Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
On Radial Heat Transport in Porous Aquifers With Nonlinear Velocity‐Dependent Thermal Dispersion
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
On Radial Heat Transport in Porous Aquifers With Nonlinear Velocity‐Dependent Thermal Dispersion
Do you wish to request the book?
On Radial Heat Transport in Porous Aquifers With Nonlinear Velocity‐Dependent Thermal Dispersion
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
On Radial Heat Transport in Porous Aquifers With Nonlinear Velocity‐Dependent Thermal Dispersion
2025
Overview
Accurate modeling of heat transport behavior near the test well is essential for the efficient operation and management of aquifer thermal energy storage (ATES) systems. Existing models typically assume a linear relationship between thermal dispersion and velocity, whereas previous controlled experiments have revealed that this relationship is nonlinear. We present a finite element model for thermal single‐well push‐pull (SWPP) tests in ATES systems, incorporating both nonlinear velocity‐dependent thermal dispersion and wellbore mixing effects. Morris global sensitivity analysis shows that heat transport is most affected by nonlinear velocity‐dependent thermal dispersion, followed by injection and extraction rates. A higher exponent of nonlinear velocity‐dependent thermal dispersion leads to a smaller thermal breakthrough curve at the wellbore and a shorter heat transport distance, while thermal dispersivity has the opposite effect. Also, neglecting nonlinear velocity‐dependent thermal dispersion significantly underestimates both effective thermal diffusivity and thermal recovery efficiency in the SWPP tests, where the former is potentially underestimated by four orders of magnitude in the thermal dispersivity range of 1.478–1,000 s. Moreover, the proposed model is used to analyze the relationship between thermal recovery efficiency and the injection‐extraction rate ratio, suggesting that keeping the ratio below one ensures that efficiency exceeds 60%. The capabilities of new model are further demonstrated through two in situ thermal SWPP tests on different time scales (1,000 min and 3 months), highlighting that incorporating nonlinear velocity‐dependent thermal dispersion into models significantly enhances their ability to interpret observations, and the thermal dispersion potentially connected to the test duration.
