To understand and describe

GE Engineering 1) Difference between flow of water in traditional

geotechnical engineering and that in environmental
engineering
2)) Various pprocesses that affect the transport
p ((i.e.
Ch 6 Contaminant
Chap C t i t 3)
migration) of the contaminants in soils
Various processes that affect the fate (chemicals
form and concentration) of contaminants in soils

Transport & Fate 4) Mathematical models that incorporate these

processes and predict contaminant transport and
f
fate in
i the
h subsurface
b f
5) Examples of application of contaminant transport
modelingg to address ggeoenvironmental p problems

1) Understand the difference between flow of

water in traditional geotechnical engineering Major
j Processes Affecting
g the Contaminants
and that inenvironmental engineering in subsurface

Traditional Geotech Geoenvironmental Engineering 1. Transport processes (e.g. advection, diffusion,

z Study
y the flow due to z In addition to what in and dispersion)
hydraulic gradient or geotech, one must Also 2. Chemical mass transfer processes (e.g. sorption &
pressure gradient study the contaminant desorption, dissolution & precipitation, oxidation &
transport and fate reduction,
d ti acid-base
id b reaction,
ti complexions,
l i iion
(chemical form &
concentration)
exchange, volatilization, and hydrolysis)
3 Biological
3. Bi l i l process (or
( biodegradation)
bi d d ti )
 Major Processes Affecting the
Contaminants in subsurface TRANSPORT PROCESSES
z Advection,, diffusion & dispersion
p are transport
p p processes
z Th
These processes under d different
diff t hydraulic
h d li and d that transport nonreactive contaminants in the subsurface
conditions exist either naturally or being applied
Notes:
externally
y in applied
pp externally
y in the soil and
groundwater systems a) nonreactive contaminants are dissolved
contaminants not influenced by chemical reactions
z Contaminant transport modeling incrporating these
or microbiological processes
processes is performed
b) reactive contaminants transport processes are
1) to determine contaminant concentrations at exposure locations
while performing the risk assessment considered along with various chemical mass
2) to evaluate an/or design effective waste containment systems t
transfer
f and d microbial
i bi l d degradation
d ti processes
e.g. slurry walls and landfill liner systems and remediation z These processes control the extent of contamination
system e.g. soil flushing, soil vapour extraction and migration in the subsurface
bioremediation

ADVECTION ADVECTION
z Also known as advective transport or convection z For 1-D steady-state flow, contaminated mass flux , Fv
z Refers to contaminant movement by flowing water in = vC= ne v s C
response to a hydraulic gradient (C = dissolved contaminant concentration)
z Groundwater velocity for 1-D steady-state flow is given z Under uniform flow condition , the advective
by Darcy
Darcys i e Darcy
s law i.e. Darcys
s velocity,
velocity = ki transport is given by
whereas Seepage/Actual velocity vs = (ki)/ne dC/dt = -vs (dC/dx)
(ne = effective p
porosity)
y) Solution to this equation implies if a contaminant of
z Effective porosity which excludes noninterconnected concentration C0 is introduced in the flowing
& dead-end pores, ne = groundwater , then in time t it will be transported a
(vol space conducts most of the flow)/total vol of soil) di t
distance, x = vs t as a plug,
l d
due tto advection
d ti
z Note: ne < n z For 2-D & 3-D steady-state or unsteady-state
groundwater flow , the velocities can be determined
by performing appropriate water flow modeling
 ADVECTION
DIFFUSION
z In general to perform advective transport analysis,
porous media parameters like i)hydraulic gradients, z Diffusion or molecular diffusion
ii)h d
ii)hydraulic
li conductivity
d ti it & ttransmissivity,
i i it iii)
iii)specific
ifi
yield & storativity, porous and effective porosity must z Movement of contaminants under a chemical
be known. concentration gradient, i.e. from an area of greater
z Note: typical hydraulic conductivity values of various concentration toward an area of lower concentration
geologic formations and typical values of porosity, z Occur even when the fluid is not flowing or is flowing
effective porosity (as specific yield),
yield) and storativity of in the direction opposite to contaminant movement
different soils are given in chapter 7 & 17of Hari s
book. z Ceases when there is no concentration gradient

