Slug Tests in PP- and PVP-Holes at Olkiluoto in 2013
Transcript of Slug Tests in PP- and PVP-Holes at Olkiluoto in 2013
Slug Tests in PP- and PVP-Holesat Olkiluoto in 2013
Wo
rk
ing
Re
po
rt 2
01
4-5
9 •
Slu
g T
es
ts in
PP
- an
d P
VP
-Ho
les
at O
lkilu
oto
in 2
01
3
POSIVA OY
Olki luoto
FI-27160 EURAJOKI, F INLAND
Phone (02) 8372 31 (nat. ) , (+358-2-) 8372 31 ( int. )
Fax (02) 8372 3809 (nat. ) , (+358-2-) 8372 3809 ( int. )
December 2014
Working Report 2014-59
El ias Pentti
December 2014
Working Reports contain information on work in progress
or pending completion.
El ias Pentti
Pöyry Finland Oy
Working Report 2014-59
Slug Tests in PP- and PVP-Holesat Olkiluoto in 2013
ABSTRACT
As part of the program for the final disposal of the nuclear fuel waste, Posiva Oy investigates the hydrological conditions at the Olkiluoto Island. The hydraulic conductivity in the shallow investigation holes OL-PP36, -PP39, -PVP4A, -PVP4B, -PVP6A, -PVP6B, -PVP14, -PVP30, -PVP31A, -PVP31B, -PVP32, -PVP33, -PVP34A, -PVP34B, -PVP36, -PVP37A, -PVP37B, -PVP37C, -PVP38A, -PVP38B, -PVP38C, and -PVP38D was measured in summer 2013. The length of PP-holes is between 12 m and 14 m, and the test sections (1 m) are located in the bedrock. PVP-tubes have an average length between 4–15 m, and the test sections (usually 2 m) are located in the overburden.
The measurements were carried out using the slug test technique with equipment renewed in 2010. In the slug test, the hydraulic head in the borehole is abruptly changed either by pouring water into the hole or by lowering the pressure sensor. The hydraulic conductivity is interpreted from the recovery of the water level. This report presents the field measurements and their interpretation. The interpretation has been done using the Hvorslev’s method, and for reference, conductivity has also been calculated according to the Thiem’s equation.
According to the results, hydraulic conductivity in the PP-holes ranges from 10-8 m/s to 4×10-6 and in the PVP-tubes from 10-7 m/s to 8×10-5 m/s. The observed range is quite similar to the preceding measurements in 2002 and 2004–2012. In general, the results are consistent with the results obtained in the earlier measurements, whereas some significant changes were also observed. In the groundwater tubes, this may have resulted from low groundwater table during the tests. In OL-PP36, an increase of conductivity was observed in sections 5.22–6.22 m and 6.22–7.22 m, while in section 8.22–9.22 m, the result decreased slightly. In OL-PP39, the results from sections 6.5–7.5 m and 8.5–9.5 m agree with earlier data, but in section 5.5–6.5 m the conductivity was interpreted to have increased remarkably.
The 2013 results agree relatively well with hydraulic conductivity interpreted from the pre-pumping done in connection with the groundwater sampling.
Keywords: Hydraulic conductivity, slug test, disposal of spent nuclear fuel, hydrology.
Vedenjohtavuuden slug-mittaukset PP- ja PVP-rei'issä Olkiluodossa 2013
TIIVISTELMÄ
Osana ydinjätteen loppusijoitustutkimusta Posiva Oy selvittää Olkiluodon saaren hydrologisia olosuhteita. Matalien reikien vedenjohtavuuksia mitattiin rei’istä OL-PP36, -PP39, -PVP4A, -PVP4B, -PVP6A, -PVP6B, -PVP14, -PVP30, -PVP31A, -PVP31B, -PVP32, -PVP33, -PVP34A, -PVP34B, -PVP36, -PVP37A, -PVP37B, -PVP37C, -PVP38A, -PVP38B, -PVP38C ja -PVP38D kesällä 2013. PP-reikien syvyys on 12 ja 14 m maanpinnasta, ja mittausjaksot (1 m) sijaitsevat kallion yläosassa. Mitatut PVP-reiät ovat keskimäärin 4–15 m syviä. Mittausvälit (useimmiten 2 m) ovat maapeiteosuudella.
Mittaukset suoritettiin käyttäen slug-tekniikkaa. Käytössä oli v. 2010 parannettu mittauslaitteisto. Mittauksessa kairareikään aiheutetaan ylipaine joko kaatamalla sinne vettä tai laskemalla paineanturia. Vedenjohtavuus lasketaan vedenpinnan palautumis-ajan perusteella. Tässä raportissa kuvataan kenttämittaukset ja niiden tulkinta. Mittaukset on tulkittu käyttäen Hvorslevin menetelmää ja tarkistusta varten vedenjohtavuus on laskettu myös Thiemin kaavalla.
Tulosten mukaan vedenjohtavuus PP-rei’issä vaihtelee välillä 10-8 m/s – 4×10-6 m/s ja PVP-rei’issä välillä 10-7 m/s – 8×10-5 m/s. Vaihteluväli on lähes sama kuin vuosien 2002 ja 2004 – 2012 mittauksissa. Pääosin tulkitut vedenjohtavuudet sopivat hyvin yhteen aiempien tulosten kanssa, mutta myös joitakin huomattavia muutoksia havaittiin. Pohjavesiputkissa syynä saattoi olla tavallista matalampi pohjaveden pinta mittausten aikana. Reiässä OL-PP36 vedenjohtavuuden havaittiin nousseen selvästi väleissä 5.22–6.22 m ja 6.22–7.22 m ja laskeneen hieman välissä 8.22–9.22 m. Reiässä OL-PP39 välien 6.5–7.5 m ja 8.5–9.5 m tulokset vastaavat hyvin aiempien vuosien mittauksia, mutta välissä 5.5–6.5 m vedenjohtavuuden tulkitaan nousseen huomattavasti.
Vuoden 2013 vedenjohtavuustulokset sopivat kohtuullisen hyvin myös pohjavesi-näytteenoton yhteydessä saatuihin esipumppauksista tulkittuihin vedenjohtavuuksiin.
Avainsanat: Vedenjohtavuus, slug-testi, käytetyn ydinpolttoaineen loppusijoitus, hydrologia.
PREFACE
This report is part of the program for the final disposal of the nuclear fuel waste on the island of Olkiluoto. The main aim of the study is to investigate the hydraulic conductivity close to the ground surface.
The field measurements were carried out by Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto, and Ilkka Vaarula from Posiva Oy, using the technique and equipment developed by PRG-Tec Oy (Hellä & Heikkinen 2004, Heikkinen 2010). The interpretation of the results and compilation of the report has been done at Pöyry Finland Oy by Elias Pentti. This work is done as part of the contract number 9118-14 by Posiva Oy. Susanna Aro has been the contact person at Posiva Oy.
1
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT TIIVISTELMÄ PREFACE
1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 3
2 FIELD MEASUREMENTS ........................................................................................ 5
2.1 MEASUREMENTS IN PP-HOLES ............................................................................. 7 2.2 MEASUREMENTS IN PVP-TUBES .......................................................................... 8
3 METHOD OF INTERPRETATION ......................................................................... 11
3.1 HVORSLEV’S METHOD ........................................................................................ 11 3.2 THIEM’S FORMULA ............................................................................................. 11
4 DATA PROCESSING ............................................................................................. 15
5 RESULTS ............................................................................................................... 17
5.1 RESULTS IN 2013 .............................................................................................. 17 5.2 COMPARISON WITH EARLIER RESULTS ................................................................ 24
6 ON THE ACCURACY OF THE RESULTS ............................................................. 31
6.1 DETECTION LIMITS ............................................................................................. 31 6.2 EFFECT OF THE TIME INTERVAL USED IN INTERPRETATION ................................... 34 6.3 COMPARISON WITH THE PRE-PUMPING RESULTS ................................................. 36 6.4 EFFECT OF GROUNDWATER LEVEL ..................................................................... 38
7 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................... 41
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 43
APPENDIX 1 MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT ............................................................. 47
APPENDIX 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA PROCESSING MACROS .................... 49
APPENDIX 3 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PP36 ................................... 53
APPENDIX 4 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PP39 ................................... 59
APPENDIX 5 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP4A ................................ 69
APPENDIX 6 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP4B ................................ 73
APPENDIX 7 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP6A ................................ 77
APPENDIX 8 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP6B ................................ 81
APPENDIX 9 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP14 ................................ 85
APPENDIX 10 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP30 .............................. 89
2
APPENDIX 11 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP31A ............................93
APPENDIX 12 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP31B ............................97
APPENDIX 13 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP32 .............................101
APPENDIX 14 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP33 .............................105
APPENDIX 15 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP34A ...........................109
APPENDIX 16 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP34B ...........................113
APPENDIX 17 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP36 .............................117
APPENDIX 18 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP37A ...........................121
APPENDIX 19 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP37B ...........................125
APPENDIX 20 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP37C ...........................129
APPENDIX 21 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP38A ...........................133
APPENDIX 22 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP38B .......................... 137
APPENDIX 23 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP38C .......................... 141
APPENDIX 24 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP38D .......................... 145
APPENDIX 25 SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS ......................................................... 149
APPENDIX 26 COMPARISON OF THE K- AND T-VALUES WITH THE PRE-PUMPING RESULTS ................................................................................................. 153
APPENDIX 27 CORRECTION TO PREVIOUS SLUG TEST REPORT ..................... 155
3
1 INTRODUCTION
As part of the program for the final disposal of the nuclear fuel waste, Posiva Oy investigates the prevailing hydrological conditions at the Olkiluoto Island. Since 2002, hydraulic testing has been carried out in the upper parts of the bedrock and in the overburden. The measurement technique applied has been the slug test technique using the equipment developed by PRG-Tec Oy (Hellä & Heikkinen 2004). Since 2010 the tests have been carried out with renewed equipment (Appendix 1). The slug tests are done in all new shallow holes. In addition, the slug tests are repeated yearly in the holes and tubes that belong to the monitoring program.
The results of previous measurement campaigns in 2002 and 2004–2012 are reported by Hellä & Heikkinen (2004), Tammisto et al. (2005), Tammisto & Lehtinen (2006), Keskitalo & Lindgren (2007), Keskitalo (2008 and 2009), Isola (2010), Hinkkanen (2011 and 2012), and Tammisto (2014). The latest slug test measurements were carried out in 2013, when PP-holes were measured in August and PVP-tubes in July and August. PP-holes represent the upper part of the bedrock, and PVP-tubes are located in the overburden.
This report describes these measurements, the method of interpretation, results and detection limits. The results of the measurements from different years are also compared. The descriptions of interpretation, data processing and detection limits are based on the first slug test report (Hellä & Heikkinen 2004).
4
5
2 FIELD MEASUREMENTS
The field measurements were done in July and August 2013. The measured shallow drillholes and groundwater tubes are presented in Figure 2-1 and listed in Table 2-1 and Table 2-2. Drilling of the holes and the installation of the casings are reported by Lehto (2001), Niemi & Roos (2004) and Toropainen (2009 and 2012). Details of the studied holes and tubes are presented in Appendices 3 to 24. Groundwater tube OL-PVP35 was also intended to be measured on 6.8.2013, but the water level in the tube was too low.
All of the shallow drillholes and tubes measured in 2013 have also been measured earlier (see Table 5-2). OL-PP39 has been measured nine times (2004–2012), OL-PP36 seven times (2006–2012), PVP-tubes OL-PVP4A and OL-PVP4B have been measured ten times (2002 and 2004–2012), OL-PVP6A and OL-PVP6B eight times (2002, 2006–2012) and OL-PVP14 nine times (2004–2012). Groundwater tubes OL-PVP30, -31A, -31B, -32, -33, -34A, and -35B have been measured three times (2009–2011), and OL-PVP36, -PVP37A, -37B, -37C, -38A, -38B, -38C, and -38D once in 2012 after installation in the previous year 2011.
Figure 2-1. Locations of the shallow holes where slug tests have been done in summer 2013.
6
Table 2-1. Measured PP-holes, measurement times and operators.
Hole Diam. (mm)
Length (m) Date start Time start Date end Time end Operator
Drilling report
OL-PP36 56 12.05 27.8.2013 12:55 27.8.2013 14:23 Pauliina Alho, Ilkka Vaarula /Posiva Oy
Niemi & Roos 2004
OL-PP39 56 13.71 28.8.2013 10:00 28.8.2013 14:01 Pauliina Alho, Ilkka Vaarula /Posiva Oy
Niemi & Roos 2004
Table 2-2. Measured PVP-tubes, measurement times and main information of the measurements.
Hole Diam. (mm)
Length (m)/ perforated section (m) Date Time Operator
Pressure sensor
movement (m) Drilling report
OL-PVP4A 56 9.55/2 3.7.2013 13:07 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5 Lehto 2001
OL-PVP4B 56 8.00/2 3.7.2013 13:45 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5 Lehto 2001
OL-PVP6A 56 7.83/2 31.7.2013 12:23 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5 Lehto 2001
OL-PVP6B 56 3.83/2 31.7.2013 12:00 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5 Lehto 2001
OL-PVP14 56 10.40/2 25.7.2013 12:19 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5 Niemi &
Roos 2004
OL-PVP30 52 3.80/1 31.7.2013 13:30 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5
Toropainen 2009
OL-PVP31A 52 6.50/2 4.7.2013 15:02 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5
Toropainen 2009
OL-PVP31B 52 7.00/2 4.7.2013 14:37 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5
Toropainen 2009
OL-PVP32 52 4.60/2 4.7.2013 13:16 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5
Toropainen 2009
OL-PVP33 52 3.90/1 6.8.2013 8:05 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5
Toropainen 2009
OL-PVP34A 52 7.40/2 2.8.2013 10:04 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5
Toropainen 2009
OL-PVP34B 52 7.60/2 2.8.2013 10:28 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5
Toropainen 2009
OL-PVP36 52 5.50/2 31.7.2013 14:41 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5 Toropainen
2012
OL-PVP37A 52 9.50/2 2.8.2013 12:54 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5 Toropainen
2012
OL-PVP37B 52 10.00/2 2.8.2013 13:18 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5 Toropainen
2012
OL-PVP37C 52 12.00/2 2.8.2013 13:39 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.5 Toropainen
2012
OL-PVP38A 52 14.80/2 6.8.2013 12:57 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.0 Toropainen
2012
OL-PVP38B 52 13.70/2 6.8.2013 13:18 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.0 Toropainen
2012
OL-PVP38C 52 12.70/2 6.8.2013 13.40 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.0 Toropainen
2012
OL-PVP38D 52 11.30/2 6.8.2013 14:02 Pauliina Alho, Iiro Kuusisto
/Posiva Oy 1.0 Toropainen
2012
7
2.1 Measurements in PP-holes
The PP-holes have been measured using a one-meter test section between inflatable packers that are installed temporarily into the hole. The measurement is divided into three stages:
1. Stabilization: the water level is stabilized in the hole after moving the equipment.
2. Inflation: the pressure level is stabilized in the hole and in the test section after inflating the packers.
3. Measurement: the piston is either pushed or pulled in the test section or water is poured into it. In the measurement, the stabilisation of the pressure transient is followed up.
Each of the three stages has a specific duration, see Table 2-3. An example of the water levels at different measurement stages is shown in Figure 2-2.
Table 2-3. Duration of the measurement stages.
Stage Time minimum, min Time maximum, min 1 1 2 2 2 5 3 5 15
8
15:20 15:25 15:30 15:35 15:40 15:45
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Pressure sensor of the measurement section
Pressure sensor of the hole waterlevel
OlkiluotoPP2
Stage1 Stage2 Stage3
Figure 2-2. An example of measurement results in a PP-hole.
2.2 Measurements in PVP-tubes
The groundwater observation tubes are measured without packers, using only the piston (pressure sensor). A PVC-tube is installed around the pressure sensor in order to increase the diameter of the piston and to generate an adequate pressure change after moving the piston. Only one measurement per each hole is made with this method as each hole consists of a plastic tube with a one to four meters perforated section installed in the overburden.
The measurement is divided into two stages, corresponding to Stage 1 and Stage 3 of the PP measurements, see Table 2-3. An example of the measurement is presented in Figure 2-3.
9
14:30 14:35 14:40 14:45 14:50
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
Pressure sensor of the hole waterlevel
OlkiluotoPVP3A
Stage1 Stage3
Figure 2-3. An example of measurement results in a PVP-tube.
10
11
3 METHOD OF INTERPRETATION
3.1 Hvorslev’s method
The slug test results were interpreted using Hvorslev’s method (Freeze & Cherry 1979). A homogeneous, isotropic, infinite medium in which both soil and water are incompressible is assumed. This assumption is valid, when a fracture or the network of fractures is homogenous and planar (can be seen in the analysis as a linear behaviour). According to Hvorslev, the flow rate q at time t is related to the hydraulic conductivity K and to the unrecovered head difference H−h (H reference water level, h head at time t) according to following equation:
,)( 2 hHFKdt
dhrtq (Equation 3-1.)
where r is the radius of the hole and F depends on the shape and dimensions of the piezometer. The flow rate will decrease asymptotically to zero with increasing time. Solution of the differential equation 3-1 is
0/0
TteHHhH (Equation 3-2.)
with initial condition h = H0 at t = 0, and the basic time lag T0 defined as
FK
rT
2
0
. (Equation 3-3.)
Plotting the normalized head recovery (H−h) / (H−H0) on a logarithmic scale against time results in a straight line, if a fracture or aquifer under measurement is ideal i.e. homogeneous, planar and cylinder-symmetric. The basic time lag T0 can be defined from the plot being the time t, when ln (H−h)/(H−H0) = −1. The shape factor suggested by Hvorslev can be applied if L/R > 8 (L length and R radius of the piezometer intake). The resulting equation for the hydraulic conductivity K is
0
2
2
ln
LT
RLrK . (Equation 3-4.)
Figure 3-1 clarifies the notation used in the equations above.
3.2 Thiem’s formula
For reference, the hydraulic conductivity K was also calculated based on Thiem’s formula:
hL
rrQK W
2
ln 0 . (Equation 3-5.)
12
In Equation 3-5, Q is the flow rate (= Adh/dt, where A is the void area between connection rods and the pressure cable, see Figure 3-1, and dh change in head during the time interval dt), r0 is the radius of influence assumed to be 14 m, rw is radius of the drillhole, L is the length of the test section and h is the overpressure, i.e., the head difference to the reference water level in the test section.
