低渗透介质热示踪传热过程的ERT动态监测方法研究

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2025.10.11

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

热示踪技术作为获取多孔介质渗透特性与热力学参数的重要手段,在水文地质领域应用十分广泛。然而,传统热示踪方法严重依赖监测井内的点尺度温度探头数据,难以重构多孔介质传热过程的空间结构。针对传统热示踪试验点尺度温度探头数据在传热过程刻画时的空间分辨率不足问题,本文在低渗透介质热示踪试验中引入高密度电阻率法(electrical resistivity tomography,ERT)。通过开展热示踪与高密度电阻率法联合监测,探究ERT在低渗透介质热示踪试验过程中提高传热过程监测空间分辨率方面的效果。此外,本文建立了黏土地层电阻率-温度的定量反演方法。通过数值模拟正演验证了该方法的可靠性,并对影响可靠性的因素进行了分析。研究结果表明:由ERT监测得到的电阻率反演温度数据在以传热过程为主导的区域(监测井位置),与地下水温度变化趋势与幅度具有一致性;在以局部热对流为主导的区域(注水井位置),与地下水温度变化趋势一致,证实了ERT在弱透水层传热过程监测的可靠性。同时,通过ERT成功识别出优势通道或热敏感区,证实其对地下非均质性具有高度敏感性,能够显著提升热示踪试验传热过程的空间分辨率。本文构建的电阻率-温度反演方法为低渗透介质热示踪提供了新方法,证实了ERT技术能够弥补传统热示踪试验传热过程空间分辨率不足的问题。

关键词: 高密度电阻率法, 低渗透介质, 热示踪试验, 黏土电阻率-温度关系, 空间分辨率

Abstract:

Thermal tracer technology is a critical method for characterizing hydraulic and thermophysical properties of porous media, with extensive applications in hydrogeology. However, conventional thermal tracer tests rely on point-scale temperature data from monitoring wells, which can not resolve the spatial architecture of heat transport processes. To overcome the spatial resolution limitations of point-scale temperature monitoring, this study integrated electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) into thermal tracer tests in low-permeability media. We combined ERT with thermal tracer tests to investigate its capacity to map heat transport dynamics with high spatial resolution. We also developed a quantitative resistivity-temperature inversion model for clay formations. The model’s reliability was verified through numerical forward modeling, and key influencing factors were analyzed to demonstrate its field applicability. Key findings include: In heat conduction-dominated zones (monitoring wells), ERT-derived temperatures closely matched groundwater temperature trends and amplitudes. In local thermal convection zones (e.g., near the injection well), ERT captured trends identical to point measurements, confirming its reliability in low-permeability settings. ERT successfully identified preferential flow paths and thermally sensitive zones, demonstrating high sensitivity to subsurface heterogeneity and substantially improving the spatial resolution of heat transport visualization. The developed resistivity-temperature inversion framework provides a novel approach for thermal tracing in low-permeability media, effectively overcoming the spatial resolution constraints of conventional methods.

Key words: electrical resistivity tomography, low-permeability media, thermal tracer test, clay resistivity-temperature relationship, spatial resolution

中图分类号:

P641.69

赵永胜, 王锦国, 乔斐, 刘芮彤, 陈舟. 低渗透介质热示踪传热过程的ERT动态监测方法研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2026, 33(1): 523-533.

ZHAO Yongsheng, WANG Jinguo, QIAO Fei, LIU Ruitong, CHEN Zhou. Dynamic characterization of heat transfer processes in low-permeability media using ERT during thermal tracer tests[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2026, 33(1): 523-533.

