CONFIRMATION OF CPT VIDEO MICROSCOPE ESTIMATES OF IN SITU SOIL POROSITY AND NAPL SATURATIONS

1
CONFIRMATION OF CPT VIDEO MICROSCOPE ESTIMATES OF
IN SITU SOIL POROSITY AND NAPL SATURATIONS

• Len Sinfield, R.G. U.S. Navy Public Works
  Center-San Diego, NAVFAC
• Tim Latas, R.G. Anteon Corporation
• Bill Collins Southwest Division, NAVFAC

2
Presentation Outline

• Introduction to Soil Video What we see by
  shoving a camera into the ground!
• Beyond Geewiz---Digital processing to assess
  effective porosity and NAPL saturations.
• Soil video and photographic still collection.
• Is it real?---Comparison/confirmation to
  collected (driven) soil samples.
• Future work.

3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
NAS Alameda Dem/Val

• Selected images from GeoVIS soil video imaging
  profile at NAS Alameda
• images provide high resolution verification of
  presence or absence of free phase product
• images combined with CPT show changes in
  lithology - confining layers

5.7 feet
8.1 feet
8.3 feet
9.5 feet
10.5 feet
Sand/Silty Sand
Bay Mud
11.1 feet
8
(No Transcript)
9
Sand/Silty Sand5.7 feet bgs
10
Data Collection

• Use SCAPS truck with triple use probe
• Cone Penetrometer Test rig (CPT).
• Laser-induced fluorescence (LIF).
• Soil video probe (GeoVIS).
• Started CPT/LIF at surface
• Captured digital stills at 3-inch depth intervals
  during each push on CPT rig.
• Started video 1 foot above LNAPL.
• All digital stills as uncompressed bitmaps.
• Video as VCR tape and MPEGs.

11
Direct push imaging system forporosity and
DNAPL/LNAPL identification
GeoVIS Video Imaging System
Record images digitally during push
SCAPS LIF Hydrocarbon Sensor
Click on profile retrieve video clip/image
12
Porosity Digital Processing
13
Estimates of Soil Porosity from GeoVIS Images
CalculatePorosity (Method of Consecutive Slices)
High Pass Filter (100 pixels)
Threshold (130)
Change to Grayscale
14
Porosity Results
39
15
(No Transcript)
16
Porosity Data Comparison
17

18
(No Transcript)
19
DNAPL and LNAPL Saturations
20
DNAPL/LNAPL Processing

• Not as successful as porosity processing
• Only consistent on BLACK NAPL droplets
• Not successful on clear or lightly colored NAPL.
• NAPL is highly variable in subsurface and cannot
  calibrate to soil samples.
• Often hard to positively identify.
• May work by Fluorescing the LNAPL droplets with
  a laser, then photographing the fluorescence.

21
DNAPL Saturation Results
22
Image DNAPL Rendering Depth
(ft) DNAPL Area () So
5.7 ft
43.11 100
8.1 ft
27.11 62.9
8.3 ft
10.81 25.1
9.5 ft
6.05 14.0
10.5 ft
2.1 4.9
11.1 ft
0 0
23
Results and Future Work

• Digital analysis of photomicrographs to obtain
  porosity estimates were successful
• Obtained reasonable results that correlated to
  driven soil samples.
• Process can be calibrated using collected soil
  samples.
• Problems 1 to 2 feet below water table due to
  liquefaction of soil.
• Needs to be tested on additional soil types and
  additional sites.
• NAPL analysis problematic
• ESTCP awarded funds for future verification and
  validation.

24
Acknowledgments

• Bill Collins, NASNI Lead RPM, Naval Facilities
  Engineering Command, Southwest Division
• George Cook, Fuels Officer, Navy Region Southwest
  (NRSW).
• John Locke, NASNI IR Manager, NRSW
• ESTCP (Project 04E-CU1-010)

25
(No Transcript)