ELSEVIER Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199

Sedimentology and hydrogeology of two braided stream deposits

M.P. Anderson Ł , J.S. Aiken 1 , E.K. Webb 2 , D.M. Mickelson
Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Wisconsin–Madison, L.G. Weeks Hall, 1215 W. Dayton Street,
Madison, WI 53706, USA
Received 7 May 1998; accepted 1 March 1999

Abstract

Two approaches were used to quantify the spatial distribution of hydrofacies in braided stream deposits. One approach
involved mapping a 50 by 60 by 3.3 m section of a proximal braided stream deposit. In a second study, we generated
a 400 by 400 by 2.6 m section of a medial braided stream deposit using a computer model. In both cases we produced
three-dimensional images showing connected hydrofacies with high permeabilities that form preferential flow paths. This
information was input to a groundwater flow model and flow paths were analyzed by following the transport of imaginary
particles. In both systems, particles that were uniformly distributed at the up-gradient end of the model clustered along
preferential flow paths during transport, showing that connection among high-permeability facies is a critical factor in
hydrogeological investigations involving assessment of contaminant movement and remediation.  1999 Elsevier Science
B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: braided streams; heterogeneity; preferential flow; computer animation; aquifers

1. Introduction logical site characterization is critical in evaluating

Hydrogeology converges with sedimentology
when we ask: “What do geologic deposits look like?”
Solute transport models can be powerful tools for
predicting contaminant movement in aquifers and
assessing potential remedial alternatives but trans-
port simulations require accurate information about
the distribution of geological units. Monitored nat-
ural attenuation has recently received attention as a
cost-effective remedial alternative but detailed geo-
Ł Corresponding author. Fax: C1 608 262 0693; E-mail:
andy@geology.wisc.edu
1 Present address: Barr Engineering Company, 8300 Norman
the potential for using natural attenuation as a rem-
edy.
Hydrogeologists have long struggled to find ways
of quantifying aquifer heterogeneity. Lumping het-
erogeneities into a global parameter (hydraulic con-
ductivity) was the approach pioneered by Theis
(1935) to solve well hydraulics problems and quickly
became the standard approach for estimating hy-
draulic conductivity in groundwater flow problems.
Analysis of solute transport in aquifers, however, re-
quires a finer-scale quantification of heterogeneities.
For example, Essaid et al. (1993) showed that repre-
sentation of the fine details of aquifer heterogeneity

Center Drive, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437. was crucial in reproducing the shape of a crude oil
2 Present address: Sandia National Laboratory, PO Box 5800, plume in a computer simulation. Theoretical inves-
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87185. tigations by Frind et al. (1988) and Tompson and

