Contaminant transport in fractured porous

media: steady-state solutions by a Fourier sine

transform method
A. Fogden, K. A. Landman, L. R. White
Department

of Mathematics,

University of Melbourne,

Parkville, Victoria, Australia

The steady-state transport of a decaying contaminant in a fractured porous rock matrix by twodimensional diffusion and vertical advection is treated by a Fourier sine transform technique for the
cases of a single vertical fracture and a periodic array offractures. The general case of unequal Peclet
numbers in the fracture and matrix regions is reduced to a first-kind Fredholm integral equation in
the transformed interfacial flux. The asymptotic behavior of the solution for large and small vertical
positions relative to the contaminant source is analyzed. For the special case of equal Peclet numbers
an exact analytical expression for the steady-state concentration has been derived for an arbitrary
source distribution. A method of calculating an accurate analytical approximate solution to the general
mismatched Peclet number case is proposed, and its accuracy verified by comparison of its predictions
with the exact numerical solution obtained by a boundary integral method.
Keywords: contaminant,

dispersion,

advection,

Introduction
The occurrence of fractures in porous media is an important factor in the movement of a contaminant by
diffusion and advection. They constitute very effective
pathways, since the internal permeability and porosity
of fractures are greater than those of the surrounding
rock or soil.
The analysis of contaminant transport in fractured
porous media is environmentally important because it
can be used to predict the consequences of leakage of
radioactive or toxic waste from an underground repository. A typical scenario concerns a contaminant
source in the vicinity of a fracture network leading to
a freshwater aquifer. Since such networks may feasibly be of extremely intricate connected or disconnected form, attention here is restricted to mathematically tractable worst-case situations of uniform vertical
fractures of constant width in uniform saturated porous
media. In what we term a full two-dimensional treatment of transport in such systems, the groundwater
velocity is assumed to be vertical and constant in the
fracture and the porous rock matrix. Also it is assumed
that in both regions contaminant diffusion occurs in
both the vertical and horizontal directions. Further,
adsorption onto the matrix face and within the matrix

Address reprint requests to Dr. Landman at the Department of Mathematics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia
Received December

160

Appt.

1987; revised August 1988

Math.

Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

fracture, porous media

and decay of the contaminant are all incorporated into

this model.
Contaminant transport in vertical fracture systems
has been studied by numerous authors. Due to the
complexities involved in attempting to solve the full
two-dimensional problem, various numerical procedures and analytical approximations have been proposed. Analytical approaches most often assume that
transport in the fracture is only in the vertical direction
and contaminant is only allowed to diffuse horizontally
in the surrounding matrix. 1-5 Then there are two onedimensional transport equations which are coupled via
a diffusive flux term across the fracture-matrix interface. The most common numerical approach uses a
finite-element technique. 6-9 In our previous paperslo-
we discuss a boundary inte,gral method based on Greens
theorem; this reduces to solving numerically Fredholm
integral equations. Here we describe an analytic approach to the full two-dimensional equations, from which
approximate solutions (and under special conditions,
exact ones) can be obtained.
Here we choose to consider the steady-state full
two-dimensional problem since it provides a means of
prediction of the ultimate penetration of any concentration level in a fracture-matrix system. Using Fourier
sine transforms, we can write the concentration in the
fracture and matrix regions in terms of-the Fourier sine
transform of the interfacial flux. Exact solutions can
be obtained for a special case that represents a realistic
physical situation. Further, we provide a method for
obtaining analytical approximate solutions of the general problem using this special case.

0 1989 Butterworth Publishers

Contaminant

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

where the dimensionless

Transport equation
The differential equation governing the steady-state
transport of a decaying contaminant in a single medium
by two-dimensional diffusion and vertical groundwater
flow is

Kf

D:1
-

(1)

LVf

This equation was derived under the assumption

that all of the transport coefficients and physical properties of the medium are constant. The hydrodynamic
dispersion coefficients Dir and D22 represent the process of dispersion due to both fluid velocity variations
and molecular diffusion. There is still considerable discussion as to these coefficients dependence on the flow
field and medium properties. With Bears definition
(Bear,* pp. 61 l-615) and only a vertical velocity,
D,l = aTIV( + TD*

(24

D2* = aLIVl + TD*

(2b)

(3d

y = YIL

(3b)

L2A*Rm

L2A*Rf
~

D;

(5c)

22

Geometries and boundary conditions

As stated earlier, worst-case two-dimensional fracturematrix systems (in which the uniform porous media
contain vertical fractures of consta.nt width) are considered. We analyze contaminant transport for two such
fracture-matrix geometries. In both cases we let b denote the half-fracture width and define the dimensionless parameter 6 by
h

a=:

(6)

The first case is that of a porous medium, modeled

by a half-plane, containing a single vertical fracture of
infinite length, as shown in Figure Z(a). For this geometry, an appropriate choice of L is the matrix diffusion length (DE/A*Rm)2. As in Fogden et al. ,I0 worst-

where ffL and iyT are the longitudinal and transverse

dispersivities, respectively, T is the tortuosity, and D*
is the molecular diffusion coeflicient of the contaminant.
Equation (1) describes transport of the contaminant
in both the fracture and the matrix, but the values of
the dispersion coeffkients, groundwater velocities, porosities, and retardation factors are particular to each
region. We shall use the superscripts f and m on these
parameters to signify their value in the fracture and
the matrix, respectively. It is necessary to scale the
transport equation in each region so that the important
dimensionless groups may be identified. Introduce dimensionless coordinates x and y defined by
x = X/L

(5b)

Dsn2

D:2

where C = concentration of contaminant

x= coordinate perpendicular to the fracture
axis
Y= coordinate along the fracture axis
D,,,&
= dispersion coefficients
v= vertical groundwater (Darcy) velocity
A* = decay constant
R= retardation coefficient

(54

LV
p = -

f = hf

D?l
DE

052

052

D,g+D**~-v~y-A*RC=O

constants appearing in (4) are

POROUS MATRIX

Y
Fig.la

where L is a representative length scale for the physical

system. A dimensionless concentration c is defined by
scaling C with the maximum value of the source strength
at the fracture origin. The transport equation can now
be written in the scaled form

in the fracture

in the matrix

Fig.lb

(4a)

(4b)

Configuration of the fracture-matrix

system in dimensionless variables x and y: (a) single fracture problem; (b)
periodic array of fractures problem

Appl.

Math.

Modelling,

1989, Vol.

13, March

161

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

Contaminant

case considerations

lead us to assume that the boundary condition imposed at y = 0 is symmetric in x.

Hence this symmetry is passed on to the entire problem, and we need only solve the fracture transport
equation in the region 0 5 x < S, y > 0 and the matrix
transport equation in the region x > 6, y > 0, imposing
the boundary conditions
c = S(x),
ac
-=
dX

y = 0,

0,

dC

-+O,
ax

c+O,

x LO

- 0,
ax-

x=0,

y>o

0b)

x-+m,

y>o

(7c)

Y+m,

xro

(7d)

a2X
Kf~

01x51

(8a)

x=0,

y>o

(8b)

(114

eUmyi2
x(x, y)

in the matrix

(1lb)

equations (4) become

a*x
+

idx

in the fracture

aY
krn~+$-jmXEO

in the matrix

x=1,

y>o

c+o,

y-m,

OSXl

C(Sf,Y)

= c(s-,Y)

$(s+,Y)

= +-,Y)

where the constant parameter

0 fDfI1
lVDW

(12b)

where

(134
Wb)
The boundary conditions on X(x, y) are precisely the
same as the boundary conditions on c(x, y), namely
equations (7) and (8) for the single fracture and periodic
array of fractures problems, respectively. The interface conditions (9) become
evmy/*x(S+,y)

XkY)

(144

= eufy*x(S-,y)
=

g&*~(S-,

y)

of x(x, y) is

(94

(9b)
u is defined as
(10)

1989, Vol. 13, March

X(x, w)sin oy do

(8d)

In this formula, 19represents the matrix porosity, while

the fracture porosity of is usually assumed to be unity.