In the interpretation of slug test results, different time intervals dt was used for tight intervals with hardly any observed recovery and intervals with clear recovery i.e. in the case of clear observed flow, hydraulic conductivity is interpreted based on head change on a short interval dt in the middle of the recovery period. As the recovery is not linear, the result is sensitive to the selection of the time interval used in interpretation (see Figure 3-2 a). If there is hardly any flow, a longer time interval equal to one third of the recovery period is used (see Figure 3-2 b). Slow recovery is approximately linear and the Thiem’s formula gives a reliable estimation of the hydraulic conductivity.
t inf inity
Ht = 0
H0
L
t+dtdh
h
t
packers
pressure sensor
PC
supporting rods
pressure cable
hole
Figure 3-1. Principle of the slug test and interpretation according to Hvorslev’s method (modified after Freeze and Cherry 1979).
13
a)
t0 tend
h1
t1
h2
t2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
t (s)
wat
er le
vel h
(m
, bel
ow g
roun
d le
vel)
b)
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
t (s)
wa
ter
leve
l h (
m, b
elo
w g
rou
nd
leve
l)
tendt1 t2
h1h2
t0
Figure 3-2. Calculation of the hydraulic conductivity according to Thiem’s formula: in case of a) a clear recovery and b) a tight interval with very slow recovery.
14
15
4 DATA PROCESSING
For the interpretation of the first measurements in 2002, a set of Microsoft Excel macros was developed (see Appendix 2 for details) (Hellä & Heikkinen 2004). The initial macro has been used in the interpretation of the former measurements in 2004–2009. The measurements in 2010–2013 were carried out with the renewed equipment (Appendix 1), and thus the structure of the data was changed slightly. Therefore, some minor changes related to the starting values had to be done to the original macro. The actual analysis of the results uses a template file (Excel worksheet), which contains the necessary formulas and graph templates (see Appendices 3 to 24). The figures on the template include a graph of the measured water level both in the measurement hole and in the test section. Another figure depicts the interpretation i.e. (H−h)/(H−H0) is plotted on a logarithmic scale as a function of time. In the latter figure also the fitted line through the measured points is plotted. The macro copies the data from the measurement file to the analysis template file. The functions and images in the template file are modified automatically. Further on, the results, the K-values by Hvorslev’s method and the two K-values obtained by Thiem’s formula, together with some comments are copied to a separate result file.
The reference for all depth values in the results is the ground level whereas in the data files the reference is the top of the casing (TOC). The subtraction of the TOC is done automatically by the macros. The reference water level H is determined as the average water level during phase one—Figure 2-2 and Figure 3-1 are referred to for the notation. Phase one is used as the water level during it is more stable than during phase two. H0, the water level at the test section after the disturbance, either adding water or lowering the pressure sensor in the drillhole, is defined to be h at 10 (PP-holes) or 20 (PVP-tubes) time steps after the minimum observed h. The minimum is not used as the data is very noisy immediately after lowering the sensor. A disadvantage is that potentially part of the recovery period on highly conductive intervals is lost. An example is given in Figure 4-1. It is also possible to manually adjust the time interval used for line fitting, which is sometimes necessary because the lowering of the water level does not obey the theoretical exponential decay law. The time range used is shown in the interpretation plot.
16
min h
t0
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
53870 53880 53890 53900
t (s)
wat
er le
vel h
(m
, bel
ow g
roun
d le
vel)
Figure 4-1. An example of the water level changes in the test section at the time of lowering the pressure sensor. The minimum of h (the highest water level) is marked by “min h”.
A straight line is fitted through ln(H−h)/(H−H0) as a function of time. The time interval used for the fitting is from t0, the time corresponding H0, to tend corresponding either the end time of the test period or the time when (H−h)/(H−H0) reaches 0.1 or the time when (H−h)/(H−H0) becomes negative. This might happen if the data is noisy at the end of the measurement. The basic time lag T0 needed for the Hvorslev analysis is then calculated from the resulting line equation. Thereafter the hydraulic conductivity K can be derived from Equation 3-4. The time instants used in the Thiem’s formula are determined as described in Chapter 3.2 and in Figure 3-2. The water levels h1 and h2 corresponding the times t1 and t2 are calculated as an average of eleven observed h values around time t. Average is used to compensate the possibly noisy data. Once the corresponding h and t values are defined, an average head difference to borehole can be calculated together with the outflow Q. These are then further used to calculate the hydraulic conductivity K according to Equation 3-5. To check the correctness of the interpretation, the quotient of the hydraulic conductivities KHvorslev / KThiem is calculated. If the ratio is between 1/3 and three, these two results are considered to be in accordance. On most of the tight intervals, T0 is not reached meaning that the value of T0 has to be extrapolated outside the observed time range and the result is thus more uncertain than in cases when T0 is reached during the observation period.
17
5 RESULTS
5.1 Results in 2013
K-values (m/s) obtained from slug measurements give information about hydraulic conductivity in the soil where test sections are located. Hydraulic conductivity K expresses the linear proportionality of the Darcy velocity to the gradient of hydraulic head of groundwater. Porosity and structure of the sediment/rock, fractures in rock, grain size, shape and sorting in sediment, and the way K is calculated from experimental data, will affect the value of K. Table 5-1 presents typical ranges of K for different kinds of soil and rock, discovered in numerous field studies and laboratory measurements over the years. Even in a certain kind of soil or rock, the hydraulic conductivity can vary by several orders of magnitude, and the ratio between coarse gravel and the most impervious rocks and clays is in the billions.
Table 5-1. Typical ranges of hydraulic conductivity for different types of soil and rock. (Niemi et al. 1994, Mälkki 1999)
Sediment type/rock type K range (m/s) Coarse gravel > 0.1 Medium gravel 0.01–0.1 Fine gravel 0.001–0.01 Sandy gravel 10−6–10−2 Sand 10−6–10−2 Coarse sand 10−4–10−1 Medium sand 10−5–10−2 Fine sand 10−6–10−3 Silt 10−9–10−5 Coarse silt 10−6–10−4 Fine silt 10−8–10−5 Clay < 10−8 Gravelly till 10−7–10−4 Sandy till 10−8–10−6 Silty till 10−9–10−7 Fractured igneous rock and metamorphic rock
10−6–10−4
Igneous rock and metamorphic rock with very little fractures
< 10−9
Schist < 10−8 Sandstone 10−10–10−7
The interpretation of the hydraulic conductivities in each of the measured holes and sections are presented in Appendices 3 to 24. Three types of recovery curves are observed: a tight section with hardly any recovery, a section with clear recovery
18
resulting in a linear trend on the semi-log plot and a section with rapid recovery, which is not linear on the semi-log plot. An example of each type is given in Figure 5-1.
Figure 5-2 presents a summary of the results in PP-holes, and Figure 5-3 and Figure 5-4 contain the summary of the results in PVP-tubes. In PP-holes, the test section is one meter along the hole. In PVP-tubes, the entire hole is measured without packers. The results represent the perforated section, which is one metre in OL-PVP30 and OL-PVP33 and two metres in the other PVP-tubes measured in 2013. OL-PVP33 and OL-PVP38D are not included in the diagrams, because their respective measurement data could not be interpreted.
All the PP-holes and PVP-tubes measured on the island of Olkiluoto are presented in Table 5-2. Altogether 12 PP-holes, 51 PVP-tubes and 4 HP-tubes have been measured. The latest measurements in 2013 included 2 PP-holes and 20 PVP-tubes. As the number of measured holes is rather small, the results of a single hole affect considerably the distributions for a single year shown in Figures 5-5 and 5-6.
Any earlier measurements available from the holes measured in 2013 are given in Table 5-2. The results from 2013 are compared with the earlier results in Figures 5-7, 5-8, 5-9 and in Appendix 25.
19
a)
b)
c)
Figure 5-1. Type of the observed recovery curves, a) a tight section with hardly any recovery, b) a section with clear recovery resulting in a linear trend on the semi-log plot and c) a section with rapid recovery, which is not linear on the semi-log plot.
20
Figure 5-2. Hydraulic conductivity (logarithm of KHvorslev in m/s) in PP-holes.
21
Fig
ure
5-3
. H
ydra
ulic
con
duct
ivit
y (l
ogar
ithm
of
KH
vors
lev
in m
/s)
in P
VP
-tub
es.
The
per
fora
ted
sect
ion
is t
wo
met
res
exce
pt i
nO
L-P
VP
30 o
ne m
etre
.
22
Fig
ure
5-4
. Hyd
raul
ic c
ondu
ctiv
ity
(log
arit
hm o
f KH
vors
lev i
n m
/s)
in P
VP
-tub
es. T
he p
erfo
rate
d se
ctio
n is
two
met
ers.
23
Table 5-2. Slug test measurements carried out on Olkiluoto Island during 2002–2013. The holes which were originally included in the monitoring programme are shown in bold.
Hole/Tube Measured Note OL-PP2 2002, 2004 collapsed OL-PP3 2002 collapsed OL-PP5 2002, 2005, 2006 OL-PP7 2002 OL-PP9 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007 OL-PP10 2002 OL-PP31 2002 OL-PP32 2002 destroyed OL-PP35 2002 not found
OL-PP36 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
OL-PP38 2004 destroyed
OL-PP39 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
OL-PVP2 2004 drilled bedrock hole OL-PVP3A 2002, 2007 OL-PVP3B 2002, 2007
OL-PVP4A 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
OL-PVP4B 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
OL-PVP5A 2002 destroyed OL-PVP5B 2002 destroyed
OL-PVP6A 2002, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
OL-PVP6B 2002, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
OL-PVP7A 2002, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP8A 2002, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP8B 2002, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP9A 2002, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP9B 2002, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP9C 2002, 2010 failed in 2010 OL-PVP10A 2002, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP10B 2002, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP11 2004, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP12 2004, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP13 2004, 2007
24
Hole/Tube Measured Note
OL-PVP14 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
OL-PVP17 2005, 2007, 2010 failed in 2010 OL-PVP18A 2005, 2007 OL-PVP18B 2005, 2007 OL-PVP19 2005, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP20 2005, 2007, 2010 OL-PVP21 2008 OL-PVP22 2008 OL-PVP23 2008 OL-PVP24 2008 OL-PVP25 2008 OL-PVP26 2008 OL-PVP27 2008 OL-PVP28 2008 OL-PVP29 2008 OL-PVP30 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013 OL-PVP31A 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013 OL-PVP31B 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013 OL-PVP32 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013 OL-PVP33 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013 OL-PVP34A 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013 OL-PVP34B 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013
OL-PVP35 2011 water table too low in 2013
OL-PVP36 2012, 2013 OL-PVP37A 2012, 2013 OL-PVP37B 2012, 2013 OL-PVP37C 2012, 2013 OL-PVP38A 2012, 2013 OL-PVP38B 2012, 2013 OL-PVP38C 2012, 2013 OL-PVP38D 2012, 2013 OL-HP1 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012 OL-HP2 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012 OL-HP3 2009, 2010, 2012 OL-HP4 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012
5.2 Comparison with earlier results
The cumulative distributions of the measured hydraulic conductivities are presented in Figures 5-5 and 5-6 including also the results from 2002 and 2004–2012. In PP-holes, the cumulative distribution of the latest measurements agrees quite well with the results from 2004 and 2007–2011 (Figure 5-5). The results from PVP-tubes from different
25
years do not agree very well, because the measurements from different years have included partly different tubes (Figure 5-6). In fact, there have only been a couple of tubes that have been measured every year (Table 5-2). That explains why results are quite widely scattered around the average cumulative distribution curve. The diagram shows that in 2013 the conductivities in the overburden were notably lower than the average cumulative distribution calculated from all results since 2002. In 2004 and 2011 the results were higher whereas in 2002, 2005, 2006, and 2012 they were lower than average. The results from 2007– 2010 seem to follow the average distribution.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1.0E-11 1.0E-10 1.0E-09 1.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04
Fre
quen
cy %
KHvorslev (m/s)
PP cumulative distribution of K
2002 results 2004 results 2005 results 2006 results
2007 results 2008 results 2009 results 2010 results
2011 results 2012 results 2013 results 2002, 2004-2013
Figure 5-5. Cumulative distribution of the hydraulic conductivities (Hvorslev) in the PP-holes.
26
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04 1.0E-03
Fre
quen
cy %
K (m/s)
PVP and HP cumulative distribution of K
2002 results 2004 results 2005 results 2006 results
2007 results 2008 results 2009 results 2010 results
2011 results 2012 results 2013 results 2002, 2004-2013
Figure 5-6. Cumulative distribution of the hydraulic conductivities (determined by the Hvorslev method) in the PVP- and the HP-tubes. The tubes where the perforated section is other than two meters are marked with red circles.
Looking at the time series of slug results at individual holes and tubes, the results of 2013 agree quite well with previous ones in some cases, but there also are several cases where a significantly different value has now been obtained.
Figure 5-7 presents the slug results from four sections of OL-PP36 that have been measured yearly since 2006. In 2013, the data from the slug test of the section centered at 7.67 m could not be interpreted to calculate a K value. In the deepest section between 8.22–9.22 m, the latest result is close to the values obtained in 2006 and 2010, whereas in the two uppermost measured sections, 5.22–6.22 and 6.22–7.22 m, the results suggest a notable increase of conductivity. Actually, it seems as if K in these sections would now be close to the previous results for the sections one meter lower. The reason for these changes, and for the relatively large K values of the deepest section obtained in 2007–2009, may be that there are some conductive fractures that intersect the hole at points that have not always been in the nominally same measuring section. Alternatively, the condition of the drillhole may have worsened. It was found to be clogged at the depth of about 5 m during groundwater sampling one week before the slug test.
27
1.E-10
1.E-09
1.E-08
1.E-07
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
)
Year
OL-PP36
PP36 (5.67m) PP36 (6.67m) PP36 (7.67m) PP36 (8.67m)
Figure 5-7. Results from OL-PP36 measured in 2013 and previous years starting in 2006. The depth mentioned in brackets is the middle point of a test section.
In OL-PP39, slug tests were carried out in seven sections, but only three of them produced data that could be reasonably interpreted. For some unknown reason, in three other tests the water level remained constant throughout the measuring time (see Appendix 4) in sections where a detectable recovery was observed in the previous tests in 2012. Figure 5-8 presents the obtained values together with the results from previous years. The latest results for the sections centered at about 7 and 9 m are close to the averages of the respective time series. By contrast, the K value for the section at about 6 m is more than two orders of magnitude larger than the rather consistent results from 2006–2011. It may be a coincidence that the anomalously large value is almost equal to the result for the next section below, but it also is a plausible explanation that there is a conductive fracture that was included in the measuring section in 2013 but not before.
There is more variation in low K-values than in higher ones. There are two main reasons for this: 1) the accuracy of slug measurement equipment is not high enough for very small values and measurement method errors become more significant in very small conductivities and 2) the macro that calculates K-values may give relatively different values depending on variation of measurement time and error factors on the result curve. Minor difference in the water-level-curve may result to a very different K-value. Furthermore, because the water level lowers so slowly in poorly conducting soil, 15 minutes of measurement time is not enough to provide reliable result. Also the calculating time should be the same every year.
28
1.E-10
1.E-09
1.E-08
1.E-07
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
)
Year
OL-PP39
PP39 (4.95m) PP39 (5.95m) PP39 (6.95m) PP39 (7.95m)
PP39 (8.95m) PP39 (9.95m) PP39 (10.95m) PP39 (11.95m)
Figure 5-8. Results from OL-PP39 measured in 2013 and previous years starting in 2004. The depth mentioned in brackets is the middle point of a test section.
In PVP-tubes, variation is rather small in most tubes but there are some tubes where the interpreted hydraulic conductivity varies by an order of magnitude or more. Figure 5-9 presents the results from the tubes that were measured in 2013 and from which there are at least two results from previous years. In OL-PVP4A, -PVP4B, and -PVP34A the results have remained essentially stable. In OL-PVP6A, the latest value is somewhat larger than the almost equal results from 2006–12, whereas in OL-PVP6B, a notable decrease is observed. In OL-PVP30, -PVP31A, and -PVP34B, the time series is quite scattered and the latest result is the smallest one obtained so far. In OL-PVP14, the slug results appeared to decrease towards a stable level during 2004–2010, but in the last three years, the values have been more scattered and slightly increasing. The largest changes have been obtained in OL-PVP31B, where the results of 2011 and 2013 are almost 103 times larger than the values obtained in 2009 and 2010. In OL-PVP32 the results have earlier also varied by three orders of magnitude, but now an intermediate value was obtained.
29
1.E-08
1.E-07
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
)
Year
PVP-tubes
OL-PVP4A (depth 6.55 m) OL-PVP4B (depth 3 m) OL-PVP6A (depth 4.83 m)
OL-PVP6B (depth 2.83 m) OL-PVP14 (depth 7.5 m) OL-PVP30 (depth 1.3 m)
OL-PVP31A (depth 3.7 m) OL-PVP31B (depth 2.6 m) OL-PVP32 (depth 1.2 m)
OL-PVP34A (depth 4.1 m) OL-PVP34B (depth 2.2 m)
Figure 5-9. Results from the PVP-tubes measured in 2013 and at least twice in the earlier measurements in 2002 and 2004–2012.
30
31
6 ON THE ACCURACY OF THE RESULTS
6.1 Detection limits
In the measurements of 2013, the interpreted hydraulic conductivities range from 10-8 m/s to 4×10-6 m/s in the PP-holes and from 10-7 m/s to 8×10-5 m/s in the PVP-tubes. In the following, the detection limits are discussed.
The accuracy of the water level obtained by the pressure sensor is 1–2 mm. By analysing the recovery in some of the tight intervals it was noticed that the change in water level has to be at least 5 mm, so that it can be distinguished from the noise. In the lowest measured K-values (10-9 – 10-10 m/s) the water level change was barely 5 mm in 15 minutes, so a longer time than the constant 15 minutes would be needed to have more reliable results. The recovery period varies from 200 s to 1000 s, so that in the slowest cases, it can be longer than the measurement time and must be determined by extrapolation. Taking the geometry of the tool and the hole into account this leads to minimum observable flow of 2×10-9 – 8×10-9 m3/s (30 ml/h) in PP-holes. The overpressure is typically 1.5 m and test section 1.0 m leading to hydraulic conductivity 1×10-9 – 5×10-9 m/s according to Thiem’s formula. Consequently, the lower detection limit in PP-holes is about 5×10-9 m/s, which corresponds to the transmissivity of 5×10-9
m2/s. The diameter of the PVP-tubes and the instrument used are different and the minimum observable flow is 2.5×10-8 m3/s. A typical overpressure is 1.5 m leading to the transmissivity of 2×10-8 m2/s. The minimum detection limit is thus 1×10-8 m/s in tubes with 2 m long perforated section.