0037-0738/99/$ – see front matter  1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 3 7 - 0 7 3 8 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 1 5 - 9
188 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199
Gelhar (1990), among others, showed that hetero-
geneity dominates the movement of a contaminant
plume at early times and that the initial configuration
of the plume influences its long-term evolution.
Petroleum reservoir geologists and engineers share
many of the same data needs and concerns as hydro-
geologists. For example, both are faced with the prob-
lem of scaling up parameters from a measurement
scale on the order of a meter to a scale suitable for
modeling on the order of tens to hundreds of meters
(Mansoori, 1994; Desbarats and Bachu, 1994; Ewing,
1997; Kitanidis, 1997). Both groups are concerned
with heterogeneity (Weber, 1986; Anderson, 1997)
and strive to describe the geometry and arrangement
of sedimentary units (North and Prosser, 1993; Fraser
and Davis, 1998). Both groups have used stochastic
modeling to fill in the gaps in geological information
between measurement points (Yarus and Chambers,
1994; Dagan and Neuman, 1997).
Much of the sedimentological literature, how-
ever, consists of qualitative descriptions of sed-
imentary units and qualitative approaches to de-
scribing units, while hydrogeologists (and petroleum
geologists=engineers) require quantitative descrip-
tions. Hydrogeologists routinely use qualitative sed-
imentological information in their work (e.g., Shep-
herd and Owens, 1981; Groenewold et al., 1981;
Davis, 1987; Danskin, 1988), but the quest for quan-
titative information on the spatial distribution of
hydrofacies has motivated hydrogeologists to initiate
field studies aimed at obtaining this information first
hand.
One of the first such studies was done by Smith
(1981), who mapped spatial variability in a sand
outcrop. His study and several that followed, were
aimed at obtaining information to quantify aquifer
heterogeneity using geostatistics. For example, Davis
et al. (1993) mapped architectural elements over a
0.16 km2 peninsular section of outcrop and col-
lected air permeability measurements at 33 points.
Weerts and Bierkens (1993) mapped lithologies in
two overbank deposits in a fluvial system in the
Netherlands and showed that variograms constructed
for the meandering river environment differed from
those constructed for lithologically more-complex
deposits formed in an anastomosing river environ-
ment. Ritzi et al. (1995) mapped hydrofacies in
a glaciofluvial aquifer system in Ohio, USA, and
Jussel et al. (1994) mapped sedimentary structures
and lithologies in glaciofluvial gravel deposits in
Switzerland.
While sedimentologists map lithofacies, hydro-
geologists must identify units of similar hydrogeo-
logical properties (Koltermann and Gorelick, 1996;
Webb and Davis, 1998). Attempts to define geologi-
cal units that are useful in hydrogeological analyses
have roots in the concept of the hydrostratigraphic
unit (Maxey, 1964; Seaber, 1988), which is typically
defined at a regional scale. Anderson (1989) and
Phillips et al. (1989) proposed the use of hydrogeo-
logical facies models based on the concept of Miall
(1985a) of architectural element analysis. Anderson
(1989) defined a hydrogeological facies to be “a ho-
mogeneous but anisotropic unit that is hydrogeolog-
ically meaningful.” Poeter and Gaylord (1990) intro-
duced the term hydrofacies for interconnected units
with relatively homogeneous hydraulic properties
that control the channeling of contaminants. Highly
conductive connected hydrofacies form preferential
flow paths. Several researchers have identified in-
terconnectedness of units as the key to quantifying
heterogeneity for purposes of hydrogeological in-
vestigations (e.g., Fogg, 1986; Silliman and Wright,
1988; Anderson, 1990; Desbarats, 1990; Fogg, 1990;
Poeter and Gaylord, 1990; Desbarats and Srivas-
tava, 1991; Moreno and Tsang, 1994; Poeter and
Townsend, 1994; Berkowitz and Scher, 1995). We
too found that interconnected facies form important
flow paths in the two deposits discussed in this paper.
Ideally, hydrogeologists would like a three-di-
mensional image of the hydraulic conductivity dis-
tribution of the aquifer under investigation. Many
investigators have used geostatistics to generate ran-
dom hydraulic conductivity fields that are assumed
to capture the variability of real aquifers (e.g., Tomp-
son and Gelhar, 1990; MacQuarrie and Sudicky,
1990; Kitanidis, 1997). Others conducted ground-
penetrating radar (GPR) surveys to obtain geophysi-
cal images for use in hydrogeological investigations
(e.g., Huggenberger et al., 1994; Rea and Knight,
1998). And still others (e.g., Koltermann and Gore-
lick, 1992; Webb, 1994; Scheibe and Freyberg, 1995;
Deutsch and Wang, 1996) used computer models to
simulate sedimentary systems.
In this paper we describe two approaches to quan-
tify heterogeneity in braided stream deposits. One
 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199
approach involved mapping a 50 m by 60 m section
of a 3.3 m high outcrop in Wisconsin, U.S.A., using
field observations, photomosaics and GPR profiles
(Aiken, 1993; Aiken and Mickelson, 1995). In a sec-
ond study, we generated a 400 m by 400 m by 2.6
m thick synthetic deposit using a computer model
(Webb, 1994; Webb and Anderson, 1996). Parameter
input values and calibration targets were compiled
using data from two similar braided river systems:
the Squamish River in British Columbia, Canada
(Brierley, 1989) and the Ohau River, New Zealand
(Mosley, 1982).
The field deposit, located in Stoughton, Wiscon-
sin, is representative of proximal conditions (Scott-
type assemblage) and the Squamish and Ohau rivers
are representative of medial conditions (Donjek-type
assemblage). The Stoughton deposit was selected
since it was actively being quarried so that fresh
sections of outcrop were exposed during the process
of excavation. Proximal deposits are typically quar-
ried because they contain plentiful gravel resources.
There are very few studies in the sedimentologi-
cal literature that contain the types of information
needed to calibrate computer models. This type of
information was available for medial deposits but not
for proximal deposits because these data are difficult
to acquire in proximal environments. Our purpose,
however, was not to compare two deposits from the
same depositional environment. Rather, we studied
the deposits available to us and used the opportu-
nity to contrast heterogeneity in two different facies
assemblages in the braided stream depositional envi-
ronment.
Three-dimensional images of the hydrofacies in
these two braided stream deposits were produced and
a groundwater model was used to simulate flow and
advective transport through each system in order to
analyze the role of connected hydrofacies in forming
preferential flow paths. Transport of contaminants
in the field is also affected by pore scale disper-
sion (and diffusion) of solutes, which we ignored in
our simulations. Pore scale dispersion is generally
considered to cause relatively minor spreading com-
pared to the spreading caused by the presence of
macroscale heterogeneities, i.e., hydrofacies. Thus,
we use the three-dimensional images of hydrofa-
cies to simulate directly the dispersion caused by
macroscale heterogeneities.
189
2. Field study: Stoughton deposit
A 50 m by 60 m by 3.3 m thick section of a
sand and gravel pit in Stoughton, Wisconsin, was
excavated between July 3 and August 1, 1991. These
materials were part of a broad outwash plain de-
posited during the retreat of the Green Bay Lobe
at the end of the late Wisconsin glaciation. A gen-
eralized profile of the outcrop is shown in Fig. 1.
The deposits at this site are comparable to the prox-
imal Scott-type example of Miall (1978), redefined
as Model GII by Miall (1985a,b) and named after
the Scott outwash (Boothroyd and Ashley, 1975).
The Scott assemblage has greater than 90% gravel.
At the Stoughton site, the deposit has approximately
91% massive stream gravel with interbedded sand.
The gravel is usually imbricated and contains a
few debris flow deposits that may exhibit crude in-
verse grading. In general, the lithofacies observed
in the Stoughton deposit were interpreted to repre-
Gmc
St
Gs
Fl, Fm
Gm
Sr
Sh
Gt
Gp
Gow
Gm
Gmc
Fig. 1. Generalized profile of the Stoughton deposit. Descriptions
of the lithofacies are given in Table 1.
190 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199
sent aggradation of superimposed gravel bars during
seasonally high discharge, with later incision and
deposition of sandier deposits during waning flow on
top of and at the flanks of the bars.
The data used to construct the geological descrip-
tion of the Stoughton site consisted of photomosaics,
GPR (ground penetrating radar) profiles, and daily
field sketches. Twenty photomosaics of active faces
were taken as the Stoughton deposit was excavated.
Eighteen GPR profiles were obtained prior to the
excavation and were used to fill in the gaps between
the photomosaics. In addition, daily field sketches
were used to track individual lithofacies. The total
volume under investigation was 9900 m3 . If the daily
sketch maps and radar data are considered to be
merely interpretive, then the volume directly mapped
is equal to the volume represented in the photomo-
saics. The total length of the photomosaics is 900 m
and the average depth shown is 2 m. Assuming that
the profiles are representative of 1 m perpendicular
to the face, gives a volume of 1800 m3 shown in
the photomosaics. Hence, the ratio of actual to inter-
preted mapped volume is 9900 to 1800 or roughly 5
to 1. In other words, conservatively speaking, 20%
of the volume was directly observed in constructing
the geological description of the site.
It is not quite fair, however, to rule out the sketch
maps and radar logs since they are measurements
rather than subjective interpretations. We estimate
that these data roughly double the number of di-
rect observations. Hence, we estimate that 40% of
the volume was observed in generating the geologi-
cal description of the site. The remaining 60% was
derived from interpretation between points. For com-
parison, in a standard hydrogeological investigation
at a site comparable in size to the Stoughton site, 70
borings, each 3.3 m deep, might be used. Assuming
that one boring samples roughly 0.5 m3 of soil, the
total volume directly observed would be about 35 m3
of soil or about 0.3% of the total volume. In other
words, geological descriptions of the subsurface typ-
ically are derived from data that sample a very small
portion (<1%) of the volume of subsurface under
consideration, while in our study 40% of the site was
sampled.
Eleven lithofacies (Fig. 1) were distinguished on
the basis of dominant clast size, sorting, bedding
style and external boundaries; 74 samples were taken
for grain size analyses. Each lithofacies is described
briefly in Table 1. Four lithofacies comprise 85%
of the deposit. Gmc is the most common unit at
the site, comprising 34% of the deposit, while Gm
comprises 25% and Gs and Gp together form 26% of
the deposit.
These eleven lithofacies form seven hydrofacies
as shown in Table 2. Hydraulic conductivity values
were assigned based on average grain size for each
hydrofacies using an equation developed by Hazen
(1893), which relates hydraulic conductivity to the
square of D10 taken from a percent finer cumulative
grain distribution curve. Hazen’s equation assumes
that D10 is the effective diameter that controls the
porosity of the sample and thereby its hydraulic con-
ductivity. Estimates of hydraulic conductivity calcu-
lated from the Hazen equation compared favorably
with laboratory estimates from individual samples
tested in permeameter experiments. The range in hy-
draulic conductivity calculated for each hydrofacies
is shown in Fig. 2. The geometric mean hydraulic
conductivity of all samples within an hydrofacies is
shown in Table 2.
The calculated hydraulic conductivities fall within
the range reported for similar materials by Freeze
and Cherry (1979, table 2.2). The assigned values,
however, do not necessarily represent absolute val-
ues of hydraulic conductivity at the Stoughton site.
It is well known that estimates of hydraulic conduc-
tivity based on grain size analyses and permeameter
results are biased by scaling effects (Bradbury and
Muldoon, 1990). Hydraulic conductivity values were
assigned in order to observe how the spatial distri-
bution in hydraulic conductivity affects contaminant
movement in computer simulations. For this pur-
pose, relative contrasts in hydraulic conductivity are
important, not absolute values.
A three-dimensional image of the lithofacies in
the Stoughton deposit is shown in Fig. 3. The block
shown in this figure is oriented east to west, follow-
ing the westerly paleocurrent. That is, the eastern
face of the block is at the top of the figure and the
western face is the downgradient exit face, which is
also shown in the inset. Laterally extensive, tabular
sheets of lithofacies Gmc and Gm can be seen in
Fig. 3. Lithofacies Gmc, in general, tends to be lat-
erally continuous and at other sites it is known to
extend on the order of tens to hundreds of meters. In
 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199 191

