1 / 38

John P. Brodt Dr. Roseanna M. Neupauer August 8, 2013

Optimization of Engineered Injection and Extraction for In Situ Remediation of Sorbing Groundwater Contaminants. 2013 REU Summer Research Project. John P. Brodt Dr. Roseanna M. Neupauer August 8, 2013. In Situ Remediation. Contaminant Plume –highest concentration.

turner
Download Presentation

John P. Brodt Dr. Roseanna M. Neupauer August 8, 2013

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Optimization of Engineered Injection and Extraction for In Situ Remediation of Sorbing Groundwater Contaminants 2013 REU Summer Research Project John P. Brodt Dr. Roseanna M. Neupauer August 8, 2013

  2. In Situ Remediation Contaminant Plume –highest concentration images accessed 7/30/2013 Left:http://dec.alaska.gov/spar/csp/images/fairbanks/gaffney_vi_map.jpg Right: http://www.regenesis.com/images/products/chemical-oxidation.jpg

  3. Engineered Injection and Extraction(EIE)-Initial Setup Wells Contaminant Plume Treatment Solution

  4. Particle Position r=radial distance from well Q=flow rate t=time b=aquifer thickness n=porosity

  5. EIE – Reaction for Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Aqueous Contaminant Q=Injection rate T=time step n=porosity b=aquifer thickness L=length scale Reaction Product Base Case - Piscopo et al. (2013)

  6. EIE – Reaction for Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Aqueous Contaminant 60% Q=Injection rate T=time step n=porosity b=aquifer thickness L=length scale Reaction Product • Strategy for Aqueous Contaminants • Stretch and fold treatment solution • Elongate interface between treatment solution and contaminant plume Base Case - Piscopo et al. (2013)

  7. Sorbing Contaminants Linear Equilibrium: Linear Kinetic: α=sorption rate constant (1/T) Kd=partition constant (L/kg) C=contaminant concentration in aqueous phase (g/L) Cs=contaminant concentration in sorbed phase (g/kg)

  8. EIE –Reaction for Sorbing Contaminants Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product Base Case - Webber (2012)

  9. EIE –Reaction for Sorbing Contaminants Sorbed Contaminant 84% Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product • Strategy for Sorbed Contaminants • Pass Treatment solution over sorbed contaminants because sorbed contaminants are stationary - Webber (2012)

  10. Research Objectives • Optimize EIE for sorbing contaminants using a genetic algorithm for instantaneous reaction for a range of parameter values • Optimize EIE for sorbing contaminants using a genetic algorithm for rate-limited reaction for a range of parameter values • Find similarities in the different optimum string sequences

  11. Genetic Algorithm (GA) • Initial Population • GA randomly selects 700 strings for first generation • Fitness Ranking • determines each string’s fitness (mass reacted) then ranks the individuals • Reproduction • Elite count-no alteration • Cross Bred- genes of two strings are crossed over at a single point • Mutation- random changes to randomly selected genes • Optimum String • The string with the highest fitness after final generation

  12. GA Parameters • Feasible Population = 1000 strings • Elite Count = 70 strings • Crossover Fraction = 0.8 • Mutation Fraction = 0.2 Constraints: 1. Zero net fluid injected or extracted from the aquifer. 2. No particles can leave the manageable boundaries. 3. The sequence cannot surpass the determined ceiling for mass extracted from the wells.

  13. Optimization for Instantaneous Reaction using the 4 outer Wells

  14. Optimum String (4 wells) – Instantaneous Reaction, Slow Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=0.01(1/T)

  15. Optimum String (4 wells) – Instantaneous Reaction, Slow Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant 90% Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=0.01(1/T) Key Feature – Step 9: The injection of clean water into the East well pushes the treatment radially outward for increased degradation

  16. Optimum String (4 wells) – Instantaneous Reaction, Fast Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=100(1/T)

  17. Optimum String (4 wells) – Instantaneous Reaction, Fast Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant 98% Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=100(1/T) Key Feature – Step 8: The extraction from the South well folds the treatment solution after it had been spread out in the first 7 steps