图/表 8

图1 现场试验设置

Fig.1 Field experimental design

图2 试验井中液相电导率随温度变化曲线

Fig.2 Liquid-phase electrical conductivity vs. temperature in the test well

图3 反演后的热示踪试验过程中体电阻率分布

Fig.3 Resistivity distribution during the thermal tracer test

图4 试验时-4 m处地下水参数变化曲线

Fig.4 Variation curves of shallow groundwater parameters during the test

图5 由ERT数据计算得到的温差分布

Fig.5 Temperature difference distribution calculated from ERT data

图6 相同位置ERT反演温度与地下水点监测温度响应对比

Fig.6 Comparison of ERT inversion temperature and groundwater point monitoring temperature response to thermal tracer tests at the same location

表1 正演模型参数设置

Table 1 Parameters setup for the forward model

参数	单位	数值
渗透系数	m/s	5.0×10^-6
饱和含水量	m³/m³	0.38
残余含水量	m³/m³	0.35
土体颗粒密度	kg/m³	2 580
堆积密度	kg/m³	1.650
多孔介质比热容	J/(kg·K)	500
液相体积热容	J/(m³·K)	4.2×10⁶
固体导热性	W/(m·K)	3.50
液相导热性	W/(m·K)	0.954
有效扩散系数	m²/s	1×10^-9