Table 1
Description of lithofacies at the Stoughton site

Lithofacies Description Interpretation

Gmc Coarse, massive gravel with cobbles and boulders; Deposited during periods of very high meltwater discharge
sandy matrix, trace silt; weakly imbricated
Gm Massive to poorly stratified medium to coarse Deposited as flow decreased from a higher discharge associated
gravel with Gmc
Gs Stratified fine to medium sandy gravel Deposited during sustained, relatively low flow conditions on the
flanks of bars or in chutes cut between bars
Gp Planar-bedded fine to coarse gravel Formed as bars migrated into deeper water
Gow Moderately well sorted, open-work gravel with Deposited during conditions of fluctuating discharge; gravel
silt-filled upper surfaces aggraded during periods of high discharge and then became
filled with suspended material when discharge decreased.
Gt Trough-bedded fine to medium gravel Fills concave-up scours cut into coarser gravel lithofacies
St Fine- to medium-grained trough-bedded sand Formed as migrating dunes in the low flow regime
Sh Horizontal to low-angle bedded fine to medium Formed as high-velocity flow diverged over bar tops or in the
sand low flow regime as aggradation on a plane or low-angle bed in
channels on bar flanks
Sr Ripple-laminated very fine to fine sand Formed as flow waned near the limit of sand bedload transport,
either on the tops of bars or in emerging chutes along bar flanks
Fm Massive very fine- to fine-grained sand and silt Deposited in stagnant flow conditions where suspended material
settled out rapidly in cut-off channels or bar-top pools; occurs as
a thick drape along or filling channel scours
Fl Laminated very fine- to fine-grained sand and silt Similar to Fm, except that periodic fluxes of sediment were
followed by stagnant periods

