Field Tracer Test for the Design of LNAPL Source Zone Surfactant Flushing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A field tracer test was carried out in a light nonaqueous phase liquid ( LNAPL ) source zone using a well pattern consisting of one injection well surrounded by four extraction wells (5‐spot well pattern). Multilevel sampling was carried out in two observation wells located inside the test cell characterized by heterogeneous lithology. Tracer breakthrough curves showed relatively uniform flow within soil layers. A numerical flow and solute transport model was calibrated on hydraulic heads and tracer breakthrough curves. The model was used to estimate an average accessible porosity of 0.115 for the swept zone and an average longitudinal dispersivity of 0.55 m. The model was further used to optimize the relative effects of viscous forces versus capillary forces under realistic imposed hydraulic gradients and to establish optimal surfactant solution properties. Maximum capillary number ( N Ca ) values between injection and extraction wells were obtained for an injection flow rate of 16 L/min, a total extraction flow rate of 20 L/min, and a surfactant solution with a viscosity of 0.005 Pa⋅s. The unconfined nature of the aquifer limited further flow rate or viscosity increases that would have led to unrealistic hydraulic gradients. An N Ca range of 3.8 × 10 −4 to 7.6 × 10 −3 was obtained depending on the magnitude of the simulated LNAPL ‐water interfacial tension reduction. Finally, surfactant and chase water slug sizing was optimized with a radial form of the simplified Ogata‐Banks analytical solution (Ogata and Banks 1961) so that injected concentrations could be maintained in the entire 5‐spot cell.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".