DIFFUSION DIFFUSION
z From
F Fick
Fi k 1st law
l & continuity
ti it equation,
ti Fi
Ficks
k 2nd law
l gives
i
z Characterized by Ficks 1st law where for 1-D flow
Fd = - D*(dC/dx) [ continuity equition] Rate of contaminant diffusion in soils, dC/dt = D* (d2 C/dx2 )

where Fd = diffusive mass/area/time Initial condition, at t=0, C(x,0)=0 i.e. assume the porous medium is contaminant free
D* = the effective coefficient (1x10-9 to 2x10-9 m2 /s) boundary conditions: C(0,t) = C0 and C(,0) = 0
dC/d = concentration
dC/dx t ti gradient di t S l ti tto above
Solution b equation,
ti
Note: D accounts for tortuosity in the soils & related to self-diffusion Concentration of contaminant at distance x from the source at time t, C(x,t)
coeff (D0 )of chemicals as: D* = D0 = C0 erfc (x/(2SQR(D*t))
= tortuosity (0.01 to 0.5), where
h C0 = initial
i iti l contaminant
t i t concentration
t ti assumed d constant
t t
erfc = complimentary error function
(tortuous: full of twists or turns of which no two successive portions are in the same plane)
erfc(u) = 1 erf(u) = Eq 8.5c (pg 170)
can be determined byy lab mtds such as steady-state
y mtd, time-lag
g mtd
and transient mtd (column mtd & half-cell mtd) T bl off erfc
Tables f are available
il bl iin mathematics
th ti h
handbooks,
db k Mi Microsoft
ft E
Excell and
d
Matlab and Table8.2 (pg 173) for erfc(u) & erf(u) for selected u values
z The typical transient diffusive transport of a contaminant as predicted by above
equation is shown in Fig Fig. 8
8.1(b)
1(b) in pg 169
169.
z To erfc of a negative number, erfc(-u) = 1+ erfc(u)
 Example 8.1
LEACHATE POND

DISPERSION DISPERSION
z At macro-scalel llevel,
l contaminant
t i t ttransportt is
i ddefined
fi d bby th
the average z D
Due tto differences
diff in
i velocities,
l iti mixing
i i (called
( ll d mechanical/hydrological
h i l/h d l i l
groundwater velocity. dispersion) occurs along the flow path
z At micro-scale level, the actual velocity of water varies from point to point of z Mixing occurs along the direction of flow path is called longitudinal
either
ith lower/higher
l /hi h than
th average di
dispersion
i whereas
h that
th t spread
d iin di
direction
ti normall tto th
the flflow path
th iis called
ll d
z The differences in micro-scale water velocities are due to transverse dispersion
1. Pore size z Both longitudinal & transverse dispersions = f[ Average Vel (Vs )]
2. Path length z The longitudinal dispersion is defined by
3. Friction in pores Coeff. of Longitudinal Mechanical Dispersion, DL = T Vs
z Pore size: water vel 1/pore
1/pore-size
size i.e. vel pore-size
pore size or vice versa where L= longitudinal
g dispersivity
p y
z Path length: vel flow-path (note: flow path can be longer/shorter depends z The Transverse dispersion is The defined by
on particle size & distribution Coeff. of Transverse Mechanical Dispersion, DL = T Vs
z Friction in pores: vel friction ; generally as water close to soil solids where T = transverse dispersivity
vel decreases due to friction while it is away from soil solids it has higher z Generally, molecular diffusion & mechanical dispersion are combined and
vel the resultant longitudinal (D*L) & transverse (D*T ) coeffs are defined as:
Long hydrodynamic
Long. h drod namic dispersion coeff
coeff., D*L = L Vs + D*
Trans. hydrodynamic dispersion coeff., D*T = T Vs + D*
 DISPERSION Example 8.2
z R
Refer
f tto Fig.8.1(c)
Fi 8 1( ) (pg
( 169),
169) the
th 11-D
D di
dispersion
i off contaminant
t i t result
lt iin a
dilution of the contaminants at the advancing edge of flow
z In 1-D condition only long. hydrodynamic dispersion coeff., D*L is
considered
id d whereas
h ffor 2
2-D,
D both
b th D*L and
d D*T are involved
i l d
z To describe dispersive transport of contaminants, L and T must first be
known
z If molecular diffusion is incorporated, D* must also be known (mtd to
determine D* in section 8.2.2 while for L and T they are determined from
lab and/or field tests (expect students to read up themselves)