Table 2
Hydrofacies in the Stoughton deposit

Hydrofacies Percent of deposit Average median grain Sorting Geometric mean hydraulic
size (mm) conductivity (cm=s)
Gow 4 9.13 poor 1.2
Gmc 34 12.40 very poor 0.17
Gm 25 2.99 very poor 0.088
Gs=Gp 26 2.67 very poor 0.090
Gt 2 0.55 poor 0.053
St=Sh 5 0.57 medium well 0.030
Fm=Fl 4 0.93 medium well 0.00068

some portions of the Stoughton deposit these tabular
sheets fill channel boundaries mantled with hydro-
facies Fl=Fm. In other areas, the Gmc=Gm sheets
grade into each other and are incised by channels
filled with lenses of Gs and Gow (Fig. 4). These
channel deposits form connected high hydraulic con-
ductivity hydrofacies. As such, they form prefer-
ential flow paths in aquifers and can be important
avenues for transport of contaminants.
3. Synthetic deposit based on the Ohau and
Squamish river systems
Webb (1994) developed a geometrically based
model that produces three-dimensional facies distri-
butions of braided river systems. The model uses a
random walk algorithm to generate two-dimensional
braided river channel patterns through time. Channel
characteristics including width, depth, and velocity,
as well as sediment type are assigned to channel seg-
ments. Sediment type is linked to the Froude number.
192 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199

4 (Miall, 1978) or Miall’s Model GIII (Miall, 1985b)

2 for the medial assemblage. The Donjek-type profile
Gow
(based on descriptions of the middle reaches of the
0
Donjek River by Williams and Rust, 1969) consists
8 of fine gravel and sand deposited in well developed
channels. The ten lithofacies identified by Brierley
4
Gmc (1989) are briefly described in Table 3.
0 A 400 m long by 400 m wide and 2.6 m thick
4
block of sediment was generated using the deposi-
tional model. Then the ten lithofacies were grouped
2 Gm into six hydrofacies as shown in Table 4. Each
0 hydrofacies was assigned a range in hydraulic con-
ductivity values (Fig. 5) from table 2.2 (p. 29) in
4 Freeze and Cherry (1979) based on grain size and
2 Gs/Gp sorting characteristics. As with the Stoughton model,
0 our purpose in assigning hydraulic conductivity val-
ues was to examine the effect of the spatial patterns
4 in hydrofacies on contaminant transport. Hence, the
2 relative contrasts in hydraulic conductivities, rather
Gt than their absolute values, are important. The result-
0
ing three-dimensional image of hydrofacies is shown
8 in Fig. 6.
4
St/Sh
0 4. Hydrogeological analysis
2
There is a 3.5 order of magnitude spread in
1 the means of the hydraulic conductivities in the
Fm/Fl
0 Stoughton deposit (Table 2) and a 2.5 order spread
-14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 in the synthetic deposit (Table 4), suggesting that the
In K (cm/sec) synthetic (medial) deposit is somewhat more hydro-
Fig. 2. Distribution of values of ln K for sediment samples geologically homogeneous than the Stoughton (prox-
from various hydrofacies in the Stoughton deposit (adapted from imal) deposit. Similarly, there is a larger range in the
Riemersma, 1997). hydraulic conductivity values for the Stoughton de-
posit (fourteen orders of magnitude, Fig. 2) than
for the synthetic deposit (five orders of magnitude,
Finally, the resulting three-dimensional topographic Fig. 5). Yet, 85% of the Stoughton deposit has hy-
surfaces are stacked to produce a three-dimensional draulic conductivity values that fall within one order
image of the sedimentary sequence. of magnitude (around 0.1 cm=s), while 83% of the
Webb (1994) used deposits of the modern day synthetic deposit has hydraulic conductivity values
Squamish and Ohau river systems as described by that fall within two orders of magnitude (between
Brierley (1989) and Mosley (1982), respectively, to 0.5 and 0.01 cm=s).
derive input parameters and to calibrate his depo- The open-framework cobbles (Gow) of the
sitional model. Mosley’s data set contains geomor- Stoughton deposit have by far the highest hy-
phological information on the channel network, while draulic conductivity (Table 2) and therefore poten-
Brierley’s data set consists of quantitative information tially could have an important effect on the flow
on the abundance and vertical transitions of sediment system. At the Stoughton site, Gow forms only 4%
units. Both rivers are characteristic of the Donjek-type of the unit and occurs as lenses surrounded by mate-
 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199 193

Fig. 3. Three-dimensional image of the hydrofacies in the Stoughton Scott-type proximal deposit. The dimensions of the deposit are 60
m in the direction of flow, 50 m wide and 3.3 m thick. Colors are interpreted as follows: red is Gow; yellow is Gmc; blue is Gm; purple
is Gs=Gp; black is Gt and Fm=Fl; dark pink is St=Sh. The inset represents the downgradient or exit face through which particles left the
flow system during particle tracking experiments. The colors in the inset represent particle concentrations where red, yellow and blue are
high concentrations. High particle concentration clusters are evident in the area labeled C and in the lower right hand corner of the inset,
just below the area labeled D. The particles within the area labeled D traveled through the tabular sheet-like body of Gmc shown near D1.

rial of lower permeability. Jussel et al. (1994), who
analyzed glaciofluvial gravel deposits of the Swiss
Plateau, also identified inclusions of Gow within a
matrix of lower permeability material. They pointed
out that in this situation, the high hydraulic con-
ductivity of the Gow inclusions will not have a
significant effect on the effective hydraulic conduc-
tivity of the flow field. Nevertheless, if connected,
these lenses may form preferential flow paths and
thereby influence contaminant movement.
The significant hydrogeological difference be-
tween the Stoughton (proximal) and synthetic (me-
dial) deposits is the arrangement, particularly the
connectedness, of hydrofacies. Connected, high-con-
ductivity hydrofacies form avenues for contaminant
movement while connected low-conductivity hydro-
facies form barriers to flow that promote channeling
of contaminants into the high-conductivity pathways.
High-conductivity paths are evident in the image of
the synthetic deposit (Fig. 6) and are formed when
hydrofacies G=Gm connects with hydrofacies Sh
and St. These three hydrofacies comprise 29% of
the deposit and play an important role in forming
preferential flow paths in this system.
The pathways are less evident in the image of
the Stoughton deposit (Fig. 3), suggesting that these
194 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199

Fig. 4. Photograph of lithofacies Gs in a channel scour in the Stoughton deposit. Inclusions of Gow within Gmc are also shown.

