Designation: D8037/D8037M − 16

Standard Practice for

Direct Push Hydraulic Logging for Profiling Variations of
Permeability in Soils1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation D8037/D8037M; the number immediately following the designation indicates the
year of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last
reapproval. A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.

1. Scope to guide confirmation sampling. The EC log and injection

1.1 This practice describes a method for rapid delineation of pressure log may be compared in some settings to identify the
variations in formation permeability in the subsurface using an presence of ionic contaminants or ionic injectates used for
injection logging tool. Clean water is injected from a port on remediation.
the side of the probe as it is advanced at approximately 2cm/s 1.4 The injection logging system does not provide quanti-
into virgin soils. Logging with the injection tool is typically tative permeability or hydraulic conductivity information.
performed with direct push equipment, however other drilling However, injection pressure and flow data may be used to
machines may be modified to run the logs by direct push provide a qualitative indication of formation permeability.
methods (for example, addition of a suitable hammer and/or Semi-quantitative values of permeability may be obtained by
hydraulic ram systems). Injection logs exceeding 100 ft [30m] correlation of injection logging data with other methods (1-4).2
depth have been obtained. Direct push methods are not Also, a log of estimated hydraulic conductivity (5) may be
intended to penetrate consolidated rock and may encounter calculated for the saturated zone using an empirical model
refusal in very dense formations or when cobbles or boulders included in some versions of the log viewing software. The
are encountered in the subsurface. However, injection logging data allows for estimates of hydraulic conductivity (K) at the
has been performed in some semi-consolidated or soft forma- inch-scale using the corrected injection pressure and flow rate.
tions. 1.5 This tool is to be used as a logging tool for the rapid
1.2 This standard practice describes how to obtain a real delineation of variations in permeability, lithology and hy-
time vertical log of injection pressure and flow rate with depth. drostratigraphy in unconsolidated formations. Direct push soil
The data obtained is indicative of the variations of permeability sampling (Guide D6282) and slug testing (Practice D7242) by
in the subsurface and is typically used to infer formation means of groundwater sampling devices (Guide D6001) or
lithology. The person(s) responsible for review, interpretation direct push monitoring wells (Guide D6724 and Practice
and application of the injection logging data should be familiar D6725) may be used to validate injection log interpretation,
with the logging technique as well as the soils, geology and permeability and hydraulic conductivity estimates. Other aqui-
hydrogeology of the area under investigation. fer tests (Guide D4043) in larger wells can also be used to
1.3 The injection logging system may be operated with a obtain additional information about permeability and hydraulic
built in electrical conductivity sensor to provide additional real conductivity. However, correlation of results from long
time information on stratigraphy and is essential for targeting screened wells with the fine detail of the hydraulic injection log
test zones. Other sensors, such as fluorescence detectors data may be difficult at best due to the effect of scale in
(Practice D6187), a membrane interface probe (Practice measurements of transmissivity (6).
D7352) or a cone penetration tool (Test Method D5778) may 1.6 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the
be used in conjunction with injection logging to provide guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in
additional information. The use of the injection logging tool in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.
concert with an electrical conductivity array or cone penetra- 1.7 The values stated in either inch-pound units or SI units
tion tool is highly recommended (although not mandatory) to [presented in brackets] are to be regarded separately as
further define hydrostratigraphic conditions, such as migration standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact
pathways, low permeability zones (for example, aquitards) and equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently
of the other. Combining values from the two systems may
1
This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D18 on Soil and
result in non-conformance with the standard.
Rock and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D18.21 on Groundwater and
Vadose Zone Investigations.
2
Current edition approved Nov. 15, 2016. Published December 2016. DOI: The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to a list of references at the end of
10.1520/D8037_D8037M-16 this standard.

Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States

1
 D8037/D8037M − 16
1.8 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing D6187 Practice for Cone Penetrometer Technology Charac-
one or more specific operations. This document cannot replace terization of Petroleum Contaminated Sites with Nitrogen
education or experience and should be used in conjunction Laser-Induced Fluorescence
with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice may D6282 Guide for Direct Push Soil Sampling for Environ-
be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not mental Site Characterizations
intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which D6724 Guide for Installation of Direct Push Groundwater
the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, Monitoring Wells
nor should this document be applied without the consideration D6725 Practice for Direct Push Installation of Prepacked
of a project’s many unique aspects. The word “standard” in the Screen Monitoring Wells in Unconsolidated Aquifers
title means that the document has been approved through the D7242 Practice for Field Pneumatic Slug (Instantaneous
ASTM consensus process. Change in Head) Tests to Determine Hydraulic Properties
1.9 This standard does not purport to address all of the of Aquifers with Direct Push Groundwater Samplers
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the D7352 Practice for Direct Push Technology for Volatile
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro- Contaminant Logging with the Membrane Interface Probe
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica- (MIP)
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
3. Terminology
2. Referenced Documents 3.1 Definitions:
3 3.1.1 Definitions are in accordance with Terminology D653.
2.1 ASTM Standards:
D653 Terminology Relating to Soil, Rock, and Contained 3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
Fluids 3.2.1 atmospheric pressure (Patm), n—relative to injection
D1587 Practice for Thin-Walled Tube Sampling of Fine- logging, the atmospheric pressure is measured with the down-
Grained Soils for Geotechnical Purposes hole pressure sensor during the reference test when no water is
D2434 Test Method for Permeability of Granular Soils being pumped through the probe, the bottom valve is open on
(Constant Head) (Withdrawn 2015)4 the reference tube, and the water level in the reference tube is
D3740 Practice for Minimum Requirements for Agencies stable.
Engaged in Testing and/or Inspection of Soil and Rock as 3.2.2 corrected injection pressure (Pc), n—relative to injec-
Used in Engineering Design and Construction tion logging, the corrected injection pressure is calculated by
D4043 Guide for Selection of Aquifer Test Method in subtracting the measured atmospheric pressure (Patm) and the
Determining Hydraulic Properties by Well Techniques piezometric pressure (Ppiezo) from the total injection pressure
D5084 Test Methods for Measurement of Hydraulic Con- (Ptot) at a specified depth increment (i). That is:
ductivity of Saturated Porous Materials Using a Flexible P c ~ i ! 5 P tot ~ i ! 2 ~ P atm ~ i ! 1 P piezo ~ i ! !
Wall Permeameter
D5088 Practice for Decontamination of Field Equipment 3.2.3 dissipation test, v—relative to injection logging, a test
Used at Waste Sites made by halting the advancement of the probe, shutting off
D5092 Practice for Design and Installation of Groundwater injection flow, and recording the change (decay) in ambient
Monitoring Wells formation pressure with time, also called a pressure dissipation
D5299 Guide for Decommissioning of Groundwater Wells, test.
Vadose Zone Monitoring Devices, Boreholes, and Other 3.2.3.1 Discussion—When the excess pressure in the forma-
Devices for Environmental Activities tion caused by water injection and probe advancement has fully
D5778 Test Method for Electronic Friction Cone and Piezo- dissipated then the observed pressure provides a measurement
cone Penetration Testing of Soils of the formation piezometric pressure (Ppiezo) when the probe
D5856 Test Method for Measurement of Hydraulic Conduc- is below the water level. It is recommended to perform
tivity of Porous Material Using a Rigid-Wall, dissipation tests in higher permeability materials (sandy) so
Compaction-Mold Permeameter that dissipation occurs quickly to stability. Changing pressure
D6001 Guide for Direct-Push Groundwater Sampling for in the formation (such as caused by a nearby extraction or
Environmental Site Characterization injection well) will result in changing piezometric pressure
D6026 Practice for Using Significant Digits in Geotechnical over time. These conditions will influence the piezometric
Data profile determined from dissipation tests.
D6067 Practice for Using the Electronic Piezocone Pen- 3.2.4 injection port, n—relative to injection logging, a
etrometer Tests for Environmental Site Characterization replaceable screened orifice approximately 0.4-in. [10mm] in
diameter on the side of the HPT probe where water is injected
into the formation as the probe is advanced into the subsurface.
3
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or 3.2.5 piezometric pressure (Ppiezo), n—relative to injection
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM logging, the piezometric pressure is the stabilized pressure
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
measured during a dissipation test when the probe is below the
the ASTM website.
4
The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced on piezometric surface, the probe is not moving and no water is
www.astm.org. being pumped through the probe.