Chemical Mass Transfer Processes

GE Engineering 1.
2.
Sorption & desorption
Dissolution & precipitation
Contaminant Transport & Fate : 3. Oxidation & reduction
4. Acid-base reactions
Chemical mass transfer processes 5
5. Complexation
6. Ion exchange
7. Volatilization, and
8. Hydrolysis
Chemical Mass Transfer Processes Chemical Mass Transfer Processes
1(a)) Sorption
1( S ti
z Refer to contaminants attached to mineral grains
and organic matter in the soil 1(b) Desorption
z Sorption includes processes like z The opposite of sorption
- adsorption (contaminants clinging to a solid surface z Refers to contaminants becoming
- chemisorption (contaminants incorporate on soil
detached from mineral grains and organic
y a chemical reaction))
surface by
matter and entering into the pore fluid
- absorption (contaminants diffusing into particle and
being adsorbed onto interior surfaces
z Generally, interested in their combined effect of all
these processes, collectively known as Sorption
z Sorption defines contaminant distribution between
solution and solid phase & therefore known as
partitioning.

Chemical Mass Transfer Processes Chemical Mass Transfer Processes

2(a) Precipitation & Dissolution
z They are reactions involve chemicals in solid phases
z They are described by an equilibrium constant (k)
z In many reactions where activity of the reacting solid
equals to 1, a comparison of the relative size k provides
an indication
i di ti off solid
lid solubility
l bilit iin pure water
t z Generally,
z Refer to Table 8.5-Some common mineral dissolution
reactions and associated ks
z Note that the larger the positive value the higher the
solubility
z Chloride & sulphate salts(k=1.54) tend to be the most
soluble phase whereas suphide (k= -18.1 to -27.5) and
hydroxide (k= -11.1 to -33.5) groups are the least.
Minerals in carbonate & silicate and aluminium silicate
groups have low solubility
2(a) Precipitation & Dissolution
z When there are other ions in a solution the solubility
of a solid differ from its value in pure water
water.
z Solubility increases due to solution nonidealites &
decreases due to common-ion effect.
Generally solubility increases with increasing ionic
strength because other ions in solutions reduce the
activity of the ion involved in the reaction
z The common-ion
common ion effect occurs when a solution
contains the same ions that will released when the
solid dissolves
z The presence of common ion means that less solid is
able to dissolve before the solution reaches
saturation with respect to that ion
z Thus the solubility of a solid is less in a solution
containing a common ion than in a pure water.
Chemical Mass Transfer Processes Chemical Mass Transfer Processes
3. Oxidation & reduction 3. Oxidation & reduction
z R d reactions
Redox ti are measuredd iin tterms off pe (Eh) &
they involve transfer of electrons
z Redox reactions can be caused by naturally occurring
z Large pe values (=low electron activity) favour the microorganisms
g ((see Table 8.7,, pg 187)) where oxidation
existence
i t off electron-poor
l t ( idi d) species
(oxidized) i of organic matter occurs by reduction of oxygen, follows
z Small pe values (=high electron activity) favour the by reduction of NO3- & NO2-
existence of electron-rich (reduced) species z Succession of these reactions follows the decreasing g pe
level
z F pH=7
For H (neutral),
( l) ddepending
di on pe, the h redox
d regions
i
are defined as pe>7 [oxic]; 2<pe<7, [suboxic] & pe<2 z Reduction of MnO2 should occur at about the same pe
[anoxic] level as nitrate reduction, followed by reduction of
z R d reaction
Redoc ti iis also
l characterize
h t i b by redox
d potential
t ti l FeOOH(s) to Fe++
(Eh) of units volts. z When sufficiently ve pe levels are reached, fementation
reactions and reduction of SO42- and CO2 may occur
simultaneously

