r1 epa well dynamics
DESCRIPTION
This presentation was given to Region 1 EPA. It illustrates flow, transport and mixing that can occur in monitoring wells in ambient conditions and during pumping.TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
A Primer on Well-Scale Processes
and uses for the Snap Sampler
Ambient Flow-Through
Flow-Weighted Averaging vs. Stratification
Pump-Induced Flow Dynamics
A Primer on WellA Primer on Well--Scale Processes Scale Processes
and uses for the Snap Samplerand uses for the Snap Sampler
Ambient FlowAmbient Flow--ThroughThrough
FlowFlow--Weighted Averaging vs. Stratification Weighted Averaging vs. Stratification
PumpPump--Induced Flow DynamicsInduced Flow Dynamics
SANFORD L. BRITT, PG, CHGPrincipal Hydrogeologist
SANFORD L. BRITT, PG, CHGPrincipal Hydrogeologist
(585) [email protected]
ProHydro, Inc.Fairport, New York
ProHydro, Inc.Fairport, New YorkCAL/EPA
DTSC
![Page 2: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Groundwater Flow
Monitoring Well
UST
NAPL (Free Product) Flow In the Unsaturated zone
Dissolved phase transport inground water
Impact of NAPL at the water table Density important in NAPL phase
Volatilization of NAPL into soil gas
VaporResidualFree Product
Free Product
Dissolution into groundwater
Dissolved Contaminant
Site-Scale ProcessSubsurface Contaminant Transport and Monitoring
Density less important in dissolved phase (at least in the aquifer)
WHAT ABOUT THIS
SCALE?
![Page 3: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Ambient Flow-Through in Monitoring Wells:
• “Stagnant” wells?• Is there really “Horizontal
Laminar Flow?”• Flow-weighted averaging?
Homogeneous vs. Stratified:
• Contaminant inflow position• Density effects• Flow-weighted averaging
Vertical Gradient Flow:
• When does it occur?• How does it affect sampling?
Well-Scale Processes-Ambient
Part 1
![Page 4: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Flow to the well/within the well
• Hydraulically controlled• Infinite permeability inside the well
Purging• Well Volume• Low Flow
Parameter Stabilization
• Proxy for contaminant• 1:1 match?• Flow-weighted averaging?
Anecdotes
• Changing purge rate• Density effects
Well-Scale Processes-Pumped
Pumping
Part 2
![Page 5: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Flow to the well/within the well
• Mixing processes• Stabilization
Flow-weighted averaging
• Stratification testing• High correlations with traditional
methods
In Situ Sealing
• No Surface Pouring• No VOC loss• No Oxygen
Snap Sampler relies on Natural Well Processes
Part 3
![Page 6: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
“Horizontal Laminar Flow”
A conventional assumption—but does it occur in wells?
How does that assumption affect decision making?
Part 1
What does happen to stratified contaminants between sampling events?
?
?Maintain vertical position?
Reposition?
Mix and Average?
![Page 7: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Internal monitoring well processes largely remain a black box.
In many cases, all we get is one sample result
?How do you test internal
monitoring well dynamics?
Build a physical model
![Page 8: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Dye source with gravity feed to injection port
Simulated 4-inch well
Upgradient/ influent reservoir
Piezometers
Dye port
Constant head reservoir
Homer’s water supply bucket
Influent supply from constant head reservoir Effluent drain
Effluent reservoir
![Page 9: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
P3070009@ 3/07/03 1217atest start 420p on 3/06/03calc. dye density: 0.999986 g/cc-1:00 hrs. since dye emerged seepage velocity: 0.47 ft/day
72 cm vertical
flow
50 cm50 cm
7 cm deep
10 cm wide
flow
flow
flow
![Page 10: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
P3070011@ 3/07/03 217atest start 420p on 3/06/03calc. dye density: 0.999986 g/cc1:00 hrs. since dye emerged seepage velocity: 0.47 ft/day
Dye
Clear water
Clear water
![Page 11: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
P3070017@ 3/07/03 817atest start 420p on 3/06/03calc. dye density: 0.999986 g/cc7:00 hrs. since dye emerged seepage velocity: 0.47 ft/day
![Page 12: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
P3070031@ 3/07/03 1017ptest start 420p on 3/06/03calc. dye density: 0.999986 g/cc21:00 hrs. since dye emerged seepage velocity: 0.34 ft/day
![Page 13: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
P3080046 @ 3/08/03 117ptest start 420p on 3/06/03calc. dye density: 0.999986 g/cc36:00 hrs. since dye emerged seepage velocity: 0.55 ft/day
![Page 14: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
P3090070 @ 3/09/03 117ptest start 420p on 3/06/03calc. dye density: 0.999986 g/cc 60:00 hrs. since dye emerged seepage velocity: 0.46 ft/day
![Page 15: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Britt, SL, 2005, Testing the In-Well Horizontal Laminar Flow Assumption with a Sand Tank Well Model. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation 25, no. 3 p.73-81
percent of initial dye concentration
33%
40%
35%
Flow weighted averaging
![Page 16: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Studies with the Polyethylene Diffusion Bag (PDB)
Sampler:
~80% of wells show little or no stratification
Causes:
1. Contaminants not stratified in the aquifer
2. Flow Weighted Averaging in the well
3. Vertical Flow
![Page 17: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
For those wells that doshow ambient stratification:
Aquifer must be stratified
But what causes contaminants to maintain stratification?
