NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

18-Geol-B1 Contaminant Hydrogeology · December 2017

Question 5 of 5: Vadose-Zone Moisture Profiles, Brooks-Corey Parameter Fitting, and Wetting-Front Advance

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

National Exams — December 2017 — 04-Geol-B1 Contaminant Hydrogeology. Three-hour, open-book exam; any non-communicating calculator permitted. Five questions constitute a complete paper and all five are of equal value (20 marks each per the printed marking scheme). Unless stated otherwise, water density = 998 kg/m³, water viscosity = 0.001 kg/m-sec, g = 9.81 m/s², 1 atm = 101300 Pa, and R = 8.314 Pa·m³/gmol·K = 0.082 atm·L/mol·K.

Reference texts: Fetter, C.W., Contaminant Hydrogeology (2nd ed., Prentice Hall, 1999) — molecular diffusion/tortuosity, sorption (Kd-Koc-Kow correlations), Henry's-law and four-phase partitioning, NAPL fate, capillarity and vadose-zone water potential; Domenico, P.A. & Schwartz, F.W., Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology (2nd ed., Wiley, 1997) — the Ogata-Banks advection-dispersion-reaction solution (with and without first-order decay) and the 2-D instantaneous-source (Gaussian puff) solution; Freeze, R.A. & Cherry, J.A., Groundwater (Prentice-Hall, 1979) — Darcy's law, the Brooks-Corey capillary pressure–saturation relation, and Green-Ampt infiltration theory; EGBC Geoscience Professional Practice Guidelines for assumption-disclosure conventions on open-book calculations.

Question 5: Vadose-Zone Moisture Profiles, Brooks-Corey Parameter Fitting, and Wetting-Front Advance (20 marks: a-6, b-7, c-7)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Given (a). $k=10^{-12}\ \text{m}^2$, $n=0.4$; Brooks-Corey $\lambda=3.0$, $p_d=40$ cm, $S_{wr}=0.1$, $S_{max}=1.0$; water table 2 m below the surface, zero vertical flux.

Find (a). Moisture content at the ground surface; then, for $RH=50\%$ at the surface (still zero flux), the depth to the water table.

Approach. Under static (zero-flux) equilibrium the matric suction head equals the height above the water table; converting that suction to saturation uses the Brooks-Corey retention curve. For the RH case, the Kelvin equation converts relative humidity directly to an equivalent suction head, which under the same static assumption equals the depth to the water table.

  1. Suction head at the surface (2 m water table). Under zero flux, $\psi(z)=$ height above the water table $=200$ cm at the surface.
  2. Effective and actual saturation (Brooks-Corey). $$S_e=\left(\frac{p_d}{\psi}\right)^{\lambda}=\left(\frac{40}{200}\right)^{3.0}=0.00800.$$ $$S_w=S_{wr}+S_e(S_{max}-S_{wr})=0.1+0.008(0.9)=0.1072.$$
  3. Volumetric moisture content. $$\theta=nS_w=0.4(0.1072)=\boxed{0.0429}\ (4.29\%\ \text{by volume}).$$
  4. Kelvin-equation suction at $RH=50\%$. $$\psi_{RH}=-\frac{RT}{M_wg}\ln(RH)=-\frac{(8.314)(293.15)}{(0.018)(9.81)}\ln(0.5)=\boxed{9560\ \text{m}}.$$
Check: at $RH=50\%$ the Kelvin equation implies a suction equivalent to a water table roughly 9.6 km below the surface — physically nonsensical for any real aquifer, but numerically the direct, correct application of the exam's own Kelvin relation. The result is deliberately extreme: it demonstrates how steeply the Kelvin equation's suction response accelerates as $RH$ drops much below the 95–100% range typical of near-surface soils (e.g. $RH=99\%$ gives only $\approx139$ m of suction, two orders of magnitude smaller) — a genuinely dry (50% RH) surface cannot be sustained in true static equilibrium with a water table at any realistic depth, so in practice such a surface would instead be actively drying under a non-zero upward vapour flux, not sitting in the zero-flux state the question specifies.

Given (b). $(S_w,\psi)$ pairs from TDR + tensiometer: surface ($z=0$) $S_w=0.10$, $\psi=2.0$ m; $z=1$ m, $S_w=0.50$, $\psi=1.0$ m. $S_{wr}=0.05$, $S_{max}=1.0$, $n=0.4$, $K_{sat}=10^{-3}\ \text{cm/s}$.

