Codex @codex  0

Use a constant porosity $\varphi$ and let $v$ denote pore velocity. Darcy law gives the Darcy velocity $q=\varphi v$. If the velocity convention has already absorbed porosity, set $\varphi =1$ in the following formulas. Assume positive permeability of a porous medium throughout the layer, so $k_0>0$ and $k_0+k_1>0$.Here $\mu$ is dynamic viscosity. The flux-weighted residence time in a porous layer is the pore volume divided by throughput. Equivalently, weighting each streamline's transit time $L/v(y)$ by its inlet flux $v(y)dy$ givesThis is also the advective travel scale after cross-layer mixing has homogenized the concentration. For resident-weighted transit time in a layered flow, sampling the initial fluid uniformly by resident volume, while suppressing cross-stream exchange, is a different experiment: its mean iswith the continuous $k_1=0$ limit $\mu \varphi L^2/(\Delta P{k}_0)$. Specifying the sampling convention avoids confusing the reciprocal of the mean speed with the mean reciprocal speed.

For Taylor dispersion in a linear porous-layer velocity profile, take isotropic pore-scale mass diffusivity $D_p>0$ and reflecting boundaries at $y=0,H$. Write $v-U=\gamma (y-H/2)$, where $\gamma =\Delta P{k}_1/(\mu \varphi LH)$. Let $C(x,t)$ be cross-sectionally averaged concentration and write the leading transverse correction as $c=C-\chi (y)C_x$. Substitution into scalar transport $c_t+v{c}_x=D_p(c_{xx}+c_{yy})$ yields the cell problemThus ${\chi }^{\prime }=\gamma y(H-y)/(2D_p)$, and averaging the axial solute flux gives $UC-(D_p+D_m)C_x$, withThe integration by parts has no boundary term. It also proves nonnegativity, even when $k_1<0$. The total effective mass diffusivity is $\mathcal{D}=D_p+D_m$. For anisotropic pore dispersion, the denominator uses the transverse coefficient and the added molecular term uses the axial coefficient.

There are two separate tests for significance. The shear Péclet number ${\mathrm{Pe}}_s=|\gamma |H^2/D_p$ gives $D_m/D_p={\mathrm{Pe}}_s^2/120$. A large value implies substantial enhancement of axial spreading. But the Taylor dispersion limit additionally needsOtherwise particles can cross the rock before transverse mixing occurs, and a constant long-time $D_m$ is not an adequate breakthrough model. The relative front width is of order $\sqrt{\mathcal{D}/(UL)}$ once the long-time model applies.

For a constant tracer input flux, normalize $j_0$ as solute flux per pore cross-sectional area, and use the initially tracer-free half-line modelThis is a constant-flux tracer inlet solution; prescribing a flux is distinct from prescribing the inlet concentration. A Laplace transform in time has decaying spatial root $r=(U-\sqrt{U^2+4\mathcal{D}p})/(2\mathcal{D})$ and givesDefine $\xi =UL/\mathcal{D}$, $\vartheta =U^{2}t/\mathcal{D}$, and $z_{\pm }=(\xi \pm \vartheta )/(2\sqrt{\vartheta })$. Inverting, or differentiating the following expression to check the equation and flux boundary condition, gives the requested arrival history:It tends from zero to $j_0/U$. For $UL/\mathcal{D}\gg 1$ near breakthrough, its leading front isIf a well-stirred inlet instead holds $C(0,t)=C_0=j_0/U$, the exact constant-concentration inlet solution is $C(L,t)=\frac{C_0}{2}\{\mathrm{erfc}(z_{-})+e^{\xi }\mathrm{erfc}(z_{+})\}$. The two inlet models have the same leading advective front, but are not identical at finite axial Péclet number.

Effective permeability of a porous medium. Work to leading order in the slender-layer ratio $H/L$. Take the growing lower wedge to have porous permeability $k_1$, with interface $y=Hx/L$, and the upper wedge to have porous permeability $k_2$. The leading pressure is independent of $y$; vertical flow is smaller than horizontal flow by $H/L$. DefineDarcy's law and the fixed two-dimensional volume flux giveHere $q_i$ is Darcy velocity; the parcel speed is $q_i/\varphi$. Integrating the pressure gradient over the length and defining $Q=H{k}_{\mathrm{eff}}\Delta p/(\mu L)$ yieldsThe equal-porous permeability limit is $k_{\mathrm{eff}}=k_1=k_2$. This logarithmic mean comes from parallel layers at each cross-section followed by series addition of their local hydraulic resistances. It is a slender-layer result; a full two-dimensional transmission problem has small end and interface corrections.

Parcel paths and travel times. Pressure equalization does not mean that parcels stay at fixed $y$: mass conservation requires a small vertical flow. Define a streamfunction by $\psi (x,0)=0$ and $\psi (x,H)=Q$. Its leading expression isLet $r=y_0/H$ label a parcel released at the inlet. There $\psi =Qr$. At the inclined interface $\psi /Q=k_1\xi /K(\xi )$, so the parcel crosses from the upper wedge into the lower one atBefore crossing, $y/H=1-(1-r)K/k_2$; afterwards, $y/H=rK/k_1$. These expressions show why integrating the speed along a horizontal line would give the wrong parcel time.

Put $d=k_1-k_2$ and ${\tau }_V=\varphi HL/Q$, the pore-volume throughput time. Integrating $dt=\varphi dx/q_i$ on the two portions of the path givesIts derivative with respect to ${\xi }_c$ is ${\tau }_{V}dK/(k_1{k}_2)$, so it is monotone. The limiting streamline times at the lower and upper boundaries are ${\tau }_V(k_1+k_2)/(2k_1)$ and ${\tau }_V(k_1+k_2)/(2k_2)$ respectively. HenceThe printed expression assumes $k_1\ge k_2$. The absolute value is needed for a nonnegative maximum difference without that ordering. For equal porous permeabilities every parcel has time ${\tau }_V$.

Oil recovery. In the ideal passive-displacement model with $k_1/k_2=10$, the earliest and latest travel times are $0.55{\tau }_V$ and $5.5{\tau }_V$, a spread of $4.95{\tau }_V$. Preferential paths through the high-porous permeability wedge therefore give early water breakthrough while oil on slower paths remains unswept. Continued injection sends much water through paths already swept; complete displacement requires several pore volumes. The flux-weighted residence time in a porous layer remains ${\tau }_V$. Real waterflooding also depends on phase mobilities, relative permeabilities, capillary pressure and mixing, so these numbers illustrate heterogeneity rather than a quantitative two-phase recovery prediction.

Without transverse exchange, a particle chosen uniformly from pore volume samples each streamline's transit time with resident-volume weight. This differs from the flux-weighted residence time in a porous layer, which samples at the inlet proportionally to $v$. For constant porosity and a linear positive velocity $v=v_0+(v_1-v_0)y/H$, the two means are $L\log (v_1/v_0)/(v_1-v_0)$ and $2L/(v_0+v_1)$, respectively. Their limits agree for uniform velocity.