Hydraulic Pulse Testing of Permeable Reactive Barriers Permeable ...
Hydraulic Pulse Testing of Permeable Reactive Barriers Permeable ...
Hydraulic Pulse Testing of Permeable Reactive Barriers Permeable ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong> <strong>Testing</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>Permeable</strong> <strong>Reactive</strong> <strong>Barriers</strong><br />
By<br />
Grant Hocking<br />
President<br />
GeoSierra LLC<br />
Atlanta, GA<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 1
Presentation Outline<br />
RTDF <strong>Permeable</strong> <strong>Reactive</strong> Barrier Meeting<br />
Niagara Falls, NY – Oct 15-16, 16, 2003<br />
<strong>Permeable</strong> <strong>Reactive</strong> Barrier Construction Methods<br />
° Continuous Trencher<br />
° Excavated Slurry Wall<br />
° Caisson, Soil Mixing, Vibrating Beam<br />
° <strong>Hydraulic</strong> Fracturing Technology<br />
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> Conditions Across PRB<br />
° Potentiometric Levels for Various PRB Configurations<br />
° Partially Clogged PRB<br />
° Slug Tests within PRB<br />
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong> Interference Tests<br />
° Test Method<br />
° Type Curve Analysis for Hydrogeological Characterization<br />
° PRB Thickness by Inclined Pr<strong>of</strong>iling<br />
° <strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong> Tests to quantify PRB <strong>Hydraulic</strong> Impact<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 2
Various Iron PRB Construction<br />
Techniques<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 3
Azimuth Controlled Vertical Hydr<strong>of</strong>racturing<br />
Installed Iron <strong>Permeable</strong> <strong>Reactive</strong> Barrier<br />
Ground Surface<br />
Contaminated<br />
Groundwater<br />
Cleaned<br />
Groundwater<br />
Down Hole<br />
Fracture Initiation<br />
Tooling<br />
Installed Iron <strong>Permeable</strong><br />
<strong>Reactive</strong> Barrier (PRB)<br />
Injection Build Sequence<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 4
Contaminant Resident Time in<br />
Iron PRB<br />
K=Soil <strong>Hydraulic</strong><br />
Conductivity<br />
i = Natural <strong>Hydraulic</strong><br />
Gradient<br />
Ground Surface<br />
Water Level<br />
1<br />
i<br />
Iron PRB<br />
T<br />
PRB<br />
PRB Porosity ( n<br />
Volume Percent<br />
Iron (I )<br />
Volume<br />
)<br />
PRB<br />
Darcy Flux =K i<br />
Water Velocity in PRB<br />
v =<br />
PRB<br />
Ki<br />
n<br />
PRB<br />
Reduce Time in Iron<br />
= T PRB<br />
t iron<br />
v PRB<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 5
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> Gradient Across Iron PRB<br />
MW-1<br />
MW-2<br />
Ground Surface<br />
Groundwater<br />
Flow Direction<br />
~20’ ~20’<br />
Water Level<br />
3’ PRB<br />
MW-1<br />
MW-2<br />
0.01’<br />
0.005’<br />
Groundwater<br />
Flow Direction<br />
0.005’<br />
0.01’<br />
PRB<br />
LEGEND<br />
Natural Gradient<br />
k PRB = k Soil<br />
k<br />
PRB =<br />
10 k<br />
Soil<br />
k<br />
PRB = ½ k Soil<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 6
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> Gradient Across Iron PRB<br />
MW-1<br />
Ground Surface<br />
MW-2<br />
0.01’<br />
0.005’<br />
0.005’<br />
Groundwater<br />
Flow Direction<br />
0.01’<br />
PRB<br />
LEGEND<br />
Natural Gradient<br />
k PRB = k Soil<br />
k<br />
PRB = 10 k<br />
Soil<br />
k<br />
PRB = ½ k Soil<br />
Groundwater<br />
Flow Direction<br />
PRB<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 7
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> Gradient Across Iron PRB<br />
Groundwater<br />
Flow Direction<br />
PRB<br />
LEGEND<br />
Natural Gradient<br />
k PRB = k Soil<br />
k<br />
PRB = 10 k Soil<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Face Clogged<br />
k PRB = kSoil<br />
(90% Clogged for<br />
k<br />
PRB = 10 k Soil)<br />
- No Gradient Change<br />
-Flow Through PRB ~10x Faster<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 8
Slug Test in Slurry Wall Constructed PRB<br />
Slug Test on Wells<br />
Skin Effects<br />
(Smear & Filter Cake)<br />