Appl. Math. Modelling,

(124

Note that the single fracture problem can be viewed

as a special case of this periodic array of fractures
problem in which the half-fracture spacing B is infinite.
Finally, for both geometries the boundary value
problems in the fracture and matrix regions are coupled
via the physical requirements that the contaminant
concentration and flux be continuous at the fracturematrix interface. This yields the two conditions

162

in the fracture

Then the transport

y=o,

- 0,
ax-

(T=-

eOy*
x(x, y)

In the usual way, a representation

ac

of solutions

C(&Y) =

eumY/*$(S+,y)

ac

formulation

Since the contaminant concentration is specified along

the boundary y = 0, it is appropriate to take the Fourier
sine transform in the y variable of the governing transport equations (4). However, the advective term u(ac/ay)
must first be removed. This is done bv defining the
variable X(x, y):

(7a)

Here the arbitrary function S(x) represents the source

distribution of contaminant at the top of the fracturematrix system.
The second case is that of a porous medium, again
modeled by a half-plane, containing an infinite set of
identical vertical fractures, of infinite length, with axes
at equal spacing. This geometry is illustrated in Figure
Z(6), where the length scale L has been chosen to be
the half-fracture spacing B. We assume that the boundary condition at y = 0 is symmetric about the axis of
symmetry of each fracture and each intervening porous
block. Then the entire problem possesses these symmetries, and we need only solve the fracture and matrix
transport equations in the regions 0 9 x < 6, y > 0
and S < x 5 1, y > 0, respectively. The appropriate
boundary conditions for this geometry are then
c=S(x),

Fourier sine transform

(15)

where X is the Fourier sine transform

variable and is detined as
X(x, w) = 1 x(x, y)sin wy dy
?3-

of x in the y

(16)

We now take the Fourier sine transform of the transport equations in the fracture and matrix regions for
the two fracture-matrix geometries considered. For both
geometries the fracture region is 0 5 x < S, y > 0.
Taking the Fourier sine transform of equation (12a)
and using the boundary conditions, we find that the
Fourier sine transform X satisfies

$ - (bf(w))2X= ax
-2

ax

0,

x = 0,

gfqx)
w>o

(174
(17b)

Contaminant

transport in fractured porous media: A, Fogden et al.

where

with
f
by&))

l/2

(18)

q
(

g(x, w) =

>

20
mcb(w)sinh b(w)( 1 - 6)

The solution to equation (17a) subject to (17b) is

.

A(w)cosh bf(o)x
X(x, w) =
+ g(x, w)
bf(o)sinh bf(w)S

(19)

cash b(w)( 1 - x) i S(x)cosh b(o)(x - 6) dx

6
I

Here gf(x, w) is a particular solution to the inhomogeneous equation (17a) and is found by using variation
of parameters:

(25)

2w
$-rKfbf(w)Sinhbf(w)6
x

g(x, w) =

cash bf(w)(6 - x)

cash b(w)(x - S) I S(x)cosh b(w)( 1 - x) dx

x

S(x)cosh bf(w)x dx

and again B(o) will be determined from equations (14).

We are using a generalized notation here, so B(w) and
g(x, o) have different explicit forms for the two geometries.

cash bf(w)x

I
x

S(x)cosh b(w)(6 - x) dx

As stated above,

(20)
A(w) is an unknown function which will be determined

using the interface conditions (14). The same methods

are used for equation (12b) in the matrix region. For
both geometries we introduce

b(w)

w2

From equations (5b) we observe that /3 = 0 corresponds to the fracture and matrix regions having the
same Peclet number.

For the single fracture problem

b(w)e

(26)

(21)
)

X(x,4 = -

the coefficient functions A(w) and

and matrix regions, respectively,
are determined via the interface conditions (14). The
three possible cases uf = u, uf > u, and uf < urnneed
to be considered separately. To this end introduce the
parameter

B(o) in the fracture

p=p_$

112

,-*

Determination of A(w) and B(u)

bm(w)tx- 6) +

gm(X,

w)

(22)
Single fracture problem
p = 0. In terms of the transform

where

interface conditions

2w

g(x, @) =

x(s+,w)

?TKb(W)

.{

e-bmW(x-*i[
S(x)cosh b(w)(x

- 6) dx

function X the

(14) become

= X(6-,w)

(27a)

:(a+,w) = cs(S-,o)

(27b)

From equations (19) and (22) these equations become

+ cash b(o)(x - 6) 1 S(x)e pbm(o)(x-S)dx}
x
(23
and B(w) is an unknown function which will
mined using equations (14). For this solution
the boundary condition (7~) we require that
0 as x + ~0.For the periodic array of fractures
X(x, 0) = -

be deterto satisfy
dSldx +
problem

B(w)cosh b(w)( 1 - x)
+ g(x, w)
b(w)sinh b(w)( 1 - 6)
(24)

coth bf(w)S
B(w)
- + g(o) =
A(4
b(w)

bf(4

+ gf(4

B(w) = aA

(284
(28b)

where, for convenience,

we have defined

gf(w) = gf(S-, 0)

(29a)

g(w) = g(6+) w)

(29b)

The algebraic equations (28) yield

A(w)

IBcw) = bfWb(4[-gfW + g(w)]

u

(30)

b(w)coth bf(w)6 + c+bf(w)

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

163

Contaminant

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

6 > 0. Equations

(14) can be written as

epPYx(a+,
Y) = x(6-,
epPy$(iS+,

y) =

Y)

(314

u$(c-,y)

(3lb)

To proceed, we require
the left-hand sides of
Fourier sine transforms
It can be easily verified
transform of h(y), that

the Fourier sine transforms of

equations (31) in terms of the
of X(S+, y) and (Ql&r)(s, y).
that if H(w) is the Fourier sine
is,

for B(o):
m
/

K(w, w)B(w) do = Fp(gm)(o) - gf(w)

(35)

6 < 0. Equations

(14) can be written as

x(6+, Y) = @Yx(~-, Y)
$(S+,y)

(3W

= uepyg(S-,y)

H(w) = ,I

(32)

h(y)sin oy dy
0

then the Fourier sine transform of e-v

F,(H j(w) where

h(y) (v > 0) is

- -B(w) + g(o) = F_,

b(w)

+ gf

(w)

B(w) = (TF_~(A)(w)
wH(w) dw

ffi

= -7xfJ
/o [(w - u)2 + v2][(w + w)2 + $1
lr

Then taking the Fourier

(31) gives

sine transform

(33)

of equations

Wb)

F&.9(4 = aA

Note that, as p+ 0, F,(H)(w) + H(w) (since the kernel

in (33) acts like a delta function); hence in this limit,
equations (34) reduce to equations (28) as required.
The term A(w) can be eliminated from equations (34)
to give a Fredholm integral equation of the first kind

A(w) = ;B(o)

bf(4bm(4[

- g(w) +

(37b)

This time B(w) can be eliminated to give a Fredholm

integral equation for A(w).
Periodic array of fractures problem
p = 0. In terms of the transform

function X the
interface conditions are again given by equations (27).
Using equations (19) and (24), we obtain the equations
- coth b(o)(l - 6) B(o) + gm(w)
b(w)
= coth bf(w)S
b(w)

A(4

+ g(o)

B(o) = aA

where g(w) and g(w) are defined by equations

The solution to equations (38) is

g(41

coth bm(l - S)

p < 0. Proceeding
tions (36)

as above, we obtain from equa-

- coth b(o)( 1 - 6) B(w) + gm(m)

bm(w)

b
=

equations (31) yields

B + gm

coth bf(o)S
b(o)

Fp(B)W = PA

B(o) = vF_~(A)(~)

(w)
A(4

+ gf(4

(404

(40b)

By eliminating A(o), we obtain an integral equation for

B(w).

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

(29).

(39)

= F_,
p > 0. Fourier-sine-transforming

(384
(38b)

bm(o)coth b(w)8 + abf(w)coth b(w)( 1 - 6)

The only difference in the structure of this equation

and the corresponding one for the single fracture problem (equation (30)) is the coth b(o)(l - 6) term in
the denominator of (39). In terms of the unscaled variables the single fracture problem corresponds to the
limit of the intervening porous block width becoming
infinite, so the coth term tends to unity.

164

coth bfS

-A

(374

FvW)(w)
4

Taking the Fourier sine transform of these equations

and using the operator F, defined in (33) gives

coth bf8
7A

+ gf (0)
>

(41a)
(41b)

Again an integral equation for A(o) can be obtained.

