Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-s9k8s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-02T23:36:27.600Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sizing Requirements for Flow-Through Geochemical Tests: Theoretical Considerations and Model Results

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

James D. Hoover  and
Edward C. Thornton
James D. Hoover
Affiliation:
Westinghouse Hanford Company, P.O. Box 1970, Richland, WA 99352
Edward C. Thornton
Affiliation:
Westinghouse Hanford Company, P.O. Box 1970, Richland, WA 99352
Get access

Abstract

A methodology for evaluating test apparatus size requirements has been applied to the sizing of flow-through tests used in the evaluation of coupled reaction and transport processes. The results of the sizing evaluation constrain the apparatus dimensions and test conditions capable of yielding results representative of the processes of interest.

The size requirements of flow-through tests involving a system of simplified granite and groundwater were determined in order to demonstrate the feasibility and implications of sizing evaluations. Reaction path simulations were performed using the E03/6 codes at temperatures of 25°C, 100°C, and 200°C. The determination of reaction path as a function of time was then used to obtain minimum column residence time requirements. Simulation results indicate that column lengths required for development of quasistatic equilibrium reaction zones at 200°C are three times smaller than at 100°C, and over 36 times smaller than at 25°C.

A range of possible combinations of column dimensions and flow rates for a set of model test conditions exist for a given residence time. The most appropriate combinations depend on the purpose of the test, the process of interest, and factors such as test duration, sampling requirements, and engineering limitations. Size and scale evaluations thus provide a technical basis for the design and construction of flow-through tests, and have profound implications for the interpretation of test results.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 176: Symposium U – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XIII , 1989 , 683
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Hoover, J.D., Khaleel, R., LeGore, T., Thornton, E.C., Anantatmula, R.P., and Lanigan, D.C., in Waste Management '89. vol. 1 (University of Arizona, Tucson) pp. 497–501.Google Scholar
2. Lichtner, P.C., Helgeson, H.C., and Murphy, W.M. in Chemical Transport in Metasomatic Processes, edited by Helgeson, H.C. (D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1987) pp. 519–545.Google Scholar
3. Lichtner, P.C., Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 52, 143–165 (1988).Google Scholar
4. Helgeson, H.C. and Murphy, W.M., Math. Geol. 15, 109–130 (1983).Google Scholar
5. Aagaard, P. and Helgeson, H.C., Amer. J. Sci. 2R, 237–285 (1982).Google Scholar
6. Helgeson, H.C., Murphy, W.M., and Aagaard, P., Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 48, 2405–2432 (1984).Google Scholar
7. Wolery, T.J., Calculation of Chemical Equilibrium Between Aqueous Solution and Minerals: The E03/6 Software Packaoe (UCRL-52658, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 1979).Google Scholar
8. Knapp, R.B., Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 53, 1955–1964 (1989).Google Scholar
9. Wolery, T.J., EQ3NR - A Computer Program for Geochemical Aqueous Speciation-solubility calculations: User's Guide and Documentation (UCRL-53414, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 1983).Google Scholar
10. Rimstidt, J.D. and Barnes, H.L., Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 44, 1683–1699 (1980).Google Scholar
11. Murphy, W.M., Oelkers, E.H., and Lichtner, P.C., Chemical Geology. (in press).Google Scholar