4.
10 Geological models
4.10 Geological models
A geological model is a spatial representation of
the distribution of sediments and rocks in the
subsurface. The model is traditionally presented
by 2D cross-sections, but increasingly visualised
as digital 3D models (Artimo et al. 2003,
Kassenaar et al. 2003, Hinsby & Abatzis 2004).
The distribution of sediments controls the
groundwater flow, and the migration of e.g.
pollutants or saltwater in the subsurface, due to
the varying physical, chemical and microbiological
properties of the different sediment types (de
Vries 1997, Refsgaard & Trolborg 2001, Harrar et
al. 2003, Hojberg & Refsgaard 2004). Hence the
geological model is the core of any deterministic
groundwater flow model, such as e.g. the
national hydrological model of Denmark
(Henriksen et al., 2003). Considerable
uncertainties are associated with the model set-
up and parameterisation, and all groundwater
flow models, including the geological model,
should therefore be validated for a specific
application (Refsgaard & Henriksen 2004).
Conventionally, the results of geological and
geophysical data collection are presented in 2D
geological maps, profiles and thematic maps. This
is adequate only, if effects of the three
dimensional structure of the underground are not
important for the problem to be solved. Buried
valleys, however, have a pronounced 3D
structure, therefore a 3D framework (Barnett et
al. 1998, Kassenaar et al. 2003) is well-suited for
integrating the results of large scale surveys like
those, which have been performed in the BurVal
pilot areas (see Chap. 5). Digital 2 and 3D
geological modelling including both geological
and geophysical data is currently increasing in
disciplines such as petroleum, mining and
hydro-geology (e.g. Hinsby & Binzer 2001,
Chambers & Brown 2003, Rasmussen 2004a,b,
Apel 2006).
Such a 3D-framework can vary from simple
conceptual models which describe the rough 3D-
geological set-up of an area up to very complex
digital models, not only showing the distribution
of geological layers but also taking into account
rock properties and changes in time. Depending
on the requirements of a project a wide range of
commercially available digital tools for the
purposes of geological 3D-modelling exist, which
can differ extremely concerning costs,
performance and user-friendliness.
The software should preferably fulfil several
prerequisites:
the import of all types of different basic data
must be possible
have interfaces to common databases
the created geological body must have
topologies (neighbourhood relationships)
it must be possible to change the geological
body, (to introduce of new information)
it must be possible to combine models of
different parts to an overall model
the program must document the alterations
occurring during the development of the
model
it must be possible to assign differently types
of information as attributes to the geological
body and the program must be able to
calculate the variation of the attributes in the
3D space
the program must be able to produce two
dimensional maps and profiles
the program must be able to produce 3D
visualisations of an integrating nature
the program must have user friendly
interfaces and export facilities to
groundwater modelling software.
4.10.1 Procedure for the development of
a Geological 3D model
The flow diagram to establish a 3D model is
shown in Figure 4.10.1. The steps to be
performed are data preparation, data import,
surface model, body model, and presentation.
127
 JENS KRGER & KLAUS HINSBY

Fig. 4.10.1: Flow diagram showing the development of a 3D geological model.

Fig. 4.10.2: Examples of 1D and 2D data of different origin (drilling results, geological cross sections, isoline
maps) which can be imported.

128
 4.10 Geological models

Data preparation

As a first step, the basic data must be checked

and tested. Usually geological data have been
collected over decades, and different experts
were involved, so that data are based on
different interpretations. All relevant data, e.g.
maps, profiles, cross sections, geophysical and
other data (Fig. 4.10.2), must be checked for
consistency, and, if necessary and possible, they
must be revised in order to produce a
homogeneous data set. Usually, this needs a lot
of manual work.

Data import
Fig. 4.10.3: Example of a surface model.
The checked data from the various data sources,
e.g. geological surveys, institutions, companies
and various databases often have quite
heterogenous formats. Hardly any software is
able to import all these different data formats.
Therefore all data have to be changed to a
common proper format before being imported.
Almost all known 3D programs allow a data
import of at least the ASCII (American Standard
Code for Information Interchange) format.

First step in model generation: Surface

models

In the first step, all the preprocessed data are

used by the 3D modelling software to create
surfaces. The surfaces are usually the boundaries
of the geological units, e.g. stratigraphic or
Fig. 4.10.4: Example of a body model.
petrographic units. During this step,
inconsistencies and errors in the basic data can
become obvious and should be eliminated at this
point, because it would be much more difficult
during the second step. The end product of this
step is a surface model including only Depending on the specific program, the 3D space
stratigraphic or petrographic attributes (Fig. can consist of a single body (Voxet) or many sub-
4.10.3). One can call this model the basic bodies. Now, attributes, e.g. permeability,
geological model. porosity, or chemical rock parameters, may be
assigned to the bodies and sub-bodies,
respectively. This process turns the basis-model
Second step in model generation: Body into a hydrogeological (subject specific) model.
model Some programs allow calculating the variation of
the parameter over the 3D space, by assigning an
In the second step bodies are generated based on individual value to each sub body using statistical
the surfaces. This means, that the entire 3D space methods.
is covered with data after this step (Fig. 4.10.4).

