Set Ascending Direction

1-10 of 27

Page:
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3

Monitoring a Remediation Process in Real-Time

Friday, 8 September 2017 17:50:35 Europe/London

Aqua Troll 600 Sonde

Aqua Troll 600 Sonde

High-resolution monitoring saves time (and money!) 

It’s not often I get excited by new products, but I was recently given access to some real-time monitoring data collected by the new In-Situ Aqua TROLL 600 multiparameter water quality sonde, which has really excited me with the possibilities of the instrument. I shall be presenting the story behind the data at the Contaminated Land Expo at London’s Excel Centre on the 27th and 28th of September 2017, so to get the complete picture come along to one of the presentations either at 1:30 pm on 27th or 12:00 pm on 28th in Seminar Theatre 13.

For this blog, I thought I’d share a snapshot of the data record with you to give a flavour of what can be achieved by real-time, high-resolution monitoring. 

Background and Data Record

Five In-Situ Aqua TROLL 600 Multiparameter Sondes were positioned in monitoring boreholes 50 to 100 metres downgradient of another borehole used to inject a colloidal remediation fluid into a chlorinated solvent contamination source. The sondes were programmed to collect data every 15 minutes. The screen shot below shows the monitoring record from one of these locations over a period of 2 weeks following injection (each vertical line represents a 2 day period). Data was collected remotely and transmitted several times per day to  In-Situ’s web-based platform, HydroVu Data Services

 

HydroVu Data Record (with annotated notes)

Notes on Data Record

The main objective of monitoring was to try and identify the direction and speed of movement of the remediation fluid. Turbidity was chosen as an indicator to detect the presence of any (black) carbon-based reagent as it was diluted into the groundwater flow. 

The graphical record shows a signifcant rise in turbidity (by 8 NTU) three days after the end of the injection works. This continued for a further 6 days before water quality returned to background concentrations.

Other physical and chemical changes reinforced the interpretation that this change could only have arisen from the injection process.

  • A reduction in electrical conductivity by 200 uS/cm following the passage of the turbidity trace correlates with the addition of clean water following injection to help flush the remediation agent out of the borehole and into the groundwater system.
  • A rise and fall in pH may be associated with the passage of remediation agent (small rise in pH) and the passage of the flush water (lowering of pH).
  • A rise in water level (the graph is inverted) by 10 cm coincides with the addition of fluids. There was no rainfall during the monitoring period.
  • The temperature change is erratic, but shows changes which also correlate with the passage of injection fluids.

All the observed changes are relatively small compared to background and relatively short-lived. It is unlikely these changes would have been detected using conventional field sampling and analysis methods. 

In this case, high-resolution measurements identified changes in water quality which convincingly demonstrated the passage of the remediation fluid at the monitoring borehole.

This enabled a series of technical decisions to be taken very quickly to re-focus the remediation effort, which saved considerable time (and money) toward achieving effective remediation at the site.

 

©Peter Dumble 2017
Peter.Dumble@pdhydrogeology.com

 This study was conducted by Adam Hobson and his colleagues at S.S. Papadopulos & Associates in the United States.  Adam will be pesenting this study at two upcoming conferences: 1) the National Ground Water Association (NGWA) Conference on Fractured Rock and Groundwater on 3 October and 2) the NGWA Groundwater Summit on 4 December.

The links to the abstracts are:

Fractured Rock and Groundwater:

https://ngwa.confex.com/ngwa/frc17/webprogram/Paper11563.html

Groundwater Summit: https://ngwa.confex.com/ngwa/2017gws/webprogram/Paper11745.html

 

 

Posted in Pete's Blog By News

Electrical Conductivity Validation and Salinity A Cautionary Tale?

Thursday, 3 August 2017 21:15:09 Europe/London

Electrical Conductivity Validation and Salinity

A Cautionary Tale?

Read More
Posted in Pete's Blog By News

Part 2: Inconsistent guidance

In Part 2 of his article on the guidance for Low Flow Sampling hydrogeologist Peter Dumble highlights some of the variances between official publications and some notable research.

Read More
Posted in Pete's Blog By Peter Dumble

Low Flow Groundwater Sampling – a misunderstood methodology?

Monday, 5 June 2017 17:16:29 Europe/London

Part 1: Evolution of Technical Guidance

Peter Dumble looks at how the guidance for low flow purging and sampling protocols has developed in part one of a two part article on low flow groundwater sampling.

Read More
Posted in Pete's Blog By Peter Dumble


groundwater trainingOver 1000 delegates, 23 years and still in demand.

It is 23 years since the first groundwater training courses started at Cranfield University in 1994.  Well over 1000 delegates have attended these courses, mainly from the UK and Ireland with the occasional overseas visitor. You may well be one of those.

It is useful to reflect on how these courses have evolved and why they are still needed and relevant for today, so here’s a quick history of the groundwater sampling training course.

 

Read More
Posted in Pete's Blog By Peter Dumble

Robin Hazell 1927 to 2017

Friday, 31 March 2017 10:17:00 Europe/London

A life in Hydrogeology

Peter looks back at the life and career of influential hydrogeologist Robin Hazell who passed away in February. Robin Hazell was a long-time member of the IAH (International Association of Hydrogeologists) and noted as a mentor for successive generations of hydrogeologists.

Read More
Posted in Pete's Blog By Peter Dumble

Is barometric compensation always necessary?

Friday, 3 March 2017 09:30:00 Europe/London

Rationalising uncertainty when using total pressure loggers for groundwater level measurements

Peter Dumble discusses whether it is justifiable, in some circumstances, to use unvented total pressure loggers for water level measurements without post-correcting the data for variation in atmospheric (barometric) pressure.

Read More
Posted in Pete's Blog By Peter Dumble

Purge Volumes in Groundwater Sampling - Part 2

Monday, 30 January 2017 09:56:07 Europe/London

Differences between purge volume calculations

In his last blog post Peter discussed a range of purge volume methods.  In part 2 of this post he looks in detail at the numbers involved and analyses the difference between the methods.

 

Read More
Posted in Pete's Blog By Peter Dumble

Purge Volumes in Groundwater Sampling - Part 1

Wednesday, 4 January 2017 09:33:42 Europe/London

Science vs Guidance

Whilst acceptance of low flow and passive sampling methods are gaining ground, most technical guidance documents still recommend full purging of wells and boreholes prior to sampling. But how much water needs to be purged to achieve “full purging” – and what is the basis of these recommendations? 

Peter Dumble takes a look at 4 different approaches to calculating purge volumes.

 

Read More
Posted in Pete's Blog By Peter Dumble

Groundwater Level Monitoring using Telemetry in Sierra Leone

Thursday, 1 December 2016 14:46:19 Europe/London

Experimental trial in a developing country – The good and the bad

Peter Dumble shares some practical experience from a telemetry trial carried out in Sierra Leone to collect groundwater level monitoring data.

 

Read More
Posted in Pete's Blog By Peter Dumble
Set Ascending Direction

1-10 of 27

Page:
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3