We end this section with some remarks regarding
the dimensionless contaminant flux (acl&)(s , y) in
the matrix. A useful property of transforms is that if
H(w) is the Fourier sine transform of h(y) then the
asymptotic form as w + ~0of H(w) yields the asymptotic form as y + 0 of h(y). By studying the asymptotic

Contaminant

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

behavior as o * CCof the functions A(w), B(w), g*(w),

and g(w) (see Appendix l), we can obtain (see Appendix 2) the following asymptotic form as y + 0:

x(x, y) =

5 Res(X(x,

wj))e-ffKf~~22y

j=l
m

12u S(a+) - s(6-j

~~+.Y-;~(Kf)l/2

[ - X(.x, rein/z)
/
(AVZ
+ X(x, re -i3T2)] e -y dr
+;

a(l)

(T(Km)1/2

(42)

for both of the fracture-matrix

geometries. Consequently this flux is finite as y + 0 if and only if S(x)
is continuous at x = 6.

(43)

where Oj and nj are related by wj = i(Af + Kf$)12 and

~~ are the k ordered (nj+ 1 > qj) solutions of the transcendental equation

Exact solutions of the j? = 0 problems

(A - Af) - KV
Km

We have obtained exact solutions to the coefficient

functions A(w) and B(w) when /3 = 0 for both geometries (equations (30) and (39)). Since explicit expressions for the Fourier sine transform X(x, w) in both
regions have been derived in terms of these known
functions A and B, we can determine X(x, y) from equation (15) and, hence, the concentration c(x, y) from
equation (11). The Fourier inversion integral (15) can
be written in a more convenient form so that it can be
evaluated by contour integration in the complex plane.
This is described in Appendix 3.

+ arl

tan

>

(4)

As discussed in Appendix 3, the residues and, hence,

the coefficients of the exponential terms in the summation in equation (43) are independent of vf and urn
when p = 0. Also it can be shown from the inequalities
(A40) on nj that the ratio of the (j + 1)th to the jth
term in this summation decays at least as fast as
exp[ - ~~r~y/46*(R)~~], while the integral on the right
side of equation (43) decays at least as fast as
e - (ArnPY.
Finally, we consider a particular example where

Single fracture

problem

The contour integration

Then the concentration

in the fracture
in the matrix

yields the solution

there is
e - [(A+

c(S-,y)

c(s+,Y)

(45)

25
j=l 1 +

(Kf/Km)(~j/bm(Oj))2

!&,*p-

uf/2ly

+ rSb(wj)

[(vj/bm(wj))2

1(+2l

oc
-y(rvufi2)

&.

(46)

Periodic array of fractures

where

The contour integration

p=_L(($_!K)(!L$r))

problem

yields the solution

k
X(X,

Y)

7~

Res(X(x, wj))e-+~~**Y

( j=l
.cot ((yJS)

(47a)

+ 2m Res(X(x, wX))e~(A+K~n*2PZy
(48)
n=l

r2 - Af

Q=Kf

(47b)

(Am - Af) - dn I*
Km
)
tanh[((Am-~~~Kfn2)(l

where Wjand nj are related by Wj = i(Af + K~T$)~ and

vj are the k ordered (nj+ I > vj) solutions of the transcendental equation

-s)]

+(+qtan+=O

(49)

All the ~2 > qk, and they satisfy another transcendental equation ((A51) in Appendix 3). Again, the residues and,
hence, the coefficients of the exponential terms in the summation in equation (48) are independent of of and urn.
Consider the example where S(x) is specified as in equation (45). Then

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

165

Contaminant

transport

in fractured

porous

media:

et al.

A. Fogden

e - [(A+&/Z)* ~ uf/Z]y
2

Kf

77js
+

sin

qja

Cos

qja

1
a

jCot

(T77i

js

tan

7@

(1

6)

b"(wj)

Note that (bm(wj))

(b(w;))*

> 0, j = 1, 2, . . . , k, while
< 0, n = 1, 2, . . . . .

Analytical approximations for /? # 0 problems

For the general case where j3 # 0 recall that either
from a Fredholm integral
equation of the first kind. Analytical solution of such
an integral equation is not possible in general, and some
of the difficulties of numerical procedures are discussed in Appendix 5. The conclusion is that the
boundary integral method given in our previous paper is a more accurate and economical method for
numerically generating concentrations for the general
p # 0 problems than is the Fourier sine transform
approach outlined above. The utility of the present
transform approach lies in its ability to generate an
accurate analytical approximation to the contaminant
concentration for /3 # 0 problems. We develop this
approximation below.
In Fogden et al. lo the full two-dimensional problem
is solved numerically by a boundary integral method
for the case considered here in which the contaminant
concentration is specified across the top of the fracture-matrix system and also the case in which a mixed
boundary condition is imposed there. It is found that
as y -+ 03the concentration has an exponential asymptotic form

A(w) or R(o) is determined

c(x, y) - k(x)e - w

for all x

(51)

Although the function k depends upon the choice of

boundary condition at y = 0, (Yis a constant for each
single fracture or periodic array of fractures system.
In the appendix of Fogden et ~1.~ we propose that, for
both geometries, the value of CYmay be analytically
approximated by the unique solution, in the interval
(0, - P/2 + ((P/2)* + hm)j2), of a particular equation.
For the single fracture and periodic array of fractures
problems, the equations are

As stated in the above-mentioned

paper, we compared the approximations to (Ygenerated by these equations with the known decay lengths of the two nontrivial exactly soluble special cases that we isolated. The
first such case is the nonphysical situation u = 0 in
which the boundary value problems in the fracture and
matrix regions are decoupled. For both the single fracture and periodic array of fractures geometries, the
reciprocal decay length of the exact solution is then
a=

((F)*+Am)*

-f+

(53)

which is also the exact solution of equations (52) in

this situation. The second such case is the situation
vf = urn (that is, p = 0) for which the exact solution
was analyzed for both geometries in the previous section. There we showed that the reciprocal decay length
of the exponential asymptotic form for the concentration as y + 00is
I/2
(y=

--+

+ Af +

Kf7):

(54)

Here v1 is the smallest solution, in the interval

(0, ((A - A)/K~)),
of the transcendental equations
(44) and (49) for the single fracture and periodic array
of fractures problems, respectively. For typical values
of the dimensionless
parameters,
the quantity
((A - Af)/~f)126
is very much smaller than unity, and
hence these transcendental equations have the unique
solution 77 = ql. Under these circumstances an extremely accurate estimate of CYis obtained if the term
tan 77~7
is replaced by 78 (the leading term in its power
series expansion about zero) so that equations (44) and
(49) become
-

(A - A) - Kfq2 * +

(+6772

Km

(A

Af)

Kf77*

(554

l*

(52a)
. tanh
+
.

tanh

respectively.

166

Appl. Math. Modelling,

(52b)

1989, Vol. 13, March

c+* = 0

(55b)

(Note that this approximation has made the single fracture equation quadratic in q2, while the periodic array
of fractures equation remains transcendental.) We in-

Contaminant

vert equation (54) to obtain v2 as a function of (Y,

7$ = $2

+ vfol - Af)

(56)

then substitute it into equations (55). This now exactly

reproduces, in this special case uf = urn, the pair of
equations (52) proposed above.
The value of the reciprocal decay length (Ypredicted
by equations (52) was also compared with the value of
this quantity obtained from numerical solution of the
general problem for a wide variety of dimensionless
parameter values and boundary conditions at y = 0.
In all cases the agreement was found to be excellent.
So henceforth we assume that equations (52a) and (52b)
yield a uniformly valid and extremely accurate approximation to the reciprocal decay length of the concentration in the single fracture problem and periodic
array of fractures problem, respectively.
Since this
quantity can be obtained so simply and is the most
important feature of the function c(x, y), it may be used
as a basis for generation of analytical approximations
to the solution of the fill two-dimensional problem.
Clearly such approximations are valuable since they
are less computationally expensive than the numerical
procedure for obtaining the exact solution described
in Fogden et al.O
The simplest use of this value of the decay length
takes the form of an upper bound
c(x,y) I epay

(57)
for both geometries and at all points in the fracturematrix system (since the maximum value of the dimensionless function c(x, 0) = S(x) is assumed to be
unity). Further, this upper bound can be multiplied by
appropriate horizontal concentration profiles to yield
the separated approximations
01x<6
X>6
for the single fracture problem
e-"Y

C(X,Y)

e_ay cash V(1 - x)

. cash V(1 - 6)

(58a)

05x<s

6<x11

for the periodic array of fractures problem

(58b)

where
A - (a2 + Pa!)

