5.1 Combining slug test methods with the use of direct push installed groundwater sampling devices provides a time and cost-effective method that was previously not available for evaluating spatial variations of hydraulic conductivity (K) in unconsolidated aquifers. Current research (Ref (4)) has found that small (decimeter) scale variations in hydraulic conductivity may have significant influence on solute transport and therefore design of groundwater remediation systems. Other investigators (Ref (5)) report that spatial variation in K is believed to be the main source of uncertainty in the prediction of contaminant transport in aquifers. They found that increasing the data density for K in model input noticeably reduced the uncertainty of model prediction. Because of increased efficiency and reduced costs, the combination of slug test methods with DP groundwater sampling devices makes it possible to obtain the additional information required to reduce uncertainty in contaminant transport models and improve remedial action design.
5.2 The data obtained from application of this practice may be modeled with the appropriate analytical method to provide information on the transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity of the screened formation in a timely and cost effective manner.
5.3 The appropriate analytical method selected for analysis of the data will depend on several factors, including, but not limited to, the aquifer type (confined, unconfined, leaky) well construction parameters (partially or fully penetrating), and the type of aquifer response observed during the slug test (overdamped or underdamped). Some of the appropriate methods may include Test Methods D4104, D5785, D5881 and D5912. A thorough review of many slug test models and analytical methods is provided in Ref (1).
5.4 Slug tests may be conducted in materials of lower hydraulic conductivity than are suitable for pumping tests. Slug tests may be used to obtain estimates of K for aquitards consisting primarily of silts and clays. Special field procedures may be required.
5.5 The pneumatic slug test provides some advantages when compared to pumping tests or slug tests conducted by other methods.
5.5.1 Some of the advantages relative to pump tests include:
5.5.1.1 No water added to or removed from the well. An important consideration when water quality must not be altered for purposes of environmental sampling.
5.5.1.2 Large volumes of water not removed from the well as during a pumping test. An important consideration if the groundwater is contaminated and will require disposal as a regulated waste.
5.5.1.3 Slug tests usually require only a fraction of the time needed to complete a pump test.
5.5.1.4 No large diameter pumping well or down well pump required.
5.5.1.5 Slug tests provide information on K for the formation in the vicinity of the well.
5.5.2 Some advantages relative to slug tests using water or a mechanical slug include:
5.5.2.1 No water added to or removed from the well or DP sampler to conduct the test. Generally does not change water quality for sampl......
Copyright ©2024 All Rights Reserved