process," Open-file report. U. S. Geological Survey, Vol 92, 2000, 134.
[44] Leake, S. "Interbed storage changes and compaction in models of regional groundwater flow," Water Resources Research, Vol 26, 9, 1990, 1939-1950.
[45] Hoffmann, J., et al. "MODFLOW-2000 ground-water model--User guide to the subsidence and aquifer-system compaction (SUB) package," Open-file report. U. S. Geological Survey, Vol 03, 2003, 233.
[46] Terzaghi, K. "Principles of soil mechanics," Engineering News-Record, Vol 95, 19-27, 1925, 19-32.
[47] Meinzer, O.E. "Compressibility and elasticity of artesian aquifers," Economic geology, Vol 23, 3, 1928, 263-291.
[48] Jacob, C.E. "On the flow of water in an elastic artesian aquifer," Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, Vol 21, 2, 1940, 574-586.
[49] De Loera, J., Rambau, J., and Santos, F., Triangulations: structures for algorithms and applications, 25, Springer Science & Business Media.2010.
[50] Tsai, V.J. "Delaunay triangulations in TIN creation: an overview and a linear-time algorithm," International Journal of Geographical Information Science, Vol 7, 6, 1993, 501-524.
[51] Lemon, A.M. and Jones, N.L. "Building solid models from boreholes and user-defined cross-sections," Computers & Geosciences, Vol 29, 5, 2003, 547-555.
[52] AGI, Instruction Manual for EarthImager 2D Version 2.4. 0 Resistivity and IP Inversion Software. 2008, Advanced Geosciences, Inc. Austin TX.
[53] Johnson, A.I., Specific yield: compilation of specific yields for various materials, US Government Printing Office.1967.
[54] Freeze, R.A. and Cherry, J.A., Groundwater. 1979.
[55] Mahmoudpour, M., et al. "Numerical simulation and prediction of regional land subsidence caused by groundwater exploitation in the southwest plain of Tehran, Iran," Engineering Geology, Vol 201, 2016, 6-28.
[56] Zhang, Q.-L., et al. "Model AVSWAT apropos of simulating non-point source pollution in Taihu lake basin," Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol 174, 1-3, 2010, 824-830.
[57] County, C. Pilot project on establishment of methodology for zonation of groundwater vulnerability. in Proceedings from a seminar on groundwater zonation. 2000. Danish.

指導教授

王士榮(Shih-Jung Wang)

審核日期

2021-7-26

推文