2
 D8037/D8037M − 16
3.2.6 total injection pressure (Ptot), n—relative to injection 4.4 At selected depths below the water table a pressure
logging, the total injection pressure is the pressure observed by dissipation test may be conducted. Insertion of the probe into
the down-hole sensor as the probe is being advanced while the formation and injection of water induces excess pore
water is injected into the formation through the injection port. pressure as the probe is advanced. To conduct a pressure
3.2.7 trigger, n—relative to injection logging, mechanical dissipation test probe advancement is halted and water flow is
interface between the operator and instrumentation to initiate stopped. The down-hole pressure transducer is used to monitor
or terminate data collection. decay of the excess pore pressure versus time. When the pore
pressure stabilizes the pressure transducer is measuring the
3.3 Symbols: potentiometric pressure at that depth in the formation. This
3.3.1 Pc—corrected injection pressure. data may be used to calculate the local water level and
3.3.2 Ptot—total injection pressure. piezometric profile. Often it is useful to conduct dissipation
3.3.3 Patm—atmospheric pressure, as measured with the tests at several depths during a log, especially between possible
down-hole pressure sensor during a reference test. confining layers. This may help to identify confined layers with
different hydraulic head or vertical hydraulic gradients across a
3.3.4 Ppiezo—piezometric pressure (same as Hydrostatic formation.
Pressure, µo, D653)
4.5 Logging is continued to the desired depth or until refusal
3.4 Acronyms: is encountered. At that point data acquisition is stopped and the
3.4.1 HPT, n—Hydraulic Profiling Tool (see 6.1) injection probe is retracted using the hydraulic system of the
3.4.2 MIP, n—Membrane Interface Probe direct push machine.
3.4.3 CPT, v—Cone Penetration Test 5. Significance and Use
3.4.4 EC, adj—Electrical Conductivity 5.1 The injection logging system provides a rapid and
3.4.5 LIF, n—laser induced fluorescence efficient way to ascertain the pressure required to inject water
3.4.6 OIP, n—Optical Image Profiler into unconsolidated formations at the given flow rate in real
time (Fig. 1) (1-4, 7).5 The measured injection pressure and
4. Summary of Practice flow rate are then used to assess variations in formation
permeability versus depth and infer changes in formation
4.1 This practice describes the field method for performing lithology and understand the local hydrostratigraphy (1-4,
an injection log. A steel probe is advanced through unconsoli- 8-16). Log interpretation should be confirmed with targeted
dated soils and sediments at approximately 2cm/s while clean soil coring adjacent to selected log locations or running logs
water is injected into the formation through a screened port on adjacent to one or more previously logged borings.
the side of the probe. An in-line pressure transducer just above
the port (or at the surface) measures the pressure required to 5.2 The tooling system described below is one commer-
inject water into the formation while a flow meter at the surface cially available injection logging system called the Hydraulic
measures the rate of water injection. Drive rods are incremen- Profiling Tool (HPT) and this standard follows the operating
tally added to the tool string as the probe is advanced to depth procedure for this system (7). Other permeability profiling
using direct push methods. Injection logs exceeding 100 ft tools have been and can be used for measuring the same or
[30m] depth have been obtained. Total log depth is controlled similar parameters related to formation permeability and hy-
by soil and formation conditions and equipment push capacity. draulic conductivity (1-4, 11, 12, and 17). Most of these tools
utilize one injection port on the probe and measure the
4.2 The injection probe may include an electrical conduc- injection pressure at the surface. When the injection pressure is
tivity (EC) array. This array is used to measure the bulk measured at the surface correction for frictional losses in the
formation electrical conductivity as the probe is advanced to water supply tube are required. These corrections will need to
depth and provides independent, real time stratigraphy data account for the length and diameter of the supply tube, flow
during the testing. Sometimes injection probes are run with a rate, temperature and viscosity of the fluid, and whether the
companion cone penetration test (CPT) which provides tip flow is laminar or turbulent in the supply tube (1). When the
resistance and sleeve friction data as the probe is advanced to pressure measurement is made down hole at the port these
depth (D6067). While neither an EC array nor a CPT module corrections are not required (5, 7). At least one type of
is required to run the injection log the additional independent hydraulic profiling tool uses two down-hole ports and pressure
data can be very useful to confirm the HPT log result and to transducers to measure pressure changes induced in the forma-
provide additional valuable information about the subsurface. tion by injection from a separate screen at discrete intervals
4.3 An electronics system with portable computer and (17). This system may be used to provide an injection pressure
software acquires the injection pressure, water flow rate and log and conduct tests to measure hydraulic conductivity at
bulk formation EC or CPT data as the probe is advanced. The discrete intervals. At least two systems enable the operator to
pressure, flow and EC or CPT data are plotted on screen versus collect ground water samples at selected depths as the probe is
depth as the log is obtained for live time viewing and advanced (11,14).
interpretation. The measured injection pressure and flow rate
along with the EC or CPT data provides information about 5
The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to a list of references at the end of
formation permeability, lithology and hydrostratigraphy. this standard.