Potential Clogging <strong>of</strong><br />
Side Walls<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 9
Slug Test in Iron PRB and Zone <strong>of</strong><br />
Influence<br />
HVORSLEV SLUG TEST ANALYSIS<br />
RISING HEAD TEST B21-72-PZ<br />
K<br />
=<br />
r<br />
c<br />
2L<br />
2<br />
e<br />
ln<br />
L<br />
R<br />
e<br />
e<br />
⎡ ⎛ y ⎞ ⎤<br />
1<br />
⎢ ln<br />
⎜<br />
⎟ ⎥<br />
⎢ ⎝ y<br />
2 ⎠ ⎥<br />
⎢ ( t2 − t1 ) ⎥<br />
⎢<br />
⎥<br />
⎢⎣<br />
⎥⎦<br />
where:<br />
r c = casing radius (feet)<br />
R e = equivalent radius (feet)<br />
L e = length <strong>of</strong> screened interval (feet)<br />
t = time (minutes)<br />
y t = head at time t (feet)<br />
INPUT PARAMETERS<br />
RESULTS<br />
r c = 0.08<br />
R e = 0.33<br />
L e = 15 K= 2.36E-02 cm/sec<br />
t 1 = 0.0022 K= 6.68E+01 ft/day<br />
t 2 = 0.0125<br />
y 1 = 0.47<br />
y 2 = 0.26<br />
L 2 =K.t/S<br />
Head Ratio<br />
1<br />
0.9<br />
0.8<br />
0.7<br />
0.6<br />
0.5<br />
0.4<br />
0.3<br />
Rising Head Slug Test B21-72-PZ<br />
L~10feet<br />
0.2<br />
0.1<br />
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05<br />
Time (mins)<br />
Project Name: MACTEC/SIERRA ARMY DEPOT, CA Analysis By: RIO<br />
Project No.: 6014 Checked By: GH<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 10
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong> Interference Test<br />
Observation Wells<br />
Source Well<br />
Ground Surface<br />
Plugs<br />
High Precision<br />
Pressure Tranducers<br />
Packers<br />
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> Source<br />
Iron <strong>Reactive</strong> Barrier<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 11
<strong>Pulse</strong> Test Solution and Dimensionless<br />
Pressure & Time<br />
The pressure response in a receiver well, denoted as ∆p(t) for a continuous flow rate injection <strong>of</strong><br />
q in the injection/source well, is given by equation (1).<br />
q<br />
∆ p t)<br />
=<br />
4π<br />
Kr<br />
( erfc(rD<br />
/ 4t<br />
D<br />
w<br />
rD<br />
)<br />
(1)<br />
where K is the formation hydraulic conductivity, S s<br />
is the formation specific storage, r w<br />
is the<br />
wellbore radius <strong>of</strong> the source well, r D<br />
is the dimensionless distance being equal to r/r w<br />
, in which r<br />
is the distance from the receiver well to the source well, and t D<br />
is denoted as dimensionless time<br />
as defined in equation (2).<br />
Kt<br />
S<br />
t<br />
D<br />
=<br />
2<br />
r<br />
w<br />
s<br />
where t is the elapsed time since start <strong>of</strong> injection and p D<br />
is denoted as the dimensionless pressure<br />
as defined in equation (3).<br />
(2)<br />
p<br />
D<br />
4 π Kr<br />
w<br />
∆ p(<br />
t)<br />
=<br />
q<br />
(3)<br />
For the solution <strong>of</strong> the pulse interference test, equation (1) needs to account for the periodic<br />
nature <strong>of</strong> the injection flow rate in the source well. The time intervals <strong>of</strong> injection and shut in do<br />
not need to be the same, but account for their periodic nature needs to be included. The<br />
dimensionless time interval for injection and shut in have been assumed to be the same in this<br />
paper with the dimensionless time interval for injection tp D<br />
as defined in equation (4).<br />
Ktp<br />
tp<br />
D<br />
=<br />
2<br />
r S<br />
where tp is the pulsed injection time interval.<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 12<br />
w<br />
s<br />
(4)
Typical <strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong> Interference<br />
Test Setup<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 13
Typical <strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong> Interference<br />
Response Data<br />
0.1<br />
0.09<br />
Confined Aquifer 35' to 110' bgs<br />
<strong>Pulse</strong> Well PW-3 at 100'-105'<br />
20 gpm with 20 sec interval<br />
Receiver Well PW-2 at 100'-105'<br />
100<br />
90<br />
Receiver Pressure (psi)<br />
0.08<br />
0.07<br />
0.06<br />
0.05<br />
0.04<br />
0.03<br />
PW-2<br />
PW-3<br />
80<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
Source Flow Rate (gpm)<br />
