Laserfiche WebLink
1 mm in diameter. Columns were 105 mm in diameter and 90 mm deep. <br />2 The bottoms of the columns were closed with aluminum screen covered <br />3 with filter paper. Duplicate columns were packed to about 1.45 Mg m 3 <br />4 bulk density with each of the size ranges listed above. Each column <br />5 vas leached separately into a funnel which directed the water [o a <br />6 fraction collector. The distilled water was applied through a constant <br />q head siphon dripping through hypodermic needles extending through the <br />$ bottom of a rotating cylinder. The number of needles used vas <br />y regulated to keep the rate of dripping at about SO mm per day for the <br />10 Williams Fork material and 250 mm per day for the Glenrock. These <br />11 values were below the saturated hydraulic conductivity for [he <br />12 respective materials. Electrical conductivity (EC) measurements were <br />i <br />13 taken on about 20 ml fractions. <br />• 14 The second experiment included 3 column lengths in duplicate 25.4 <br />15 ® diameter columns using the Glenrock < 0.5 mm spoil material packed <br />16 to a bulk density of about 1.4 M8 m 3 these columns were 0.25, 0.50, <br />lq and 1 m in length. The electrical conductivity for these columns was <br />lg measured periodically on increments of flow. The flow rate was <br />19l~intained at about 30 mm per day. <br />20 The third experiment involved batch extraction. Duplicate 100 g <br />spoil samples of both Williams Fork and Glenrock material, which were <br />22laieved to < 0.5 mm diameter, were mixed with distilled water in the <br />Zg same manner prescribed in the USDA Agriculture Handbook No. 603 for <br />saturated extract. After the extraction for the saturation eztract <br />ermiastion the water vas returned to the sample and more water added <br />26 to achieve Che 1:1 ratio of sample to water weight. Water vas <br />• 2Y eztracted for the EC determination and returned. The ratio was <br />3 <br />... ..r... ~- <br />x ~ . _ .. <br />