Laserfiche WebLink
which tends to have linear anisotropy simply because of the way the dragline • <br />places overburden into the reclaimed workings. <br />There were problems in running tests in this well because it was nearly <br />impossible to maintain a water level above the 40 ft, depth level, l~he <br />loss of water at and above that level has been interpreted as a relatively <br />abrupt discontinuity between lower permeability material from 40-50 feet, <br />and higher permeability material above 40 feet. Since a water level could <br />not be maintained above the 40 foot level, the test was run completely within <br />the slotted portion of the well. Because of the well depth it was impossible <br />to run the test as a constant head test. Therefore, the test was analyzed <br />as an auger hole or borehole permeability test. <br />After the test was allowed to stabilize (about two hours), the water level <br />drop was measured over time, with an average head drop at the end of the test <br />of 0.008 ft/sec. <br />First the results were analyzed according to the formula of an uncased hole • <br />as per the U.S. Navy Bureau of Yards and Docks Method (Cedergren, 1967). <br />According to the formla <br />K 16 DS X (h` hl <br />(tZ -tl) <br />Where K = hydraulic conductivity <br />R = radius of borehole <br />D = depth of borehole in saturated section <br />h2 = head at t2 <br />hl = initial head at tl <br />and where, since the test is a reverse slug test the absolute value of <br />hz - hl is taken <br />and S = a graphically determined shape factor • <br />7-9-22 <br />