Chapman Ross, P.E.

Direct-Push High-Pressure Jet Injection for Rapid Amendment Delivery in Low-Permeability

Zones: Full-Scale Demonstration

AEHS Conference - October 2015

Partners in Developing Technology

FRx

Christiansen and Wood, 2006

Problem Statement: Develop Better Injection Technology to Treat Clay Till

Method development partially funded by Danish government. Why?

40% Denmark covered in highly fractured clay till.

Treating low permeability sites is a major challenge for US and Canadian Sites.

Technology Development Chronology

2011 Pilot Test – Denmark

2012 Pilot Test – South Carolina

2013 Pilot Test – Ohio

2014 Full-Scale Field Demonstration – Denmark

PATENT PENDING TECHNOLOGY

High Pressure Jet Injection – How Does it Work?

Drive tooling to depth with direct

push rig.

10,000 psi water jetting

0.9 m

High Pressure Jet Injection – How Does it Work?

High Pressure Jetting in Saprolite

Path of jet cutting across weathered rock

High Pressure Jet Injection Mechanisms

150 to 400+ psi slurry injection which creates

hydraulic fractures

High Pressure Jet Injection Mechanisms

Slurry contains proppant (sand, ZVI, etc) which holds

fracture open and either enhances permeability,

reacts with contaminants directly, or both.

Fracture

Cavity

HorizontalFracture

Conduits

Cavity

Applications

Tested in clay till in Ohio and Denmark

Tested in saprolite in South Carolina

Effective in heterogeneous low permeability formations

Capable of emplacing wide range of powdered, granular, and liquid amendments:

nZVI, mZVI, Granular ZVI

Solid and Liquid-Phase Electron Donors

Persulfate, Permanganate

Carbon-based amendments

Advantages over Traditional Hydraulic Fracturing

Reduces overall injection time

Delivers more power to the formation

Jetting cuts across vertical fractures

Creates more predictable fracture forms

Works more reliably than traditional fracturing

methods at shallow depths

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Conceptual Model – Treatment with DPT Jet Injection

Remedy Design

714 sq meter Target Treatment Area (TTA)

4 m design ROI 21 injection locations with

121 individual injections 1 to 7 discrete injections

per location 50 tonnes mZVI 25 tonnes sand

5

25

50

5 to 80 mg/kg VOCs (mostly

TCE)

Characterization Methods

79 soil borings: Visual identification of fractures and

tracers (colored sands and dye) Fracture thickness Magnetic susceptibility (MS) screening

1-cm intervals (detected mZVI zones) Geologic logging

423 discrete ZVI-filled horizontal fractures

80% between 0 and 10 mm

increasing fracture thickness = fewer fractures observed

Horizontal Fracture Thickness

- nI-A = 6 (# injection depths at Injection Location A)

- nI-B = 7 (# injection depths at Injection Location B)

- nSB-X = 8 (# observed fractures in Soil Boring X)

- Example calculation for ratio of observed fractures to injection depths:

- nSB-X / nI-A = 8 / 6 = 1.33

- Note: calculation performed only for full-length continuous soil borings.

Distribution of Horizontal Fractures - Fracture to Injection Ratio Calculation

Methodology Soil Borin

g X

Injection A

Injection

B

6 8 7

Yellow/red shading demonstrates coverage across TTA

Gray/white shading shows overlap between injection locations (fractures observed > # injections)

Results demonstrate effective distribution using 4 m design ROI

Lateral Distribution of Horizontal Fractures – Plan View

Injections were concentrated in more contaminated portions of the TTA (>25 mg/kg total chlorinated organics)

Overlap in these areas reflects tighter design injection spacing.

Fracture Distribution with Soil Contaminant Concentrations

5

25

50

5 Total chlorinated organics (mg/kg)

Methodology3D modeling (EVS software) was utilized to interpolate MS readings.Interpolated MS readings >1x10-3 were generally co-located with visual identification of ZVI-filled fractures.