The upper limit of the measurement range is not as clear as the lower limit. In PP-holes, the maximum observable transmissivity is estimated to be in the order of 5×10-5 m2/s, which leads to hydraulic conductivity of 5×10-5 m/s in 1 m test section. This value is deduced assuming a steel rod with a diameter of 2.5 cm, including the pressure sensor hose inside the rod with a diameter of about half of the steel rod, and further more overpressure of 2 m and a 2 m decrease in water level within 10 seconds. The observed conductivity can be higher as the flow is not necessarily steady-state as assumed in the estimation of the detection limit. In PVP-tubes, the geometry is different and the typical overpressure 1.5 m, resulting in the transmissivity of 1.6×10-4 m2/s. In PVP-tubes with 2 m long perforated section, the upper limit of hydraulic conductivity is thus 8.0×10-5 m/s. The diameter of PP-holes is 46 mm or 56 mm. The detection limits are calculated to 46 mm holes but are practically the same for 56 mm holes. In the 2013 results, the highest observed hydraulic conductivity in the PP-holes is 3.75×10-6 m/s in OL-PP39 at the depth of 6.5–7.5 m (Appendix 4), where the water level in the test section decreased 1 m in 2 minutes. The conductivity value agrees well with previous results for the same section range with the exception of the value of 1.2×10-6 m/s obtained in 2012. After lowering the sensor there is a period of about 2–3 seconds when the water level is unstable. The interpretation can be started first after more stable conditions are reached so the recovery period should last at least 5 seconds. During the first seconds the water table already decreases noticeably on sections with high conductivity. The overpressure
32
H0 used in the interpretation is, therefore, considerably less than the theoretical value of 2 m, as the example shows. In the 2013 results, the highest observed conductivity in the PVP-tubes is 8.18×10-5 m/s (OL-PVP31B, see Appendix 12). About the same limits are obtained by comparing the hydraulic conductivities resulting from the interpretations using the two methods, Hvorslev and Thiem. In general, the hydraulic conductivities calculated according to Thiem’s equation and according to Hvorslev’s method seem to be well in accordance, see Figure 6-1. The results from the PP-holes agree extremely well when the conductivity is larger than about 5×10-8 m/s. In these cases T0 is reached during the observation period. When the hydraulic conductivity is small, i.e., hardly no recovery is observed, the results obtained by the two methods are slightly different, KThiem being approximately two to three times larger than KHvorslev. In the PVP-tubes, higher conductivities are observed, and the interpreted hydraulic conductivities according to two methods match relatively well. The coefficient of correlation (R2), which measures the linear relationship between ln(H−h) / (H−H0) and time t, decreases clearly when the hydraulic conductivity in the PP-holes is less than 1×10-8 m/s. In the earlier years the correlation slightly decreases in the PVP-tubes when the hydraulic conductivity is less than 1×10-6 m/s. In the 2013 results, the correlation is relatively good both in the PP-holes and in the PVP-holes (Figure 6-2).
33
a)
1.0E-10
1.0E-09
1.0E-08
1.0E-07
1.0E-06
1.0E-05
1.0E-041.0E-10 1.0E-09 1.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04
KT
hie
m(m
/s)
KHvorslev (m/s)
Ø = 56 mm 2002 results 2004 results 2005 results 2006 results 2007 results
2008 results 2009 results 2010 results 2011 results 2012 results 2013 results
b)
1.0E-08
1.0E-07
1.0E-06
1.0E-05
1.0E-04
1.0E-031.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04 1.0E-03
KT
hie
m(m
/s)
KHvorslev (m/s)
2002 results 2004 results 2005 results 2006 results
2007 results 2008 results 2009 results 2010 results
2011 results 2012 results 2013 results
Figure 6-1. Comparison of the hydraulic conductivities calculated by the Hvorslev’s method and using Thiem’s formula a) in the PP-holes (the holes with diameter 56 mm are marked with red circles), and b) in the PVP- and the HP-tubes.
34
a)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.01.0E-10 1.0E-09 1.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04
R2
KHvorslev (m/s)
2002 results 2004 results 2005 results 2006 results2007 results 2008 results 2009 results 2010 results2011 results 2012 results 2013 results
b)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.01.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04 1.0E-03
R2
KHvorslev (m/s)
2002 results 2004 results 2005 results 2006 results
2007 results 2008 results 2009 results 2010 results
2011 results 2012 results 2013 results
Figure 6-2. R2 as a function of hydraulic conductivity K in a) the PP-holes and b) the PVP- and the HP-tubes.
6.2 Effect of the time interval used in interpretation
As Figure 6-1 shows, the hydraulic conductivity by the Hvorslev’s method is normally less than the one obtained by the Thiem’s formula in PP-holes. This is mainly due to the way how the time interval used in the interpretation is chosen. The choice of the time interval can also be a significant source of error in cases of rapid or irregular recovery.
35
If the recovery does not obey the theoretical exponential decay law, the time interval is manually chosen by the person doing the analysis so that a sufficiently regular part of the data is used for fitting. This has proven to be the main reason for variation between results obtained in different years. If the used time interval is different from an earlier year, then the K-value is also different even when the observed lowering water level curve would be exactly the same. Selection of the starting time affects also the H0, the reference water level. Figure 6-3 presents an example of the effect of the selected time range. In the result figures (Appendices 3 to 24), the time range used in the interpretation according to the Thiem’s formula and in the Hvorslev’s method is therefore shown.
3) KHvorslev negative, KThiem = 1.5E-6 m/s
2) KHvorslev = 2.3E-6 m/s, KThiem = 2.0E-6 m/s
1) KHvorslev = 2.3E-6 m/s, KThiem = 2.8E-6 m/s
-0.5
-0.1
0.3
0.7
1.1
1.5
54500 54600 54700 54800 54900 55000
t (s)
wat
er le
vel h
(m
, bel
ow g
roun
d le
vel)
Open borehole Measurement Section Intervals
1
2
3
0.1
1.0
10.054500 54600 54700 54800 54900 55000 55100
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
Figure 6-3. An example how the time selected for the interpretation affects the resulting hydraulic conductivity. Three time intervals were used each corresponding to approximately one third of the recovery. The example is from OL-PP2 at the depth of 19.42 m (Hellä & Heikkinen 2004). The interpreted values for this section were KHvorslev 1.1×10-6 m/s and KThiem 8.1×10-7 m/s. For the interval 3 the interpretation according to the Hvorslev’s method failed as the T0 gets negative.
36
6.3 Comparison with the pre-pumping results
Some of the holes studied by the slug method in 2013 were also used for groundwater sampling during April–August. These holes are OL-PP36, -PP39, -PVP4A, -PVP14, -PVP36, -PVP30, -PVP31A, -PVP36, -PVP37A, -PVP37B, -PVP37C, -PVP38A, -PVP38B, -PVP38C, and -PVP38D. Before taking the groundwater samples, the hole is pre-pumped for a certain period of time, typically for a few hours. The yield (l/min) and the change in the water table (m) are measured, which provides a way to determine the hydraulic conductivity of the surroundings of the hole. Using the pumping information and the length of the test section (either the part of the hole below the water table or the perforated section in the groundwater observation tubes), hydraulic conductivity can be estimated according to the Thiem’s formula (Equation 3-5). These values were compared to the conductivities interpreted from the slug tests. In case of the PP-holes (OL-PP36 and OL-PP39), where the slug tests were performed on 1-metre test sections, the mean of the successfully measured conductivities was used for the comparison of the K values, and the sum of the obtained T values to compare transmissivities. Figure 6-4 and Figure 6-5 show plots of the results since 2002, and Appendix 26 present the 2013 pumping results in numerical form.
PP7
PVP9B
PVP3B
PP38
PVP14
PP5
PP9
PVP4B
PVP20
PP5PP36
PVP3A
PVP10BPVP11
PP9PVP12
PVP4A
PP36 PP36
PVP23
PVP27
PVP29
PVP30
PVP31B
PVP32
PP36
PP39
PVP4A
PVP9B
PVP10A
PVP10B
PVP12
PVP14
PVP20
PP36
PP39
PVP4A
PVP14
PVP30 PVP31A
PVP31B
PVP32
PVP34A
PVP34B
PP36
PVP36
PVP37A
PVP38C
PVP38D
PP36
PP39
PVP4A
PVP14 PVP30PVP31A
PVP36PVP37A
PVP37B
PVP37C
1.0E-08
1.0E-07
1.0E-06
1.0E-05
1.0E-04
1.0E-031.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04 1.0E-03
Slu
g te
st, K
Th
iem
(m/s
)
Pre-pumping, KThiem (m/s)
2002 results 2004 results 2005 results 2006 results 2007 results 2008 results
2009 results 2010 results 2011 results 2012 results 2013 results
Figure 6-4. Comparison of the hydraulic conductivities obtained by the interpretation of the slug tests (an average conductivity of the entire hole) and from the results of pre-pumping in connection with groundwater sampling.
37
OL-PP36
OL-PP36
OL-PP36
OL-PP36
OL-PP36
OL-PP36
1.0E-08
1.0E-07
1.0E-06
1.0E-05
1.0E-04
1.0E-031.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04 1.0E-03
Slu
g te
st, T
(m2 /
s)
Pre-pumping, T (m2/s)
2004 results 2005 results 2006 results 2007 results 2008 results
2009 results 2010 results 2011 results 2012 results 2013 results
Figure 6-5. Comparison of the transmissivities in OL-PP36 and OL-PP39 obtained by the interpretation of the slug tests (sum of the T values of the measured 1-metre sections) and from the results of pre-pumping in connection with groundwater sampling.
The results from the pre-pumping agree quite well with those from the slug tests, although there are also some exceptions (Figure 6-4 and Figure 6-5) (Tuominen 1998, Hatanpää 2002, Kröger 2004, Hellä & Heikkinen 2004, Hirvonen 2005, Tammisto et al. 2005, Tammisto & Lehtinen 2006, Lehtinen et al. 2006, Partamies et al. 2007, Keskitalo & Lindgren 2007, Keskitalo 2008–2009, Partamies et al. 2008, Pitkänen et al. 2009, Isola 2010, Penttinen et al. 2011, Penttinen et al. 2013 & 2014abc, Hinkkanen 2011–2012, Tammisto 2014). In general, the pre-pumping values are usually slightly smaller than the slug results. This results from the longer duration of the pre-pumping in comparison with the slug test. Although the radius of influence r0 is assumed to be constant, it actually increases gradually with the duration of the pumping, which leads to a decrease in the flow and a smaller calculated conductivity. If the pre-pumping values are higher, it is possible that there is a conductive fracture outside the section measured in slug tests that affects the pre-pumping that measures the whole open drillhole. Another reason could be that dirty or clayey water blocks small holes in a measurement section during a slug test while the flow towards the hole during pre-pumping clears the holes.
38
In 2013, the pre-pumping results correlate quite well with the slug test results except for OL-PP36, OL-PP39, OL-PVP37C, and OL-PVP31A (Appendix 23). In OL-PP36, the prepumping result is an order of magnitude higher than the slug test result, as it has also been in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, and 2012. It is very likely that there is a conductive fracture outside the part of the hole measured in the slug tests. The test sections in the slug test were between 5.22–9.22 m, whereas the prepumping measures the whole open drillhole which is 12 meters long of which over 8 meters is below the water level. 6.4 Effect of groundwater level
In the end of summer 2013, at the time when most of the slug tests were conducted, groundwater table at Olkiluoto was unusually low. During the analysis of the test results, it was noticed that in some PVP-tubes, the initial water level had been very close or even within the perforated test section of the tube and that the interpreted result differed notably from previous data. The data from the test in OL-PVP33 was not possible to interpret at all (see Appendix 14), and the planned slug test in OL-PVP35 was cancelled because the water level in the tube was too low. The possible connection between groundwater table and results of slug tests was investigated by combining the interpreted K values and groundwater tables in the measured tubes from the past years. Figure 6-6 presents slug results as a function of groundwater table at the time of the test, showing data from the tubes that have been measured in 2013 and at least twice during previous years. The groundwater table in the graph is expressed as the height of water above the midpoint of the measurement section, which is 1 m long in OL-PVP30 and OL-PVP35, and 2 m in others.
1E‐8
1E‐7
1E‐6
1E‐5
1E‐4
‐2 ‐1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Slug test K(m
/s)
Water table above midpoint of measurement section (m)
PVP4A
PVP4B
PVP6A
PVP6B
PVP14
PVP30
PVP31A
PVP31B
PVP32
PVP33
PVP34A
PVP34B
2013 resultsfailed
Figure 6-6. Results of slug tests in PVP-tubes as a function of initial water table relative to the test section. Red circles mark the results of 2013.
39
The graph above indicates rather clearly that groundwater table has an effect on slug results or their interpretation. In five tubes where water level has been at least 2 metres above the midpoint of the measuring section in every slug test (OL-PVP4A, -4B, -6A, -14, and -34A), the results from different years vary much less than in the other tubes. The largest differences of results from the same tube have occurred in OL-PVP32, where the water level has been in the lower half of the measuring section during each slug test, and in OL-PVP31B, where the water level has varied between 0.5 m below to 1 m above the top of the measuring section. In both of these holes, the largest interpreted K-values are about three orders of magnitude larger than the smallest. This is likely to result from different choices of the time interval used in the interpretation of irregular measurement data.
In conclusion, it appears that one of the reasons for large differences between slug test results from different years is that the initial water level in the groundwater tube is too close to the measurement section. It is conceivable that the observed recovery rate (and consequently the interpreted hydraulic conductivity) actually depends very strongly on the initial water level in these cases, or that the recovery curve deviates from the assumed ideal time-dependence in a way that makes its interpretation ambiguous.
40
41
7 CONCLUSIONS
Slug tests were performed in several shallow PP-holes and PVP-tubes at Olkiluoto during the summer 2013. The measurements were carried out using the same technique developed by PRG-Tec Oy as in the measurements in 2002, 2004–2012 (Hellä & Heikkinen 2004, Tammisto et al. 2005, Tammisto & Lehtinen 2006, Keskitalo & Lindgren 2007, Keskitalo 2008, 2009, Isola 2010, Hinkkanen 2011 and 2012, Tammisto 2013). The equipment in use was a renewed version from the year 2010 (Hinkkanen 2011).
The measurement results were interpreted by the Hvorslev’s method. For comparison, the conductivity was also calculated using the Thiem’s formula. The interpretation was done by using MS-Excel macros written for the purpose. The analysis method is easy to use and quick as manual work is hardly needed for the file operations.
According to the measurements conducted in 2013, hydraulic conductivities in the PP-holes range from 10-8 m/s to 4×10-6 m/s and in the PVP-tubes from 10-7 m/s to 8×10-5 m/s. The range is quite similar to the one in the measurements of the years 2002 and 2004–2012. With the applied technique, hydraulic conductivities in the range 4×10-10 – 5×10-5 m/s in the PP-holes and 10-8 – 7×10-5 m/s in the PVP/HP-tubes can be detected, so that some of the results of 2013 are at the upper limit of the method. The detection limits of hydraulic conductivity depend on the length of the test sections and the overpressure used.
The results from the holes and tubes measured in 2013 were analysed and compared with the results from the earlier measurements. In general, the results of repeated measurements are quite close to each other, but there are some groundwater tubes with variations of up to three orders of magnitude. Variation in results of different years can be explained by disturbance factors in measurement, limited range of accuracy of the slug test method, and the different way the MS-Excel macro analyzes water-level recovery curves when the user manually sets the applied time interval.
In OL-PP36, measurement data from only three packer sections could be interpreted. In sections 5.22–6.22 m and 6.22–7.22 m hydraulic conductivity appears to have increased in comparison with earlier results, and in section 8.22–9.22 m remained at the level observed in 2006 and 2010–2012. In OL-PP39, slug tests were conducted in seven packer sections but only three yielded data that could be interpreted reasonably. In section 5.5–6.5 m the obtained result is two orders of magnitude larger than the conductivities measured in 2005–2011 and very close to the result for the next section below, 6.5–7.5 m. In section 8.5–9.5 m, the result is again at the typical level after the unusually large value in 2012.
The interpreted hydraulic conductivities from the slug tests were also compared to those obtained by the pre-pumping during the water sampling. The results are mostly in good agreement with four exceptions in OL-PP36, OL-PP39, OL-PVP31A, and OL-PVP37C. The dependence of the accumulated slug results on the initial water level in the groundwater tube was also investigated to check whether low groundwater table during the 2013 tests could have caused the deviations from earlier results. It appears that large variation of results has mainly occurred in tubes where the water level is typically lower than about 2 m above the measuring section. Therefore, in order to obtain comparable results in different years, it would be advisable to carry out the slug tests when the groundwater table is high or the same as during earlier tests.
42
43
REFERENCES
Freeze, R. A. & Cherry, J.A. 1979. Groundwater. Prentice Hall Inc. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. United States. 604 p.
Hatanpää, E. 2002. Groundwater Sampling from Drilled Holes (PR and PP) and Groundwater Pipes (PVP) at Olkiluoto in 2001. Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2002-20. 90 p. (in Finnish with an English Abstract)
Hellä, P. & Heikkinen, P. 2004. Slug Tests in Shallow Holes at Olkiluoto 2002. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2004-13. 201 p.
Hinkkanen, H. 2011: Slug-tests in PP- and PVP-holes at Olkiluoto in 2010. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2011-40. 121 p.
Hinkkanen, H. 2012: Slug-tests in PP- and PVP-holes at Olkiluoto in 2011. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2012-51. 89 p.
Hirvonen, H. 2005. Groundwater Sampling from Shallow Boreholes (PP and PR) and Groundwater Observation Tubes (PVP) at Olkiluoto in 2004. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2005-57. 148 p.
Isola, O. 2010: Slug-tests in PP- and PVP-holes at Olkiluoto in 2009. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2010-19. 95 p.
Keskitalo, K. & Lindgren, S. 2007: Slug-tests in PP- and PVP-holes at Olkiluoto 2006. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2007-93. 81 p.
Keskitalo, K. 2008. Slug-tests in PP- and PVP-holes at Olkiluoto in 2007. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2008-21. 111 p.
Keskitalo, K. 2009. Slug-tests in PP- and PVP-holes at Olkiluoto in 2008. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2009-05. 95 p.