U=
(

Km

I*
(59)

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

soluble special case that represents realistic physical

situations in which the fracture-matrix system is not
trivially degenerate. Use of this special case extends
beyond its obvious application to analytical approximation of the solution for those situations in which the
value of p is very small. For any general situation
(corresponding to a particular choice of boundary condition at y = 0 and dimensionless parameters g, 6, uf,
urn, hf, A, K~, Km) the shape of the concentration function will be unchanged if the values of uf and/or urn are
altered to satisfy the condition uf = urn. Further, for a
problem with uf # urn it is possible to find another
problem with new values of uf and urn, such that uf =
urn (p = 0), whose solution approximates well the solution to the original problem. We now describe a simple means of obtaining this p = 0 problem which
matches the original problem.
In order to avoid grossly inaccurate estimates of the
penetration distances of small levels of contaminant,
it is important that the solutions of the two problems
be reasonably close at large distances vertically from
the source. If this is achieved then, as the original
solution and its /3 = 0 matching problem satisfy the
same boundary condition at the top of the system, the
vertical concentration profiles of the two solutions will
coincide at y = 0 and as y + 00; hence it is reasonable
to assume that they should be close at all intermediate
y values. So our task is reduced to matching the asymptotic form as y + 00 (given in equation (51)) of the
original solution with the solution of its p = 0 counterpart. For the p = 0 situation it was proved in the
last section that the known function k(x) is independent
of uf = um, while for the general situation this function
can only be derived numerically. Hence the criterion
for matching cannot be obtained from the x-dependencies of the two asymptotic forms. Instead, matching
is achieved by determining the value of uf = urn which
makes the known decay length for the p = 0 problem
equal to the analytical approximation to this quantity
for the original problem. Recall that the reciprocal decay length for the exactly soluble p = 0 case is given
in equation (54), where v1 is the smallest solution, in
the specified interval, of the transcendental equations
(44) and (49) for the single fracture and periodic array
of fractures problems, respectively. Also, we noted
that v1 is independent of uf = urn, so equation (56) can
be explicitly inverted to give
Uf = urn =

A(Af

+ Kf$

&)

Equations (58a) and (58b) were derived in the appendix

of Fogden et al.O and are a refinement of the analytical
approximations of Tang et aL3 and Sudicky and Frind.4
They are accurate approximations to the exact solution
for each geometry provided (~8 is sufficiently large or,
to a lesser extent, if aa is only of moderate size but uf
is sufficiently large.
Another analytical approximation that makes use of
equations (52a) and (52b) is based upon the special case
p = 0 of the full problem. This is the only exactly

In this equation (Yrepresents the analytical approximation to the reciprocal decay length of the original
problem and is obtained from equations (52a) and (52b)
for the single fracture and periodic array of fractures
geometries respectively, as usual.
In summary, the solution of any general (p f 0)
problem is analytically approximated by the exact solution of the p = 0 matching problem in which the
value of uf = urn is given by equation (60) (while the
choice of boundary condition at y = 0 and the values

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

167

Contaminant

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

Of the dimensionless
are all unchanged).

parameterS

u,

6, hf, A",

Kf,

Km

Table l(a).

Common

Darameter values

Parameter

Dimension

Value

Results and discussion

;:

In the previous section two analytical approximations

to the solution of the full two-dimensional
problem
were stated. The first, given for both geometries by
equation (58), has a compact form but is disadvantaged
by its inability to model an arbitrary source distribution
at the top of the fracture-matrix
system and by the
limitation of its accuracy to the particular parameter
ranges described above. The second such approximation is the exact solution of the p = 0 problem. It
does not have the former of the above-mentioned disadvantages of the first approximation but is more computationally expensive to evaluate (for example, the
concentration at the interface is given for the two geometries by equations (46) and (50) when the source
distribution (45) is considered). In this section we assess the accuracy of this approximation over the full
range of parameter space by analyzing a number of
representative specific cases.
In Fogden et al. lo we chose to consider four specific
cases for both geometries with the discontinuous source
distribution (45). We analyze the same situations here,
but, as our fundamental conclusions in that paper were
identical for the two geometries, we shall only display
solutions of the single fracture problem. So the common values of the physical quantities (characterizing
the contaminant and the fracture-matrix system) in all
of these cases are given in Table I(a), and the two
remaining physical quantities which are varied are given
in Table I(b). The values of the dimensionless groups
in each of the four cases are given in first eight rows
of Table 2.
In the ninth row of Table 2 the (extremely accurate)
analytical approximation to the value of (Yobtained by

Rm

7
P

ef

m
m
m.day-
m
-

L = (~~lh*Rm)2

a:

V
b

Table l(b).

1.780 x 10mg
1.6 x IO-$
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.0
5.0 x IO-5
1.0
0.3

The four cases

Vf (m.day-)

Case
1
2
3
4

em

0.1
0.1

0.01
0.1

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.1

solving the fourth-degree polynomial equation (52a) is

displayed. The first approximation discussed above to
the exact solution is generated in each case by substituting this value of (Yinto equation (58a). Further,
when this (Yis substituted into equation (60), together
with the unique solution 77 = n1 of equation (44) in
each case (supplied in the second last row of the table),
the value of the dimensionless group uf = urn in the
p = 0 matching problem is determined. This value is
denoted by u and is listed in the last row of the table.
This /3 = 0 problem gives the second approximation
to the exact solution of the general single fracture problem. For each case here we have, from equation (46),
m

e-my

()

~ P
re
= 2 1 + (Kf//cm)(q/bm(o))2 + cTSbm(w)((~/bm(w))* + l/a2) + ;1(rcArnjli2P2
+ Q*
/

where

two solutions.

b(w) =

(Am _ Af) _ Kf.$

Km

while in the second term P and Q are defined by equations (47) and
hf=hf+

Am=,,+

i
0

As in our previous paper, the accuracy of analytical

approximations to the solution (generated numerically
using the boundary integral method) is assessed by
comparing the vertical concentration profiles of the

168

21

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

pr(r

- 012) &

Again we choose to graphically analyze

two such profiles: one at the fracture-matrix interface
and the other at a distance of one-half the length scale
of the problem from the central line of the fracture.
The numerically calculated profiles will not be shown
here; they are displayed in Fogden et al. lo Instead, for
comparison purposes it is more meaningful if we plot
the percentage error in the two analytical approximations as a function of y for the two constant x values.
This quantity is positive (negative) at any point if the
approximate solution is greater than (less than) the
exact solution there. If, for some cases, the exact value
of cx precisely coincides with the solution of the relevant equation of the pair (52) then, from equation (51),
the percentage error in the vertical concentration profile at any x predicted by either analytical approxi-

Contaminant
Table 2.
Parameter
K
Km
6
A
ifrn

LIm
(T
a
I

Dimensionless

parameter

values for the four cases

Case 1
1.0
1.0
1.67 x lO-4
2.76 x 1O-4
0.598
1.0
0.0
3.63 x IO5
0.2683 x IO-
0.1279
0.5931