  18. GA Optimum Strings (4 Wells) for Range of Parameters (Kd,α)

  19. GA Optimum String Similarity – Stretch and Fold with Sorbed Particle Contact R=2.65, α=10(1/T) R=2.65, α=0.1(1/T) R=2.65, α=1(1/T) R=2.65, α=100(1/T

  20. GA Optimum String Similarity – Stretch and Fold with Sorbed Particle Contact R=2.65, α=10 First 8 Steps of base case EIE sequence - Mays and Neupauer (2012) R=2.65, α=0.1(1/T)

  21. Optimization for Instantaneous Reaction using 5 Wells • The string creation function is allowed to use the center well in the EIE sequence

  22. Optimum String (5 wells) – Instantaneous Reaction, Slow Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=0.01(1/T)

  23. Optimum String (5 wells) – Instantaneous Reaction, Slow Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product 95% R=2.65 α=0.01(1/T) Key Feature – Use of Center Well: The center well efficiently pushes the treatment over the sorbed particles and into the aqueous contaminant

  24. Optimum String (5 wells) – Instantaneous Reaction, Fast Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=100(1/T)

  25. Optimum String (5 wells) – Instantaneous Reaction, Fast Sorption Sorbed Contaminant 100% Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=100 Key Feature – Step 9: The large injection rate in step 9 allows the treatment solution to overpass the entire contaminant plume

  26. GA Optimum Strings (4 & 5 Wells) for Range of Parameters (Kd,α)

  27. GA Optimum String Similarity – Alternating between Center Well and Outer Wells R=2.65, α=1(1/T) R=5, α=0.01(1/T) R=10, α=0.01(1/T) R=2.65, α=10(1/T)

  28. Optimization for Rate-Limited Reaction using 5 Wells • Chemical Kinetics are incorporated into the model

  29. Optimum String (5 wells) – Slow Reaction, Slow Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=0.1(1/T) Ka=2e-6(g/L/day) Ks=2e-7(L/g/day)

  30. Optimum String (5 wells) – Slow Reaction, Slow Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product 30% R=2.65 α=0.1(1/T) Ka=2e-6(g/L/day) Ks=2e-7(L/g/day)

  31. Optimum String (5 wells) – Slow Reaction, Fast Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=1000(1/T) Ka=2e-6(g/L/day) Ks=2e-7(L/g/day)

  32. Optimum String (5 wells) – Slow Reaction, Fast Sorption Sorbed Contaminant Aqueous Contaminant Treatment Solution Reaction Product R=2.65 α=1000(1/T) Ka=2e-6(g/L/day) Ks=2e-7(L/g/day) 33%

  33. GA Slow Optimum Strings (5 Wells) for Range of Parameters (Kd,α)

  34. GA Slow Optimum Strings (5 Wells) for Range of Parameters (Ka,Ks)

  35. GA Slow Optimum String Similarity – Pushing treatment solution into the radial contaminant plume R=2.65, α=100, Ka=2e-6, Ks=2e-7 R=10, α=0.1, Ka=2e-6, Ks=2e-7 R=2.65, α=10, Ka=2e-6, Ks=2e-7 R=5, α=0.1, Ka=2e-6, Ks=2e-7

  36. GA Slow Optimum String Similarity – smaller flow rates for slower reaction rates R=2.65, α=0.1, Ka=2e-2, Ks=2e-3 R=2.65, α=0.1, Ka=2e-5, Ks=2e-6 R=2.65, α=0.1, Ka=2e-3, Ks=2e-4 R=2.65, α=0.1, Ka=2e-6, Ks=2e-7

  37. Conclusion 1. GA improved the degradation from the EIE sequence by • 6% for fast reaction with 4 wells • 11% for fast reaction with 5 wells • 14% for slow reaction with 5 wells 2. Similarities in optimum strings • Stretch and fold while passing over sorbed contaminant • Alternating between center well and outer wells • Placing treatment inside contaminant plume • Smaller injection and extraction rates for slower reaction rates

  38. Future Work • Optimization of EIE for heterogenous aquifers

More Related