0.02<br />
20<br />
0.01<br />
10<br />
0<br />
0 1 2 3 4 5<br />
Time (mins)<br />
0<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 14
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong> Interference<br />
Pre-Construction Results<br />
0.1<br />
<strong>Pulse</strong> Well PW-3 at 100'-105'<br />
20 gpm with 20 sec interval<br />
Phase 1 Pre-PRB 11/04/00<br />
100<br />
90<br />
Receiver Pressure (psi)<br />
0.075<br />
0.05<br />
0.025<br />
PW-1<br />
PW-2<br />
PW-4<br />
PW-3<br />
80<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
Source Flow Rate (gpm)<br />
10<br />
0<br />
0<br />
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1<br />
Time (mins)<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 15
Type Curve Analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong><br />
Interference Data<br />
Type Curve Analysis <strong>of</strong> Confined Aquifer 35' to 110' bgs<br />
Source Well and Receiver Well both at 100'-105'<br />
10 -1<br />
Dimensionless Pressure<br />
10 -3<br />
10 -4<br />
10 -5<br />
10 -2 10 -2<br />
10 -3<br />
1e3<br />
Pressure (psi)<br />
10 -4<br />
3.5e3<br />
1e4<br />
3.5e4<br />
1e5<br />
3.5e5<br />
1e6<br />
3.5e6<br />
1e7<br />
3.5e7<br />
10 -6<br />
10 -1 10 0 10 1 10 2<br />
Time (mins)<br />
10 4 10 5 10 6 10 7 10 8<br />
Dimensionless Time<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 16
Match <strong>of</strong> <strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong> Interference<br />
Data<br />
0.1<br />
0.09<br />
<strong>Pulse</strong> Well PW-3 at 100'-105'<br />
Confined Aquifer 35' to 110' bgs<br />
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> Conductivity = 105 ft/day<br />
Specific Storage = 5.2x10-6 /ft<br />
100<br />
90<br />
Receiver Pressure (psi)<br />
0.08<br />
0.07<br />
0.06<br />
0.05<br />
0.04<br />
0.03<br />
0.02<br />
PW-2 Matched<br />
PW-2 Measured<br />
PW-3<br />
80<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
Source Flow Rate (gals/min)<br />
0.01<br />
10<br />
0<br />
0 1 2 3 4 5<br />
Time (minutes)<br />
0<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 17
View <strong>of</strong> Frac Equipment and<br />
Final PRB Alignment<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 18
Plan & Cross Section <strong>of</strong> Iron PRB<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 19
Pre and Post PRB Construction <strong>Pulse</strong><br />
Interference Tests<br />
0.1<br />
<strong>Pulse</strong> Well PW-3 at 100'-105'<br />
20 gpm with 20 sec interval<br />
Phase 1 Pre-PRB 11/04/00<br />
100<br />
90<br />
0.1<br />
<strong>Pulse</strong> Well PW-3 at 100-105'<br />
20 gpm with 20 sec interval<br />
Phase 1 Post-PRB 02/09/01<br />
100<br />
90<br />
Receiver Pressure (psi)<br />
0.075<br />
0.05<br />
0.025<br />
PW-1<br />
PW-2<br />
PW-4<br />
PW-3<br />
80<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
Source Flow Rate (gpm)<br />
Receiver Pressure (psi)<br />
0.075<br />
0.05<br />
0.025<br />
PW-1<br />
PW-4<br />
PW-2<br />
PW-3<br />
80<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
Source Flow Rate (gpm)<br />
10<br />
10<br />
0<br />
0<br />
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1<br />
Time (mins)<br />
0<br />
0<br />
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1<br />
Time (mins)<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 20
Conclusions<br />
Groundwater monitoring well water level data insufficient to<br />
quantify PRB permeability or clogging issues<br />
PRB Slurry Wall Construction Method<br />
° Reduced residence time within the PRB could be due to<br />
partial clogging <strong>of</strong> PRB faces (skin effect) during construction<br />
° Jetting and surging to remove PRB skin virtually impossible to<br />
achieve<br />
<strong>Hydraulic</strong> <strong>Pulse</strong> Interference Test<br />
° Ideal to quantify hydraulic impact <strong>of</strong> PRB and partial<br />
clogging issues<br />
° Test very sensitive to hydrogeological conditions between<br />
source and receiver wells<br />
° Test can quantify PRB skin effects<br />
° Simple and straightforward test<br />
RTDF03.ppt<br />
©GeoSierra LLC 21
Change language