图7 温差结果对比验证 (a)—电阻率反演得到的温差空间分布;(b)—正演模型得到的温差空间分布;(c)—相关性分析结果。

Fig.7 Comparison and validation of temperature difference results

参考文献 37

[1]	ISTOK J D, FIELD J A, SCHROTH M H, et al. Single-well “push-pull” partitioning tracer test for NAPL detection in the subsurface[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2002, 36(12): 2708-2716. DOI URL
[2]	BARTH G R, ILLANGASEKARE T H, RAJARAM H. The effect of entrapped nonaqueous phase liquids on tracer transport in heterogeneous porous media: laboratory experiments at the intermediate scale[J]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2003, 67(1/2/3/4): 247-268. DOI URL
[3]	ANDERSON M P. Heat as a ground water tracer[J]. Groundwater, 2005, 43(6): 951-968. PMID
[4]	卢富运, 余方潜, 陈杨, 等. 盐热联合示踪表征薄层水流剖面流速分布[J]. 农业工程学报, 2023, 39(23): 85-93.
[5]	DIAW E H B, LEHMANN F, ACKERER P. Modélisation du transport d’un soluté réactif en milieux poreux non saturés[J]. Comptes Rendus de L’Académie Des Sciences - Series IIA - Earth and Planetary Science, 2001, 333(2): 129-132.
[6]	HERMANS T, WILDEMEERSCH S, JAMIN P, et al. Quantitative temperature monitoring of a heat tracing experiment using cross-borehole ERT[J]. Geothermics, 2015, 53: 14-26. DOI URL
[7]	郭琼泽, 施小清, 王慧婷, 等. 井间分溶示踪估计重非水相污染物残留量的影响因素数值分析[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2019, 46(6): 165-172.
[8]	MENG F S, WANG J G, ZHAO Y S, et al. Quantification of soil water content by machine learning using enhanced high-resolution ERT[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2024, 643: 131994. DOI URL
[9]	柳建新, 曾加佳, 谢静, 等. 黏质砂土地球物理与水文化学特性综合动态测量系统[J]. 地球物理学报, 2025, 68(7): 2754-2768.
[10]	LESPARRE N, ROBERT T, NGUYEN F, et al. 4D electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) for aquifer thermal energy storage monitoring[J]. Geothermics, 2019, 77: 368-382. DOI URL
[11]	HERMANS T, NGUYEN F, ROBERT T, et al. Geophysical methods for monitoring temperature changes in shallow low enthalpy geothermal systems[J]. Energies, 2014, 7(8): 5083-5118. DOI URL
[12]	HERMANS T, VANDENBOHEDE A, LEBBE L, et al. A shallow geothermal experiment in a sandy aquifer monitored using electric resistivity tomography[J]. Geophysics, 2012, 77(1): B11-B21.
[13]	CHRÉTIEN M, LATASTE J F, FABRE R, et al. Electrical resistivity tomography to understand clay behavior during seasonal water content variations[J]. Engineering Geology, 2014, 169: 112-123. DOI URL
[14]	FOWLER D E, MOYSEY S M J. Estimation of aquifer transport parameters from resistivity monitoring data within a coupled inversion framework[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2011, 409(1/2): 545-554. DOI URL
[15]	SAKAR C, SCHWARTZ N, MORENO Z. Physics-informed neural networks trained with time-lapse geo-electrical tomograms to estimate water saturation, permeability and petrophysical relations at heterogeneous soils[J]. Water Resources Research, 2024, 60(8): e2024WR037672.
[16]	杨晨, 潘剑伟, 钱伦, 等. 盐渍红黏土电阻率影响因素的试验分析[J]. 环境工程学报, 2025, 19(2): 437-445.
[17]	PATNODE H W, WYLLIE M R J. The presence of conductive solids in reservoir rocks as a factor in electric log interpretation[J]. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 1950, 2(2): 47-52. DOI URL
[18]	QI Y Z, WU Y X. Electrical conductivity of clayey rocks and soils: a non-linear model[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2022, 49(10): e2021GL097408.
[19]	刘文辉, 乔翠平, 索奎, 等. 综合物探方法在锌污染场地探测中的应用[J]. 华北水利水电大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 43(2): 77-83.
[20]	李文忠, 孙卫民. 分布式高密度电法装置类型选择及工程勘查应用[J]. 长江科学院院报, 2019, 36(10): 161-164. DOI
[21]	赵荣春, 吕玉增, 张智, 等. 基于2.5d有限元的高密度电法不同装置勘探效果研究[J]. 煤田地质与勘探, 2024, 52(4): 128-136.
[22]	ROY A, APPARAO A. Depth of investigation in direct current methods[J]. Geophysics, 1971, 36(5): 943-959. DOI URL
[23]	马志飞, 刘鸿福, 叶章, 等. 高密度电法不同装置的勘探效果对比[J]. 物探装备, 2009, 19(1): 52-55, 67.
[24]	郑冰, 李柳德. 高密度电法不同装置的探测效果对比[J]. 工程地球物理学报, 2015, 12(1): 33-39.
[25]	冯世进, 陈佳卓, 高梦雯, 等. 软土地区在产企业污染监测及预警方法研究:基于时移高密度电法的应用[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(4): 1323-1334.
[26]	DE GROOT-HEDLIN C, CONSTABLE S. Occam’s inversion to generate smooth, two-dimensional models from magnetotelluric data[J]. Geophysics, 1990, 55(12): 1613-1624. DOI URL
[27]	曹恩伟, 叶鹏, 刘璐琦, 等. ERT技术及其在环境污染调查中的应用进展[J]. 化工环保, 2025, 45(1): 11-18.
[28]	董江鑫, 王飞. 地质雷达和高密度电法联合探测底板含水性的应用[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2022, 50(5): 222-231.
[29]	徐宝平. 高密度电法和瞬变电磁法在铀尾矿库三维地质调查中的应用研究[D]. 抚州: 东华理工大学, 2023.
[30]	SUN H, WANG Y Q, ZHAO Y L, et al. Assessing the value of electrical resistivity derived soil water content: insights from a case study in the critical zone of the Chinese Loess Plateau[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2020, 589: 125132. DOI URL
[31]	ARCHIE G E. The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir characteristics[J]. Transactions of the AIME, 1942, 146(1): 54-62. DOI URL
[32]	景茂恒, 卢文浩, 彭翔, 等. 饱和水土壤电阻率温度特性及对直流接地极温升的影响[J]. 智慧电力, 2022, 50(12): 19-25, 33.
[33]	徐兴倩, 蔡波, 屈新, 等. 土体电阻率模型研究现状综述[J]. 地球物理学进展, 2022, 37(5): 2205-2217.
[34]	CULTRERA M, BOAGA J, DI SIPIO E, et al. Modelling an induced thermal plume with data from electrical resistivity tomography and distributed temperature sensing: a case study in northeast Italy[J]. Hydrogeology Journal, 2018, 26(3): 837-851. DOI URL
[35]	CHO O H, BURNS S E. Review of Archie’s equation through theoretical derivation and experimental study on uncoated and hematite coated soils[J]. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 2014, 105: 225-234. DOI URL
[36]	FRIEDMAN S P. Soil properties influencing apparent electrical conductivity: a review[J]. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 2005, 46(1/2/3): 45-70. DOI URL
[37]	WAGNER V, LI T, BAYER P, et al. Thermal tracer testing in a sedimentary aquifer: field experiment (Lauswiesen, Germany) and numerical simulation[J]. Hydrogeology Journal, 2014, 22(1): 175-187. DOI URL