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

Case 2

Case 3

Case 4

1.0
1.0
1.67 x IO-=
2.76 x 1O-4
0.598
1.0

1.0
1.0
1.67 x 10m4
2.69 x 10m3
0.584
1.0

1.0
1.0
1.67 x 10m4
2.69 x 10m3
0.584
1.0

0.0
3.63 x IO4
0.2022
0.3897
0.5502

0.0
3.72 x IO4
0.2035
0.3851
0.5384

0.0
3.72 x lo3
0.7668
0.8770
0.2396

mation
will, as y ---f ~0, approach the constant value
given by the corresponding percentage error in k(x).
In general, the analytically derived value of (Ydiffers
from the value obtained numerically (typically the magnitude of the discrepancy is less than O.l%), so at large
y the magnitude of the percentage error is an extremely
slowly growing exponential function. Thus, in general,
the percentage error in both approximations will become sizable at large y; however, this does not destroy
the validity of either approximation, since at such distances from the source the exact and approximate concentration levels are equally insignificant. In this paper
we cease plotting the percentage error at the distance
vertically where the concentration falls below 10e4.
In Fogden er al. lo it was found that the dimensionless group that most strongly influences the nature of
the steady-state concentration distribution is the product CTS,representing the effectiveness of the fracture,
relative to the porous matrix, as a pathway for contaminant transport. In particular, we showed there that
as (TS increases, the exponential analytical approximation given by equation (58) becomes increasingly
accurate. Also, in the analytical approximation given
by the exact solution of the p = 0 altered problem,
we clearly expect that, as US increases, the uniform
value u of the Peclet number obtained from equation
(60) approaches the value of the fracture Peclet number
uf (while moving away from that of the corresponding
matrix quantity urn) in the original problem. (This fact
is illustrated by the values of u given in Table 2 for the
four specific cases considered here.) Further, it is obvious from the construction of this second approximation detailed in the previous section that its accuracy will decrease as 1~~- urnI is increased (with all
other dimensionless parameters held constant).
For case 1 the percentage error in the vertical concentration profiles at x = S and x = i predicted by the
two analytical approximations is displayed in Figures
2(a) and 2(b), respectively. With the exception of small
y values in the latter of these two representative
profiles, the approximation given by equation (58a) is very
good in this case, while the agreement between the
numerical solution of the case 1 problem and the solution of its fi = 0 matching problem is excellent for
all y values considered. The corresponding plots for
cases 2 and 3, which are not shown here, retain the

form of the curves in case 1, although the percentage

error in both analytical approximations has uniformly
increased (in magnitude). Again the solution of the
/3 = 0 problem is a more accurate approximation than
that of equation (58a). For case 4 the percentage error
in the approximations to c(S, y) and ~(4, y) generated
by the two analytical methods has further (uniformly)
Ac?$

-----------------------------

o-5

-----------

100

200

.----___

300

-0.5

AC%
1

I
I
I
L___
----___
---___
--------

0.5-

---__
--------

--

-__

Figure 2. Percentage error, AC%, in the exponential solution

(----I and the 6 = 0 matching solution (-)
versus y for the
single fracture problem and case 1 parameter values with S(x)
given by equation (45): (a) x = 6; (b) x = $

Appl.

Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

169

Contaminant

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

increased from that of cases 2 and 3 and is shown in

Clearly the exponential approximation given by equation (%a) is now
significantly in error and rapidly loses all accuracy as
the top of the system is approached in the latter vertical
protile. On the other hand, the approximation obtained
by p = 0 matching still lies inside the limits of acceptable accuracy for all y values considered.
The fundamental fact illustrated by the four specific
cases considered above is that the solution of any general case is approximated more accurately by the analytical solution of the /? = 0 matching problem than
by the formulas of equation (58) (which are refinements
of the steady-state formulas derived by Tang et ~1.~
and Sudicky and Frind4). It is also apparent from analysis of these cases that an above stated conclusion of
our previous paper that as UISincreases the approximation given by equation (58) becomes increasingly
accurate can now be extended to include the approximation obtained using the p = 0 matching procedure
introduced in this paper. For example, in case 1 the
value of US is approximately 60, which is sufficiently
large for this second analytical approximation to yield
excellent agreement, despite the unfavorably large value
Figures 3(a) and .?(6), respectively.

AC%
loo-

__r--

__---

,xX
,

50-

//
,/

/
.:
(.

'Y

10

-15.L
-5.

-10.

-20

of uf - urn. In case 2 the value of u6 has decreased by

an order of magnitude (while all other dimensionless
parameters are unchanged), and the accuracy of this
approximation has decreased noticeably. The decrease
in crS by an order of magnitude (with all other parameters held constant) from case 3 to case 4 has the same
effect on the approximation. The largest discrepancies
between the numerical solution and the p = 0 matching
solution occur in case 4, where the unfavorable effect
of a large value of Uf - urnis accentuated by a relatively
small value of ~6.
In general, the major source of inaccuracy in the
first analytical approximation (compared to the second
such approximation) is the fact that equation (58) yields
a form for the function c(x, 0) which may differ significantly from the chosen source distribution S(x). This
fact has the obvious direct consequence that the first
analytical approximation may be greatly in error near
the top of the system, but this discrepancy is minor
since we are more concerned with the accuracy of its
predictions of contaminant penetration at reasonably
large distances from the source. Recall that as y -+ ~0
the steady-state concentration distribution assumes the
asymptotic form given by equation (51), and in both
analytical methods (Yis extremely accurately approximated in the two geometries by the solution of equation (52). Although both approximations have the same
vertical decay length, their asymptotic forms may be
significantly different since the form of the function
k(x) depends on the choice of source distribution. The
sensitivity of the function k(x) to this choice is increased as the product aS is decreased. Hence if aS
is large, then there is virtually no disadvantage in using
equation (58) instead of the more accurate /3 = 0
matching approximation. But if this condition does not
hold, then equation (58) may produce very inaccurate
values for the ultimate vertical penetration distances
of small levels of contaminant, so under these circumstances the method of p = 0 matching is the only
satisfactory analytical approximation to the numerical
solution.

AL%
400.

Appendix 1: asymptotic

results as w +

I
I

The expression

300. :

F,(H)(w) - H(w)

zoo- \
\\
____________________-___I

10

'

(v>O)

(Al)

is proved here, provided H(w) decreases slower than

S(wP3) as o + ~0. From this we will determine the
asymptotic behavior of A(o) and B(W) as w -+ m.
Consider the operator F, defined by equation (33);
it can be written as
m
F,(H)(o)

= ;I

-15
1

L(w, w)H(o) do

W)

Figure 3. Percentage error, AC%, in the exponential solution

(----) and the p = 0 matching solution (-)
versus y for the
single fracture problem and case 4 parameter values with S(x)
given by equation (45): (a) x = 6; (b) x = h

170

aso+=a

Appl.

Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

where the kernel is

L(w, w) =

4ww
[(o - w)Z + zq[(o + w)2 + 91

(A3)

Contaminant transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

Now L(w, w), as a function of w, monotonically increases from zero to its maximum value at w,,,, where
(02 %ax

ZJ) + 2(w4

+ VW

+ v4)*

(A9)
if gf or gm are not identically zero. Therefore in this
case gf and gm decrease slower than 6(wd3) as w + 03
unless S(S) = dS(S)ldx
= 0 or S(6+) = dS(S+)ldx
= 0, respectively. (This method assumes that all the
derivatives of S(X) are finite at the boundaries of the
fracture and matrix regions.) The asymptotic forms for
A and B as w -+ 00 are obtained from (A6) and (A7),
using (AS) and (A9) for the two geometries. In both
cases we find that

A(w) -;B(o)

2[S(6+) -

7T[(Kf)*

S(S-)I + o i
CJ.(Km)*]

o-+w

(AlO)

Therefore A and B decrease slower than 0(0-*) as

w -+ m, as required. Moreover, if S is continuous at
the fracture-matrix interface, then A and B are @(w-I)
as w --, a; if S is discontinuous at this interface, then
both are 6(l) as o + 03.
W)

Using this result, we observe that when p # 0 the

pairs of equations (34) and (37) for the single fracture
problem and (40) and (41) for the periodic array of
fractures problem reduce to the p = 0 pairs of equations (28) and (38), respectively, as w + 03, provided
gf and g decrease slower than Q(w-~) (or are identically zero) and A and B decrease slower than 6(wP2)
as o + ~0, If this condition holds (the verification is
below), then the pair of equations defining A and B
when p # 0 reduces to give the solutions for A and B
when p = 0 as o + ~0for both geometries. Therefore
the asymptotic forms for A and B as w + ~0are

bB(o) -

WV

(-44)

v2, du

= H(w)

4~) -

as 0 + 00,

I*

For values of o larger than wmax, L monotonically

decreases to zero and is 0((~)-~) as w 4 03.
Furthermore
as o -+ m, w,,, - o t- 6(we3) and
L(w, w,,,) - v-2.
Now consider F,(H)(o) as w + ~0. Clearly when w
is small, L(o, w)H(w) = S(W-~) as w + w; when w
is large, the above analysis shows that L(o, w)H(w)
has a sharp maximum when o - w, where L(w, o)H(o)
- V-*H(W). So, provided H(w) decreases more slowly
than 6(0 P3), the dominant contribution to the integral
F,(H)(w) as o -+ ~0 comes from w - w. Hence as
w --, 00, with a change of integration variable