Kröger, T. 2004. Groundwater Sampling from Shallow Boreholes (PP and PR) and Groundwater Observation Tubes (PVP) at Olkiluoto in 2003. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2004-44. 117 p.
Lehtinen, A., Hatanpää, H. & Hirvonen H. 2006. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2005. Geochemistry. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2006-67. 174 p.
Lehto, K. 2001. Installation of Groundwater Observation Tubes at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki 2001. Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 58 p. Working Report 2001-39. 58 p.
Mälkki, E. 1999. Pohjavesi ja pohjaveden ympäristö. Helsinki: Tammi. 304 p.
Niemi, A., Kling, T., Vaittinen, T., Vahanne, P., Kivimäki, A. & Hatva, T., 1994. Tiesuolauksen pohjavesivaikutusten simulointi tyyppimuodostumissa. Talvi ja tieliikenne -projekti. Tielaitoksen selvityksiä 66/1994. Tielaitos, Helsinki. 55 s.
44
Niemi, K. & Roos, S. 2004. Havaintoputkien asentaminen, matalien kairareikien kairaa-minen, painokairaaminen ja maaperänäytteet Eurajoen Olkiluodon tutkimusalueella vuoden 2003 syksyllä. Eurajoki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 43 p. Working Report 2004-03. 43 p. (in Finnish)
Partamies, S., Pitkänen, P., Lahdenperä, A.-M., Lehtinen, A., Ahokas, T., Hirvonen, H. & Hatanpää, E. 2007. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2006: Hydrogeochemistry. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2007-51. 238 p.
Partamies, S., Pitkänen, P., Lahdenperä, A-M, Ahokas, T., Lehtinen, A., Hirvonen H & Hatanpää, E. 2008. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2007: Hydrogeochemistry. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2008-24. 212 p.
Penttinen, T., Partamies, S., Lahdenperä, A-M, Pitkänen, P., Ahokas, T & Kasa, S. 2011. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2009: Hydrogeochemistry. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2010-44. 296 p.
Penttinen, T., Partamies, S., Lahdenperä, A-M, Lamminmäki, T., Lehtinen, A. & Sireeni, S. 2013. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2010: Hydrogeochemistry. Eurajoki, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2011-44. 358 p.
Penttinen, T., Partamies, S., Lahdenperä, A-M., Ahokas, T., Lamminmäki, T. & Lehtinen, A. 2014a. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2011: Hydrogeochemistry. Eurajoki, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2012-44. XX p. (in print)
Penttinen, T., Partamies, S., Ahokas, T., Lamminmäki, T. & Lehtinen, A. 2014b. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2012: Hydrogeochemistry. Eurajoki, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2013-44. XX p. (in preparation)
Penttinen, T., Partamies, S., Ahokas, T., Lamminmäki, T. & Lehtinen, A. 2014c. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2013: Hydrogeochemistry. Eurajoki, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2014-44. XX p. (in preparation)
Pitkänen, P., Partamies, S., Lahdenperä A-M., Ahokas, T. & Lamminmäki, T. 2009: Results of monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2008: Hydrogeochemistry. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2009-44. 236 p.
Tammisto, E. 2014. Slug-tests in PP- and PVP-holes at Olkiluoto in 2012. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2013-50
Tammisto, E., Hellä, P. & Lahdenperä, J. 2005. Slug-Tests in PP- and PVP-Holes at Olkiluoto in 2004. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2005-76. 87 p.
Tammisto, E. & Lehtinen, A. 2006. Slug-tests in PP- and PVP-holes at Olkiluoto in 2005. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. 93 p. Working Report 2006-100. 93 p.
Toropainen, V. 2009. Installation of Groundwater Observation Tubes OL-PVP30–35 at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki 2009. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2009-27. 17 p.
45
Toropainen, V. 2012. Installation of Groundwater Observation Tubes OL-PVP36–38 and Drilling of Shallow Drillholes OL-PP70–71 at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki 2011. Olkiluoto, Finland: Posiva Oy. Working Report 2012-22. 56 p.
Tuominen, M. 1998. Hydrogeochemical Studies at Olkiluoto During 1997: Drilled Holes PR3 and PR4 and Ground Water Pipes PVP1 and PVP2. Helsinki, Finland: Posiva Oy. 39 p. Working Report 98-07. 39 p.
46
47
APPENDIX 1 MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT
The principle of the tool was introduced in the first slug-test report (Hellä & Heikkinen 2004). The equipment for measurements was modified in the beginning of the year 2010 but the principle is still the same. Block diagram in Figure A1-1 shows the main parts of the equipment. Components which are renewed are presented with red shaded. Also a new measuring program was programmed to PDA-unit.
Figure A1-1. Block diagram of the tool.
Other components except those used in a hole were installed into a plywood box which is easy to carry in one’s back (Figure A1-2).
Hig
h pr
essu
re b
ottl
e (a
ir)
Bluetooth- RS485 converter
HP iPAQ (PDA)
Pre
ssur
e se
nsor
M
eas.
sec
tion
1.
5 B
ar
Pressure sensor Drillhole
1.5 bar
Pressure reducer 4 bar
Data Logger
Bubble device
Dou
ble
pack
er
Transformer230 V / 12 V
Pre
ssur
e bo
ttle
(w
ater
)
Battery 12 V
4/6 mm hose
Release packer pressure
48
Figure A1-2. Transport box was made of plywood and it is easy to carry in one’s back.
The equipment is instantly ready for use after opening the box (Figure A1-3). The tool can be used with 220 V (AC) or 12 V (DC).
Figure A1-3. Transport box opened.
49
APPENDIX 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA PROCESSING MACROS
In the interpretation of the measurement data the same macros developed for the interpretation of the slug tests in 2002 (Hellä & Heikkinen 2004) were used. Some modifications were done, when the slug tests of 2004 were interpreted (Tammisto et al. 2005). Use of the renewed measuring equipment in 2010 caused also some modifications to the interpretation macros. The version number of the macro used in 2010 was 1.5 (Hinkkanen 2011). In 2011, the macro was further renewed so that it reads the data directly from the data file, and only drillhole diameter and length of the casing above ground level are given in a file named “slugmakefile”, where the names of the data files of the latest slug tests are listed for the macro. The version number of the macro used in 2011–2013 slug data interpretations was 1.6.
For the interpretation, a Microsoft Excel file containing the necessary functions and graphs was used as a template. The macro copies the necessary data from the measurement file to the analysis template. The functions and graphs in the template file are modified automatically. Further on the results, K-values by Hvorslev’s method and the two K-values obtained by Thiem’s equation, together with some comments are copied to a separate result file. The result files and the sheets with the interpretations of the 2013 measurements are presented in Appendices 3–24.
Input Data
Data from “slugmakefile”: - Name of the datafile - Diameter of the drillhole (mm) - Length of the casing above ground level (m)
Data from the header of the measurement files used for interpretation: - Top depth of the test section (m) - Depth of the pressure sensor, drillhole (m) - Initial depth of the pressure sensor of the test section (m) - Depth of the pressure sensor of the test section after movement (m) - Length of the test section (m) And from the data columns (the letter in parentheses refers to the column’s name in Excel):
Cable Depth (A) depth of the top of the test section (ref TOC), only first value used
Date (B) date, only first value used Time (C) time Phase (E) 1 = open borehole equipment installed
2 = inflation of packers + stabilization of pressure 3 = pressure increase + recovery phase
WaterLevelBorehole(m) (G) water column above pressure sensor of borehole water WaterLevelMeasurement-Section(m) (I)
water column above pressure sensor of test section
50
The template workbook
The template workbook analysis_template.xls contains three sheets:
parameters for input parameters, results and figure of the water level at the borehole and in the test section during the measurement and a figure with the measurement results and the fitted line. The data copied from the input file is marked with italic. The content with some comments is described below:
- input file, name of the input file containing the hole id and the file number - date, date of the measurement - TOC (m), length of the casing above ground level - depth of pressure sensor open hole (m), measured from the top of the casing - depth of pressure sensor meas. section (m), measured from the top of the casing - depth of meas. section (m), top of the section measured from the top of the casing - depth of meas. section (m), midpoint of the section measured from ground level - tube diameter (mm), diameter of the tube having an equal area to a double tube with
given inner and outer diameter (16.6/24.9 mm in PP-holes and 40/56 mm in PVP-tubes) - r (mm), radius of the tube with the above diameter - H, initial water level (m, below ground level) average of the observed values during
phase 1 - H0, water level (m, below ground level) after the disturbance, H0* = min(water level in
test section), H0 = water level in test section 10 observations after H0*, the shift is done because the water level changes rapidly just after the moving of the pressure sensor.
- t0, time corresponding to H0, start time of the line fitting or the time instant given by the user
- tend (s), end time of the line fitting, is either the end time of the measuring period, or the time when (H−h)/(H−H0) reaches 0.1 or the time when (H−h)/(H−H0) gets negative, this might happen if the data is noisy at the end of the measurement, the user can also define the tend
- T0, time when (H−h)/(H−H0) = 0.37, calculated from the estimated line equation - L (m), length of the test section - screen diam. (mm), hole diameter - screen radius R (mm), hole radius - L/R - K (m/s), hydraulic conductivity calculated according to Equation 4-4. - logK
51
For the calculation of hydraulic conductivity according to Thiem’s equation following data is used:
Two time instants are used in calculating the flow for the Thiem analysis and two cases are considered:
- flow o t1 (s) corresponds to the time when h is equal to (H + H0) / 2, if such h is
not reached t1 is defined to be the time corresponding to one third of the recovery period.
o t2 (s) is 20 observations later - no flow
o t1 (s) is 20 observations later than t0 o t2 (s) is determined to be t0 + (tend – t0)/3, but if the recovery period is
short, less than 40 time steps, then the whole recovery is used i.e. t2 equal to tend
- h1 (m) is the average of 11 observed h values at time t1, average is used to compensate the possibly noisy data, otherwise erroneous results are obtained especially in case of no flow
- h2 (m) is the average of 11 observed h values at time t2 - dh (m) is the average change in water level, h in Equation 4-5, dh = (h1+h2)/2 – H0 - Q (m3/s) observed flow in time t1 – t2 - KThiem (m/s) hydraulic conductivity assuming r0 = 14 m - logK - KHvorslev / KThiem quotient of the hydraulic conductivities according to the two
methods The sheet contains also two figures: the first one presents the measured water levels in the open borehole and in the test section. The measured values are corrected so that the reference is always ground level. The other figure shows the results of the Hvorslev’s method, the measured (H−h)/(H−H0) values are plotted on a logarithmic scale as a function of time, also the fitted line is shown as well as the line (H−h)/(H−H0) = 0.37.
data initial measurement data together with the processed one. The columns are the following:
- Time(s), copy of the time column of the input file - Phase, copy of the phase column of the input file - WaterLevelBorehole(m), copy of the water level/borehole column of the input file - WaterLevelMeasurementSection(m), copy of the water level/measurement section
column of the input file - Open borehole, corrected water level in the open borehole below ground level (m)
taking into account the depth of the pressure sensor and the casing (=ps_depth – toc - wl)
- Measurement Section, h, corrected water level in the test section below ground level (m) taking into account the depth of the pressure sensor and the casing (=ps_depth – toc - wl). Here, the possible change in the pressure sensor depth is taken into account.
- t, time from t0 i.e. start of the line fitting
52
- H−h, change in the water level at the test section - H−H0, the total overpressure (m) - (H−h)/(H−H0) - ln((H−h)/(H−H0)) - fitted, the fitted values at the given time - (H−h)/(H−H0)<0.1, used to define the end of the time interval used in the line fitting
support data needed to draw a line (H−h)/(H−H0) = 0.37 in the lower figure on sheet parameters.
Subprograms
The interpretation macro consists of following subprograms:
prepare_file_for_analysis opens a file containing measurement data and copies the necessary data to the analysis template deleting the header rows of the input data file
preliminary_analysis modifies the functions and images in the analysis template workbook to correspond the current data file.
Write_results writes the results of the analysis to the results workbook (filename, depth of test section, hydraulic conductivity K according to Hvorslev’s method and the two Thiem approximations, R2-value of the line fitting and comments:
T0 not reached means that during the recovery period (H−h)/(H−H0) does not reach value 0.37 corresponding the time needed for the recovery assuming steady state flow. This means that the value of T0 has to be extrapolated outside the observed time range and the result is thus more uncertain than in the case when T0 is reached during the observation period.
Thiem different means that the hydraulic conductivity by Hvorslev’s method is at least three times greater or smaller than the one obtained by Thiem’s method.
q increasing with time means that the fitted line has a positive slope and thus no recovery is observed, indicates an error.
Negative K means hydraulic conductivity obtained by Hvorslev’s method is negative indicating an error.
Print_results prints the paper copy and a pdf-file from the parameters-sheet.
53
APPENDIX 3 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PP36
APPENDIX 3
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
P36
Pau
liina
Alh
o, Il
kka
Vaa
rula
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 4.
73 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
8 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&ru
n
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2
KTh
iem
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
161
27.8
.201
312
:27
54.
735.
780
460
ml w
ater
add
ed16
227
.8.2
013
12:5
66
4.73
5.78
046
0 m
l wat
er a
dded
PP36
0001
62.d
at5.
721.
26E
-07
0.99
92.
32E
-07
2.18
E-0
7T0
not
reac
hed
163
27.8
.201
313
:24
74.
735.
781.
5PP
3600
0163
.dat
6.72
4.51
E-0
70.
976
7.96
E-0
77.
86E
-07
164
27.8
.201
313
:52
84.
735.
781.
5fa
iled
PP36
0001
64.d
at7.
727.
42E
-09
0.90
02.
56E
-08
1.06
E-0
8N
o re
cove
ry, r
esul
t rej
ecte
d
165
27.8
.201
314
:00
94.
735.
781.
5PP
3600
0165
.dat
8.72
1.39
E-0
80.
954
2.68
E-0
83.
83E
-08
T0 n
ot re
ache
d
54
APPENDIX 3
inpu
t file
PP36
0001
62.d
atda
te27
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.78
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)4.
73 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
3.81
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
78
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7.
28
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)6
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
72tu
be d
iam
eter
(m
m)
18.5
6
r (m
m)
9.28
H4.
78
H 04.
42
t 046
828.
0t en
d (s)
4707
4.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
246.
0T 0
1219
.4
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)1.
26E-
07T0
not
rea
ched
logK
-6.9
0ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
0082
2923
0.00
3454
414
t146
900.
0h1
4.44
1.23
214E
-06
0.00
0175
15t2
4692
0.0
h24.
440.
9995
0.00
1380
737
Q (m
3 /s)
7.98
E-08
dh (m
)0.
3444
6066
.485
924
5K T
hiem
(m/s
)2.
32E-
07lo
gK-6
.63
0.85
0396
887
0.00
0467
077
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
0.54
Stat
test
stig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
066
7.88
t146
848.
0h1
4.42
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
19.7
2t2
4691
0.0
h24.
44t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
97Q
(m3 /s
)7.
69E-
08dh
(m)
0.35
K Thi
em (m
/s)
2.18
E-07
logK
-6.6
6K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
0.
58
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.046
800
4685
046
900
4695
047
000
4705
047
100
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
3.5
3.7
3.9
4.1
4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9 46
500
4700
047
500
4800
048
500
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
55
APPENDIX 3
inpu
t file
PP36
0001
63.d
atda
te27
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.78
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)4.
73 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
3.81
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
78
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7.
28
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)6.
72tu
be d
iam
eter
(m
m)
18.5
6
r (m
m)
9.28
H4.
77
H 03.
54
t 048
750.
0t en
d (s)
4965
7.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
907.
0T 0
341.
4
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)4.
51E-
07lo
gK-6
.35
ln((
H-h)
/(H-H
0)) =
a*t
+ b
Thie
m a
naly
sis
for c
ontro
la
bflo
w-0
.002
1929
04-0
.251
3572
76t1
4893
6.0
h14.
141.
1334
1E-0
50.
0059
3685
3t2
4895
6.0
h24.
170.
9764
0.08
9520
75Q
(m3 /s
)4.
98E-
07dh
(m)
0.62
3743
4.11
7990
6K T
hiem
(m/s
)7.
96E-
07lo
gK-6
.10
299.
9956
989
7.26
0652
006
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
0.57
Stat
test
stig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
019
3.48
t148
770.
0h1
3.66
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
42.3
4t2
4905
2.0
h24.
31t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
96Q
(m3 /s
)6.
25E-
07dh
(m)
0.79
K Thi
em (m
/s)
7.86
E-07
logK
-6.1
0K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
0.
57
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.048
700
4890
049
100
4930
049
500
4970
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
33.
23.
43.
63.
8 44.
24.
44.
64.
8 5 4800
048
500
4900
049
500
5000
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
56
APPENDIX 3
inpu
t file
PP36
0001
64.d
atda
te27
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.78
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)4.
73 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
3.82
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
78
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7.
28
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)8
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7.
72tu
be d
iam
eter
(m
m)
18.5
6
r (m
m)
9.28
H4.
79
H 04.
41
t 050
132.
0t en
d (s)
5033
8.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
206.
1T 0
2075
2.1
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)7.
42E-
09T0
not
rea
ched
logK
-8.1
3ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-4.8
1345
E-05
-0.0
0110
9435
t150
190.
0h1
4.41
1.12
225E
-06
0.00
0133
68t2
5021
0.0
h24.
410.
8997
0.00
0964
828
Q (m
3 /s)
9.86
E-09
dh (m
)0.
3818
39.6
4692
420
5K T
hiem
(m/s
)2.
56E-
08lo
gK-7
.59
0.00
1712
515
0.00
0190
833
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
0.29
Stat
test
stig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
042
.89
t150
152.
0h1
4.41
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
8.30
t250
200.
0h2
4.41
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.97
Q (m
3 /s)
4.10
E-09
dh (m
)0.
38K T
hiem
(m/s
)1.
06E-
08lo
gK-7
.97
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
0.70
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.050
100
5015
050
200
5025
050
300
5035
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
3.5
3.7
3.9
4.1
4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9 49
900
5000
050
100
5020
050
300
5040
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
57
APPENDIX 3
inpu
t file
PP36
0001
65.d
atda
te27
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.78
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)4.
73 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
3.82
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
78
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7.
28
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)9
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)8.
72tu
be d
iam
eter
(m
m)
18.5
6
r (m
m)
9.28
H4.
79
H 03.
33
t 050
878.
0t en
d (s)
5178
5.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
906.
