Laserfiche WebLink
-ME3Y <br /> 6 <br /> Interpretation of 3.5 gpm Pumping Teot <br /> Sehastiani Vineyard Site <br /> 4614 West Turner Road <br /> Lodi, CA <br /> Test Fr,xmat: <br /> �R A four hour constant rate pumping test was conducted on. December <br /> 14, ` 1989 at the above site. Well MW2 was utilized for production ` <br /> and wells MW1, MW3, MW4 and MW6 were monitored during pumping. A <br /> ` total pumping period of 4 hours was monitored. <br /> Instrumentation <br /> Drawdowns were monitored with solinst conductivity meters. The <br /> pumping rate was determined using a stopwatch and graduated <br /> cylinder. <br /> Test Results <br /> Semilog drawdown plots for the production well (MW2) and the <br /> nearest observation well (MW3 ) are plotted on the attached <br /> figures. Several problems were incurred in .interpreting the <br /> test. Due to these problems the data from wells 1, 4, and 6 was <br /> unanalyzable. . <br /> The most significant-.was the errati.c .drawdown response: . . This is <br /> due la7gn1 y" to.`the effects , from• the facility well which ..tripped <br /> :on intermi'ttentl,y duringthe test. " It was observed that three of <br /> the monitoring wells showed rapid, though small responses to the <br /> facility well production. The plot for the pumping well (MW2) <br /> shows small increases in drawdown which last for short periods of <br /> time (ex. 3-8 minutes into the test). <br /> Ignoring the short term increases, a straight line segment can be <br /> identified on the plot for well MW2 with a slope of approximately <br /> 0.10 ft/cycle. Using this value a transmissivity for MW2 of 9240 <br /> gpd/ft is calculated. For a saturated thickne of 17 feet this <br /> yields an hydraulic conductivity of 543 gpd/ft . This is twice <br /> as large as the value previously calculated from slug tests. <br /> A straight line segment can also be identified on the plot of <br /> monitoring well MW3. This well is 60 feet from MW2 and is <br /> completed to the same depth. The slope of this line is <br /> approximately 0.07 ft/cycle. This yields a transmis!�Lvity of <br /> 13200 gpd/ft and an hydraulic conductivity of 776 gpd/ft . Using <br /> the to value from the plot a storativity of 0.0075 is calculated. <br /> All calculations are conducted from the semilog data using the <br /> methods of Cooper and Jacob, 1946, "A generalized graphical <br /> method for evaluating formation constants" , Frans. Amer. <br /> Geophysical Union, V.27, No 4. <br />