• Journal of Soil and Groundwater Environment
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.23-33
• /
• 2002

There are two case history. One is the case of 3 wells-group well system-drilled and artificially hydrofractured for dewatering to help to excavate and treat deep building foundation. The recoveries of groundwater of 3 wells are increased 29%, 42% and 110% respectively through hydrofracturing. Simultaneous pumping test reveals that 3 wells are geohydrologically interconnected considering lowered specific capacity comprising influence of additional drawdown effect by other 2 wells compared to single well test. Response time effect during single well test shows that dorminant lineaments are more expandable to other geological structures. The other one is the case of 28% increasing of groundwater productivity for domestic use by hydrofracturing.

• Journal of Soil and Groundwater Environment
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.39-49
• /
• 2010

Drilling at unconsolidated layer can make the aquifer disturbed and reduce a productivity of groundwater well. Surge block and air surging were applied to a pumping well located in Jeungsan-ri, Changnyung-gun, to improve a well efficiency by removing clogging and fine-grained slime. Two experimental log-linear equations, $y_1=-0.1769\;ln(x_1)+0.4960$ and $y_2=-84.3358\;ln(x_2)+512.8162$, were proposed in this site, in which $x_1$ and $x_2$ are the number of surging event, $y_1$ is the amount of slime, and $y_2$ is a recovery time of groundwater level after air surging. Well loss exponent (P) decreased after surging, from 3.422 to 1.439, and the groundwater inflow from aquifer happened in all directions around a well with gradually increasing the homogeneity in a local aquifer's hydraulic property. It was revealed that long-term well development should be done in the pumping well which is located in unconsolidated sediments to increase a well productivity.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Soil and Groundwater Environment Conference
• /
• 1997.05a
• /
• pp.8-11
• /
• 1997

Current methods of evaluating soil contamination by heavy metals rely on analyzing samples for total contents of metals or quantities recovered in various chemical extracting solutions. Results from these approaches provide only an index for evaluation because these methodologies yield values not directly related to bioavailability of soil-borne metals. In addition, even though concentrations of metals may be less than those required to cause toxic effects to biota, they may cause substantial effects on soil chemical parameters that determine soil quality and sustainable productivity. The objective of this research was to characterize effects of Cu or Cd additions on soil solution chemistry of soil quality indices, such as pH, EC, nutrient cation distribution and quantity/intensity relations (buffer capacity). Metals were added at rates ranging from 0 to 400 mg/kg of soil. Soil solution was sequentially extracted from saturated pastes using vacuum. Concentrations of Cu or Cd remaining in soil solutions were very low as compared to those added to the soils, warranting that most of the added metals were recovered as nonavailable (strongly adsorbed) fractions. Adsorption of the added metals released cations into soil solution causing increases of soluble cation contents and thus ionic strength of soil solution. At metal additions of 200~400 mg/kg, EC of soil solution increased to as much as 2~4 dS/m; salinity levels considered high enough to cause detrimental effects on plant production. More divalent cations (Ca+Mg) than monovalent cations (K+Na) were exchanged by Cu or Cd adsorption. The loss of exchangeable nutrient cations decreased long-term nutrient supplying capacity or each soil. At 100 mg/kg or metal loading, the buffering capacity was decreased by 60%. pH of soil solution decreased linearly with increasing metal loading rates, with a decrement of up to 1.3 units at 400 mg Cu/kg addition. Influences of Cu on each of these soil quality parameters were consistently greater than those of Cd. These effects were of a detrimental nature and large enough in most cases to significantly impact soil productivity. It is clear that new protocols are needed for evaluating potential effects of heavy metal loading of soils.