9T 0
1108
1.3
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)1.
39E-
08T0
not
rea
ched
logK
-7.8
6ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-8.6
6043
E-05
-0.0
4030
9773
t151
170.
0h1
3.43
6.30
373E
-07
0.00
0330
177
t251
190.
0h2
3.43
0.95
420.
0049
7892
5Q
(m3 /s
)3.
68E-
08dh
(m)
1.36
1887
4.83
489
906
K Thi
em (m
/s)
2.68
E-08
logK
-7.5
70.
4679
0129
20.
0224
5945
8K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
0.
52St
at te
sts
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
137.
39t1
5089
8.0
h13.
37te
st s
tat,
b <>
012
2.09
t251
180.
0h2
3.43
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.96
Q (m
3 /s)
5.36
E-08
dh (m
)1.
39K T
hiem
(m/s
)3.
83E-
08lo
gK-7
.42
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
0.36
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.050
850
5105
051
250
5145
051
650
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
2.5 3
3.5 4
4.5 5 50
000
5050
051
000
5150
052
000
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
58
59
APPENDIX 4 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PP39
APPENDIX 4
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PP
39P
auliin
a A
lho,
Ilkk
a V
aaru
la
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
11 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.5
0 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&ru
n
m
easu
rem
ent d
epth
(m)
belo
w
grou
nd le
vel
mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KHv
orsle
v
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
16
628
.8.2
013
10:0
05
2.11
2.11
1.5
PP39
0001
66.d
at5
--
-1.1
8E-0
64.
87E
-07
no li
ne e
stim
ate
167
28.8
.201
310
:24
62.
112.
111.
5PP
3900
0167
.dat
62.
86E
-06
0.97
64.
54E
-06
5.30
E-0
6
168
28.8
.201
311
:46
72.
112.
111.
5PP
3900
0168
.dat
73.
75E
-06
0.98
66.
39E
-06
6.76
E-0
6
169
28.8
.201
312
:18
82.
112.
111.
5PP
3900
0169
.dat
82.
63E
-09
0.81
80.
00E
+00
1.10
E-0
8N
o re
cove
ry, r
esul
t rej
ecte
d
170
28.8
.201
312
:46
92.
112.
111.
5PP
3900
0170
.dat
91.
15E
-08
0.96
71.
85E
-08
3.11
E-0
8T0
not
reac
hed
171
28.8
.201
313
:10
102.
112.
111.
5PP
3900
0171
.dat
104.
12E
-11
0.00
20.
00E
+00
4.70
E-0
9N
o re
cove
ry, r
esul
t rej
ecte
d
172
28.8
.201
313
:38
112.
112.
111.
5PP
3900
0172
.dat
116.
30E
-10
0.28
51.
41E
-09
5.40
E-0
9N
o re
cove
ry, r
esul
t rej
ecte
d
60
APPENDIX 4
inpu
t file
PP39
0001
66.d
atda
te28
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.5
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)2.
11 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
1.52
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
11
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
61
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5
tube
dia
met
er (
mm
)18
.56
r (m
m)
9.28
H0.
75
H 00.
93
t 035
292.
0t en
d (s)
3529
1.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
-1.0
T 0#V
ALU
E!
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)#V
ALU
E!#V
ALU
E!lo
gK#V
ALU
E!ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
#VA
LUE!
#VA
LUE!
t135
281.
0h1
0.56
#VA
LUE!
#VA
LUE!
t236
036.
0h2
1.51
#VA
LUE!
#VA
LUE!
Q (m
3 /s)
3.41
E-07
dh (m
)-0
.29
#VA
LUE!
#VA
LUE!
K Thi
em (m
/s)
-1.1
8E-0
6lo
gK#N
UM!
#VA
LUE!
#VA
LUE!
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
#VA
LUE!
Stat
test
stig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
0#V
ALU
E!t1
3529
2.0
h10.
12te
st s
tat,
b <>
0#V
ALU
E!t2
3529
1.0
h20.
11t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%#V
ALU
E!Q
(m3 /s
)3.
11E-
07dh
(m)
0.63
K Thi
em (m
/s)
4.87
E-07
logK
-6.3
1K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
#V
ALU
E!
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.035
250
3526
035
270
3528
035
290
3530
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
00.
20.
40.
60.
8 11.
21.
41.
61.
8 2 3450
035
000
3550
036
000
3650
037
000
3750
038
000
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
61
APPENDIX 4
inpu
t file
PP39
0001
67.d
atda
te28
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.5
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)2.
11 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
1.61
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
11
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
61
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)6
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)6
tube
dia
met
er (
mm
)18
.56
r (m
m)
9.28
H1.
58
H 00.
73
t 038
081.
0t en
d (s)
3815
0.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
69.0
T 053
.8
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)2.
86E-
06lo
gK-5
.54
ln((
H-h)
/(H-H
0)) =
a*t
+ b
Thie
m a
naly
sis
for c
ontro
la
bflo
w-0
.016
3594
68-0
.120
2261
35t1
3810
2.0
h11.
060.
0003
1358
80.
0125
4412
4t2
3812
2.0
h21.
210.
9756
0.05
3009
608
Q (m
3 /s)
2.03
E-06
dh (m
)0.
4427
21.5
7034
868
K Thi
em (m
/s)
4.54
E-06
logK
-5.3
47.
6476
6313
70.
1910
8126
1K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
0.
63St
at te
sts
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
52.1
7t1
3810
1.0
h11.
05te
st s
tat,
b <>
09.
58t2
3810
4.0
h21.
08t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%2.
00Q
(m3 /s
)2.
74E-
06dh
(m)
0.51
K Thi
em (m
/s)
5.30
E-06
logK
-5.2
8K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
0.
54
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.038
050
3825
038
450
3865
038
850
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
00.
20.
40.
60.
8 11.
21.
41.
61.
8 2 3750
038
000
3850
039
000
3950
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
62
APPENDIX 4
inpu
t file
PP39
0001
68.d
atda
te28
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.5
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)2.
11 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
1.56
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
11
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
61
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7
tube
dia
met
er (
mm
)18
.56
r (m
m)
9.28
H1.
47
H 00.
70
t 043
086.
0t en
d (s)
4316
0.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
74.0
T 041
.1
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)3.
75E-
06lo
gK-5
.43
ln((
H-h)
/(H-H
0)) =
a*t
+ b
Thie
m a
naly
sis
for c
ontro
la
bflo
w-0
.021
3024
35-0
.125
0926
39t1
4310
1.0
h10.
970.
0002
9703
0.01
2724
03t2
4312
1.0
h21.
160.
9860
0.05
5685
779
Q (m
3 /s)
2.60
E-06
dh (m
)0.
4051
43.4
8532
573
K Thi
em (m
/s)
6.39
E-06
logK
-5.1
915
.949
4645
10.
2263
6613
8K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
0.
59St
at te
sts
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
71.7
2t1
4310
6.0
h11.
03te
st s
tat,
b <>
09.
83t2
4311
0.0
h21.
07t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
99Q
(m3 /s
)2.
85E-
06dh
(m)
0.42
K Thi
em (m
/s)
6.76
E-06
logK
-5.1
7K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
0.
55
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.043
050
4325
043
450
4365
043
850
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
00.
20.
40.
60.
8 11.
21.
41.
61.
8 2 4250
043
000
4350
044
000
4450
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
63
APPENDIX 4
inpu
t file
PP39
0001
69.d
atda
te28
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.5
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)2.
11 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
1.61
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
11
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
61
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)8
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)8
tube
dia
met
er (
mm
)18
.56
r (m
m)
9.28
H1.
59
H 0-0
.03
t 044
831.
0t en
d (s)
4573
6.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
905.
0T 0
5863
0.5
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)2.
63E-
09T0
not
rea
ched
logK
-8.5
8ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-1.6
7062
E-05
-0.0
2050
8294
t145
122.
0h1
0.01
2.62
393E
-07
0.00
0137
144
t245
142.
0h2
0.01
0.81
770.
0020
6563
3Q
(m3 /s
)0.
00E+
00dh
(m)
1.58
4053
.696
3890
4K T
hiem
(m/s
)0.
00E+
00lo
gK#N
UM!
0.01
7296
466
0.00
3857
222
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
#DIV
/0!
Stat
test
stig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
063
.67
t144
851.
0h1
-0.0
1te
st s
tat,
b <>
014
9.54
t245
132.
0h2
0.01
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.96
Q (m
3 /s)
1.77
E-08
dh (m
)1.
59K T
hiem
(m/s
)1.
10E-
08lo
gK-7
.96
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
0.24
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.044
800
4500
045
200
4540
045
600
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-1
-0.5 0
0.5 1
1.5 2 44
000
4450
045
000
4550
046
000
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
64
APPENDIX 4
inpu
t file
PP39
0001
70.d
atda
te28
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.5
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)2.
11 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
1.58
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
11
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
61
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)9
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)9
tube
dia
met
er (
mm
)18
.56
r (m
m)
9.28
H1.
54
H 0-0
.12
t 046
472.
0t en
d (s)
4738
3.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
911.
0T 0
1337
1.9
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)1.
15E-
08T0
not
rea
ched
logK
-7.9
4ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-7.2
7812
E-05
-0.0
2677
6227
t146
765.
0h1
-0.0
44.
4238
6E-0
70.
0002
3275
7t2
4678
5.0
h2-0
.04
0.96
750.
0035
1724
2Q
(m3 /s
)2.
96E-
08dh
(m)
1.58
2706
6.78
827
910
K Thi
em (m
/s)
1.85
E-08
logK
-7.7
30.
3348
4294
10.
0112
576
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
0.62
Stat
test
stig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
016
4.52
t146
492.
0h1
-0.0
9te
st s
tat,
b <>
011
5.04
t246
775.
0h2
-0.0
4t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
96Q
(m3 /s
)5.
05E-
08dh
(m)
1.61
K Thi
em (m
/s)
3.11
E-08
logK
-7.5
1K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
0.
37
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.046
450
4665
046
850
4705
047
250
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-1
-0.5 0
0.5 1
1.5 2 45
500
4600
046
500
4700
047
500
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
65
APPENDIX 4
inpu
t file
PP39
0001
71.d
atda
te28
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.5
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)2.
11 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
1.59
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
11
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
61
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)10
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)10
tube
dia
met
er (
mm
)18
.56
r (m
m)
9.28
H1.
54
H 0-0
.20
t 048
082.
0t en
d (s)
4899
5.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
913.
0T 0
3739
877.
8
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)4.
12E-
11T0
not
rea
ched
logK
-10.
39ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-2.6
316E
-07
-0.0
1581
2487
t148
376.
0h1
-0.1
71.
8837
4E-0
79.
9317
4E-0
5t2
4839
6.0
h2-0
.17
0.00
210.
0015
0261
9Q
(m3 /s
)0.
00E+
00dh
(m)
1.71
1.95
1639
3891
2K T
hiem
(m/s
)0.
00E+
00lo
gK#N
UM!
4.40
654E
-06
0.00
2059
172
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
#DIV
/0!
Stat
test
stig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
01.
40t1
4810
2.0
h1-0
.18
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
159.
21t2
4838
6.0
h2-0
.17
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.96
Q (m
3 /s)
8.14
E-09
dh (m
)1.
71K T
hiem
(m/s
)4.
70E-
09lo
gK-8
.33
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
0.01
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.048
050
4825
048
450
4865
048
850
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-1
-0.5 0
0.5 1
1.5 2 47
500
4800
048
500
4900
049
500
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
66
APPENDIX 4
inpu
t file
PP39
0001
72.d
atda
te28
.8.2
013
TOC
(m)
0.5
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
ope
n ho
le (m
)2.
11 re
f toc
m
in o
pen
bore
-ho
le p
ress
ure
(m)
1.61
ref g
roun
d le
vel
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
11
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
61
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)11
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)11
tube
dia
met
er (
mm
)18
.56
r (m
m)
9.28
H1.
58
H 0-0
.19
t 049
613.
0t en
d (s)
5052
2.0
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
908.
9T 0
2443
61.0
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
35.7
1K
(m/s
)6.
30E-
10T0
not
rea
ched
logK
-9.2
0ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-4.0
1142
E-06
-0.0
1976
5964
t149
906.
0h1
-0.1
62.
1066
5E-0
70.
0001
1058
2t2
4992
6.0
h2-0
.16
0.28
540.
0016
6941
5Q
(m3 /s
)2.
46E-
09dh
(m)
1.73
362.
5847
565
908
K Thi
em (m
/s)
1.41
E-09
logK
-8.8
50.
0010
1050
40.
0025
3054
6K H
vors
lev /
KT
hiem
0.
45St
at te
sts
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
19.0
4t1
4963
3.0
h1-0
.17
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
178.
74t2
4991
6.0
h2-0
.16
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.96
Q (m
3 /s)
9.47
E-09
dh (m
)1.
74K T
hiem
(m/s
)5.
40E-
09lo
gK-8
.27
K Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thi
em
0.12
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
2
4.9
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 1
6.6
mm
initia
l, re
f toc
fina
l, re
f toc
ref T
OC,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fittin
g
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rres
pond
ing
the
time
whe
n ln
((H-
h)/(H
-H0)
) = -1
le
ngth
of m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.049
600
4980
050
000
5020
050
400
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-1
-0.5 0
0.5 1
1.5 2 49
000
4950
050
000
5050
051
000
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Ope
n bo
reho
leM
easu
rem
ent S
ectio
n
67
68
APPENDIX 5 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP4A
69
APPENDIX 5
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
VP
4APa
uliin
a Al
ho, I
iro K
uusi
sto
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 1.
32 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
0 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2
KTh
iem
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
12
93.
7.20
1313
:07
1.47
not i
n us
e1.
471.
5P
VP
4A00
0129
.dat
6.55
1.19
E-0
50.
990
1.78
E-0
51.
72E
-05
70
APPENDIX 5
inpu
t file
PVP4
A00
0129
.dat
date
3.7.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.7 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
47
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
97
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
55
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)6.
55tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
0.66
H0
0.21
20
t 047
445
t end (
s)47
535.
98Ti
me
rang
e (s
)90
.98
T 034
.41
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
71.4
3K
(m/s
)1.
191E
-05
logK
-4.9
2ln
((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
a*t
+ b
Thie
m a
naly
sis
for c
ontro
la
bflo
w-0
.024
8572
07-0
.144
7222
28t1
4745
5.97
h10.
347
0.00
0267
276
0.01
4079
836
t247
476.
02h2
0.49
10.
9897
0178
40.
0680
7826
8Q
(m3 /s
)8.
69E-
06dh
(m)
0.24
8649
.378
152
90K
Thie
m (m
/s)
1.78
E-05
logK
-4.7
540
.086
8459
70.
4171
1855
7K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.67
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
093
.00
t147
464.
96h1
0.42
7te
st s
tat,
b <>
010
.28
t247
474.
98h2
0.48
6t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
99Q
(m3 /s
)7.
07E-
06dh
(m)
0.20
KTh
iem
(m/s
)1.
72E-
05lo
gK-4
.76
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
69
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.047
400
4745
047
500
4755
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-0.5
-0.3
-0.1 0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9 47
200
4740
047
600
4780
048
000
4820
048
400
4860
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
71
72
APPENDIX 6 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP4B
73
APPENDIX 6
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
VP
4BPa
uliin
a Al
ho, I
iro K
uusi
sto
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 1.
55 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.8
6 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
13
03.
7.20
1313
:45
1.47
not i
n us
e1.
471.
5P
VP
4B00
0130
.dat
36.
33E
-06
0.99
59.
09E
-06
8.52
E-0
6
74
APPENDIX 6
inpu
t file
PVP4
B00
0130
.dat
date
3.7.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.86 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
47
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
97
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
00
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
00tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
0.46
H0
-0.3
740
t 049
688.
98t en
d (s)
4982
2.99
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
134.
01T 0
64.7
8
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
71.4
3K
(m/s
)6.
3260
5E-0
6lo
gK-5
.20
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
1672
355
0.08
3334
428
t149
727
h1-0
.031
0.00
0102
590.
0079
5306
3t2
4974
6.95
h20.
098
0.99
5019
943
0.04
6452
256
Q (m
3 /s)
7.77
E-06
dh (m
)0.
4226
573.
5233
913
3K
Thie
m (m
/s)
9.09
E-06
logK
-5.0
457
.340
6697
20.
2869
8900
6K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.70
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
016
3.01
t149
709.
03h1
-0.1
72te
st s
tat,
b <>
010
.48
t249
732.
96h2
0.01
2t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
98Q
(m3 /s
)9.
24E-
06dh
(m)
0.54
KTh
iem
(m/s
)8.
52E-
06lo
gK-5
.07
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
74
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.049
650
4970
049
750
4980
049
850
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2 0
0.2
0.4 49
400
4960
049
800
5000
050
200
5040
050
600
5080
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
75
76
APPENDIX 7 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP6A
77
APPENDIX 7
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
VP
6APa
uliin
a Al
ho, I
iro K
uusi
sto
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
26 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
14
331
.7.2
013
12:2
32.
41no
t in
use
2.41
1.5
PV
P6A
0001
43.d
at4.
831.
68E
-07
0.74
01.
18E
-07
1.00
E-0
7T0
not
reac
hed
78
APPENDIX 7
inpu
t file
PVP6
A00
0143
.dat
date
31.7
.201
3TO
C (m
)0.
7 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
41
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
91
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
83
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
83tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.45
H0
-0.0
070
t 044
753.
04t en
d (s)
4565
7.04
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
904
T 024
32.1
3
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
71.4
3K
(m/s
)1.
6849
2E-0
7T0
not
reac
hed
logK
-6.7
7ln
((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
a*t
+ b
Thie
m a
naly
sis
for c
ontro
la
bflo
w-0
.000
4354
590.
0590
9357
2t1
4504
4.98
h10.
071
8.58
53E-
060.
0044
8400
8t2
4506
5.03
h20.
077
0.74
0406
641
0.06
7430
67Q
(m3 /s
)3.
28E-
07dh
(m)
1.37
2572
.665
163
902
KTh
iem
(m/s
)1.
18E-
07lo
gK-6
.93
11.6
9763
885
4.10
1299
462
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
1.
43S
tat t
ests
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
50.7
2t1
4477
2.99
h10.
008
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
13.1
8t2
4505
5h2
0.07
4t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
96Q
(m3 /s
)2.
85E-
07dh
(m)
1.41
KTh
iem
(m/s
)1.
00E-
07lo
gK-7
.00
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
1.