F,(H)(w) = ;4w / (u2 $),;;~;w;7wj

--o
m
OH(W)
-- v4W
Gr _I _ (u2 + v2)(2w)Zd

geometries,

Appendix 2: asymptotic results as y -+ 0

From equations (11) and (15), the horizontal derivative
of the concentration function in the matrix region is
dC

a~ (x, y) = eomy*I $(x,

o)sin oy dw

(All)

To determine the behavior

y -+ 0, we need to consider

of the interfacial

flux as

%(x,
y)

lim lim
yOxL+6f ax

bf(@)brnh)[ -g(w) + P(4

bm(w)coth bf(w)6 + &J(W)

(-46)
for the single fracture problem and

Single fracture

problem

From equation (22) we obtain

ax

A(w) - ; B(o)

bf(4brn(4[ - s94 + grnb)l

- bm(w)coth b(w)6 + abf(w)coth b(w)(l - 6)
(A7)
for the periodic array of fractures problem.
To validate the proviso stated above, we now determine the asymptotic forms for gf, gm, A, and B as
w+ 00.By repeated integration by parts of the integrals
deIining gf and g, it can be verified that for both

(x, w) = B(w)e-bm()(x-S) +

(x, w)

(A121

Before this expression is substituted into equation (Al I),

it is convenient to rewrite B(w) as
B(w) = B, + (B(w) - B,)

(Al3)

where
B

ws(6+)

- S(S-)I

co

?T[(Kf)*

C(Km)*]

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

(AI4)

171

Contaminant

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

Then equation (All) can be expressed

a~

e ~ bm(4(x_ 6)

(x, y) = cum*

as
sin

Hence, returning to (A15), as y * 0, we get

my

dw

(B(w) - B,)e-bm(w)(x-S) sin WYdw

Periodic

array of fractures

problem

From equation (24) we obtain

0
m
+
I

(x,

w)sin wy do

(A15)

sinh bm(o)(l $(x,w) = B(w) sinh

bm(w)(l -

x) + agm
ax (x, 6.))
6)

(A221

We are interested in the behavior of this function as

x -+ S and then y += 0. For y in the neighborhood of
zero, the dominant contribution to the Fourier sine
transforms in equation (Al5) comes from the integrands as w += ~0. Now from equation (AlO) we know
that B(w) - B, is 0(w-r) as w + 00for all values of p.
Also by repeated integration by parts of equation (23),
8gm(S+, 0)/8x is O(wP1) as w + w. Therefore in the
second and third integrals in (A15) the limit as x + 6
can be interchanged with the integration to yield a finite
integral as y -+ 0. We now investigate the asymptotic
form of the first integral as x -+ S+.
Now from equation (21)
CZ
e bm(Mx-6) sin

my

On rewriting B(w) in terms of B, as in (A13) and (A14),

the horizontal derivative can be expressed as
e - brn(m)(x
- 6) sin

my

dw

(B(w) - B,)e-b@)C-S)sinwy dw

+
0
m

_I5

(x, w)sin wy dw

sinh b(w)(l - x)
sinh b(o)(l - 6)

do

(A231

cc
=
I

e-~*+~*~sinoydw

(A16)

where
X-S

(A17)

ff=(Km)112

Define the second integral in (A16) to be Z(cu,y). We

introduce two changes of variables: w = ~/a and y =
(YZ,so equation (A16) becomes
m

The first three integrals have the same form as those

in equation (A15) for the single fracture problem. The
last integral is finite as y + 0 since B(w) - B, is 6(0-r)
as w + ~0. Therefore as y + 0, we obtain equation
(A21) again.
Hence the flux at the fracture-matrix
interface is
finite as y + 0 if and only if S(X) is continuous at x =
6. When this flux has a singularity, it goes as y-l as
y * 0, and its residue is proportional to the size of the
discontinuity in S for both geometries. These facts were
referred to in Fogden et al.O

Appendix 3: the Fourier inversion integration

As (Y+ 0, (k2 + Am~2)12--, /L, so

Cc

Using a generalized
tries, we get

0
=--=1 z
cuz*+ 1

Y
y* + (Y2

(A19)

Hence as x --, S+ ,

J0

bm(d(x ~ 6) sin

=--2 w
7~F(o)

!_ Sf(x, w)
uf

in the fracture region

in the matrix region

SYX, 0)

(A24)
wy

do

Y
y2 + (X - 6)2/Km

WO)

172

again, for both geome-

X(x, w)

I(a,y)-_Je-sinpzdp

m
I-

notation

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

Here Sf and S are functions in terms of integrals involving the source distribution S. Only their properties
will be required for this discussion; explicit expressions for them are in Appendix 4 for both geometries.

Contaminant

Single fracture

For the single fracture problem

F(w) = b(w)cosh bf(o)S
+ abqw)sinh b(o)6
and for the periodic array of fractures problem
F(w) = b(o)cosh bf(w)S sinh b(w)(l - 6)
+ c+byw)sinh b(w)6 cash b(w)( 1 - 6)

(A25)

(A26)

x(x, y) = I X(x, o)sin wy dw

0
cc

X(x, w)e+do
1, --m

(~27)

where Im signifies the imaginary part of the complex

valued integral. To evaluate this integral, we investigate the singularity structure of X in the complex o
plane.
The only singularities of X(x, w) are branch points
and/or poles. The only possible branch points occur
when bf(w) = 0 or b(w) = 0, that is, at w = -+i(h)*
or w = &i(Am)r*. It can be verified that F(w), Sf(x, w),
and Sm(x, w) are even functions of bf(w) for both geometries and of b(w) for the periodic array of fractures
geometry. We assume that the source distribution S(x)
is integrable over its domain of definition, namely [O,m)
and [O,l] for the single fracture and periodic array of
fractures problems, respectively. It then follows that
the zeros of F(w) are the only points of nonanalyticity
of the complex function X(x, w) for the periodic array
of fractures problem, whereas for the single fracture
problem X(x, o) additionally has a pair of branch points
at w = &i(hm)l*.
Now we investigate the zeros of equations (A25)
and (A26). From their definitions, b(w) can be expressed in terms of bf(o) as
(b(o))* =

$(Kf(hyw))*

(h

Af))

(A28)

Let
V(w) = 5 + in

(A29a)

(b(o))2 = /.&I+ iy

(A29b)

b(w) = /_Q+ iV*

(A29c)

Then
/-h =

$(Kf@

s*)

(A - A)),
u1

/_&I +

CL2 =

(/A: +
2

vy* l*

$26~

problem

Consider the zeros of F(w), defined in equation (A25):

Since the o dependence of F, Sf, and S is only

through w* in bf(w) and b(w), X(x, w) is an odd function of w. So to evaluate x(x, y) we write
m

=kIm

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

(A30a)

VI

v2 = 5-L

(A30b)

b(w)cosh bf(w)6 + crbf(w)sinh bf(w)6 = 0

6431)

Using equations (A29) and writing cash and sinh in

terms of their real and imaginary parts, we obtain for
equation (A3 1)
(p2 + iv2)(cosh @ cos q6 + i sinh @ sin q6)
+ c (5 + i$(sinh @ cos ~6 + i cash @ sin ~6)
= 0 (A32)
Provided cash 258 - cos 2776 # 0, we can multiply
(A32) by sinh @ cos 76 - i cash @ sin r$); then using
some trigonometric identities, the equation becomes
(p2 + iv,)(sinh 2@ - i sin 2776)
+ (r(t + i$(cosh 256 - cos 2778) = 0

(A33)

Equating the real and imaginary parts of this equation

to zero gives
p2 sinh 256 + u2 sin 2776+ a&cosh 256
- cos 2778) = 0

(A34a)

- p2 sin 2176 + v2 sinh 2&i + ar](cosh 256

- cos 2778) = 0

(A34b)

If (5, 77)is a solution to (A34), then so is (5, - n), (- 5, q),

and ( - 5, - q), so we may restrict ourselves to seeking
solutions in the first quadrant 5 2 0, n 2 0. Now (A29a)
implies that
W*= ( - Af +

Kf(cf2

T*))

iKf2577

(A35)

so the fourfold symmetry implies that if w is a solution

then so is -w, 23, and -23. Further, w will be real or
imaginary if and only if ..$n = 0. But & = 0 implies
that