Chemical Mass Transfer Processes Chemical Mass Transfer Processes

4. Acid-base reactions 5. Complexation

p

z Acid base reactions involve either

Acid-base z The process of ion or molecule
gain/loss of a proton (H+) or gain/loss of combination in the dissolved phase
y y ((OH -)
a hydroxyl z The ligands (or surrounding atoms/ions
z The strength of an acid or base is the can include organic and inorganic species
extent to which pprotons are lost or g
gained,, z The complexes so formed may be
respectively charged/uncharged, and the solubility of
z The rest student to p
the complex cab be affected.
Chemical Mass Transfer Processes Chemical Mass Transfer Processes

6. Ion exchange 7. Volatilization

a process of liquid- or solid-phas evaporation
z A specific category of adsorption called that occurs when contaminants (non-aqueous
adsorbent-motivated sorption or dissolved) contact a gas phase
z Accumulation occurs due to affinity
ff off solid
surface for the chemical
z Ion exchange is important for clays

BIOLOGICAL PROCESS
Chemical Mass Transfer Processes
(Biodegradatiom)
8. Hydrolysis
y y z An oxidation-reduction
oxidation reduction reaction that is
mediated by microorganisms
z A chemical transformation process in z A biological process that must be
which an organic molecule, RX, reacts with considered for organic contaminants
water
z In general
general, an organic compound is
z Reaction results in the introduction of oxidised (loses electrons) by an electron
y y group
hydroxyl g p ((OH)) into the organic
g
compound: acceptor which is reduced (gains electrons
Example:
p RX+H2O = ROH + H+ + X-
 APPLICATIONS
z Contaminant Transport & Fate Modelling zContainment transport & fate modeling is
z Analytical Methods performed to assess and/or design GE
z Numerical Methods engineering systems e e.g.
g landfills
landfills,
impoundments, in-situ barriers, and
z Applications
groundwater remedial systems
zDetails on these systems
E l off applications
zExamples li ti

1) LANDFILLS & 1) LANDFILLS &

SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
zRefer FigFig.8.9
8 9 (pg 200) z Designing the liner systems, containment transport
modeling is performed to determine potential
zLandfills & impoundments are designed
breakthrough of the waste constituents (i.e.
with liner systems to protect groundwater contaminants)
quality against disposed wastes z Regulations also require a designed liner system at
Th liliner systems
zThe t are adopted
d t d no time should the concentrations of a selected set
zA liner system consists of low-permeable of contaminants (see Chap 17) exceed the values
specified in the uppermost aquifer at the point of
materials (compacted clay, geomembrane,
compliance or the property boundary, whichever
geosynthetic clay liner) and must contain lesser
the disposed waste effectively
z
 1) LANDFILLS & 1) LANDFILLS &
SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
z For low ppermeabilityy reason,, the p
primary
y contaminant z Using Eq 8.31 (pg 194) as governing equation to describe containment transport
thru the liner systems of landfills & impoundments is given by Eq. 8.47 (pg 199)
transport mechanism in liner systems is diffusion
z In addition, advection (contaminant movement by flowing C/t = (D*/R) (2 C/z2) (Vs /R)(C/z) --- Eq 8.47
water
t in
i response tto a hydraulic
h d li gradient
di t ) andd sorption
ti
(contaminants attached to mineral grains & organic matter in where C = contaminant concentration
the soil) effects are commonly taken into account in t= elapsed time
assessing contaminant transport thru liner systems z= distance in the direction of flow
V= seepage velocity
z Due to large areal extent of a landfill compared to the liner & R= retardation coefficient
subsurface profile to the upper aquifer,
aquifer an assumption of 1 1-
D contaminant transport (i.e. in the vertical direction, say z, If a liner sorption isotherm, S = Kd C is assumed
is valid R = 1 + (d /n) Kd --- Eq 8.47a
where n &d are porosity and dry density of the transport medium, respectively