Table 3
Description of lithofacies in the synthetic deposit

Lithofacies Description Interpretation

G Imbricated clast-supported gravels Form channel lag deposits
Gm Matrix-supported gravel with massive to crudely planar bedding Deposited from bedload
Sh Planar-bedded fine to coarse sand Deposited in the upper flow regime
St Medium to very coarse trough cross-bedded sand Deposited in the lower flow regime as dunes
Sp Medium to very coarse sand planar-tabular cross beds Forms the foresets of advancing sand sheets
Sr Ripple-bedded fine to coarse sand Deposited in the lower flow regime
Sw Wavy-bedded fine sand with no structures Deposited in the lower flow regime
Ss Massive medium to coarse sand with no structures Deposited from suspension
O Organically dominated fines with minor sand and no structures Deposited as overbank or drape deposits
Fm Massive or finely laminated fine material with no structure Deposited as overbank or drape deposits

Table 4
Hydrofacies for the synthetic deposit arranged in order of decreasing hydraulic conductivity

Hydrofacies Percent of deposit Mean grain size Froude number Mean hydraulic conductivity
(mm) (cm=s)
G=Gm 4 – 99.0 1.0
Sh 5 0.18 0.900 0.5
St 20 0.35 0.550 0.1
Sp 24 0.62 0.310 0.05
Sr=Sw 34 0.14=0.13 0.210 0.01
Ss=Fm=O 13 0.20=0.09=0.12 0.080 0.005
 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199 195

Fig. 5. Distribution of hydraulic conductivity in hydrofacies in the synthetic deposit.

Fig. 6. Three-dimensional image of the hydrofacies in the synthetic Donjek-type medial deposit (Webb, 1994). Colors are interpreted as
follows: dark blue is G=Gm; light blue is Sh; green is St; yellow is Sp; red is Sr=Sw; orange is Ss=Fm=O.