129
 JENS KRGER & KLAUS HINSBY
Data presentation and data export for
further application
The 3D program itself usually yields data
presentations that are comfortable for the user.
In addition, the surfaces and bodies can be
exported for example as VRML files and can be
displayed with customary programs. Most of the
3D programs also allow an export of maps,
profiles and so on.
Hydrogeological models with hydraulic
parameters like porosity or permeability assigned
to their bodies are the core of every groundwater
model. Combined hydrogeological and
groundwater flow models are valuable tools for
water resource management. Freshwater layers
with high quality potable groundwater can be
separated from polluted or saline waters, and
the possible pathways of man-made pollution or
geogenic salt water migration can be analyzed.
This helps to plan and carry out effective
protection measures.
4.10.2 Summary and conclusion
The geological modelling tools is developing
rapidly e.g. to include 3D visualisation and
interpretation and real-time fly-throughs of the
models, and the integration of all available
geological and geophysical data. Modern digital
modelling tools are able to interface with
common database formats and groundwater
modelling software. This option increase the
efficiency considerably and provides the
possibility of up-dating the geological and
groundwater flow models simultaneously with
database up-dates. The models can be
continuously updated to include new data when
these are available in order to optimise the
performance of the models. Geological and
groundwater flow modelling is an on-going
iterative process, where for instance new
borehole logging or groundwater dating results
may require changes of the (hydro)geological
model. It is of crucial importance to acknowledge
that the releability of the groundwater model
strongly depends on the reliability of the
(hydro)geological model. Erroneous geological
models may result in strongly misleading results,
that may result in wrong and costly management
decisions.
130
4.10.3 References
Apel M (2006): From 3D geomodelling systems
towards 3D geoscience information systems:
Data model, query functionality, and data
management. Computers & Geosciences
32(2): 222229.
Artimo A, Makinen J, Berg RC, Abert CC,
Salonen VP (2003): Three-dimensional
geologic modeling and visualization of the
Virttaankangas aquifer, southwestern Finland.
Hydrogeology Journal 11(3): 378386.
Barnett PJ, Sharpe DR, Russell HAJ, Brennand TA,
Gorrell G, Kenny F, Pugin A (1998): On the
origin of the Oak Ridges Moraine. Canadian
Journal of Earth Sciences 35(10): 11521167.
Chambers H, Brown AL (2003): 3-D visualization
continues to advance integrated
interpretation environment. First Break, May
2003,
http://www.lgc.com/resources/technicalreview
04/ 3dvisualizationcontinues.pdf.
de Vries JJ (1997): Prediction in hydrogeology:
two case stories. Geol. Rundschau 86: 354
371.
Harrar WG, Sonnenborg TO, Henriksen HJ
(2003): Capture zone, travel time, and solute-
transport predictions using inverse modeling
and different geological models.
Hydrogeology Journal 11: 536548.
Hinsby K, Abatzis I (2004): Petroleum geology
modelling tools of relevance to groundwater
investigations. Geologisk Tidsskrift 2004 2:
1011 (in Danish).
Hinsby K, Binzer K (2001): Freshwater our most
important resource geology and
groundwater models. Geologi Nyt fra
GEUS, 2001 1 special issue (available in
English and Danish at: www.geus.dk).
Henriksen HJ, Troldborg L, Nyegaard P,
Sonnenborg TO, Refsgaard JC, Madsen B
(2003): Methodology for construction,
calibration and validation of a national
hydrological model for Denmark. Journal of
Hydrology 280(14): 5271.
 4.10 Geological models

Hojberg AL, Refsgaard JC (2005): Model

uncertainty parameter uncertainty versus
conceptual models. Water Science and
Technology 52(6): 177186.

Kassenaar D, Holysh S, Gerber R (2003): An

integrated 3D Hydrostratigraphic
Interpretation Methodology for Complex
Aquifer Systems. In: Poeter, Zheng, Hill and
Doherty (eds.): Proceedings, MODFLOW and
More, understanding through modelling,
Colorado School of Mines, Golden CO,
September 1619, 2003, p. 661665.

Rasmussen ES (2004a): The interplay between

true eustatic sea-level changes, tectonics, and
climatical changes: What is the dominating
factor in sequence formation of the Upper
Oligocene-Miocene succession in the eastern
North Sea Basin, Denmark? Global and
Planetary Changes 41: 1530.

Rasmussen ES (2004b): Stratigraphy and

depositional evolution of the uppermost
Oligocene Miocene succession in Denmark.
Geological Society of Denmark, Bulletin 51:
89109.

Refsgaard JC ,Henriksen HJ (2004): Modelling

guidelines terminology and guiding
principles. Advances in Water Resources
27(1): 7182.

Refsgaard JC, Troldborg L (2001): Geological data

improves groundwater models. In: Hinsby, K ,
Binzer, K (2001). Freshwater our most
important resource geology and
groundwater models. Geologi Nyt fra
GEUS, 2001, 1, special issue (available in
English and Danish at: www.geus.dk).

131
 JENS KRGER & KLAUS HINSBY

132