68
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.044
750
4495
045
150
4535
045
550
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-1
-0.5 0
0.5 1
1.5 44
400
4460
044
800
4500
045
200
4540
045
600
4580
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
79
80
APPENDIX 8 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP6B
81
APPENDIX 8
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
VP
6BPa
uliin
a Al
ho, I
iro K
uusi
sto
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
14 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.9
m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
142
31.7
.201
312
:00
2.29
not i
n us
e2.
291.
5P
VP
6B00
0142
.dat
2.83
2.62
E-0
70.
663
2.18
E-0
78.
08E
-07
T0 n
ot re
ache
dTh
iem
diff
eren
t
82
APPENDIX 8
inpu
t file
PVP6
B00
0142
.dat
date
31.7
.201
3TO
C (m
)0.
9 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
29
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
79
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
73
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
73tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.17
H0
0.32
20
t 043
396.
99t en
d (s)
4429
9.95
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
902.
96T 0
1563
.35
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
71.4
3K
(m/s
)2.
6212
6E-0
7T0
not
reac
hed
logK
-6.5
8ln
((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
a*t
+ b
Thie
m a
naly
sis
for c
ontro
la
bflo
w-0
.000
3722
35-0
.418
0670
98t1
4368
7.98
h10.
700
8.84
207E
-06
0.00
4611
106
t243
708.
03h2
0.70
40.
6627
1008
50.
0693
7697
Q (m
3 /s)
2.08
E-07
dh (m
)0.
4717
72.2
5725
190
2K
Thie
m (m
/s)
2.18
E-07
logK
-6.6
68.
5301
6468
94.
3414
7387
1K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
1.20
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
042
.10
t143
417.
03h1
0.48
1te
st s
tat,
b <>
090
.67
t243
698
h20.
703
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.96
Q (m
3 /s)
9.52
E-07
dh (m
)0.
58K
Thie
m (m
/s)
8.08
E-07
logK
-6.0
9K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.32
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.043
350
4355
043
750
4395
044
150
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-0.5
-0.3
-0.1 0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5 43
000
4320
043
400
4360
043
800
4400
044
200
4440
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
83
84
APPENDIX 9 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP14
85
APPENDIX 9
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
VP
14Pa
uliin
a Al
ho, I
iro K
uusi
sto
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 3.
46 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
13
825
.7.2
013
12:1
93.
61no
t in
use
3.61
1.5
PV
P14
0001
38.d
at7.
42.
68E
-05
0.99
73.
39E
-05
3.06
E-0
5
86
APPENDIX 9
inpu
t file
PVP1
4000
138.
dat
date
25.7
.201
3TO
C (m
)0.
7 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
61
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
11
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)6.
4
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7.
4tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
2.72
H0
2.30
30
t 044
555.
01t en
d (s)
4458
6.02
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
31.0
1T 0
15.2
7
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
56sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)28
L/R
71.4
3K
(m/s
)2.
6835
7E-0
5lo
gK-4
.57
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
6941
9137
0.06
0065
913
t144
555.
96h1
2.32
20.
0007
3736
80.
0132
9632
1t2
4457
6h2
2.61
40.
9966
2662
80.
0385
3185
9Q
(m3 /s
)1.
76E-
05dh
(m)
0.26
8863
.179
8430
KTh
iem
(m/s
)3.
39E-
05lo
gK-4
.47
13.1
5919
979
0.04
4541
124
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
79S
tat t
ests
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
94.1
4t1
4455
5.01
h12.
298
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
4.52
t244
586.
02h2
2.67
5t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%2.
04Q
(m3 /s
)1.
47E-
05dh
(m)
0.24
KTh
iem
(m/s
)3.
06E-
05lo
gK-4
.51
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
88
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.044
550
4456
044
570
4458
044
590
4460
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.3
2.5
2.7
2.9 44
200
4440
044
600
4480
045
000
4520
045
400
4560
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
87
88
APPENDIX 10 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP30
89
APPENDIX 10
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
VP
30Pa
uliin
a Al
ho, I
iro K
uusi
sto
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
75 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
1.2
m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
14
431
.7.2
013
13:3
02.
9no
t in
use
2.9
1.5
PV
P30
0001
44.d
at1.
31.
48E
-05
0.99
12.
78E
-05
2.55
E-0
5
90
APPENDIX 10
inpu
t file
PVP3
0000
144.
dat
date
31.7
.201
3TO
C (m
)1.
2 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
90
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
40
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)0.
8
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
3tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.52
H0
1.31
90
t 048
777.
98t en
d (s)
4885
0.04
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
72.0
6T 0
47.2
2
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
38.4
6K
(m/s
)1.
4839
7E-0
5lo
gK-4
.83
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
2052
5203
-0.0
3079
2851
t148
798.
97h1
1.39
30.
0002
2798
60.
0095
1328
7t2
4881
9.02
h21.
442
0.99
1316
132
0.04
1046
31Q
(m3 /s
)2.
94E-
06dh
(m)
0.11
8105
.079
651
71K
Thie
m (m
/s)
2.78
E-05
logK
-4.5
613
.655
4348
60.
1196
2077
1K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.53
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
090
.03
t148
798.
02h1
1.39
0te
st s
tat,
b <>
03.
24t2
4880
2h2
1.40
1t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
99Q
(m3 /s
)3.
25E-
06dh
(m)
0.13
KTh
iem
(m/s
)2.
55E-
05lo
gK-4
.59
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
58
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.048
750
4895
049
150
4935
049
550
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.9 48
400
4860
048
800
4900
049
200
4940
049
600
4980
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
91
92
APPENDIX 11 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP31A
93
APPENDIX 11
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P31A
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
21 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.6
2 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
13
44.
7.20
1315
:02
2.36
not i
n us
e2.
361.
5P
VP
31A
0001
34.d
at3.
722.
88E
-05
0.99
53.
77E
-05
3.04
E-0
5
94
APPENDIX 11
inpu
t file
PVP3
1A00
0134
.dat
date
4.7.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.62 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
36
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
86
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
72
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
72tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.58
H0
1.43
50
t 054
337.
99t en
d (s)
5436
9.96
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
31.9
7T 0
14.4
9
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)2.
8770
6E-0
5lo
gK-4
.54
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
6641
1605
-0.0
3764
0881
t154
337.
99h1
1.42
30.
0008
3701
60.
0155
8895
4t2
5435
7h2
1.53
70.
9950
9986
70.
0457
8149
2Q
(m3 /s
)7.
26E-
06dh
(m)
0.10
6295
.358
899
31K
Thie
m (m
/s)
3.77
E-05
logK
-4.4
213
.194
7261
40.
0649
7429
6K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.76
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
079
.34
t154
337.
99h1
1.42
3te
st s
tat,
b <>
02.
41t2
5436
9.96
h21.
559
t-crit
ical
, 90%
2.04
Q (m
3 /s)
5.17
E-06
dh (m
)0.
08K
Thie
m (m
/s)
3.04
E-05
logK
-4.5
2K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.95
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.054
300
5432
054
340
5436
054
380
5440
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.9 54
000
5420
054
400
5460
054
800
5500
055
200
5540
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
95
96
APPENDIX 12 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP31B
97
APPENDIX 12
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P31B
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
08 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.9
9 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
13
34.
7.20
1314
:37
2.23
not i
n us
e2.
231.
5P
VP
31B
0001
33.d
at2.
598.
18E
-05
0.99
75.
84E
-05
9.54
E-0
5
98
APPENDIX 12
inpu
t file
PVP3
1B00
0133
.dat
date
4.7.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.99 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
23
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
73
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
59
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
59tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.01
H0
0.94
20
t 053
038.
97t en
d (s)
5304
7.95
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
8.98
T 05.
10
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)8.
1818
8E-0
5lo
gK-4
.09
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.1
9975
0901
0.01
7834
884
t153
031.
97h1
0.73
80.
0039
5558
30.
0211
7064
5t2
5305
2.01
h21.
005
0.99
6872
674
0.03
5910
074
Q (m
3 /s)
1.61
E-05
dh (m
)0.
1425
50.0
9571
88
KTh
iem
(m/s
)5.
84E-
05lo
gK-4
.23
3.28
8433
612
0.01
0316
267
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
1.
40S
tat t
ests
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
50.5
0t1
5303
8.97
h10.
932
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
0.84
t253
047.
95h2
0.99
7t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%2.
31Q
(m3 /s
)8.
65E-
06dh
(m)
0.05
KTh
iem
(m/s
)9.
54E-
05lo
gK-4
.02
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
86
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.053
000
5301
053
020
5303
053
040
5305
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8 1
1.2
1.4 52
800
5300
053
200
5340
053
600
5380
054
000
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
99
100
APPENDIX 13 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP32
101
APPENDIX 13
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
VP
32Pa
uliin
a Al
ho, I
iro K
uusi
sto
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
97 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.8
0 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
13
24.
7.20
1313
:16
3.14
not i
n us
e3.
141.
5P
VP
3200
0132
.dat
1.2
6.32
E-0
70.
995
9.81
E-0
79.
37E
-07
102
APPENDIX 13
inpu
t file
PVP3
2000
132.
dat
date
4.7.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.8 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
14
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
64
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)0.
2
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
2tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
2.04
H0
1.39
50
t 047
953.
98t en
d (s)
4885
9.02
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
905.
04T 0
659.
81
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)6.
3186
4E-0
7lo
gK-6
.20
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
0150
8277
-0.0
0482
5327
t148
377
h11.
713
3.64
071E
-06
0.00
1902
855
t248
396.
95h2
1.72
40.
9947
6040
70.
0286
6078
2Q
(m3 /s
)6.
32E-
07dh
(m)
0.32
1716
28.4
986
904
KTh
iem
(m/s
)9.
81E-
07lo
gK-6
.01
140.
9825
864
0.74
2582
142
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
64S
tat t
ests
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
414.
28t1
4797
4.03
h11.
418
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
2.54
t248
255
h21.
641
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.96
Q (m
3 /s)
9.58
E-07
dh (m
)0.
51K
Thie
m (m
/s)
9.37
E-07
logK
-6.0
3K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.67
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.047
950
4815
048
350
4855
048
750
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.3
2.5 47
600
4780
048
000
4820
048
400
4860
048
800
4900
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
103
104
APPENDIX 14 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP33
105
APPENDIX 14
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
VP
33Pa
uliin
a Al
ho, I
iro K
uusi
sto
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
68 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
1.2
4 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
15
16.
8.20
138:
052.
83no
t in
use
2.83
1.5
PV
P33
0001
51.d
at1.
264.
85E
-08
0.45
71.
79E
-07
0.00
E+0
0no
line
est
imat
e
106
APPENDIX 14
inpu
t file
PVP3
3000
151.
dat
date
6.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
1.24 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
83
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
33
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)0.
76
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
26tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.36
H0
1.08
30
t 029
292.
96t en
d (s)
3019
2.99
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
900.
03T 0
4677
8.12
L (m
)1
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
38.4
6K
(m/s
)1.
498E
-08
T0 n
ot re
ache
dlo
gK-7
.82
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-2.1
8527
E-05
0.02
2230
171
t129
583.
01h1
1.07
31.
6481
8E-0
60.
0008
5671
t229
602.
97h2
1.07
40.
1635
5958
40.
0128
6772
3Q
(m3 /s
)5.
49E-
08dh
(m)
0.29
175.
7926
368
899
KTh
iem
(m/s
)1.
93E-
07lo
gK-6
.72
0.02
9107
445
0.14
8854
886
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
08S
tat t
ests
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
13.2
6t1
2931
3.01
h11.
084
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
25.9
5t2
2959
3.03
h21.
074
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.96
Q (m
3 /s)
-4.3
9E-0
8dh
(m)
0.28
KTh
iem
(m/s
)-1
.57E
-07
logK
#NU
M!
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
-0
.10
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.029
250
2945
029
650
2985
030
050
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5 29
000
2920
029
400
2960
029
800
3000
030
200
3040
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
107
108
APPENDIX 15 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP34A
109
APPENDIX 15
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P34A
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
26 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.9
2 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
14
62.
8.20
1310
:04
2.41
not i
n us
e2.
411.
5P
VP
34A
0001
46.d
at4.
084.
77E
-06
0.99
96.
41E
-06
6.71
E-0
6
110
APPENDIX 15
inpu
t file
PVP3
4A00
0146
.dat
date
2.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.92 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
41
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
91
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
08
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
08tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.23
H0
0.26
70
t 036
446.
02t en
d (s)
3664
1.98
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
195.
96T 0
87.3
5
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)4.
7730
9E-0
6lo
gK-5
.32
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
1122
3907
-0.0
1963
9661
t136
495.
01h1
0.69
32.
6834
3E-0
50.
0030
3989
1t2
3651
4.97
h20.
795
0.99
8886
624
0.02
1418
74Q
(m3 /s
)6.
17E-
06dh
(m)
0.48
1749
47.9
8519
5K
Thie
m (m
/s)
6.41
E-06
logK
-5.1
980
.259
5646
10.
0894
5867
6K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.74
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
041
8.27
t136
465.
98h1
0.47
5te
st s
tat,
b <>
06.
46t2
3651
0.99
h20.
776
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.97
Q (m
3 /s)
8.06
E-06
dh (m
)0.
60K
Thie
m (m
/s)
6.71
E-06
logK
-5.1
7K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.71
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.036
400
3645
036
500
3655
036
600
3665
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-0.5
-0.3
-0.1 0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5 36
200
3640
036
600
3680
037
000
3720
037
400
3760
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
111
112
APPENDIX 16 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP34B
113
APPENDIX 16
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P34B
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
10 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
9 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
14
72.
8.20
1310
:28
2.25
not i
n us
e2.
251.
5P
VP
34B
0001
47.d
at2.
211.
75E
-06
0.99
82.
46E
-06
2.36
E-0
6
114
APPENDIX 16
inpu
t file
PVP3
4B00
0147
.dat
date
2.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.79 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
25
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
75
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
21
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
21tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.27
H0
1.05
10
t 037
885.
96t en
d (s)
3815
0Ti
me
rang
e (s
)26
4.04
T 023
7.93
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)1.
7522
1E-0
6lo
gK-5
.76
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
0388
4541
-0.0
7573
7076
t138
033.
02h1
1.15
41.
1146
5E-0
50.
0017
0090
6t2
3805
2.97
h21.
163
0.99
7839
196
0.01
3880
719
Q (m
3 /s)
5.28
E-07
dh (m
)0.
1112
1450
.947
126
3K
Thie
m (m
/s)
2.46
E-06
logK
-5.6
123
.400
4833
60.
0506
7335
6K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.71
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
034
8.50
t137
906.
01h1
1.08
2te
st s
tat,
b <>
044
.53
t237
974
h21.
125
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.97
Q (m
3 /s)
7.66
E-07
dh (m
)0.
16K
Thie
m (m
/s)
2.36
E-06
logK
-5.6
3K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.74
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.037
850
3805
038
250
3845
038
650
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5 37
600
3780
038
000
3820
038
400
3860
038
800
3900
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
115
116
APPENDIX 17 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP36
117
APPENDIX 17
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
P
VP
36Pa
uliin
a Al
ho, I
iro K
uusi
sto
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
78 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
5 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
14
531
.7.2
013
14:4
12.
93no
t in
use
2.93
1.5
PV
P36
0001
45.d
at1.
87.
00E
-06
0.95
61.
12E
-05
1.04
E-0
5
118
APPENDIX 17
inpu
t file
PVP3
6000
145.
dat
date
31.7
.201
3TO
C (m
)0.
75 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
93
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
43
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)0.
8
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
8tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
2.01
H0
1.62
40
t 053
040
t end (
s)53
230
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
190
T 059
.53
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)7.
0038
1E-0
6lo
gK-5
.15
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
1208
5826
-0.2
8057
8483
t153
066.
96h1
1.77
90.
0001
8839
50.
0206
928
t253
087.
01h2
1.85
30.
9560
9152
70.
1435
5674
8Q
(m3 /s
)4.
44E-
06dh
(m)
0.20
4115
.408
353
189
KTh
iem
(m/s
)1.
12E-
05lo
gK-4
.95
84.8
1255
778
3.89
5014
065
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
63S
tat t
ests
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
64.1
5t1
5305
9.96
h11.
745
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
13.5
6t2
5310
2.99
h21.
892
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.97
Q (m
3 /s)
4.10
E-06
dh (m
)0.
20K
Thie
m (m
/s)
1.04
E-05
logK
-4.9
8K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.67
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.053
000
5305
053
100
5315
053
200
5325
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8 2
2.2
2.4 52
800
5300
053
200
5340
053
600
5380
054
000
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
119
120
APPENDIX 18 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP37A
121
APPENDIX 18
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P37A
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
14 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
5 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
14
82.
8.20
1312
:54
2.29
not i
n us
e2.
291.
5P
VP
37A
0001
48.d
at9
5.77
E-0
60.
978
8.45
E-0
67.
96E
-06
122
APPENDIX 18
inpu
t file
PVP3
7A00
0148
.dat
date
2.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.75 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
29
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
79
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)8
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)9
tube
dia
met
er (m
m)
39.1
9
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.35
H0
0.41
80
t 046
662.
99t en
d (s)
4688
2.02
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
219.
03T 0
72.3
1
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)5.
7659
7E-0
6lo
gK-5
.24
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
1000
776
-0.2
7638
7931
t146
694.
01h1
0.81
00.
0001
0233
30.
0129
1852
6t2
4671
3.97
h20.
943
0.97
7814
324
0.09
6058
226
Q (m
3 /s)
8.01
E-06
dh (m
)0.
4795
64.0
8580
321
7K
Thie
m (m
/s)
8.45
E-06
logK
-5.0
788
.249
5679
92.
0022
9866
7K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.68
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
097
.80
t146
683.
04h1
0.70
6te
st s
tat,
b <>
021
.39
t246
734.
96h2
1.03
5t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
97Q
(m3 /s
)7.
63E-
06dh
(m)
0.48
KTh
iem
(m/s
)7.
96E-
06lo
gK-5
.10
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
72
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.046
650
4670
046
750
4680
046
850
4690
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-0.5
-0.3
-0.1 0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5 46
400
4660
046
800
4700
047
200
4740
047
600
4780
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
123
124
APPENDIX 19 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP37B
125
APPENDIX 19
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P37B
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 2.
15 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
5 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
14
92.
8.20
1313
:18
2.3
not i
n us
e2.
31.
5P
VP
37B
0001
49.d
at4.
84.
66E
-06
0.99
36.