hydrofacies are less well connected. This perception Stoughton deposit is 2 m, while the resolution of
may be due, however, to differences in scale. The the image of the synthetic deposit is 10 m. Hence,
resolution of the three-dimensional image of the facies transitions were captured on a finer scale in
196 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199
the Stoughton deposit. The length of the Stoughton
deposit, which is represented by 30 grid blocks in
Fig. 3, would be represented by six blocks if mapped
at the same scale as the synthetic deposit. Riemersma
et al. (1996) constructed indicator variograms for the
Stoughton and synthetic deposits and showed that
the correlation ranges for the hydrofacies in the
Stoughton deposit are on the order of 10’s of meters
while the ranges for the synthetic deposit are on
the order of 100’s of meters. From this result, it
appears that, at least at the scale considered in this
study, the Stoughton deposit is less well connected
than the synthetic deposit. Lithofacies=hydrofacies
Gmc is known to be laterally extensive at other
sites in the proximal environment. Well logs in the
vicinity of the Stoughton site show some evidence
of larger-scale sand-filled channels on the order of
100’s of meters at this site as well, suggesting that
at larger scales, the Stoughton deposit could exhibit
stronger connectivity of hydrofacies.
The hydrofacies distributions shown in Figs. 3
and 6 were input to groundwater flow models based
on the code MODFLOW (McDonald and Harbaugh,
1988). A mean hydraulic conductivity was assigned
to each hydrofacies as listed in Tables 2 and 4. An
hydraulic gradient was imposed across each system
and MODFLOW was used to solve for the head
distribution. Numerical experiments with the particle
tracking code PATH3D (Zheng, 1991) were used
to trace paths of imaginary particles through each
medium. A constant effective porosity of 0.20 was
assigned to all hydrofacies in order to isolate the
effect of contrasts in hydraulic conductivity.
Although the Stoughton deposit seemingly is less
well connected than the synthetic deposit, the parti-
cle tracking experiments for the Stoughton deposit,
as reported by Aiken (1993) and Aiken and Mick-
elson (1995), exhibited preferential flow paths. In
both the Stoughton and the synthetic deposits, par-
ticles that initially were uniformly distributed at the
up-gradient end of the model clustered along prefer-
ential flow paths during transport.
The results of one particle tracking experiment
in the Stoughton deposit is shown in the inset of
Fig. 3, which shows the downgradient (western) face
of the sediment block through which the particles
exited the system. The colors on the exit face shown
in the inset represent particle concentrations. The
areas of highest concentration are shown in red,
yellow and blue. One particle cluster (labeled C in
the inset) is associated with a large channel scour
filled with a tabular body of Gmc with discontinuous
lenses of Gow (e.g., see location C1 in Fig. 3 and
Fig. 4). Underlying both of these facies is Fm=Fl,
which fills in the base of the channel scour and
is relatively continuous, extending from C2 to C3.
The area labeled D in the inset contains particles
that traveled through the tabular sheet-like body of
Gmc, labeled D1 in Fig. 3. Another particle cluster
in the lower right hand corner of the inset (shown in
yellow and red) is associated with Gow at the exit
face. In other simulations (Aiken, 1993; Aiken and
Mickelson, 1995), particle clusters were associated
with multiple, superimposed channel scours.
Because of the complex interfingering of facies
at the Stoughton site, correlations between zones of
high particle concentration and their associated fa-
cies are obvious in only a few places. These zones
have three characteristics in common. They contain a
high-conductivity hydrofacies such as Gow or Gmc.
Secondly, they are laterally continuous. Finally, the
high-conductivity hydrofacies are constrained by rel-
atively finer-grained facies such as Fm=Fl, which
may form channel boundaries. These low-conductiv-
ity facies act as boundaries that keep the particles
confined within the high-permeability flow paths.
The results of particle tracking experiments in the
synthetic deposit were reported by Webb and An-
derson (1996) and show that particles are channeled
into pathways formed by hydrofacies G=Gm con-
nected to Sh and St (Fig. 6). Webb and Anderson
(1996) showed that similar channeling of particles
occurs even when the six hydrofacies are grouped
into two hydrofacies with a hydraulic conductivity
contrast of 1.25 orders of magnitude. The preserva-
tion of preferential flow under a bimodal hydraulic
conductivity distribution indicates the strong direc-
tional control that is exerted by the internal structure
of high-conductivity channels.
5. Summary and conclusions
Lithofacies and hydrofacies were mapped in a 50
m by 60 m by 3.3 m thick proximal braided stream
deposit in Stoughton, Wisconsin (Fig. 3), using pho-
 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199
tomosaics, GPR profiles and field sketches of the
outcrop. In a second, related study, a composite set
of field data was developed from data collected by
others (Mosley, 1982; Brierley, 1989). This data set,
which consists of more quantitative information than
is typical for sedimentological studies, was used to
calibrate a depositional model that generated a 400
m by 400 m by 2.6 m block of sediment, which con-
tains hydrofacies representative of medial braided
stream deposits (Fig. 6). In both the Stoughton and
the synthetic sediment sequences, there are con-
nected hydrofacies that form preferential flow paths
in aquifers. Numerical models were used to simulate
groundwater flow through each sequence of sedi-
ments and to trace the movement of imaginary parti-
cles through the representations of the two deposits.
These experiments demonstrate that connected hy-
drofacies having high hydraulic conductivity act as
preferential flow paths through which particles (as
surrogates for contaminants) are funneled.
While the lithology and distribution of sedimen-
tary units is certainly important when describing the
hydrogeology of a sedimentary sequence, the con-
nection among units of high hydraulic conductivity
has special importance in hydrogeological inves-
tigations involving contaminant transport. Existing
studies in the sedimentological literature typically
do not contain enough information about the spatial
distribution and connection among lithofacies to be
useful in quantitative hydrogeological studies. Site-
specific sedimentological investigations designed to
identify connections among hydrofacies as well as
quantitative methods to describe these connections
are needed for hydrogeological site characteriza-
tion designed to evaluate remediation alternatives for
contaminated aquifers.
Webb and Davis (1998) summarized the kinds of
