Transport parameters and contaminant data - Revision history

Klmos at 15:08, 24 April 2019

2019-04-24T15:08:58Z

Klmos at 09:17, 11 April 2019

2019-04-11T09:17:23Z

Klmos at 15:36, 9 February 2018

2018-02-09T15:36:42Z

Klmos: /* Transport parameters */

2018-02-07T19:27:44Z

‎Transport parameters

Klmos at 19:13, 7 February 2018

2018-02-07T19:13:45Z

Klmos at 22:22, 5 February 2018

2018-02-05T22:22:13Z

Klmos at 22:21, 5 February 2018

2018-02-05T22:21:35Z

Klmos: /* Contaminant data */

2018-02-05T22:18:42Z

‎Contaminant data

Klmos: /* Contaminant data */

2018-02-05T22:14:06Z

‎Contaminant data

Klmos at 22:08, 5 February 2018

2018-02-05T22:08:51Z

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
+|
 == Transport parameters ==
-Advective transport happens due to the groundwater flow.
+Advective transport happens with the groundwater flow.
 However, to describe the transport of a substance in a fractured limestone aquifer properly, additional parameters are required.
 Important transport parameters that influence the migration of a substance are
-* diffusion coefficient of the substance in the limestone (often estimated as molecular diffusion coefficient times the tortuosity or porosity of the limestone)
+* effective matrix diffusion coefficient of the substance in the limestone (often estimated as molecular diffusion coefficient times the tortuosity or porosity of the limestone)
-* dispersivities (may be less important, if fracture flow dominates)
+* dispersivities (dispersion may be less important, if fracture flow dominates and if the hydraulic conductivity of the matrix is low)
 * sorption coefficient (organic carbon is usually low in limestone)
 * limestone porosity
@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 At the Akacievej site, this yielded porosity values between 7 and 46 %, with a strong variation with depth.
 The determined hydraulic conductivity values were correlated to the porosity (and limestone hardness) and were in the range of between 5x10<sup>-11</sup> and 10<sup>-6</sup> m/s, see
-<ref name="Broholm2016a"> Broholm et al. (2016a), ''Sammenligning af niveauspecifikke prøvetagningsmetoder for vurdering af knocentrationsfordeling i kalkmagasin: Akacievej, Hedehusene.'' Technical University of Denmark, DTU Environment</ref>.
+<ref name="Broholm2016a"> Broholm et al. (2016a), ''[[:Media:Sammenligning_af_niveauspecifikke_prøvetagningsmetoder.pdf|Sammenligning af niveauspecifikke prøvetagningsmetoder for vurdering af koncentrationsfordeling i kalkmagasin.]]'' DTU Environment</ref>.
 == Sampling methods to determine contaminant data ==
@@ Line 43: / Line 43: @@
 However, limestone has a very varying hardness and may be unstable.
 This complicates the collection of representative samples as well as the subsampling of the collected cores in the laboratory.
-Soft limestone material is often lost when taking a borehole core.
+Soft limestone material is often lost when extracting a borehole core.
-The concentration in the softer more porous material is thereby not represented and as a consequence, the core analysis may lead to inadequate vertical delineation.
+The concentration in the softer, more porous material is thereby not represented and as a consequence, the core analysis may lead to inadequate vertical delineation of the contaminant distribution.
 In situations where larger areas of the subsurface (e.g. the crushed zone) is lost during coring, the lack of data could lead to a wrong conceptual model.
 [[File:BladderPump.jpg|thumb|200px| Fig. 2: Bladder pump.]]

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 In the limestone project, a forced-gradient tracer test with several injection wells and a central pumping well for tracer monitoring was conducted.
 Details are described in the following report:
-<!-- * [[:Media:Pumping_and_tracer_test_report.pdf |Report about the pumping and tracer test at Akacievej (PDF)]]. -->
+* [[:Media:Pumping_and_tracer_test_report.pdf |Report about the pumping and tracer tests at Akacievej, Hedehusene (PDF)]]
 Furthermore, measurements from core material can be used to determine the porosity and hydraulic conductivity of a limestone sample, for example using gas permeameter and porosimeter (Poroperm test).
@@ Line 75: / Line 74: @@
 * NAPL-FLUTe (detection of DNAPL)
 * Water FLUTe
-* FACT-FLUTe (dissolved concentrations) <ref name="Broholm2016b"> Broholm et al. (2016b), ''Characterization of chlorinated solvent contamination in limestone using innovative FLUTe technologies in combination with other methods in a line of evidence approach'', Journal of Contaminant Hydrogeology</ref>
+* FACT-FLUTe (dissolved concentrations) <ref name="Broholm2016b"> Broholm et al. (2016b), ''Characterization of chlorinated solvent contamination in limestone using innovative FLUTe technologies in combination with other methods in a line of evidence approach'', Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 189, 68-85</ref>
 * Passive flux meters for fractured aquifers