Entry point Density differential Pressure gradient
!! Contaminants may stratify at different intervals than they enter !!
![Page 18: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
P21000024 @ 2/10/03 1240atest start 0900 on 2/9/03calc. dye density: 0.999996 g/cc10:06 hrs. since dye emergedseepage velocity: 1.08 ft/day
~1-4 x 10-5 higher density
![Page 19: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
P21000060 @ 2/10/03 0640atest start 0900 on 2/9/03calc. dye density: 0.999996 g/cc 16:06 hrs. since dye emerged seepage velocity: 1.08 ft/day
~1-4 x 10-5 higher density
![Page 20: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
P21000059 @ 2/10/03 1038ptest start 0900 on 2/9/03calc. dye density: 0.999996 g/cc32:04 hrs. since dye emergedseepage velocity: 0.90 ft/day
~1-4 x 10-5 higher density
![Page 21: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
P2210125@ 2/21/03 0325ptest start 1120a on 2/20/03calc. dye density: 0.999935 g/cc16:00 hrs. since dye emerged= seepage velocity: 0.79 ft/day
~1-4 x 10-5 lower density
![Page 22: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
P2220081@ 2/22/03 0734ptest start 1120a on 2/20/03calc. dye density: 0.999935 g/cc 44:09 hrs. since dye emergedseepage velocity: 0.74 ft/day
~1-4 x 10-5 lower density
![Page 23: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
P2230046@ 2/23/03 1134ptest start 1120a on 2/20/03calc. dye density: 0.999935 g/cc 72:09 hrs. since dye emergedseepage velocity: 0.54 ft/day
~1-4 x 10-5 lower density
![Page 24: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Common Possible Possible Rare, if ever
![Page 25: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Got Heterogeneity?
Heterogeneous Sand Tank Well Model at NFESC
![Page 26: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Dye introduced in high K zone
Velocity = x
Velocity = ~8x
Dye enters well only here {
Bulk velocity is 0.5 ft/day
• High K unit ~1.6 ft/day• Low K unit ~0.2 ft/day
High K unit contributes ~2/3of the well’s inflow volume
Dye migrates verticallyin both directions
6h 9h 12h 15h 18h
![Page 27: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Flow-weighted averaging
effect may be prevalent under ambient conditions
No “Horizontal Laminar Flow”
Concept not replicated in the physical model study
![Page 28: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Multilevel data useful for interpretation
Useful for selection of single sampling interval
Contaminant Stratification
Reflects aquifer stratification
May not show direct 1:1 correspondence
![Page 29: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Active Sampling Methods
Water chemistry changes as a well is pumped
Why does chemistry change?
“Stagnant” water?
Or
A varying mix of water entering the pump?
Pumping
Part 2
![Page 30: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
End Cap
Sand Pack
Grout
Pump IntakeScreen Zone
Actual Monitoring Zone
Varljen, et al., 2006, Numerical Simulations to Assess the Monitoring Zone Achieved during Low-Flow Purging and Sampling, GWMR, 26: p. 44-52
Hydraulics controls flow
But purge time controls what water comes from the pump
![Page 31: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Stability parameters monitored
Proxy for contaminant
Stability could occur…
early in pumping or late
Depends on:
Pre-purge well stratification Stratification in the aquifer Inflow characteristics Shadow effects in the aquifer Density effects
How you measure
Pumping
![Page 32: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Well Purging is Designed to Collect Representative Samples
But how effective is it?
Gibs and Imbrigiotta (1990) showed 3 well volume purging resulted in purge stability parameter stabilization 84% of the time, and VOC contaminant stabilization only 55% of the time. Groundwater, v. 28, p. 68-78
Martin-Hayden (2000) indicated contaminant stratification in the aquifer outside the well may result in relatively large purge volumes to achieve a flow-weighted average—5 well volumes may be needed to achieve 95% of the flow-weighed average. Groundwater, v.38, p. 12-19
![Page 33: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
���
���
���
���
� � � �
���
�� �
�����
� ��
����������������������
������������������
����������������������
������������������
��������
������ ��� �� �
�����
���� �� ������ �� ��������������� !"!��
What controls when a FWA is achieved?
• Stratified or Unstratified Contaminant
• Inflow Location
• Pump position relative to stratification
Zero volume purge and late-time purge often closest to FWA
Martin-Hayden, 2000, Sample Concentration Response to Laminar Wellbore Flow: Implications to Ground Water Data Variability, Ground Water 38: p. 12-19.
![Page 34: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Questions to Answer
What other factors impact purge stability?
and how do you KNOW that reflects a “representative” sample?