Lateral Distribution of Horizontal Fractures – 3D Modeling

Cross sections cut through the 3D model as shown.

Cross-sections show:1) overlap of horizontal fractures between injection locations 2) ROI of at least 4 m at many locations.

Lateral Distribution of Horizontal Fractures – Cross Sections

NS 1 NS 2 NS 3

NS 4

EW 1

EW 2

EW 4

EW 3

EW 5

Columbia, Maryland March 2015

North-South 2 Cross-SectionMøllevej 9, Nivå, Denmark

North South

Example North – South Cross Section (NS 2)

4m ROI

1 x 10-

3

2 x 10-3

3 x 10-3

Magnetic Susceptibility

Boring Type

Injection Boring

Soil Boring

Above Redox Boundary

Below Redox Boundary

Dense Gray Till

Lithology Black tick marks are

visual ZVI observations in soil borings

(3D model verification)

Columbia, Maryland March 2015

North-South 2 Cross-SectionMøllevej 9, Nivå, Denmark

North South

Example North – South Cross Section (NS 2)

4m ROI

1 x 10-

3

2 x 10-3

3 x 10-3

Magnetic Susceptibility

Boring Type

Injection Boring

Soil Boring

Above Redox Boundary

Below Redox Boundary

Dense Gray Till

Lithology

Achieved 0.3 m average fracture

spacing with depth in some borings

Mapping ROI and Fracture Overlap with Tracers

A series of colored sands and dyes with ZVI were injected at three locations on the northern end of the TTA

These “tracers” were modeled in 3D and successfully demonstrated discrete overlapping fractures between injection locations.

Tracers also confirmed the successful creation of sub-horizontal fractures.

4m ROI

A series of colored sands and dyes with ZVI were injected at three locations on the northern end of the TTA

These “tracers” were modeled in 3D and successfully demonstrated discrete overlapping fractures between injection locations.

Tracers also confirmed the successful creation of sub-horizontal fractures.

Mapping ROI and Fracture Overlap with Tracers

4m ROI

A series of colored sands and dyes with ZVI were injected at three locations on the northern end of the TTA

These “tracers” were modeled in 3D and successfully demonstrated discrete overlapping fractures between injection locations.

Tracers also confirmed the successful creation of sub-horizontal fractures.

Mapping ROI and Fracture Overlap with Tracers

4m ROI

A series of colored sands and dyes with ZVI were injected at three locations on the northern end of the TTA

These “tracers” were modeled in 3D and successfully demonstrated discrete overlapping fractures between injection locations.

Tracers also confirmed the successful creation of sub-horizontal fractures.

Mapping ROI and Fracture Overlap with Tracers

4m ROI

A series of colored sands and dyes with ZVI were injected at three locations on the northern end of the TTA

These “tracers” were modeled in 3D and successfully demonstrated discrete overlapping fractures between injection locations.

Tracers also confirmed the successful creation of sub-horizontal fractures.

Mapping ROI and Fracture Overlap with Tracers

4m ROI

A series of colored sands and dyes with ZVI were injected at three locations on the northern end of the TTA

These “tracers” were modeled in 3D and successfully demonstrated discrete overlapping fractures between injection locations.

Tracers also confirmed the successful creation of sub-horizontal fractures.

Mapping ROI and Fracture Overlap with Tracers

4m ROI

Mapping ROI and Fracture Overlap with Tracers

4m ROI

Documented multiple overlapping ZVI-filled horizontal fractures between injection

locations.

Conclusions

DPT Jet Injection shown to be an effective delivery technique for emplacing amendments in low permeability formations.

Performance monitoring for full-scale case study over next 5 years will include membrane interface probe (MIP), soil sampling, and groundwater sampling.

Next steps: Identify new challenging sites for implementation.

Questions?

Chapman Ross – cross@geosyntec.com

FRx (Bill Slack and Doug Knight) – frx-inc.com