1) LANDFILLS & 1) LANDFILLS &

SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
z Assumes no reactions take place, equation 8.47 can be solved using different z The solution to Eq.8.50 is given by
initial & boundary y conditions commonlyy applicable
pp for liner system
y in new
landfills as follows: C(z,t)= (C0 ) erfc(z/2SQR(D*t/R) --- Eq. 8.51
C(z,0) = 0 z0 initial condition
C(0,t) = C0 t0 where C(z,t) is the concentration at distance z from the source at time, t,
C(,t) = 0 t0 boundary conditions C0 = initial contaminant concentration assumes to be constant
erfc = the complementary error function
Solution to Eq. 8.47 is given by Eq. 8.48 (pg. 199)
For a Peclet number > 1000, the approximated solution as: z The analytical solutions for Eqs.8.48, 8.49 & 8.51 are valid for a single
homogeneous layer.
C(z,t)= (C0 /2) erfc((Rz Vz t)/2SQR(D*tR)) --- Eq. 8.49 p through
z To simulate contaminant transport g a multilayer
y system,
y , a numerical
model (e.g. POLLUTE) can be used
In a diffusion-dominated system (Pe<1), Ficks 2nd law used to describe transient z In addition, where vertical transport of contaminants through the liner system
diffusion is given by : (dC/dt) = (D*/R)(d2 C/dz2) --- Eq. 8.50 and the underlying low-permeability soils, followed by lateral migration in the
with initial condition: C(z,0) = 0 & boundary conditions: C(0,t)=C0 & C(x,0)=0 uppermostt aquifer,
if isi tto be
b simulated,
i l t d a combination
bi ti off numerical
i l models
d l e.g.
MIGRATE may be used
 2) IN
IN-SITU
SITU BARRIERS
z They y are constructed to p prevent migration
g of contaminants
in the subsurface.
z Details in Chap 12 of Sharma Reddy Book
z In-situ barriers [horiz barriers (bottom barriers), vert barriers
(cutoff /slrry walls ) (see Fig. 8.10) are commonly used at
contaminated sites
z These barriers are constructed with soil-bentonite or soil
cement-bentonite that possess low permeability & thus
contaminant
t i t transport
t t thru
th these
th walls
ll due
d to t advection
d ti is
i
less significant whereas diffusion is the primary transport
mechanism

2) IN-SITU BARRIERS
z Fig
Fig.8.11
8 11 shows bottom and vert barriers configuration 2) IN
IN-SITU
SITU BARRIERS
z With uniform seepage velocity (Vx), liner sorption, and 1st order decay, the
governing equation for contaminant transport thru these barrier systems is:
z Neglecting reactions, Eq 8.52 = Eq 8.47
C/t = D* (2C/z2) Vx (C/z) (d/n) (S/t) + (C/t)rxn --- Eq 8.52
where C = concentration of solute in the liquid C/t = D* (2C/z2) Vx (C/z) (d/n) (S/t) + (C/t)rxn --- Eq 8.52
tt= elapsed time SAME AS
D* = effective molecular diffusion coeff C/t = (D*/R) (2 C/z2) (Vs /R)(C/z) --- Eq 8.47
Vx = (Kh/neL) = seepage velocity (-ve if it is inward seepage)
d = bulk density of barrier material
With initial
i iti l condition
diti C(x,0)
C( 0) = 0 &
n = porosity
boundary conditions C(0,t) = C0 [contaminant side] & C(x , t) = 0
S = the amount of solute sorbed per unit wt. of solid
(assuming the contaminant transported out of the wall is removed)
rxn = subscript indicates biological or chemical reaction of the solute (other
than sorption) z The analytical solution is given by Eq8.48 (pg 199) and only if diffuse
K= effective hydraulic conductivity of the barrier material in the direction flux is assumed & the solution is given by
normal to the plane of the barrier C(z,t)= (C0 ) erfc(z/2SQR(D*t/R) --- Eq. 8.51
L = barrier thickness, and
h = difference in piezometric head across the barrier wall
 2) IN-SITU BARRIERS - notes 2) IN-SITU BARRIERS - notes
1. Important to recognize that the 1-D system described assumes the z The solution is given by Rabideau & Khandelwall (1998) as
flow media to be infinite. Eq 8.53 (pg 201)
2. However, instead of infinite system, finite systems may be considered z Using g the analytical
y solution above ((i.e. Eqs.
q 8.48,, 8.49,, 8.51& 8.53),),
in modeling. contaminant transport thru the barrier systems can be computed.
3. In finite systems such as cutoff wells, water containing a known z Notes:
concentration of the contaminant enters the system at the origin (i.e. 1 neglect reactions and/or sorption in the analysis will normally yield
1.
x=0) conservative estimates of contiminant flux, and
4. Water and contaminant exit at opposite ends of the system (i.e. x=L), 2. In a finite length system, the outflow boundary is close enough that
which could represent the outer boundary of the wall it will have an effect on the magnitude of the concentration within
5. With above conditions, the governing equation the area of interest.
C/t = (D*/R) (2 C/z2) (Vs /R)(C/z) --- Eq 8.47 3. if the outflow boundary is far away to have a negligible effect on
can be solved with the following initial and boundary conditions: containment concentrations in the area of interest
interest, solutions for
Initial; C(x,0)=0 infinite system can be used and are generally easier to evaluate
Boundary conditions; C(0,t)=C0 & 4. The flux calculated from 1-D models can be used as source terms
C( L t)=0
C(x=L, t) 0 (this
(thi considers
id finite
fi it length
l th off th
the for 2-D
2 D & 3-D
3 D models for the fate and transport of contaminants
material) outside the contaminated zone. These models are generally
numerical in nature (see Sect. 8.5.2)

GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION
z Contaminant transport modeling is very helpful in
groundwater contamination assessment and
remediation studies
z Contaminant transport modeling is performed to
1. determine the contaminant concentrations at
exposure locations
l ti d i risk
during i k assessmentt ((ref.
f
Chap 11)
2 assess the fate of contamination under
2. nder different
remedial scenarios, including a scenario in which
no remedial action is proposed
 GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION
z Fig. 8.12 (pg 206) gives an example where 1-D analytical
solutions
l ti can be
b used d to
t study
t d some simple
i l groundwater
d t z Analytical
Anal tical solutions
sol tions req
require
ire
contamination conditions 1. constant parameters
z In this example, horizontal groundwater flow (which has
been contaminated) from river A to river B.
2 simple
2. i l geometries ti
z 2-D analytical solutions can be used here for 3. well-defined boundary conditions
h
homogeneous aquifers
if with
i h no vertical
i l flow
fl component. z However, for many sites conditions, groundwater flow
z In 2-D, the governing equation in 2 dimensions (i.e. x & y and contaminant transport are complicated and 2- and
directions) is solved with relatively simple initial and 3 D numerical models may be required.
3-D required
boundary conditions (see Sect.8.5.1 for examples of such
analytical solutions)

SUMMARY
1. Various transport, chemical, and biological
processes that affect contaminant migration,
transfer, ad transformation in natural soil and
groundwater systems are presented
2. An understanding of these processes is
essential for the design of effective waste
containment and remedial systems
3. Example 1: to evaluate the potential for leachate
migration
i ti th thru liliner systems
t iin a llandfill,
dfill th
the
contaminant transport analysis must include the
processes that affect site-specific materials and
conditions
 SUMMARY
4
4. Example 2: in the development/selection of a
remediation method for contaminated soils &
groundwater, the processes that effectively
separate or transform the contaminants under
the site-specific contaminant, soil & groundwater END
combinations
bi ti mustt b
be assessedd carefully
f ll b
by
citing practical examples of landfill, surface
impoundment contaminant barrier
impoundment, barrier, and
groundwater systems