More Experiments…
• Density effects on purge capture
• Flow rate changes
![Page 35: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
P2260032@ 2/26/03 0312ptest start 0312p on 2/26/03Dye density 0.999935 g/ccTime elapsed pumping 0:00flow rate = 150 ml/minCumulative flow = 0 0 WV
Discharge from bottom
Dye traceInjected dye
Density Effects During Purging
![Page 36: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
P2260048@ 2/26/03 0344ptest start 0312p on 2/26/03Dye density 0.999935 g/cc Time elapsed pumping 0:32flow rate = 150 ml/minCumulative flow = 4.8L 1 WV
Note dye slugs move horizontally
Density Effects During Purging
![Page 37: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
P2260067@ 2/26/03 0423ptest start 0312p on 2/26/03Dye density 0.999935 g/cc Time elapsed pumping 1:11flow rate = 150 ml/minCumulative flow = 10.65L 2WV
“light” dye moves up despite
pumping from the bottom
Density Effects During Purging
![Page 38: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
P2260082@ 2/26/03 0453ptest start 0312p on 2/26/03Dye density 0.999935 g/cc Time elapsed pumping 1:41flow rate = 150 ml/minCumulative flow = 15.15L 3WV
Density Effects During Purging
![Page 39: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
P2260096@ 2/26/03 0522ptest start 0312p on 2/26/03Dye density 0.999935 g/cc Time elapsed pumping 2:10flow rate = 150 ml/minCumulative flow = 19.50 4WV
Density Effects During Purging
![Page 40: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Rhodamine WT Fluorescence Results3-21-03, light dye in middle port, pump from middle
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
W ell V o lumes
DyePump ResultTop of Well ResultBottom of Well ResultFlow Weighted Average (est.)
Rhodamine FluorescenceLight dye entering center, pump from bottom
![Page 41: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Reducing Purge Rate Prior to Sampling:
Good practice to limit VOC losses?
…or trading one problem for another?
• Historic understanding that filling bottles at a high rate may cause VOC loss during sampling
• Recognition of the advantages of low-flow purging
• In-well flow dynamics during purging and sampling hard to examine
![Page 42: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Reducing flow rate as acceptable practice.
Historically….USEPA, September 1985, Practical Guide for Ground-Water Sampling, EPA 600/2-85/104
Rate should be kept to a minimum. Reduce sampler purge rate to desired 100 ml/minute during sampling
Recently… USEPA, May 2002, Ground-Water Sampling Guidelines for Superfund and RCRA Project Managers, EPA 542-S-02-001
“…samples will be collected by lowering the flow rate to a rate that minimizes aeration of the sample while filling the bottles (approximately 300 ml/min).”
ASTM, March 2002, Standard Practice for Low Flow Purging and Sampling For wells and devices used for ground-water quality investigations, D 6771-02
“…pumping rate may remain at the established purging rate or it may be adjusted downward…”
![Page 43: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
No flowNo drawdown
250 ml/min0.10 ft drawdown
1000 ml/min0.50 ft drawdown
Changing Flow Rate
![Page 44: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
30 seconds 7:00 minutes4:00 minutes 9:00 minutes
For suspense….
Drawdown Stable water level, stable concentrationStart Pumping with Tracer
13:00 minutesstable
20:00 minutespump rate down
Changing Flow Rate
![Page 45: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
30 secondspump rate down
Resulting in….
2:00 minutespump rate down
3:00 minutespump rate down
5:00 minutespump rate down
7:00 minutespump rate down
9:00 minutespump rate down
Reduce flow rate, reduce drawdown
Casing drawdown recovery is faster than upper zone
inflow rate…
…Displacing tracer slug away from pump intake
Changing Flow Rate
![Page 46: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Concentration stable in 9-13
minutes
Reduce pump rate
Large tracer concentration drop
concentration re-equilibrates in 5-7 minutes
(after you’re done sampling)
Temporarily overweight water entering below the pump intake
Changing Flow Rate
![Page 47: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Averaging of inflow occurs in the pump tubing, not in the well
Lots of action occurs in the “Black Box”
Utmost care is required to maintain consistency-disruption is easy
Pumping
Purge parameters need close watch
![Page 48: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
• Cal/EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control
• U.S. Air Force; U.S. Navy
• Dr. James Martin-Hayden, University of Toledo
• Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC) Diffusion Sampler Workgroup
CAL/EPA
DTSC
![Page 49: R1 Epa Well Dynamics](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062405/5576d8cdd8b42a87588b4a5b/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
MW-17 Phenol
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200Oc t-
03Ja
n-0 4
Apr-0
4Ju
l-04
Oc t-04
Jan-
0 5A pr
-05
Jul-0
5Oc t-
05Ja
n-0 6
Apr-0
6Ju
l-06
Oc t-06
Date
Conc
entra
tion
mg/
L
PurgeSnap, open wellSnap w/ isolators
?
?
?
Purge Snap Sampler (open well)
Snap Sampler
(w/ baffles)
Snap Sampler
(open well)
333
327
293
346
0.004
6.53
118
710
In-well mixing inhibitors:isolating inflow zones