data needed by hydrogeologists as follows: “A great
service that sedimentologists could provide is to de-
scribe in detail the characteristic three-dimensional
shapes and hydrologic properties of the building
blocks that comprise the internal geometry of sedi-
mentary deposits, and then correlate them with their
genetic processes.” They also point out that a spatial
geological simulation model that is designed for hy-
drogeological applications must: “(1) distribute ge-
ological features (facies or three-dimensional units)
objectively in three-dimensional space at a scale
197
of most hydrologic problems and with high resolu-
tion; (2) relate facies deposits to expected=observed
hydraulic controls, such as channel location and
discharge rates; (3) account for both spatial and
temporal variability; (4) allow point sampling at
various scales; (5) be conditioned to existing site
data; and (6) allow for multiple realizations based
on a random component and uncertainty in input
parameters.” While numerous models are available
for hydrogeological simulation, for the most part,
the required input data are lacking. The combined
efforts of hydrogeologists and sedimentologists will
be required to develop ways to collect the field data
needed for these models.
Acknowledgements
Funding for this project was provided by grants
from the State of Wisconsin Groundwater Coordinat-
ing Council, the American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, and the Environmental Restoration and
Waste Management Fellowship program adminis-
tered by Oak Ridge Associated Universities for the
U.S. Department of Energy. The authors are grateful
to two journal reviewers for helpful comments on an
earlier version of the manuscript.
References
Aiken, J.S., 1993. A Three-Dimensional Characterization of
Coarse Glacial Outwash Used for Modeling Contaminant
Movement. MS thesis, Univ. of Wisconsin–Madison, 136 pp.
Aiken, J.S., Mickelson, D.M., 1995. Three-dimensional charac-
terization of hydraulic properties of a coarse glacial outwash
deposit. Groundwater Research Report, WRC GRR 95-01,
Water Resources Center, Univ. of Wisconsin–Madison, 18.
Anderson, M.P., 1989. Hydrogeologic facies models to delineate
large-scale spatial trends in glacial and glaciofluvial sediments.
Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 101, 501–511.
Anderson, M.P., 1990. Aquifer heterogeneity — a geological
perspective. In: Hitchon, B. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth
Canadian=American Conference on Hydrogeology, Banff, Al-
berta, Canada. National Water Well Assoc., Dublin, Ohio, pp.
3–22.
Anderson, M.P., 1997. Characterization of geological heterogene-
ity. In: Dagan, G., Neuman, S.P. (Eds.), Stochastic Subsurface
Hydrology. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, pp. 23–43.
Berkowitz, B., Scher, H., 1995. On characterization of anomalous
dispersion in porous and fractured media. Water Resour. Res.
198 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199
31 (6), 1461–1466.
Boothroyd, J.C., Ashley, G.M., 1975. Processes, bar morphology,
and sedimentary structure on braided outwash fans, Northeast-
ern Gulf of Alaska. In: Jopling, A.V., McDonald, B.C. (Eds.),
Glaciofluvial and Glaciolacustrine Sedimentation. Soc. Econ.
Paleontol. Mineral., Spec. Publ. 23, 193–222.
Bradbury, K.R., Muldoon, M.A., 1990. Hydraulic conductivity
determinations on unlithified glacial and fluvial materials. In:
Nielson, D.M., Johnson, A.I. (Eds.), Groundwater and Vadose
Zone Monitoring. ASTM, STP 1053, American Society for
Testing Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 138–151.
Brierley, G.J., 1989. River planform facies models: the sedimen-
tology of braided, wandering and meandering reaches of the
Squamish River, British Columbia. Sediment. Geol. 61, 17–
35.
Dagan, G., Neuman, S.P. (Eds.), 1997. Subsurface Flow and
Transport: A Stochastic Approach. Cambridge Univ. Press,
Cambridge, 241 pp.
Danskin, W.R., 1988. Preliminary evaluation of the hydrogeo-
logic system in Owens Valley, California. U.S. Geol. Surv.
Water Resour. Invest. Rep. 88-4003, 76 pp.
Davis, A.D., 1987. Determination of mean transmissivity val-
ues in the modeling of groundwater flow. In: Solving Prob-
lems with Ground Water Models. National Water Well Assoc.,
Dublin, Ohio, pp. 1162–1173.
Davis, J.M., Lohmann, R.C., Phillips, F.M., Wilson, J.L., Love,
D.W., 1993. Architecture of the Sierra Ladrones Formation,
central New Mexico: depositional controls on the permeability
correlation structure. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 105, 998–1007.
Desbarats, A.J., 1990. Macrodispersion in sand–shale sequences.
Water Resour. Res. 26 (1), 153–163.
Desbarats, A.J., Bachu, S., 1994. Geostatistical analysis of
aquifer heterogeneity from the core scale to the basin scale: a
case study. Water Resour. Res. 30 (3), 673–684.
Desbarats, A.J., Srivastava, R.M., 1991. Geostatistical character-
ization of groundwater flow parameters in a simulated aquifer.
Water Resour. Res. 30 (3), 673–684.
Deutsch, C.V., Wang, L., 1996. Hierarchical object-based
stochastic modeling of fluvial reservoirs. Math. Geol. 28 (7),
857–880.
Essaid, H.I., Herkelrath, W.N., Hess, K.M., 1993. Simulation
of fluid distributions observed at a crude oil spill site incor-
porating hysteresis, oil entrapment, and spatial variability of
hydraulic properties. Water Resour. Res. 29 (6), 1753–1770.
Ewing, R.E. 1997. Aspects of numerical methods in multiphase
flows. In: Dagan, G., Neuman, S.P. (Eds.), Subsurface Flow
and Transport: A Stochastic Approach. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, pp. 92-100.
Fogg, G.E., 1986. Groundwater flow and sand body intercon-
nectedness in a thick, multiple-aquifer system. Water Resour.
Res. 22 (5), 679–694.
Fogg, G.E., 1990. Architecture of low-permeability geologic me-
dia and its influence on pathways for fluid flow. In: Neuman,
S.P, Neretnieks, I. (Eds.), Hydrogeology of Low Permeability
Environments. H. Heise, Hanover, pp. 19–40.
Fraser, G.S., Davis, J.M. (Eds.), 1998. Hydrogeologic Models
of Sedimentary Aquifers. Society for Sedimentary Geology,
Tulsa, Okla.
Freeze, R.A., Cherry, J.A., 1979. Groundwater. Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 604 pp.
Frind, E.O., Sudicky, E.A., Schellenberg, S.L., 1988. Micro-scale
modelling in the study of plume evolution in heterogeneous
media, In: Custodio, E. et al. (Eds.), Groundwater Flow and
Quality Modelling. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 439–461.
Groenewold, G.H., Rhem, B.W., Cherry, J.A., 1981. Depositional
setting and groundwater quality in coal-bearing sediments and
spoila in western North Dakota. In: Recent and Ancient Non-
Marine Depositional Environments: Models for Exploration.
Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Spec. Publ. 31, 157–167.
Hazen, A., 1893. Some physical properties of sands and gravels.
Massachusetts State Board of Health, 24th Annual Report.
Huggenberger, P., Meier, E., Pugin, A., 1994. Ground-probing
radar as a tool for heterogeneity estimation in gravel deposits:
advances in data-processing and facies analysis. J. Appl. Geo-
phys. 31, 171–184.
Jussel, P., Stauffer, F., Dracos, T., 1994. Transport modeling in
heterogeneous aquifers, 1. Statistical description and numeri-
cal generation of gravel deposits. Water Resour. Res. 30 (6),
1803–1817.
Kitanidis, P.K., 1997. Groundwater flow in heterogeneous for-
mations. In: Dagan, G., Neuman, S.P. (Eds.), Subsurface Flow
and Transport: A Stochastic Approach. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, pp. 83–91.
Koltermann, C.E., Gorelick, S.M., 1992. Paleoclimatic signature
in terrestrial flood deposits. Science 256, 1775–1782.
Koltermann, C.E., Gorelick, S.M., 1996. Heterogeneity in sed-
imentary deposits: a review of structure-imitating, process
imitating and descriptive approaches. Water Resour. Res. 32
(9), 2617–2658.
MacQuarrie, K.T.B., Sudicky, E.A., 1990. Simulation of
biodegradable organic contaminants in groundwater, 2. Plume
behavior in uniform and random flow fields. Water Resour.
Res. 26 (2), 223–239.
Mansoori, J., 1994. A review of basic upscaling procedures:
Advantages and disadvantages. In: Yarus, J.M., Chambers,
R.L. (Eds.), Stochastic Modeling and Geostatistics. American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., pp. 65–74.
Maxey, G.B., 1964. Hydrostratigraphic units. J. Hydrol. 2, 124–
129.
McDonald, M.G., Harbaugh, A.W., 1988. A modular three-
dimensional finite difference ground water flow model. U.S.
Geol. Surv. Tech. Water Resour. Invest. Bk 6, Ch A1.
Miall, A.D., 1978. Lithofacies types and vertical profile models
in braided river deposits: a summary. In: Miall, A.D. (Eds.),
Fluvial Sedimentology. Can. Soc. Pet. Geol. Mem. 5, 597–
604.
Miall, A., 1985a. Architectural-element analysis: a new method
of facies analysis applied to fluvial deposits. Earth Sci. Rev.
22, 261–308.
Miall, A.D., 1985b. Multiple-channel bedload rivers. In: Recog-
nition of fluvial depositional and systems and their resource
potential. SEPM Short Course 19, Society of Economic Pale-
ontologists and Mineralogists, pp. 83–100.
 M.P. Anderson et al. / Sedimentary Geology 129 (1999) 187–199
Moreno, L., Tsang, C.-F., 1994. Flow channeling in strongly
heterogeneous porous media: a numerical study. Water Resour.
Res. 30 (5), 1421–1430.
Mosley, M.P., 1982. Analysis of effect of changing discharge
on channel morphology and in stream uses in a braided river,
Ohau River, New Zealand. Water Resour. Res. 18, 800–812.
North, C.P., Prosser, D.J. (Eds.), 1993. Characterization of Flu-
vial and Aeolian Reservoirs. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 73, The
Geological Society, Bath, 450 pp.
Phillips, F.M., Wilson, J.L., Davis, J.M., 1989. Statistical analysis
of hydraulic conductivity distributions: a quantitative geolog-
ical approach. In: Proceedings of New Field Techniques for
Quantifying the Physical and Chemical Properties of Hetero-
geneous Aquifers. National Ground Water Assoc., Columbus,
Ohio.
Poeter, E., Gaylord, D.R., 1990. Influence of aquifer hetero-
geneity on contaminant transport at the Hanford Site. Ground
Water 28 (6), 900–909.
Poeter, E., Townsend, P., 1994. Assessment of critical flow path
for improved remediation management. Ground Water 32 (3),
439–447.
Rea, J., Knight, R., 1998. Geostatistical analysis of ground-pen-
etrating radar data: a means of describing spatial variation in
the subsurface. Water Resour. Res. 34 (3), 329–340.
Riemersma, P.E., 1997. Geostatistical Characterization of Het-
erogeneity, Simulation of Advective Transport, and Evaluation
of Pump-and-Treat Systems in Braided Stream Deposits. Ph.D.
thesis, Univ. of Wisconsin–Madison, 239 pp.
Riemersma, P.E., Bahr, J.M., Anderson, M.P., 1996. A compari-
son of geological and stochastic approaches to characterization
of heterogeneity and their effects on simulations of pump-and-
treat systems. In: Uncertainty in the Geologic Environment.
Am. Soc. of Civil Engineers, pp. 1003–1018.
Ritzi Jr., R.W., Dominic, D.F., Brown, N.R., Kausch, K.W.,
McAlenney, P.J., Basial, M.J., 1995. Hydrofacies distribution
and correlation in the Miami Valley aquifer system. Water
Resour. Res. 31 (12), 3271–3281.
Scheibe, T.D., Freyberg, D.L., 1995. The use of sedimentological
information for geometric simulation of natural porous media
structure. Water Resour. Res. 31 (12), 3259–3270.
Seaber, P.R., 1988. Hydrostratigraphic units. In: Back, W.,
Rosenshein, J.S., Seaber, P.R. (Eds.), Hydrogeology. The Ge-
ology of North America Vol. O-2, Geol. Soc. Am., Boulder,
Colo., pp. 9–14.
199
Shepherd, R.G., Owens, W.G., 1981. Hydrogeologic significance
of Ogallala fluvial environments, the gangplank. In: Recent
and Ancient Non-Marine Depositional Environments: Models
for Exploration. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral., Spec. Publ.
31, 89–94.
Silliman, S.E., Wright, A.L., 1988. Stochastic analysis of paths
of high hydraulic conductivity in porous media. Water Resour.
Res. 24 (11), 1901–1910.
Smith, L., 1981. Spatial variability of flow parameters in a
stratified sand. Math. Geol. 13, 1–21.
Theis, C.V., 1935. The relation between the lowering of the
piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of
a well using groundwater storage. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union
2, 519–524.
Tompson, A.F.B., Gelhar, L.W., 1990. Numerical simulation of
solute transport in three-dimensional, randomly heterogeneous
porous media. Water Resour. Res. 26 (10), 2541–2562.
Webb, E.K., 1994. Simulating the three-dimensional distribution
of sediment units in braided-stream deposits. J. Sediment. Res.
B64 (2), 219–231.
Webb, E.K., Anderson, M.P., 1996. Simulation of preferential
flow in three-dimensional, heterogeneous conductivity fields
with realistic internal architecture. Water Resour. Res. 32 (3),
533–545.
Webb, E.K., Davis, J.M., 1998. Simulation of spatial heterogene-
ity of geologic properties: an overview. In: Fraser, G.S., Davis,
J.M. (Eds.), Hydrogeologic Models of Sedimentary Aquifers.
Society for Sedimentary Geology, Tulsa, Okla., pp. 1–24.
Weber, K.J., 1986. How heterogeneity affects oil recovery. In:
Lake, L.W., Carroll, H.B., Jr. (Eds.), Reservoir Characteriza-
tion. Academic Press, Orlando, Fla., pp. 487–544.
Weerts, H.J.T., Bierkens, M.F.P., 1993. Geostatistical analysis
of overbank deposits of anastomosing and meandering fluvial
systems: Rhine–Meuse delta, the Netherlands. Sediment. Geol.
85, 221–232.
Williams, P.F., Rust, B.R., 1969. The sedimentology of a braided
river. J. Sediment. Petrol. 39 (2), 649–679.
Yarus, J.M., Chambers, R.L., 1994. Stochastic Modeling and
Geostatistics. AAPG Computer Applications in Geology 3,
Am. Assoc. of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 379 pp.
Zheng, C., 1991. PATH3D — a groundwater path and travel time
simulator, version 3.0 user’s manual. S.S. Papadopulos and
Associates, 79 pp.