(A36)
From (A34), p2 = v2 = 0 is not a solution, so we may
consider & + 4 > 0. Then multiplying (A34a) by p2
and (A34b) by u2 and adding them gives
(& + &sinh 256 + a(5p2 + nv2)(cosh 256
- cos2$)

= 0

(A37)

For 5 > 0, this equation has no solutions, since both

terms on the left side are strictly positive. Thus, in
seeking solutions of the system (A34) we need only
deal with the case 5 = 0.
Set 5 = 0; then from (A34a) either sin 2776 = 0 or
~2 = 0. However, if sin 2776 = 0, then (A34b) leads to
a contradiction of the condition cash 256 - cos 27$
# 0. Hence y = 0, and from (A34b) n must lie in the
interval 0 < r,~< ((Am - Af)l~)l* and be a solution
of
-((A - Af) - K~TJ*)* sin 2776
+ (Km)* m-/(1 - cos 2778) = 0 (A38)

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

173

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

Contaminant

such that sin 2778 # 0. This equation can be written as

_

urn- Af) -

KfV22 + +q

Km

tan

q6

(A39)
which is equation (44) in the main text. Also, if k is
the positive integer defined by the inequality
(A40a)
then (A39) has exactly k solutions,
. . . ) k, such that

say vj, j = 1, 2,

Fig. Ita

(A40b)
Furthermore,
j=

1,2 7 . . . 3k-l
(A40c)

The above discussion shows that the integrand in (A27)

has exactly 2k simple poles at + Wj = + i(hf + K~T#)
(j=
1,2,...,
k) which all lie on the imaginary axis
between *ii(A
and ki(Am)l with (wj+,I > Jwjl.
From the above discussion, X(x, w) is a single-valued function of w in the complex plane with the cuts
Re(o) = 0, IIm(w)l 2 (Am)12.Therefore we evaluate
the integral in (A27) by closing the contour in the upper
half-plane, as shown in Figure 4(a), since the integrand
is exponentially decaying there. The only contributions
to the integral over the closed contour are from the
integral in (A27) and the integrals around the branch
cut; their sum equals 2~i multiplied by the sum of the
residues of the k simple poles between i(Af)2 and
i(Am)2. Hence, we obtain

X(x, w)eio dw

-R

R-rCYJ

>

Fig. l+b
Figure 4. Closed contour used in the Fourier inversion integration: (a) single fracture problem; (b) periodic array of fractures
problem

is solely through b(tij) and b(Wj), where

-m

bf(wj) =

iqj

and

(Am _ Af) _ Kfrlj 2

b(wj) =
Km

+i

[-X(x,
_f
(A)*

r~?~) + X(x, re-i32)]epYdr

(A41)

The residues in equation (A41) are calculated from

equation (A24). Dropping the f and m superscripts for
the moment, for each j = 1, 2, . . . , k, we obtain
Res(X(x, tij)) = -L
7TK

The Wjdependence

wj
dF(tij)ldw

174

Appl.

(~42)

Periodic

array of fractures

problem

Consider the zeros of F(w), defined in equation (A26):

b(w)cosh bf(w)6 sinh b(w)(l - 6)
+ abf(w)sinh bf(o)6cosh b(w)(l - 8) = 0

(A44)

as above, we find that if

cash 268 - cos 2776# 0 and

(sinh2p2(1 - S))2 + (sin2v2(1 - S))* # 0

S(X, Oj)

Modelling,

Since qj and A - Af are independent of uf and urn

when p = 0, we see that the residues and hence the
coefficients of the exponential terms in the summation
in equation (A41) are independent of uf and urn.

Proceeding

of the terms

and

Math.

wi
S(X, wj)
dF(mj)/dw

(A43)

1989, Vol. 13, March

Contaminant

then equation (A44) is equivalent

to the equation

transport

in fractured

media:

+ (T((&
x

+ vvhinh2~2(1

- 6) + (71~2 - 4%)

sin 2v2( 1 - 6)) (cash 256 -

cos

2776) = 0

(A47)

+ (~(5 + in)(sinh 2~~( 1 - S) - i sin 2v,( 1 - S))

(A45)

From their definitions it is easy to verify that qp2 5y 1) 0 for all 5, rt 2 0. Hence as sinh u 2 u and
(sin U( I u for all u 2 0,

The real and imaginary parts of this equation give the

pair of equations
(Z..Q
sinh 25s + v2 sin 277S)(cash 2& I - 6)
- cos 2v,( 1 - 6)) + u ([sinh 2& 1 - S)
+ r] sin 2v,(l - 6)) (cash 256 - cos 276) = 0
(A46a)
( - p2 sin 2776 + v2 sinh 256) (cash 2p2( 1 - 6)
- cos2v2(1 - 6)) + cr(--csin2v2(l
- 6)

(4%~+ qV2)sinh2p2(l - S)
+ (77~~- Sv2)sin 2v2(l - 6) 2 2(1 - S)&.L: + v$)
(A4g)
Since p2 = y = 0 is excluded by the second condition
above, each term on the left side of (A47) is strictly
positive for 5 > 0. Thus there are no solutions of the
system (A46) for 5 > 0, so only the case c = 0 need
be considered.
Set 5 = 0; then equations (A46) reduce to
v2 sin 2$(cosh

+ n sinh 2& 1 - 6)) (cash 256 - cos 277S) = 0

(A46b)
The observations following the derivation of equations
(A34) (up to and including equation (A36)) regarding
the nature of solutions of this system are also true for
equations (A46). Multiplying (A46a) by p2 and (A46b)
by v2 and adding them yields

2p2( 1 - 6) - cos 2v2( 1 - 6))

+ ~7 sin 2v2(1 - S)(l - cos 2776) = 0

+ ar] sinh 2p2( 1 - S)( 1 - cos 2~6) = 0

which is equation (49) in the main text. On the other hand, if n > ((A 0, and v2 = [Z_Q)~,
so (A49b) is satisfied and (A49a) becomes
_

(Am

Af)

tan
Km

>

WO)

+7

n?rl2
(-)l-6

Af)l~f)"2,

then v1 = 0, pi < 0, p2 =

[(

(A51)

Note that the w values corresponding to solutions of

equations (ASO) and (A51) satisfy (Af)12 < (WI< (Am)2
and 10) > (Am)l12,respectively, and both of these equations are independent of uf and urn for this p = 0 case.
The distribution of the k solutions n to (A50) is again
determined by equations (A40a-c). (For eachj, thejth
solution is always less than or equal to thejth solution
of the transcendental equation (A39) for the single fracture problem.)
Equation (A51) possesses an infinite number of solutions. To outline their distribution in (((A - Af)/~f)"2,
m) let
Km

= II2

(A49b)

Suppose that 0 < 77 < ((A - Af)/Kf)2.

Then V, =
0, Pl > 0, P2 = Pii2, and v2 = 0, so (A49a) is satisfied
and (A49b) becomes

+g77tan$=o

Kf$

(A49a)

- p2 sin 2nS(cosh 2p2( 1 - 6) - cos 2u2(l - 6))

(Am-~~-KfT2)12tanh[((hm-~~-Kf~2)2(~
__@I

et al.

A. Fogden

(pi + vf)sinh 256 (cash 2p2(1 - 6) - cos 2v2(1 - 6))

(pL2+ iv,)(sinh 256 - i sin 2776)

. (cash 2p2( 1 - 6) - cos 2v,(l - 6))
. (cash 256 - cos 2778) = 0

porous

nrrl2
and b, = 6

If the positive integer k (defined by inequality (A40a))

is such that

1,2k,. . . , to form the sequence of disjoint open

intervals (I,), n = 1, 2, . . . (say Z,, = (c,_ , , CT,)).Then
the transcendental function defined by the left side of
(A51) is continuous and monotonically increasing in
each of the Z, and possesses exactly one zero q,* in
each interval of the subsequence (Z2,,),n = 1, 2, . . . ,
and no zeros in the complementary subsequence (Zzn_ ,),
n= 1,2,....
On the other hand, if
2k -

l/2

<k;

then we partition, using the sequences (a,), n = 0, 1,

and (b,), n = 2k, 2k + 1, . . . to form the
sequknce of disjoint open intervals (J,), i = 1, 2, . . .
(say I,, = (4, _ , , d,)). Again the transcendental
function is continuous and monotonically increasing in each
of the J,,, but now it possesses exactly one zero n,* in
each interval of the subsequence (J2_,), n = I, 2,
. . . ) and no zeros in the complementary
sequence
(J2n),n

then partition the semi-infinite open interval, using the

sequence of points (a,), n = 0, 1, . . . , and (b,), n =

= 1,2,.

