The purpose of this study was to evaluate Lewis (2016) simple method to determine hydraulic conductivity in soil samples. This was conducted by comparing Lewis method to a slug-test, Guelph permeameter and calculations from grain size analysis in order to find out if the method is a reliable source for measuring hydraulic conductivity. Other parameters to compare is time consumption, cost effectiveness and area of use. Four different samples were used in the testing, a sand, two tills and pyrite ash (which is a rest product from manufacturing sulfite pulp). The results indicated that measurements in the homogenic sand all methods was in a good range of each other, while in the more heterogenic till the slug-test and Lewis method was close and the calculations from grainsize analysis was much lower. Only grainsize analysis was performed on the pyrite ash and the results was similar to Lewis method. This study shows that Lewis method works well as a reliable source for K measurements and is less time consuming than all the other methods. The material required for the method can be obtained in a hardware store.

Orientador: Maria Rita Caetano Chang / Banca: André Celligoi / Banca: Carlos de Almeida Nóbrega / Resumo: Utilizando-se de dados hidrogeológicos em área selecionada na cidade de Londrina (PR), foi realizada avaliação da vulnerabilidade natural do aqüífero constituído pelo manto de alteração das rochas basálticas da Formação Serra Geral, através da aplicação do índice DRASTIC. Este método possui características de simplicidade, de baixo custo, de fácil aplicação e é amplamente utilizado em estudos de vulnerabilidade natural. A caracterização da susceptibilidade do meio à poluição fornece subsídios para tomada de decisões quanto ao uso e ocupação do solo e conseqüentemente ao planejamento sócio-econômico. Na zona não-saturada, através dos ensaios de infiltração, obteve-se baixa permeabilidade dos solos, com variações entre 10-3 cm/s e 10-5 cm/s. Os ensaios de slug, na zona saturada, por sua vez, indicaram condutividade hidráulica de 10-1 a 10-4 cm/s, apresentando média ao redor de 10-2 cm/s. Dessa forma, o poluente ao atingir a zona dos saprolitos, tende a se espalhar rapidamente através das linhas de fluxo subterrâneo. O fluxo preferencial subterrâneo apresenta-se orientado de sul para norte, seguindo grosso modo o declive do terreno. Em geral, na área de estudo predomina a vulnerabilidade moderada, enquanto que nas proximidades do ribeirão Lindóia e nos divisores d'água, as vulnerabilidades foram classificadas como alta e baixa, respectivamente. / Abstract: The DRASTIC index was used for the evaluation of the natural vulnerability of groundwater constituted by the mantle of weathering of the basaltic rocks of the Serra Geral Formation. DRASTIC method was used in this evaluation, for its simplicity, low cost, easy application and it has been widely used for analysis of the natural vulnerability. The characterization of the enviromental to the pollution supports the decisions about ground use and occupation for partner-economic planning. Hydraulic conductivities in the unsaturated and saturated zones, as well as the groundwater flow direction were determined. In the unsaturated zone, permeability of the soils is low, as reveled by infiltrations tests with ranging 10-3 cm/s to 10-5 cm/s. Hydraulic conductivity obtained from slug tests range from 10-1 to 10-4 cm/s, with average around 10-2 cm/s. The flow direction occurs from south to north, accompanying the general slope of the landscape. The pollutant when reaches the zone of the saprolite, tends to spread quickly through the groundwater flow lines. In general, the vulnerability of the studied area can be classified as moderate, while that in the water divide region and in the vicinity of ribeirão Lindóia, are ranked low and high, respectively. / Mestre

Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:26:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2005-04-11Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T19:13:11Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 santos_mm_me_rcla.pdf: 3370944 bytes, checksum: 430e0a04e4974c12aeac911e17927ebb (MD5) / Utilizando-se de dados hidrogeológicos em área selecionada na cidade de Londrina (PR), foi realizada avaliação da vulnerabilidade natural do aqüífero constituído pelo manto de alteração das rochas basálticas da Formação Serra Geral, através da aplicação do índice DRASTIC. Este método possui características de simplicidade, de baixo custo, de fácil aplicação e é amplamente utilizado em estudos de vulnerabilidade natural. A caracterização da susceptibilidade do meio à poluição fornece subsídios para tomada de decisões quanto ao uso e ocupação do solo e conseqüentemente ao planejamento sócio-econômico. Na zona não-saturada, através dos ensaios de infiltração, obteve-se baixa permeabilidade dos solos, com variações entre 10-3 cm/s e 10-5 cm/s. Os ensaios de slug, na zona saturada, por sua vez, indicaram condutividade hidráulica de 10-1 a 10-4 cm/s, apresentando média ao redor de 10-2 cm/s. Dessa forma, o poluente ao atingir a zona dos saprolitos, tende a se espalhar rapidamente através das linhas de fluxo subterrâneo. O fluxo preferencial subterrâneo apresenta-se orientado de sul para norte, seguindo grosso modo o declive do terreno. Em geral, na área de estudo predomina a vulnerabilidade moderada, enquanto que nas proximidades do ribeirão Lindóia e nos divisores d'água, as vulnerabilidades foram classificadas como alta e baixa, respectivamente. / The DRASTIC index was used for the evaluation of the natural vulnerability of groundwater constituted by the mantle of weathering of the basaltic rocks of the Serra Geral Formation. DRASTIC method was used in this evaluation, for its simplicity, low cost, easy application and it has been widely used for analysis of the natural vulnerability. The characterization of the enviromental to the pollution supports the decisions about ground use and occupation for partner-economic planning. Hydraulic conductivities in the unsaturated and saturated zones, as well as the groundwater flow direction were determined. In the unsaturated zone, permeability of the soils is low, as reveled by infiltrations tests with ranging 10-3 cm/s to 10-5 cm/s. Hydraulic conductivity obtained from slug tests range from 10-1 to 10-4 cm/s, with average around 10-2 cm/s. The flow direction occurs from south to north, accompanying the general slope of the landscape. The pollutant when reaches the zone of the saprolite, tends to spread quickly through the groundwater flow lines. In general, the vulnerability of the studied area can be classified as moderate, while that in the water divide region and in the vicinity of ribeirão Lindóia, are ranked low and high, respectively.

