• A Numerical Analysis on Pneumatic Fracturing for in-situ Remediation
  • Kwon, Mi-Seon;Park, Eun-Gyu;Lee, Cheol-Hyo;Kim, Yong-Seong;Kim, Nam-Jin;
  • Dept. of Geology, Kyungpook National University;Dept. of Geology, Kyungpook National University;OIKOS Co., Ltd;Yooshin Engineering Corporation;Dept. of Geology, Kyungpook National University;
  • 비포화대 오염정화 설계를 위한 공압파쇄 모사 해석
  • 권미선;박은규;이철효;김용성;김남진;
  • 경북대학교 지질학과;경북대학교 지질학과;(주)오이코스;(주)유신;경북대학교 지질학과;
Abstract
Pneumatic fracturing is an emerging tool to enhance the remediation efficiency of contaminated unsaturated zones by injecting high pressure air and inducing artificial fracture networks. Pneumatic fracturing is reported to be well suited for the cases where the contaminated unsaturated zone thickness is less than 5 m as many contaminated domestic sites in Korea. Nevertheless, there have been almost no studies carried out on the site-specific efficiency and the optimized design of pneumatic fracturing considering the unsaturated zone characteristics of Korea. In this study, we employ numerical simulations to compare the efficiency of pneumatic fracturing on the aspect of the site remediation and the porosity improvement at several hypothetic unsaturated zones composed of four typical soil types. According to the simulation results, it is found that the zone with fine grains soil such as clay and silt shows better efficiency than the zone composed of coarse grains in terms of air flow and porosity enhancements. The results imply that pneumatic fracturing may improve the efficiency of site reclamation by jointly or independently applied to the many contaminated sites in Korea.

Keywords: Pneumatic fracturing;Multiphase flow simulation;Unsaturated zone;Porosity improvement;

References
  • 1. Brooks, R.H. and Corey, A.T., 1964, Hydraulic properties of porous media: Hydrology Papers, Colorado State University, p. 24.
  •  
  • 2. Burdine, N.T., 1953, Relative permeability calculation from pore size distribution data, Trans. Am. Inst. Min. Eng., 198, 71-78.
  •  
  • 3. COMSOL AB, COMSOL Multiphysics Earth Science Module User's Guide (Version 3.2), 120 p (2005a).
  •  
  • 4. COMSOL AB, COMSOL Multiphysics Modeling Guide (Version 3.2), 336p (2005b).
  •  
  • 5. King, T.C., Mechanism of Pneumatic Fracturing, M. S. thesis, Department
  •  
  • 6. Lambe T.W. and Whitman R.V., 1979, Soil Mechanics, Wiley, New York, p. 533.
  •  
  • 7. Lee, C.-H., "Status and Prosect of Soil Remediation Industry", Konetic report, http://www.konetic.or.kr/, 2001.
  •  
  • 8. Biot, M.A. 1941, General Theory of Three-Dimensional Consolidation, Journal of Applied Physics, 12, 155-164.
  •  
  • 9. Biot, M.A., 1955, Theory of Elasticity and Consolidation for a Porous Anisotropic Solid, Journal of Applied Physics, 26, 182-185.
  •  
  • 10. Lewis Thigpen and James G. Berryman, 1985, Mechanics of porous elastic materials containing multiphase fluid, International Journal of Engineering Science, Volume 23(11), 1203-1214.
  •  
  • 11. M. Th. van Genuchten, 1980, A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic of conductivity of unsaturated soils, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 44, 892-898.
  •  
  • 12. Mualem, Y., 1976, A new model for predicting the hydraulic permeability of unsaturated porous media, Water Res. Research, 12, 513-522.
  •  
  • 13. Schuring, J.R., 1994, Pneumatic Fracturing to remove soil contaminants, NJIT Res., 2, Spring 1994.
  •  
  • 14. Suthersan, S. Suthersan., 1999, Remediation Engineering: Design Concepts, CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, p. 237.
  •  
  • 15. Terzaghi, K., Theoretical Soil Mechanics, 1943, John Wiley and Sons, New York, p. 510.
  •  
  • 16. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 1992, A Technology Assesment of Soil Vapor Extraction and Air Sparging. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC 20460, EPA/600/R-92/173.
  •  
  • 17. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 1993, Accutech pneumatic fracturing extraction and hot gas injection, phase I, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH 45268, EPA/540/AR-93/509.
  •  

This Article

  • 2010; 15(6): 53-63

    Published on Dec 31, 2010

  • Received on Aug 31, 2010
  • Accepted on Oct 12, 2010