Find (b). Brooks-Corey $p_d$ and $\lambda$; depth to the water table (no flow).

Approach. Two independent $(S_e,\psi)$ points on the Brooks-Corey curve give two equations in the two unknowns $p_d,\lambda$; solve simultaneously by taking logs. The same zero-flux, suction-equals-height-above-water-table relation used in part (a) gives the water-table depth, checked for consistency at both measurement points.

  1. Effective saturations. $$S_{e,1}=\frac{0.10-0.05}{1-0.05}=0.0526\ (\text{surface}),\qquad S_{e,2}=\frac{0.50-0.05}{1-0.05}=0.4737\ (1\ \text{m depth}).$$
  2. Solve for $\lambda$ (log-linear Brooks-Corey form, $\ln S_e=\lambda\ln p_d-\lambda\ln\psi$). $$\lambda=\frac{\ln S_{e,1}-\ln S_{e,2}}{\ln\psi_2-\ln\psi_1}=\frac{\ln(0.0526)-\ln(0.4737)}{\ln(100)-\ln(200)}=\boxed{3.17}.$$ (heads in cm: $\psi_1=200$, $\psi_2=100$.)
  3. Solve for $p_d$. $$\ln p_d=\frac{\ln S_{e,1}}{\lambda}+\ln\psi_1=\frac{-2.944}{3.17}+5.298=4.369\ \Rightarrow\ p_d=\boxed{79.0\ \text{cm}}.$$ (Confirmed identically from the $z=1$ m point.)
  4. Depth to the water table. Under zero flux, $\psi(z)=D_{wt}-z$, so $D_{wt}=z+\psi(z)$. Surface: $D_{wt}=0+2.0=2.0$ m. At $z=1$ m: $D_{wt}=1+1.0=2.0$ m — both points agree exactly. $$D_{wt}=\boxed{2.0\ \text{m}}.$$

Given (c). Soil of part (b) ($p_d=79.0$ cm, $\lambda=3.17$, $n=0.4$, $K_{sat}=10^{-3}\ \text{cm/s}$), initially uniform $S_{w,i}=0.05$ to 10 m depth; infiltrating pulse $S_{w,wet}=0.9$; target wetting-front depth $L=30$ cm.

Find (c). Time for the wetting front to reach 30 cm depth.

Approach. A sharp, near-saturated wetting front advancing into much drier soil is the classic Green-Ampt scenario; use the Brooks-Corey air-entry pressure $p_d$ from part (b) as the effective wetting-front suction and solve the (here non-iterative, since the target depth is specified directly) Green-Ampt time-infiltration relation.

  1. Moisture deficit across the front. $$\Delta\theta=n(S_{w,wet}-S_{w,i})=0.4(0.9-0.05)=\boxed{0.340}.$$
  2. Cumulative infiltration at $L=30$ cm. $$F=L\,\Delta\theta=30(0.340)=10.2\ \text{cm}.$$
  3. Green-Ampt time-infiltration relation. $$t=\frac{F-\psi_f\Delta\theta\,\ln\!\left(1+\dfrac{F}{\psi_f\Delta\theta}\right)}{K_{sat}},\qquad \psi_f\approx p_d=79.0\ \text{cm}.$$ $$\psi_f\Delta\theta=79.0(0.340)=26.9\ \text{cm};\quad \ln\!\left(1+\frac{10.2}{26.9}\right)=0.322.$$ $$t=\frac{10.2-26.9(0.322)}{10^{-3}}=\boxed{1554\ \text{s}}\ (\approx25.9\ \text{min}).$$
Question 5 — Final Results
ItemResult
5(a) Moisture content at surface (2 m WT)0.0429 (4.29%)
5(a) Depth to WT at $RH=50\%$ (Kelvin eq.)≈9560 m (illustrative, see the check note)
5(b) Brooks-Corey $\lambda$, $p_d$3.17, 79.0 cm
5(b) Depth to water table2.0 m
5(c) Moisture deficit $\Delta\theta$0.340
5(c) Time for wetting front to reach 30 cm1554 s ($\approx$25.9 min)
Back to the paper →