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 Details are described in the following report:
 <!-- * [[:Media:Pumping_and_tracer_test_report.pdf |Report about the pumping and tracer test at Akacievej (PDF)]]. -->
-Mosthaf et al., 2016: Pumping and tracer test in a limestone aquifer and model interpretation <ref>Mosthaf et al. (2016), ''Pumping and tracer test in a limestone aquifer and model interpretation'', DTU Environment</ref>
+Mosthaf et al., 2016: Pumping and tracer test in a limestone aquifer and model interpretation <ref>Mosthaf et al. (2016), ''Pumping and tracer test in a limestone aquifer and model interpretation'', DTU Environment</ref>.
 Furthermore, measurements from core material can be used to determine the porosity and hydraulic conductivity of a limestone sample, for example using gas permeameter and porosimeter (Poroperm test).
 At the Akacievej site, this yielded porosity values between 7 and 46 %, with a strong variation with depth.
 The determined hydraulic conductivity values were correlated to the porosity (and limestone hardness) and were in the range of between 5x10<sup>-11</sup> and 10<sup>-6</sup> m/s, see
-<ref name="Broholm2016a"> Broholm et al. (2016a), ''Sammenligning af niveauspecifikke prøvetagningsmetoder for vurdering af knocentrationsfordeling i kalkmagasin: Akacievej, Hedehusene.'' Technical University of Denmark, DTU Environment.</ref>
+<ref name="Broholm2016a"> Broholm et al. (2016a), ''Sammenligning af niveauspecifikke prøvetagningsmetoder for vurdering af knocentrationsfordeling i kalkmagasin: Akacievej, Hedehusene.'' Technical University of Denmark, DTU Environment</ref>.
 == Sampling methods to determine contaminant data ==

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 Furthermore, measurements from core material can be used to determine the porosity and hydraulic conductivity of a limestone sample, for example using gas permeameter and porosimeter (Poroperm test).
 At the Akacievej site, this yielded porosity values between 7 and 46 %, with a strong variation with depth.
-The determined hydraulic conductivity values were correlated to the porosity (and limestone hardness) and were in the range of between 5x10-11 and 10-6 m/s, see
+The determined hydraulic conductivity values were correlated to the porosity (and limestone hardness) and were in the range of between 5x10<sup>-11</sup> and 10<sup>-6</sup> m/s, see
 <ref name="Broholm2016a"> Broholm et al. (2016a), ''Sammenligning af niveauspecifikke prøvetagningsmetoder for vurdering af knocentrationsfordeling i kalkmagasin: Akacievej, Hedehusene.'' Technical University of Denmark, DTU Environment.</ref>

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 In the limestone project, a forced-gradient tracer test with several injection wells and a central pumping well for tracer monitoring was conducted.
 Details are described in the following report:
-* [[:Media:Pumping_and_tracer_test_report.pdf |Report about the pumping and tracer test at Akacievej (PDF)]].
+<!-- * [[:Media:Pumping_and_tracer_test_report.pdf |Report about the pumping and tracer test at Akacievej (PDF)]]. -->
 Furthermore, measurements from core material can be used to determine the porosity and hydraulic conductivity of a limestone sample, for example using gas permeameter and porosimeter (Poroperm test).

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 <ref name="Broholm2016a"> Broholm et al. (2016a), ''Sammenligning af niveauspecifikke prøvetagningsmetoder for vurdering af knocentrationsfordeling i kalkmagasin: Akacievej, Hedehusene.'' Technical University of Denmark, DTU Environment.</ref>
-== Contaminant data ==
+== Sampling methods to determine contaminant data ==
 [[File:Core-analysis.jpg|thumb|200px| Fig.1: Extraction of samples from a borehole core for the lab analysis of PCE and TCE.]]
 Different sampling and monitoring techniques to determine the depth-discrete contaminant distribution in boreholes have been developed.

@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 The passive sampling is based on the assumption that the flow is horizontal and laminar at the screen, whereby the most representative data is achieved by a minimum disturbance of the flow.
 However, this flow assumption may not always be valid and the (semi-)passive methods are vulnerable to e.g. vertical flow in the well.
-[[File:SnapSampler2.jpg|thumb|200px| Fig. 3: Snap sampler.]]
+[[File:SnapSampler2.jpg|thumb|200px| Fig. 4: Snap sampler.]]
 The following sampling methods were utilized at the long screened wells at the Akacievej site:

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 The concentration in the softer more porous material is thereby not represented and as a consequence, the core analysis may lead to inadequate vertical delineation.
 In situations where larger areas of the subsurface (e.g. the crushed zone) is lost during coring, the lack of data could lead to a wrong conceptual model.
 Depth-discrete concentrations can also be obtained by water sampling in the borehole.
 Water sampling is a good supplement to the core sampling, especially in depths intervals with high core losses or when a temporal development in the concentrations needs to be monitored.
 The sampling is done best from dedicated multilevel screens; however, this is not always an option, especially in unstable limestone.
 Water sampling is generally divided into active and passive sampling methods.
@@ Line 57: / Line 59: @@
 The passive sampling is based on the assumption that the flow is horizontal and laminar at the screen, whereby the most representative data is achieved by a minimum disturbance of the flow.
 However, this flow assumption may not always be valid and the (semi-)passive methods are vulnerable to e.g. vertical flow in the well.
 The following sampling methods were utilized at the long screened wells at the Akacievej site: