| ||Format||Pages||Price|| |
|8||$50.00||  ADD TO CART|
|Hardcopy (shipping and handling)||8||$50.00||  ADD TO CART|
|Standard + Redline PDF Bundle||16||$60.00||  ADD TO CART|
Significance and Use
5.1 This test method allows the user to compute the true hydraulic efficiency of a pumped well in a confined aquifer from a constant rate pumping test. The procedures described constitute the only valid method of determining well efficiency. Some practitioners have confused well efficiency with percentage of head loss associated with laminar flow, a parameter commonly determined from a step-drawdown test. Well efficiency, however, cannot be determined from a step-drawdown test but only can be determined from a constant rate test.
5.2.1 Control well discharges at a constant rate, Q.
5.2.2 Control well is of infinitesimal diameter.
5.2.3 Data are obtained from the control well and, if available, a number of observation wells.
5.2.4 The aquifer is confined, homogeneous, and extensive. The aquifer may be anisotropic, and if so, the directions of maximum and minimum hydraulic conductivity are horizontal and vertical, respectively.
5.2.5 Discharge from the well is derived exclusively from storage in the aquifer.
5.3 Calculation Requirements—For the special case of partially penetrating wells, application of this test method may be computationally intensive. The function fs shown in should be evaluated using arbitrary input parameters. It is not practical to use existing, somewhat limited, tables of values for fs and, because this equation is rather formidable, it may not be tractable by hand. Because of this, it is assumed the practitioner using this test method will have available a computerized procedure for evaluating the function fs. This can be accomplished using commercially available mathematical software including some spreadsheet applications. If calculating fs is not practical, it is recommended to substitute the Kozeny equation for the Hantush equation as previously described.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
1.1 This test method describes an analytical procedure for determining the hydraulic efficiency of a production well in a confined aquifer. It involves comparing the actual drawdown in the well to the theoretical minimum drawdown achievable and is based upon data and aquifer coefficients obtained from a constant rate pumping test.
1.2 This analytical procedure is used in conjunction with the field procedure, Test Method .
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard, except as noted below. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units, which are provided for information only and are not considered standard.
1.3.1 The gravitational system of inch-pound units is used when dealing with inch-pound units. In this system, the pound (lbf) represents a unit of force (weight), while the unit for mass is slugs.
1.4 Limitations—The limitations of the technique for determination of well efficiency are related primarily to the correspondence between the field situation and the simplifying assumption of this test method.
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and round established in Practice , unless superseded by this standard.
1.5.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported date to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis method for engineering design.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
2. Referenced Documents (purchase separately) The documents listed below are referenced within the subject standard but are not provided as part of the standard.
D653 Terminology Relating to Soil, Rock, and Contained Fluids
D3740 Practice for Minimum Requirements for Agencies Engaged in Testing and/or Inspection of Soil and Rock as Used in Engineering Design and Construction
D4050 Test Method for (Field Procedure) for Withdrawal and Injection Well Testing for Determining Hydraulic Properties of Aquifer Systems
D5521 Guide for Development of Groundwater Monitoring Wells in Granular Aquifers
D6026 Practice for Using Significant Digits in Geotechnical Data
ICS Number Code 93.160 (Hydraulic construction)
|Link to Active (This link will always route to the current Active version of the standard.)|
ASTM D6034-17, Standard Test Method (Analytical Procedure) for Determining the Efficiency of a Production Well in a Confined Aquifer from a Constant Rate Pumping Test, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2017, www.astm.orgBack to Top