1. Complexities of the Flow System, Edwards Aquifer Susan Hovorka, Bureau of Economic Geology with data from: Geary Schindel and Steve Johnson, Edwards Aquifer Authority J. P Nicot, Bureau of Economic Geology Steve Worthington, Worthington Associates Adrien Lindley and Thandar Phu, University of Texas at Austin

2. Purpose What is the scale, distribution, and hydrologic significance of heterogeneity in the Edwards aquifer? How much information can be extracted from existing data? Where are productive areas for future research to better answer this question?

3. Techniques Thin section petrography Measurement of porosity and permeability core plugs from cores and outcrops Calibration of wireline logs using core plug data and porosity/permeability transforms Core examination Fracture aperture measurement Outcrop photograph digitization Cave trend analysis Calculation of permeability from specific capacity tests Well hydrograph recession analysis Pseudosynoptic analysis of troughs in the water level Calcite saturation and other geochemical indicators

4. Facies Cross Section

5. Based on log analysis

6. Variation in Water Level

7. High Permeability Deep in the Aquifer Hovorka and Yeh

8. Pore Types

9. Permeability in Carbonate Dissolution of dolomite during diagenesis Randolph FM 1604 core, 924 ft 1 mm

10. Impact of Gypsum on Permeability Calcitized gypsum = vuggy, zone, moderate to low permeability

11. Conduit Flow Dominates To match springflow, models must upscale transmissivity several orders of magnitude above estimated transmissivity from wells High transmissivity areas of Maclay and Land overlain on well-test-derived permeability model SWRI, 2002

12. Conduit Flow Dominates In wells with estimated transmissivity, matrix flow accounts for about 1% of total flow. Mace and Hovorka, permeability from core compared to permeability calculated from specific capacity

13. Fractures or faults Dolomite layer 0 1 m Caves Fractures and Caves are Obvious in Outcrop

14. From G. Schindel

15. Evolution of Karst, Confined Zone Hovorka and Yeh

16. Karst features are found in the confined aquifer 5 cm Missing section, terra rosa, Off-scale caliper

17. Effects of faulting on permeability Offset decreases cross- fault transmissivity Fractures and brecciation increase permeability parallel to the fault Fracturing focuses development of karst

18. Topographic Expression of Balcones Fault Zone, Austin

19. Mixing Zone Dissolution – Matrix and Karst

20. Tracer tests to define conduits in Barton Springs segment Brian Smith BSEACD Nico Hauwert COA

21. Uranine Tracer Test Results in the Landa Park Area LCRA Well Panther Canyon Well NBU Well 5 Eosine Uranine   Schindel, Johnson and others, 2002

22. Conduit Interpretation (Steve Worthington) Comal Sp. San Marcus Sp. Base permeability from SWRI, based on statistical handling of well tests

23. Synoptic Potentiometric Surface of San Antonio Segment Esquilin, 2003 provisional synoptic

24. Trough in Water Level Interpreted as Conduits Brian Smith, Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer CD; Nico Hauwert City of Austin

25. Conduits Interpreted from Pseudosynoptics

26. Interpreted Conduits Compared to Other Indicators

27. Conclusions Matrix permeability is inadequate to describe Edwards flow system Numerous lines of evidence suggest that conduit flow dominates