Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> MAR 06 '08 20.29 EXCELTECHi5F P,B <br /> Kayo OII Company EXCI aTICH March 5, 1983 <br /> Protect No. 1813G Page 6 <br /> I ANALYSIS <br /> s <br /> Analysis of data was conducted on MW-22 and MW-31. Data for MW-30 was <br /> recovered only for the time the slug was in the well. Measurements were not <br /> recovdred for the time after the slug was withdrawn from ground-water due to <br /> Instrument failure. Analysis of aquifer response at well MW-30 was therefore <br /> not performed. <br /> F l <br /> 1 00 <br /> r Figure 2 illustrates the logarithmic plot of a recovery in feet versus elapsed <br /> time in minutes for the slug test conducted at this well. The data points begin <br /> „e to deviate from a straight line past 0.117 minutes (7.02 seconds) Into the test. <br /> By combining the Information generated by extending the straight line portion <br /> of the data points before 7.02 seconds into the test, with. the physical <br /> dimensions of the well (Figure 2a) into the Bouwer and Rice equation, a <br /> !m hydraulic conductivity of 6.8 meters per day (M/DAY) for the aquifer was <br /> calculated. Multiplying this value. by the effective saturated thickness of the <br /> aquifer (5.2 feet) yields the transmissivity of 10.8 square meters per day (80 ' <br /> M/DAY) or 871 gallons per day per foot of aquifer thickness (GPD/FT). <br /> � r <br /> Figura 3 illustrates the. logarithmic plot of recovery in feet versus elapsed . <br /> time in minutes.for the slug test conducted at MW-3. The data points begin to ' <br /> deviate from a straight line 0.67 minutes (40.2 seconds) into the test. <br /> g..-the- Information—generated-in--the- lot,withthe-physical-dinl6n3ions <br /> of the well (Figure 3a), into the Bouwer and Rice equation, yields a hyd,aulic <br /> conductivity of 25.1 M/DAY. Multiplying this value by the effective saturated <br /> thickness of the aquifer (5.2 feet) yields a transmissivity of 39.7 SQ M/DAY or <br /> 'f 3198 GPD/FT. <br /> r <br />