Analytical Solutions for Determination of Non-Steady- State and Steady-State Capture Zones

This paper presents analytical solutions for determining non-steady-state capture zones produced by a single recovery well and steady-state capture zones produced by multiple recovery wells. Analysis of non-steady-slate capture zones is based on the lime-dependent location of caplure zone stagnation points and the geometric similarity between steady-slate and non-steady-state capture zones. The analytical solution of steady-state capture zones is obtained from spatial variations of discharge potential across the capture zone boundary. Both capture zone analyses are based on the assumptions of uniform flow field with a constant hydraulic conductivity, the Dupuit assumption of insignificant vertical flow, a negligible delayed yield, and a fully penetrating well with a constant pumping rate. For a ground water pump-and-trcat remediation program, the pumping rate and well location design variables can be adjusted to ensure containment of the ground water contaminant plume.     

Capture Versus Capture Zones: Clarifying Terminology Related to Sources of Water to Wells

The term capture, related to the source of water derived from wells, has been used in two distinct yet related contexts by the hydrologic community. The first is a water‐budget context, in which capture refers to decreases in the rates of groundwater outflow and (or) increases in the rates of recharge along head‐dependent boundaries of an aquifer in response to pumping. The second is a transport context, in which capture zone refers to the specific flowpaths that define the three‐dimensional, volumetric portion of a groundwater flow field that discharges to a well. A closely related issue that has become associated with the source of water to wells is streamflow depletion, which refers to the reduction in streamflow caused by pumping, and is a type of capture. Rates of capture and streamflow depletion are calculated by use of water‐budget analyses, most often with groundwater‐flow models. Transport models, particularly particle‐tracking methods, are used to determine capture zones to wells. In general, however, transport methods are not useful for quantifying actual or potential streamflow depletion or other types of capture along aquifer boundaries. To clarify the sometimes subtle differences among these terms, we describe the processes and relations among capture, capture zones, and streamflow depletion, and provide proposed terminology to distinguish among them.     

Issues and Options in the Delineation of Well Capture Zones under Uncertainty

The delineation of wellhead protection areas (WHPAs) under uncertainty is still a challenge for heterogeneous porous media. For granular media, one option is to combine particle tracking (PT) with the Monte Carlo approach (PT‐MC) to account for geologic uncertainties. Fractured porous media, however, require certain restrictive assumptions under this approach. An alternative for all types of media is the capture probability (CP) approach, which is based on the solution of the standard advection‐dispersion equation in a backward mode, making use of the analogy between forward and backward transport processes. Within this context, we review the current controversy about the correct form of the conceptual model for transport, finding that the advection‐diffusion model, which represents the diffusive interchange between streamtubes with differing velocities, is more physically realistic than the conventional advection‐dispersion model. For mildly to moderately heterogeneous materials, stochastic theories and simulation experiments show that this process converges at the field scale to an effective advection‐dispersion process that can be simulated with conventional transport models using appropriate macrodispersivity values. For highly heterogeneous materials, stochastic theories do not yet exist but there is no reason why the process should not converge naturally as well. Macrodispersivities appear to be formation‐specific. The advection‐dispersion model can be used for capture zone delineation in heterogeneous granular media. For fractured porous systems, hybrid equivalent porous medium and discrete fracture network or CP‐based approaches may have potential. In general, capture zones delineated by PT without MC will always be too small and should not be used as a basis for land‐use decisions.     

Automatic Delineation of Capture Zones for Pump and Treat Systems: A Case Study in Piedmont,Italy

The design of a pump and treat (P&T) system for the hydraulic control of a contaminated plume in a confined aquifer is presented here. Being the system designed for the emergency containment of a nonaqueous phase liquid plume, the evaluation of the system’s short-term efficiency was considered an important issue. For this reason, both time-related and ultimate capture zones were defined. They were traced using the automatic protection area (APA) model, a capture-zone delineation tool based on a hybrid forward-backward particle tracking algorithm, that provides an automatic post-processing encirclement of capture zones. Two simple indexes are here proposed for the evaluation of the performance of the hydraulic barrier, that is, the efficacy and efficiency indexes, calculated from the capture areas provided by APA. The discharge rates of the wells were dimensioned applying the APA algorithm, maximizing efficacy and efficiency of the barrier. Results proved both visually (via plotting of capture zones) and numerically (via calculation of the indexes) that the P&T system can provide a complete capture of the contaminated area and minimizes the volume of extracted water. Consequently, the APA algorithm was proved to be a useful tool in capture zone delineation. As a future perspective, it could be coupled with the real-time measurement of pumping rates and water levels and be implemented as a part of a tuning tool for the management of the hydraulic barrier.     

Groundwater Flow Analysis for Inclined Aquifers

Sedimentary deposits that have water in subsurface groundwater system are not often completely horizontal because of the geological features such as: bedding and folding. These deposits typically overlay on sloped impervious layers, and therefore; additional research is necessary for these situations. In this research an analytical model is presented for groundwater flow on inclined impermeable layer. The presented model is preferable to the Paolowsky method regarding its applicability and accuracy. The Dupuit's assumption is used for the formulation. The presented model can be generalized for the situation, having surficial infiltration into and exfiltration from the groundwater system. Several problems of different slope situations and boundary conditions are addressed by the presented model and the results are shown here. The model is compared with numerical model Seep/w and good agreements are obtained when possible.