65E
-06
6.69
E-0
6
126
APPENDIX 19
inpu
t file
PVP3
7B00
0149
.dat
date
2.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.75 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
30
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
80
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
8
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
8tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
1.39
H0
0.30
50
t 048
049.
02t en
d (s)
4828
4.03
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
235.
01T 0
89.5
5
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)4.
6558
3E-0
6lo
gK-5
.33
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
0957
4866
-0.1
4261
3002
t148
094.
04h1
0.78
15.
0702
8E-0
50.
0068
8549
1t2
4811
3.99
h20.
901
0.99
3481
096
0.05
3064
98Q
(m3 /s
)7.
29E-
06dh
(m)
0.55
3566
1.60
495
234
KTh
iem
(m/s
)6.
65E-
06lo
gK-5
.18
100.
4192
302
0.65
8918
742
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
70S
tat t
ests
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
188.
84t1
4806
8.98
h10.
561
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
20.7
1t2
4812
6.96
h20.
964
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.97
Q (m
3 /s)
8.38
E-06
dh (m
)0.
63K
Thie
m (m
/s)
6.69
E-06
logK
-5.1
7K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.70
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.048
000
4805
048
100
4815
048
200
4825
048
300
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-0.5
-0.3
-0.1 0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5 47
800
4800
048
200
4840
048
600
4880
049
000
4920
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
127
128
APPENDIX 20 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP37C
129
APPENDIX 20
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P37C
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 1.
92 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
15
02.
8.20
1313
:39
2.07
not i
n us
e2.
071.
5P
VP
37C
0001
50.d
at1.
85.
55E
-07
0.94
33.
93E
-07
1.15
E-0
6
130
APPENDIX 20
inpu
t file
PVP3
7C00
0150
.dat
date
2.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.75 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
07
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)3.
57
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)0.
8
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
8tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
0.73
H0
0.46
20
t 049
342
t end (
s)50
244.
96Ti
me
rang
e (s
)90
2.96
T 075
1.48
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)5.
5478
6E-0
7lo
gK-6
.26
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
0098
5252
-0.2
5960
5279
t149
749.
03h1
0.59
48.
0467
3E-0
60.
0041
9851
6t2
4976
8.99
h20.
596
0.94
3307
988
0.06
3071
265
Q (m
3 /s)
1.04
E-07
dh (m
)0.
1314
991.
8915
590
1K
Thie
m (m
/s)
3.93
E-07
logK
-6.4
159
.637
5116
13.
5841
6399
7K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
1.41
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
012
2.44
t149
361.
96h1
0.47
6te
st s
tat,
b <>
061
.83
t249
643.
02h2
0.58
2t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
96Q
(m3 /s
)4.
56E-
07dh
(m)
0.20
KTh
iem
(m/s
)1.
15E-
06lo
gK-5
.94
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
48
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.049
300
4950
049
700
4990
050
100
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
-0.5
-0.3
-0.1 0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9 49
000
4920
049
400
4960
049
800
5000
050
200
5040
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
131
132
APPENDIX 21 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP38A
133
APPENDIX 21
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P38A
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 3.
97 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
5 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
15
26.
8.20
1312
:57
4.12
not i
n us
e4.
121
PV
P38
A00
0152
.dat
11.8
1.72
E-0
70.
990
2.67
E-0
73.
14E
-07
T0 n
ot re
ache
d
134
APPENDIX 21
inpu
t file
PVP3
8A00
0152
.dat
date
6.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.75 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
12
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
12
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)10
.8
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)11
.8tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
3.01
H0
1.60
10
t 046
833.
03t en
d (s)
4773
6Ti
me
rang
e (s
)90
2.97
T 024
28.7
2
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)1.
7165
8E-0
7T0
not
reac
hed
logK
-6.7
7ln
((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
a*t
+ b
Thie
m a
naly
sis
for c
ontro
la
bflo
w-0
.000
3976
69-0
.034
1712
95t1
4712
4.02
h11.
807
1.31
121E
-06
0.00
0683
744
t247
143.
98h2
1.81
70.
9902
8893
40.
0102
8804
Q (m
3 /s)
6.37
E-07
dh (m
)1.
2091
981.
7235
390
2K
Thie
m (m
/s)
2.67
E-07
logK
-6.5
79.
7356
9208
20.
0954
7107
8K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.64
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
030
3.28
t146
852.
99h1
1.62
4te
st s
tat,
b <>
049
.98
t247
133.
96h2
1.81
2t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
96Q
(m3 /s
)8.
08E-
07dh
(m)
1.29
KTh
iem
(m/s
)3.
14E-
07lo
gK-6
.50
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
55
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.046
800
4700
047
200
4740
047
600
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
1
1.5 2
2.5 3
3.5 46
600
4680
047
000
4720
047
400
4760
047
800
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
135
136
APPENDIX 22 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP38B
137
APPENDIX 22
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P38B
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 4.
06 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.7
0 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
15
36.
8.20
1313
:18
4.21
not i
n us
e4.
211
PV
P38
B00
0153
.dat
8.7
3.08
E-0
70.
991
6.14
E-0
73.
90E
-07
T0 n
ot re
ache
d
138
APPENDIX 22
inpu
t file
PVP3
8B00
0153
.dat
date
6.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.7 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
21
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
21
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)7.
7
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)8.
7tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
3.11
H0
1.83
80
t 048
086
t end (
s)48
988.
02Ti
me
rang
e (s
)90
2.02
T 013
55.4
4
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)3.
0758
3E-0
7T0
not
reac
hed
logK
-6.5
1ln
((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
a*t
+ b
Thie
m a
naly
sis
for c
ontro
la
bflo
w-0
.000
7317
83-0
.008
1148
72t1
4837
5.96
h12.
068
2.26
581E
-06
0.00
1180
283
t248
396
h22.
089
0.99
1436
122
0.01
7748
568
Q (m
3 /s)
1.27
E-06
dh (m
)1.
0410
4308
.351
190
1K
Thie
m (m
/s)
6.14
E-07
logK
-6.2
132
.858
3462
50.
2838
2550
1K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.50
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
032
2.97
t148
105.
96h1
1.87
3te
st s
tat,
b <>
06.
88t2
4838
5.98
h22.
079
t-crit
ical
, 90%
1.96
Q (m
3 /s)
8.86
E-07
dh (m
)1.
14K
Thie
m (m
/s)
3.90
E-07
logK
-6.4
1K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.79
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.048
050
4825
048
450
4865
048
850
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
1
1.5 2
2.5 3
3.5 47
800
4800
048
200
4840
048
600
4880
049
000
4920
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
139
140
APPENDIX 23 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP38C
141
APPENDIX 23
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P38C
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 4.
10 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.6
0 m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
15
46.
8.20
1313
:40
4.25
not i
n us
e4.
251
PV
P38
C00
0154
.dat
5.7
6.07
E-0
70.
994
8.02
E-0
79.
84E
-07
142
APPENDIX 23
inpu
t file
PVP3
8C00
0154
.dat
date
6.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.6 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
25
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
25
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
7
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
7tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
3.34
H0
2.24
80
t 049
397.
99t en
d (s)
5030
1.99
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
904
T 068
6.98
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)6.
0687
6E-0
7lo
gK-6
.22
ln((
H-h
)/(H
-H0)
) = a
*t +
bTh
iem
ana
lysi
s fo
r con
trol
ab
flow
-0.0
0129
7912
-0.1
0836
5357
t149
822.
04h1
2.78
63.
3416
2E-0
60.
0017
4457
5t2
4984
2h2
2.80
10.
9940
4995
10.
0262
6271
2Q
(m3 /s
)8.
74E-
07dh
(m)
0.55
1508
60.4
615
903
KTh
iem
(m/s
)8.
02E-
07lo
gK-6
.10
104.
0529
897
0.62
2826
212
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
76S
tat t
ests
tight
test
sta
t, a
<> 0
388.
41t1
4941
8.03
h12.
311
test
sta
t, b
<> 0
62.1
2t2
4969
9h2
2.69
4t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
96Q
(m3 /s
)1.
65E-
06dh
(m)
0.84
KTh
iem
(m/s
)9.
84E-
07lo
gK-6
.01
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
0.
62
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
0.1
1.0
10.049
350
4955
049
750
4995
050
150
5035
0
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.3
2.5
2.7
2.9
3.1
3.3
3.5 49
000
4920
049
400
4960
049
800
5000
050
200
5040
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
143
144
APPENDIX 24 MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS IN OL-PVP38D
145
APPENDIX 24
Area
:H
ole:
Mea
sure
r:O
lkilu
oto
PV
P38D
Paul
iina
Alho
, Iiro
Kuu
sist
o
Wat
er le
vel b
efor
e st
artin
g 4.
41 m
The
refe
renc
e le
vel t
o de
pth
is to
p of
the
casi
ng, t
he le
ngth
of t
he c
asin
g is
0.8
m
File
Dat
eTi
me
Dep
th
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
open
bo
reho
le
(m)
Dep
th o
f pr
essu
re
sens
or
mea
s.
sect
ion
(m)
Mov
ing
pist
on
(m)
NO
TE!
m
easu
rem
ent/h
ole
&run
m
easu
rem
ent
dept
h (m
) be
low
gro
und
leve
l mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
) R
2 K
Thie
m
(m/s
) flo
w K
Thie
m
(m/s
)tigh
t c
omm
ents
15
56.
8.20
1314
:02
4.56
not i
n us
e4.
561
PV
P38
D00
0155
.dat
2.3
7.55
E-0
90.
983
8.02
E-0
96.
26E
-09
T0 n
ot re
ache
d
146
APPENDIX 24
inpu
t file
PVP3
8D00
0155
.dat
date
6.8.
2013
TOC
(m)
0.8 0
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)4.
56
dept
h of
pre
ssur
e se
nsor
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)5.
56
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)1.
3
dept
h of
mea
s. s
ectio
n (m
)2.
3tu
be d
iam
eter
(mm
)39
.19
r (m
m)
19.6
0H
3.32
H0
2.29
00
t 050
693.
04t en
d (s)
5159
7.04
Tim
e ra
nge
(s)
904
T 055
250.
02
L (m
)2
scre
en d
iam
. (m
m)
52sc
reen
radi
us R
(mm
)26
L/R
76.9
2K
(m/s
)7.
5458
7E-0
9T0
not
reac
hed
logK
-8.1
2ln
((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
a*t
+ b
Thie
m a
naly
sis
for c
ontro
la
bflo
w-1
.811
33E-
050.
0007
6129
2t1
5098
4.03
h12.
294
7.81
224E
-08
4.07
823E
-05
t251
003.
99h2
2.29
40.
9834
8006
0.00
0613
985
Q (m
3 /s)
1.65
E-08
dh (m
)1.
0353
758.
2168
190
3K
Thie
m (m
/s)
8.02
E-09
logK
-8.1
00.
0202
6562
0.00
0340
41K
Hvo
rsle
v / K
Thie
m
0.94
Sta
t tes
tstig
htte
st s
tat,
a <>
023
1.86
t150
712.
99h1
2.29
1te
st s
tat,
b <>
018
.67
t250
993.
97h2
2.29
4t-c
ritic
al, 9
0%1.
96Q
(m3 /s
)1.
29E-
08dh
(m)
1.03
KTh
iem
(m/s
)6.
26E-
09lo
gK-8
.20
KH
vors
lev /
KTh
iem
1.
21
refe
renc
e w
ater
leve
l at t
he m
easu
rem
ent s
ectio
n b
ased
on
phas
e 1,
ref g
roun
d le
vel
wat
er le
vel a
t the
mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
afte
r d
istu
rban
ce, r
ef g
roun
d le
vel
tim
e of
dis
turb
ance
equ
ival
ent a
rea
to a
dou
ble
tube
with
out
er d
iam
56
mm
and
inne
r dia
m 4
0 m
m
initi
al, r
ef to
c
fina
l, re
f toc
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
top
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of t
he s
ectio
n
end
of t
ime
rang
e us
ed to
line
fitti
ng
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e ra
dius
bas
ic ti
me
lag,
t co
rresp
ondi
ng th
e tim
e w
hen
ln((H
-h)/(
H-H
0)) =
-1
leng
th o
f mea
sure
men
t sec
tion
equ
al to
bor
ehol
e di
amet
er
Tim
e ra
nge
used
for i
nter
pret
atio
n
0.1
1.0
10.050
650
5085
051
050
5125
051
450
(H-h)/(H-H0)
t (s)
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.3
2.5
2.7
2.9
3.1
3.3
3.5 50
400
5060
050
800
5100
051
200
5140
051
600
5180
0
water level h (m, below ground level)
t (s)
Mea
sure
men
t Sec
tion
147
148
APPENDIX 25 SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS
149
APPENDIX 25
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2002
Hol
eTe
st s
ectio
n,
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
(m)
KH
vors
lev (
m/s
)K
Thie
m (m
/s)
Test
sec
tion,
re
f gro
und
leve
l, m
idpo
int o
f th
e se
ctio
n (m
)
KH
vors
lev (
m/s
)K
Thie
m (m
/s)
Test
sec
tion,
re
f gro
und
leve
l, m
idpo
int o
f th
e se
ctio
n (m
)
KH
vors
lev (
m/s
)K
Thie
m (m
/s)
Test
sec
tion,
re
f gro
und
leve
l, m
idpo
int o
f th
e se
ctio
n (m
)
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
)K
Thie
m
(m/s
)Te
st s
ectio
n,
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
(m)
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
)K
Thie
m
(m/s
)Te
st s
ectio
n,
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
(m)
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
)K
Thie
m
(m/s
)Te
st s
ectio
n,
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
(m)
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
)K
Thie
m
(m/s
)C
omm
ents
OL-
PP
52.
692.
8E-0
64.
5E-0
52.
56.
8E-0
61.
1E-0
5de
pths
of t
est s
ectio
ns in
200
2 an
d 20
05 d
iffer
19
cm
OL-
PP
52.
691.
6E-0
53.
8E-0
5th
e m
easu
rem
ent h
as n
ot s
ucce
eded
OL-
PP
53.
694.
6E-0
77.
3E-0
73.
237.
5E-0
68.
5E-0
6de
pths
of t
est s
ectio
ns in
200
2 an
d 20
05 d
iffer
46
cm
OL-
PP
54.
697.
7E-0
61.
3E-0
54.
237.
6E-0
61.
2E-0
5de
pths
of t
est s
ectio
ns in
200
2 an
d 20
05 d
iffer
46
cm
OL-
PP
55.
72.
0E-0
73.
9E-0
75.
692.
4E-0
74.
1E-0
75.
231.
8E-0
83.
5E-0
8de
pths
of t
est s
ectio
ns in
200
2 an
d 20
05 d
iffer
46
cm
OL-
PP
56.
71.
0E-0
72.
1E-0
76.
692.
0E-0
74.
1E-0
76.
232.
1E-0
73.
3E-0
7de
pths
of t
est s
ectio
ns in
200
2 an
d 20
05 d
iffer
46
cm
OL-
PP
57.
77.
6E-0
81.
5E-0
77.
699.
6E-0
81.
9E-0
77.
236.
0E-0
87.
2E-0
8de
pths
of t
est s
ectio
ns in
200
2 an
d 20
05 d
iffer
46
cm
OL-
PP
58.
79.
1E-0
82.
0E-0
78.
691.
0E-0
72.
1E-0
78.
231.
0E-0
71.
9E-0
7de
pths
of t
est s
ectio
ns in
200
2 an
d 20
05 d
iffer
46
cm
OL-
PP
59.
71.
5E-0
73.
2E-0
79.
691.
6E-0
73.
3E-0
79.
233.
2E-0
75.
0E-0
7de
pths
of t
est s
ectio
ns in
200
2 an
d 20
05 d
iffer
46
cm
OL-
PP
510
.71.
4E-0
73.
3E-0
710
.69
1.6E
-07
3.6E
-07
10.2
31.
7E-0
72.
7E-0
7de
pths
of t
est s
ectio
ns in
200
2 an
d 20
05 d
iffer
46
cm
OL-
PP
511
.07
1.4E
-08
2.7E
-08
OL-
PP
9O
L-P
P9
2.84
3.8E
-11
2.4E
-22
OL-
PP
93.
88.
3E-0
82.
1E-0
73.
841.
5E-0
92.
9E-0
9O
L-P
P9
4.83
4.7E
-06
6.7E
-06
4.83
5.2E
-06
6.7E
-06
4.8
1.9E
-06
2.8E
-06
4.84
1.8E
-06
1.7E
-06
OL-
PP
95.
834.
5E-0
91.
3E-0
85.
83-9
.6E
-10
2.1E
-09
5.8
2.3E
-08
1.3E
-07
5.84
2.5E
-09
6.6E
-09
OL-
PP
96.
85.
3E-0
61.
0E-0
5K
-val
ue d
iffer
s ra
dica
lly fr
om tw
o ot
her m
easu
rem
ents
from
the
sam
e se
ctio
n in
200
2 an
d 20
05O
L-P
P9
6.83
6.3E
-09
3.9E
-08
6.8
2.2E
-08
2.1E
-07
6.84
5.9E
-09
1.2E
-08
OL-
PP
97.
831.
3E-0
72.
2E-0
77.
81.
2E-0
73.
5E-0
77.
847.
3E-0
81.
2E-0
7O
L-P
P9
8.83
3.5E
-07
5.4E
-07
8.8
5.0E
-08
3.0E
-07
8.84
4.2E
-07
6.4E
-07
OL-
PP
99.
833.
3E-0
74.
9E-0
79.
81.
7E-0
73.
6E-0
79.
841.
1E-0
71.
7E-0
7O
L-P
P9
10.8
3-6
.0E
-10
1.4E
-08
10.8
3.4E
-08
2.5E
-07
10.8
42.
4E-0
96.
8E-0
9O
L-P
P9
11.8
32.
7E-0
92.
1E-0
811
.82.
6E-0
82.
3E-0
711
.84
4.3E
-09
1.0E
-08
OL-
PP
912
.84
2.3E
-09
2.6E
-08
OL-
PP
913
.32
3.8E
-09
1.1E
-08
OL-
PP
36O
L-P
P36
5.67
1.2E
-08
2.1E
-08
5.67
1.0E
-08
1.8E
-08
5.67
1.3E
-08
2.3E
-08
OL-
PP
366.
671.
4E-0
73.
0E-0
76.
671.
2E-0
72.
4E-0
76.
671.
3E-0
72.
2E-0
76.
671.
3E-0
72.
4E-0
7O
L-P
P36
7.67
6.8E
-07
1.4E
-06
OL-
PP
367.
674.
8E-0
78.