. . .

The above discussion shows that the integrand in

(A27) has exactly 2k simple poles at ?wi = +i(Af +

Appl.

Math.

Modelling,

1989,

Vol. 13, March

175

Contaminant

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

Kf7#)*
(j
=
1, 2, . . . , k) which all lie on the Im(o)
axis between ki(hf)* and I*,
with jq+rI >
[ql, and an infinite number of simple poles at k w,* =
ki(Af + K~T$*)*,
n
=
1, 2, . . . , lying on the Im(w)
axis beyond + i(A
with lo,*+r[ > [o$ Hence, X(x, W)
is an analytic function in the complex w plane except
for these simple poles. Therefore we evaluate the integral in (A27) by closing the contour in the upper halfplane, as shown in Figure 4(b), since the integrand is
exponentially decaying there. Hence we obtain
m

The residues are again calculated from (A24)), and,

dropping the f and m superscripts for the moment, if
o, denotes any of the wj or w,* then
Res(X(x, 0,)) = 1

X(x, w)eioY dw

(5

2mj

Appendix 4: explicit forms of Sf(x, o) and

Srnh a)
&$X(x,

~ (*+

oj))e

~f~2)zY

For the single fracture problem with p = 0, Sf and S

in (A24) are

j=l

(A53)

It can be shown that these residues are independent

of uf and urn for this p = 0 case.

-m
=

Or
Sk w,)
dF(w,.)ldw

7TK

~,*))e~(~+~b~*2)2Y

Res(X(x,

(A521

n=l

cash bf(o)x y S(x)e- bm(W)(x-S)d~+ (Tcash bf(w)(S - x) S(x)cosh bf(w)x dx

I
0
s

Sf(x, w) = f

cash bf(w)x

I
x

S(x)cosh bf(w)(S - x) dx + $,,

sinh bf(w)(S - x)

S(x)cosh 64~)~ dx

6
-

fpyx,

w)

cash bf(w)6

I
x

S(x)sinh b(o)(x - x) dx

us

e-bm(-)(x-s)

(A54)

S(x)cosh bf(w)x dx + cash bf(w)S e-bm(o)(xPS) S(x)cosh b(w)(x - 6) dx

I
6

cc

+ cash b(w)(x - 6) 1 S(x)e-0m(~6)dx)

+ u bf(W)~~~f(w)F

(sinh P(w)(x

- 6)

x
x

S(x)e-bm()(-S)dx -

I
s

I
6

S(x)sinh b(o)(x - x) dx

(A55)

>

For the periodic array of fractures problem with p = 0, Sf and S in (A24) are
1
Sf(x, w) = f

cash bf(o)x j- S(x)cosh b(o)( 1 - x) dx + u cash b(w)( 1 - 6)

6
6
x
_f

S(x)cosh bf(o)(S - x) dx

S(x)cosh bf(o)x dx + cash bf(w)x

*

cash bf(w)(S -- x)

bm(w) sinh b(o)( 1 - 6)

+ bfo
>

6
. (sinh

bf(w>(S

x)

176 Appl. Math. Modelling,

S(x)cosh bf(o)x dx - cash bf(w)6 I S(x)sinh bf(w)(x - x) dx

>
x

1989, Vol. 13, March

(A56)

Contaminant

transport in fractured porous media: A. Fogden et al.

S(x, W) = (+5 cash b(w)( 1 - x) 1 S( x )cash bf(w)x dx + cash bf(w)6 cash b(w)(l - x)
(

S(x)cosh b(w)(x - 6) dx + cash b(w)(x - 6) I S(x)cosh b(o)( 1 - x) dx)

x

- 1

1
+

(+ s

sinh b(w)6 (sinh b(o)(x - 6) I S(x)cosh b(w)( 1 - x) dx

6

- cash b(o)( 1 - 6) I S(x)sinh b(w)(x - x) dx

Appendix 5: solving the integral equation for

/3 # 0 problems
For the general case where p # 0 recall that either
from a Fredholm integral
equation of the first kind. Analytical solution of such
an integral equation is not possible in general, and
numerical procedures are inherently unstable, unless
the kernel function has a singularity which stabilizes
the integral equation. lo It can be shown that the kernels
of all four integral equations, when written in the form
K* (w, w) and considered here as functions of the
integration variable o, monotonically increase from
zero on an interval 0 < w < w, and monotonically
decrease to zero on w2 < w < ~0and are S((w)-) as
W + 00. Their finite maximum values are attained in
the interval wl < w < w2, and these maximum values
are 6(wP) as w + m. Hence any discretization of the
integral equations will not be diagonally dominant, and
the matrix inversions involved in the calculations may
be unstable. There are added complications when the
source distribution S is discontinuous at the fracturematrix interface, for then A(o) and B(w) are 6(l) as
w + ~0(see (AlO)). It would then be necessary to extract the known constant part, say, for example, 8, =
lim,,
B(w), and treat it analytically and solve numerically a new integral equation for the more rapidly
decreasing unknown function B(w) - B,.
Besides these complications, even if A(w) and B(w)
are determined satisfactorily, the numerical inversion
of the Fourier sine transformation X(x, w) obtained
from them is prone to oscillation which may totally
obscure the all-important asymptotic form of the function c(x, y) as y -+ CQ.Some numerical techniques (aliasing, tail matching) to overcome this exist, but they
are computationally time consuming. So, in summary,
the boundary integral method given in our previous
paperi is a more accurate and economical method for

A(w) or B(o) is determined

(A57 1

>

numerically generating concentrations for the general

p # 0 problems than is the Fourier sine transform
approach outlined above. The utility of the present
transform approach lies in its ability to generate an
accurate analytical approximation to the contaminant
concentration for p # 0 problems.
References
1

2
3
4
5

6
I
8
9

10

Neretnieks, 1. Diffusion in a rock matrix: an important factor

in radionuclide retardation? J. Geophys. Res. 1980, 85(B8),
4379-4397
Grisak, G. E. and Pickens, .I. F. An analytical solution for
solute transport through fractured media with matrix diffusion.
.I. Hydrology 1981, 52, 47-57
Tang. D. H., Frind, E. 0.. and Sudicky, E. A. Contaminant
transport in fractured porous media: analytical solution for a
single fracture. Waler Resow. Res. 1981, 17(3), 555-564
Sudicky, E. A. and Frind, E. 0. Contaminant transport in
fractured porous media: analytical solutions for a system of
parallel fractures. Wafer Resow. Res. 1982. 18(6), 1634-1642
Chen, C. S. Solution for radionuclide transport from an injection well into a single fracture in a porous formation. Water
Resow. RPS. 1986, 22(4), 508-518
Grisak, G. E. and Pickens, J. F. Solute transport through fractures media 1. The effect of matrix diffusion. Wafer Resow.
Res. 1980, 16(4), 719-730
Bibby, R. Mass transport of solutes in dual-porosity media.
Wuter Resow. Res. 1981, 17(4), 1075-1081
Noorishad, J. and Mehran, M. An upstream finite element
method for solution of transient transport equation in fractured
porous media. Water Resour. Res. 1982, H?(3), 588-596
Huyakorn, P. S., Lester, B. H., and Mercer, J. W. An efficient
finite element technique for modelling transport in fractured
porous media 1. Single species transport. Water Resow. Res.
1983, 19(3), 841-854
Fogden, A., Landman, K. A., and White, L. R. Contaminant
transport in fractured porous media: steady state solutions by
a boundary integral method. Water Resour. Res. 1988, 24(8),
1384-1396

11
12

Landman, K. A. A boundary integral method for contaminant

transport in two adjacent porous media. Australian Marh. Sot.
Ser. B. 1989, 30(3), 251-267
Bear, J. Dynumics ofFluids

in Porous

Media.

Elsevier, New

York, 1972

Appt.

Math. Modelling,

1989, Vol. 13, March

177