Det finns idag behov av att ta fram information om hur vatten flödar i marken. För att undersöka detta brukar det installeras grundvattenrör. Grundvattenrör används oftast i syfte att bevaka grundvattennivåer i marken men kan även användas för att utföra hydrauliska tester vars syfte är att skatta jordens hydrauliska egenskaper. Det är då framförallt den hydrauliska konduktiviteten som söks. Kunskap om markens hydrauliska konduktivitet är bland annat viktig för modellering av grundvattenflöden och beräkning av föroreningsspridning. Genom åren har det utvecklats ett antal hydrauliska tester för att ta fram hydrauliska egenskaper i jorden. Från de ursprungliga testerna med pumprör och observationsrör (interferenstester) har det tillkommit metoder för att genomföra tester i enskilda grundvattenrör. Idag kan bland annat pumptest och slugtest genomföras för att skatta hydrauliska egenskaper i enskilda grundvattenrör. Examensarbetet har undersökt olika hydrauliska tester som genomförs i enskilt grundvattenrör. Testerna har varit pumptest, injektionstest, slugtest med solid slug, slugtest med vatten och stigningsmätning. Testerna har genomförts i 11 olika grundvattenrör. Grundvattenrören har varit placerade i olika jordarter och akvifertyper. Alla tester har gjorts i alla rör för att kunna göra en jämförelse mellan testerna. Resultat från testerna visar att det föreligger en variation i skattade hydrauliska egenskaper när en jämförelse gjordes mellan alla slugtester och alla pumptester. Pumptesterna gav generellt en mindre variation mellan test och modellösning och visar sig därför mer oberoende av testtyp och val av modellösning. Slugtesterna visade skillnad i skattad hydraulisk konduktivitet beroende på modellösning. Modellösningarna Hyder mfl. (1994)/KGS och Dougherty-Babu (1984) för slugtest gav en högre skattning hydraulisk konduktivitet än pumptesterna medan modellösningen Bouwer-Rice (1976) gav en lägre skattning av hydraulisk konduktivitet än pumptesterna. Testerna skiljer sig åt när de genomförs i olika jordarter. I lågkonduktiva jordarter är det svårt att genomföra olika typer av pumptest då dessa är påverkade av brunnsmagasin och det krävs att pumpflödet är tillräckligt lågt för att grundvattenröret inte ska torrläggas eller svämma över. Därför är det rekommenderat att utföra slugtest i lågkonduktiva jordarter. I högkonduktiva jordarter är det rekommenderat att göra pumptester då slugtester genererar färre mätpunkter och kan därför leda till fel i modelleringen. / There is a need today to gain information on how water moves in the ground. Groundwater pipes are therefore installed to monitor the groundwater levels. These groundwater pipes can however be used to perform hydraulic tests to obtain information regarding hydraulic properties of the soil. Hydraulic tests are usually performed to investigate the water flow in the soil. This water flow is called hydraulic conductivity. Information on hydraulic conductivity is, for example, essential in modeling of pollutant transport. Several types of hydraulic tests have been developed throughout history in the purpose to investigate hydraulic properties in the soil. The original tests involved pumping tests where one pipe was pumped while an adjacent pipe was used to monitor water level changes. From these original pumping tests there has been a development where the methods can be applied in a single groundwater pipe. Typical single-well tests used today are pumping tests and slug tests. This thesis has investigated and evaluated different hydraulic test performed in single groundwater pipes. Two types of pumping test have been performed: pumping test with constant flow, where the water is pumped out from the pipe, and injection test where water is pumped into the pipe with a constant flow. Three types of slug test have been performed: slug test using a solid slug, slug test using water and rising head test. Slug test is a test where the water level in the pipe is rapidly lowered or raised. The time it takes for the water to return to the initial water level is measured and used to calculate the hydraulic conductivity of the soil. The tests have been performed in 11 different groundwater monitoring pipes. The groundwater pipes were situated in different types of soil and aquifers. All the tests were performed in all the pipes to be able to compare them. Different model solutions were used to analyze the measured data from the hydraulic tests. The results showed variation in estimated hydraulic conductivity when the average hydraulic conductivity of pumping tests and slug tests were compared. The different types of pumping tests had on average a small difference in hydraulic conductivity and the results were on average independent of model solution used. Depending on the model solution there was a difference in hydraulic conductivity for the slug tests. The model solutions of Hyder et al (1994)/KGS and Dougherty-Babu (1984) for slug test estimated over-all a higher hydraulic conductivity than the pumping tests while the model solution of Bouwer-Rice (1976) estimated over-all a lower hydraulic conductivity than the pumping tests. The results and performance of the tests behaved differently depending on the type of soil. It was difficult to perform pumping and injection tests in low conductivity soils due to well-bore storage in the groundwater pipe. It is therefore recommended to perform slug tests in low conductivity soils and pumping tests in high conductivity soil because slug tests generates fewer measurements than pumping tests and can cause errors in the modeling.