3E-0
77.
674.
2E-0
77.
3E-0
77.
675.
3E-0
77.
8E-0
77.
675.
2E-0
77.
7E-0
7O
L-P
P36
8.67
5.4E
-07
9.6E
-07
8.67
6.0E
-07
1.1E
-06
8.67
4.7E
-07
7.5E
-07
8.67
1.6E
-08
5.2E
-08
OL-
PP
394.
951.
3E-0
72.
5E-0
74.
951.
2E-0
72.
4E-0
74.
951.
2E-0
71.
8E-0
74.
951.
2E-0
72.
3E-0
74.
949.
6E-0
81.
7E-0
74.
926.
2E-0
81.
5E-0
7O
L-P
P39
5.95
1.3E
-08
2.9E
-08
5.95
1.4E
-08
3.9E
-08
5.95
9.7E
-09
6.0E
-09
5.95
8.5E
-09
3.2E
-08
5.94
3.9E
-09
1.3E
-08
5.92
2.7E
-08
9.5E
-08
OL-
PP
396.
954.
6E-0
68.
0E-0
66.
953.
9E-0
66.
6E-0
66.
953.
8E-0
66.
7E-0
66.
954.
2E-0
65.
1E-0
66.
944.
5E-0
68.
1E-0
66.
944.
6E-0
67.
6E-0
6O
L-P
P39
7.95
4.2E
-06
6.8E
-06
7.95
3.6E
-06
6.4E
-06
7.95
3.1E
-06
5.9E
-06
7.95
7.5E
-06
5.3E
-06
7.94
4.8E
-06
8.4E
-06
7.94
4.3E
-06
7.2E
-06
OL-
PP
398.
957.
8E-0
92.
0E-0
88.
951.
5E-0
99.
7E-0
98.
953.
1E-0
84.
4E-0
88.
956.
1E-0
92.
8E-0
88.
941.
5E-0
81.
7E-0
88.
946.
2E-0
92.
7E-0
8O
L-P
P39
9.95
3.0E
-08
6.8E
-08
9.95
2.5E
-08
6.6E
-08
9.95
2.5E
-08
4.8E
-08
9.95
1.3E
-08
4.1E
-08
9.94
5.5E
-08
1.0E
-07
9.94
2.4E
-08
9.7E
-08
OL-
PP
3910
.95
2.6E
-09
1.8E
-08
10.9
51.
0E-0
91.
5E-0
810
.95
1.2E
-09
-3.5
E-0
910
.95
-1.5
E-0
9-2
.0E
-21
10.9
42.
4E-0
93.
6E-0
910
.94
1.6E
-10
4.3E
-09
OL-
PP
3911
.95
4.4E
-10
1.6E
-08
11.9
5-9
.1E
-10
1.7E
-08
11.9
52.
1E-0
96.
6E-0
911
.94
7.9E
-09
1.1E
-08
11.9
43.
7E-0
91.
4E-0
8
2013
2012
2011
2010
Hol
eTe
st s
ectio
n,
ref g
roun
d le
vel,
mid
poin
t of
the
sect
ion
(m)
KH
vors
lev (
m/s
)K
Thie
m (m
/s)
Test
sec
tion,
re
f gro
und
leve
l, m
idpo
int o
f th
e se
ctio
n (m
)
KH
vors
lev (
m/s
)K
Thie
m (m
/s)
Test
sec
tion,
re
f gro
und
leve
l, m
idpo
int o
f th
e se
ctio
n (m
)
KH
vors
lev (
m/s
)K
Thie
m (m
/s)
Test
sec
tion,
re
f gro
und
leve
l, m
idpo
int o
f th
e se
ctio
n (m
)
KH
vors
lev
(m/s
)K
Thie
m
(m/s
)
OL-
PP
364.
726.
0E-0
69.
0E-0
6O
L-P
P36
5.72
1.3E
-07
2.2E
-07
5.72
2.4E
-08
3.1E
-08
5.72
2.2E
-08
4.3E
-08
5.72
2.0E
-08
3.3E
-08
OL-
PP
366.
724.
5E-0
78.
0E-0
76.
721.
5E-0
72.
8E-0
76.
721.
5E-0
72.
8E-0
76.
721.
3E-0
72.
5E-0
7O
L-P
P36
OL-
PP
367.
727.
724.
2E-0
77.
6E-0
77.
724.
2E-0
77.
6E-0
77.
724.
5E-0
77.
9E-0
7O
L-P
P36
8.72
1.4E
-08
3.8E
-08
8.72
2.7E
-08
7.0E
-08
8.72
1.9E
-08
6.2E
-08
8.72
1.2E
-08
4.0E
-08
OL-
PP
395.
005.
002.
2E-0
73.
3E-0
75.
001.
4E-0
72.
8E-0
75.
001.
7E-0
73.
5E-0
7O
L-P
P39
6.00
2.9E
-06
4.5E
-06
6.00
8.2E
-08
1.8E
-07
6.00
9.1E
-09
1.6E
-08
6.00
1.4E
-08
5.0E
-08
OL-
PP
397.
003.
7E-0
66.
4E-0
67.
001.
2E-0
64.
9E-0
67.
004.
2E-0
67.
3E-0
67.
004.
2E-0
67.
4E-0
6O
L-P
P39
8.00
8.00
3.9E
-06
7.0E
-06
8.00
5.1E
-06
8.5E
-06
8.00
1.9E
-06
4.7E
-06
OL-
PP
399.
001.
2E-0
83.
1E-0
89.
007.
9E-0
81.
9E-0
79.
004.
1E-0
91.
1E-0
89.
001.
7E-0
86.
9E-0
8O
L-P
P39
10.0
010
.00
5.6E
-08
1.8E
-07
10.0
01.
3E-0
82.
6E-0
810
.00
1.4E
-07
2.8E
-07
OL-
PP
3911
.00
11.0
02.
4E-0
81.
3E-0
711
.00
-8.9
E-1
0-5
.9E
-09
11.0
07.
1E-0
94.
3E-0
8O
L-P
P39
12.0
07.
0E-0
81.
7E-0
712
.00
-1.4
E-0
9-5
.8E
-09
12.0
09.
8E-1
02.
2E-0
8
150
APPENDIX 25
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2002
Tube
Perfo
rate
d se
ctio
n fro
m
grou
nd
surfa
ce (m
-m)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
K Hvo
rsle
v (m
/s)
K Thi
em (m
/s)
Com
men
ts
OL-
PVP3
A3.
80-5
.80
6.5E
-06
5.3E
-06
1.3E
-05
1.6E
-05
OL-
PVP3
B1.
80-3
.80
1.1E
-05
1.7E
-05
1.7E
-05
2.1E
-05
OL-
PVP4
A5.
55-7
.55
1.2E
-05
1.8E
-05
9.8E
-06
1.3E
-05
1.3E
-05
1.9E
-05
1.0E
-05
1.6E
-05
1.4E
-05
2.0E
-05
1.5E
-05
2.2E
-05
1.5E
-05
2.2E
-05
1.5E
-05
2.2E
-05
1.4E
-05
2.1E
-05
1.4E
-05
2.0E
-05
9.7E
-06
1.3E
-05
OL-
PVP4
B2.
00-4
.00
6.3E
-06
9.1E
-06
5.0E
-06
7.3E
-06
7.9E
-06
1.2E
-05
4.1E
-06
5.9E
-06
2.9E
-06
4.2E
-06
4.0E
-06
5.2E
-06
3.9E
-06
5.5E
-06
4.2E
-06
6.0E
-06
3.3E
-06
4.6E
-06
3.1E
-06
3.7E
-06
3.0E
-06
3.4E
-06
OL-
PVP5
A3.
3E-0
64.
4E-0
6O
L-PV
P5B
1.3E
-06
1.5E
-06
OL-
PVP6
A3.
83-5
.83
1.7E
-07
1.0E
-07
7.2E
-08
1.0E
-07
7.9E
-08
1.2E
-07
7.9E
-08
1.3E
-07
1.1E
-07
1.6E
-07
8.8E
-08
1.8E
-07
8.3E
-08
1.4E
-07
9.8E
-08
8.9E
-08
4.8E
-08
8.6E
-08
OL-
PVP6
B1.
83-3
.83
2.6E
-07
8.1E
-07
2.4E
-06
3.7E
-06
3.5E
-06
5.1E
-06
3.8E
-06
5.7E
-06
3.9E
-06
5.5E
-06
2.0E
-06
3.0E
-06
9.8E
-06
1.4E
-05
2.6E
-06
4.3E
-06
2.3E
-06
1.1E
-06
OL-
PVP7
A1.
75-3
.75
3.6E
-07
5.0E
-07
2.9E
-07
4.1E
-07
3.5E
-07
4.1E
-07
OL-
PVP8
A4.
45-6
.45
1.2E
-05
1.7E
-05
1.1E
-05
1.6E
-05
3.4E
-06
5.0E
-06
OL-
PVP8
B2.
45-4
.45
1.9E
-07
3.4E
-07
4.5E
-07
6.3E
-07
4.2E
-07
1.1E
-06
OL-
PVP9
A5.
00-7
.00
3.7E
-05
9.0E
-05
6.2E
-05
8.9E
-05
8.5E
-05
1.2E
-04
OL-
PVP9
B3.
00-5
.00
7.6E
-05
5.9E
-05
1.8E
-05
7.3E
-05
5.1E
-07
6.0E
-06
OL-
PVP1
0A1.
00-3
.00
4.7E
-06
6.9E
-06
1.4E
-04
2.0E
-04
1.2E
-04
1.5E
-04
OL-
PVP1
0B0.
30-0
.50
2.2E
-05
6.7E
-05
3.8E
-05
6.3E
-05
4.8E
-06
9.3E
-06
OL-
PVP1
11.
20-3
.20
3.1E
-06
6.2E
-06
3.0E
-05
4.2E
-05
5.2E
-05
7.5E
-05
OL-
PVP1
22.
30-4
.30
8.7E
-07
1.5E
-06
2.1E
-06
3.4E
-06
1.8E
-06
1.7E
-06
OL-
PVP1
33.
10-5
.10
6.4E
-06
8.8E
-06
5.3E
-06
7.7E
-06
9.2E
-06
1.6E
-05
OL-
PVP1
46.
40-8
.40
2.7E
-05
3.4E
-05
2.0E
-05
3.0E
-05
3.2E
-05
3.8E
-05
1.7E
-05
2.4E
-05
1.7E
-05
2.4E
-05
1.9E
-05
2.7E
-05
1.9E
-05
2.7E
-05
2.6E
-05
3.7E
-05
4.5E
-05
6.9E
-05
8.2E
-05
1.2E
-04
OL-
PVP1
72.
30-4
.30
3.1E
-06
4.5E
-06
6.2E
-07
1.2E
-06
OL-
PVP1
8A3.
00-6
.00
1.6E
-06
2.0E
-06
1.3E
-06
1.5E
-06
OL-
PVP1
8B2.
00-3
.00
8.5E
-07
1.2E
-06
8.4E
-07
2.0E
-06
OL-
PVP1
8B2.
00-3
.00
6.7E
-07
1.7E
-06
OL-
PVP1
99.
15-1
1.15
13
.15-
15.1
51.
7E-0
61.
5E-0
61.
4E-0
61.
7E-0
66.
2E-0
71.
3E-0
6tw
o se
para
te p
erfo
rate
d se
ctio
nsO
L-PV
P20
8.60
-10.
607.
0E-0
68.
4259
E-06
1.0E
-05
1.1E
-05
1.1E
-05
1.6E
-05
OL-
PVP2
16.
75-8
.75
4.5E
-06
6.1E
-06
OL-
PVP2
25.
22-7
.22
2.5E
-06
3.9E
-06
OL-
PVP2
32.
43-4
.43
5.9E
-05
8.6E
-05
OL-
PVP2
41.
91-3
.91
4.5E
-06
6.5E
-06
OL-
PVP2
51.
91-2
.91
6.8E
-05
1.2E
-04
OL-
PVP2
60.
81-2
.81
5.2E
-05
7.7E
-05
OL-
PVP2
70.
59-2
.59
1.3E
-05
2.2E
-05
OL-
PVP2
81.
32-2
.82
3.7E
-06
5.6E
-06
OL-
PVP2
91.
59-3
.09
2.2E
-06
5.5E
-05
OL-
PVP3
00.
80-1
.80
1.5E
-05
2.8E
-05
7.0E
-05
1.0E
-04
5.0E
-05
8.2E
-05
6.7E
-05
1.2E
-04
OL-
PVP3
1A1.
59-3
.59
2.9E
-05
3.8E
-05
6.6E
-05
8.5E
-05
4.9E
-05
5.5E
-05
4.2E
-05
6.0E
-05
OL-
PVP3
1B2.
72-4
.72
8.2E
-05
5.8E
-05
3.8E
-05
4.6E
-05
9.7E
-08
1.7E
-07
9.1E
-08
8.3E
-07
OL-
PVP3
20.
20-2
.20
6.3E
-07
9.8E
-07
9.7E
-08
2.0E
-07
7.1E
-08
2.1E
-07
5.2E
-05
7.9E
-05
OL-
PVP3
30.
76-1
.76
2.0E
-05
-1.4
E-05
2.4E
-05
3.9E
-05
1.4E
-05
2.3E
-05
OL-
PVP3
4A3.
08-5
.08
4.8E
-06
6.4E
-06
4.5E
-06
6.1E
-06
4.8E
-06
6.8E
-06
4.0E
-06
5.4E
-06
OL-
PVP3
4B1.
21-3
.21
1.8E
-06
2.5E
-06
2.0E
-05
2.7E
-05
3.4E
-06
5.9E
-06
1.1E
-05
1.6E
-05
OL-
PVP3
54.
6E-0
51.
6E-0
3O
L-PV
P36
0.80
-2.8
07.
0E-0
61.
1E-0
57.
0E-0
79.
2E-0
7O
L-PV
P37A
8.00
-10.
005.
8E-0
68.
5E-0
64.
4E-0
64.
6E-0
6O
L-PV
P37B
3.80
-5.8
04.
7E-0
66.
6E-0
64.
7E-0
66.
6E-0
6O
L-PV
P37C
0.80
-2.8
05.
5E-0
73.
9E-0
76.
1E-0
68.
5E-0
6O
L-PV
P38A
10.8
0-12
.80
1.7E
-07
3.1E
-07
6.3E
-08
1.1E
-07
OL-
PVP3
8B7.
70-9
.70
3.1E
-07
3.9E
-07
2.5E
-07
1.9E
-07
OL-
PVP3
8C4.
70-6
.70
6.1E
-07
8.0E
-07
2.7E
-07
3.0E
-07
OL-
PVP3
8D1.
30-3
.30
1.6E
-07
6.4E
-07
OL-
HP1
4.00
-5.0
07.
3E-0
62.
0E-0
51.
9E-0
64.
2E-0
61.
6E-0
63.
3E-0
62.
2E-0
66.
8E-0
6O
L-H
P22.
00-3
.00
2.1E
-05
3.2E
-05
8.3E
-07
1.4E
-06
7.0E
-07
1.4E
-06
7.4E
-07
1.4E
-06
OL-
HP3
4.00
-5.0
08.
6E-0
61.
4E-0
57.
9E-0
71.
8E-0
63.
3E-0
71.
2E-0
6O
L-H
P42.
00-3
.00
1.8E
-05
7.9E
-06
1.2E
-04
1.4E
-04
4.3E
-05
5.9E
-05
9.6E
-06
2.9E
-05
151
152
APPENDIX 26 COMPARISON OF THE K- AND T-VALUES WITH THE PRE-PUMPING RESULTS
153
APPENDIX 26
Pum
ping
Sa
mpl
ing
date
Yiel
dYi
eld
Wat
er ta
ble
at s
tart
Wat
er ta
ble
at th
e en
dh
Leng
th o
utsi
de c
asin
gL
K Thi
emT
Slu
g te
st
LC
ompa
rison
Com
paris
onho
lel/m
inm
3 /sfro
m T
OC
, mfro
m T
OC
, mm
mm
m/s
m2 /s
KTh
iem
m/s
T m
2 /sm
Kpu
mp/K
slug
T p
ump/T
slug
OL-
PP36
22.8
.13
0.30
5.00
E-06
4.54
4.69
0.15
8.29
3.98
E-06
3.33
E-05
3.51
E-07
1.40
E-06
411
.34
23.7
5O
L-PP
3915
.8.1
30.
931.
54E-
051.
883.
731.
8512
.33
6.68
E-07
8.33
E-06
3.66
E-06
1.10
E-05
30.
180.
76O
L-P
VP
4A23
.4.1
33.
505.
83E-
050.
772.
441.
672
1.73
E-05
3.49
E-05
1.78
E-05
3.56
E-05
20.
970.
98O
L-P
VP
1424
.4.1
33.
606.
00E-
051.
503.
161.
662
1.79
E-05
3.61
E-05
3.39
E-05
6.79
E-05
20.
530.
53O
L-P
VP
302.
5.13
0.79
1.32
E-05
1.79
2.37
0.58
12.
27E-
052.
27E-
052.
78E-
052.
78E-
051
0.82
0.82
OL-
PVP3
1A2.
5.13
4.37
7.29
E-05
1.81
2.19
0.38
29.
60E-
051.
92E-
043.
77E-
057.
55E-
052
2.54
2.54
OL-
PV
P36
30.5
.13
0.86
1.43
E-05
1.90
2.76
0.86
28.
34E-
061.
67E-
051.
12E-
052.
24E-
052
0.74
0.74
OL-
PVP3
7A5.
6.13
1.68
2.79
E-05
1.58
3.75
2.17
26.
44E-
061.
29E-
058.
45E-
061.
69E-
052
0.76
0.76
OL-
PVP3
7B6.
6.13
1.31
2.18
E-05
1.62
3.69
2.07
25.
28E-
061.
05E-
056.
65E-
061.
33E-
052
0.79
0.79
OL-
PVP3
7C11
.6.1
30.
427.
00E-
060.
954.
243.
292
1.06
E-06
2.13
E-06
3.93
E-07
7.87
E-07
22.
712.
70
154
APPENDIX 27 CORRECTION TO PREVIOUS SLUG TEST REPORT
In the previous slug test report (Tammisto 2014), Figure 5-4a should be replaced with the following figure.
155
APPENDIX 27
Fig
ure
5-4a
. Hyd
raul
ic c
ondu
ctiv
ity (m
/s) i
n PV
P-tu
bes.
The
perf
orat
ed se
ctio
n is
two
met
ers.
156