3
 D8037/D8037M − 16

The water container (A) provides water to the metering pump in the HPT flow module (B) and is pumped down hole via the trunkline (D) and through the inline pressure
sensor (E) and out of the screened port (F) into the formation. As the probe is advanced at 2cm/s the inline pressure sensor (E) monitors the pressure required to inject
water into the formation while the injection flow rate is measured with a flow meter in the flow module (B). The electrical conductivity array (G) simultaneously provides
an EC log of the bulk formation as the probe is advanced. Analog signals are converted to digital output in the field instrument (C) and displayed on the computer screen
(H) for live-time viewing in the field. Data is saved for later review and analysis.
FIG. 1 Schematic of an Injection Logging System, Demonstrating Principles of Operation

NOTE 1—Some early versions of the 2-port Permeameter suffered from 5.4 Both contaminant migration pathways and low perme-
anomalous K measurements when tests were conducted over small ability zones (barriers) may be defined for environmental
vertical intervals with significant changes in K over the decimeter to
centimeter scale (18). More recent versions of the 2-port Permeameter investigations. The injection logging system may be used to
overcome this limitation by measuring injection pressure from one port as conduct water supply and groundwater resource investigations
the probe is advanced to verify homogeneity over the interval where (9) or to evaluate sites for aquifer recharge (14) in appropriate
quantitative K tests are performed (17). Additional work with driveable geological settings. Some investigators use injection log data to
piezometers and injection logging tools has been conducted by several
researchers (19-23). assist in the development of groundwater models (2).
5.3 Correlation of a series of injection logs across a site can 5.5 The data obtained from application of this practice may
provide 2-D and 3-D definition of variations in formation be used to guide soil (Guide D6282) and groundwater sampling
permeability, lithology and hydrostratigraphy (2, 8, 9, 13, 14, (Guide D6001) or placement of long-term monitoring wells
15). (Guide D6724, Practice D6725, and Practice D5092). The logs

4
 D8037/D8037M − 16
also may be used to select the location and screen intervals for consolidated sandstone) and may have difficulty penetrating
water supply wells (9, 14) or dewatering wells. very dense formations (for example, highly compacted glacial
5.6 The data can be used to optimize site remediation by tills) and heavily cemented soils (for example, caliche). Allu-
knowing the depth and distribution of higher permeability vial and glacial deposits with abundant cobbles and boulders
zones and lower permeability zones. For example, the logs can usually cannot be penetrated. Other drilling methods can be
guide where remediation fluids may be injected successfully or used to pre-bore through surface obstructions and set surface
provide guidance about the required injection pressures. casings.
5.7 The injection logging system may be configured with a NOTE 2—The quality of the result produced by this standard is
dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the
soil electrical conductivity array (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2) for suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Practitioners that meet the
simultaneous logging of bulk formation electrical conductivity criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent
which also may be used to infer formation lithology or indicate and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are
changes in pore fluid ionic strength (14, 15). Alternately, the cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure
HPT system may be paired with a CPT probe to obtain reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740
provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
information on soil/sediment types and strength of materials Practice D3740 was developed for agencies engaged in the testing
for foundation design (24). The HPT probe also may be and/or inspection of soils and rock. As such, it is not totally applicable to
coupled with a membrane interface probe for the detection of agencies performing this practice. However, users of this practice should
some volatile organic contaminants (Practice D7352) (8) or recognize that the framework of Practice D3740 is appropriate for
with a laser induced fluorescence (LIF) probe (D6187) or evaluating the quality of an agency performing this practice. Currently
there is no known qualifying national authority that inspects agencies that
optical image profiler (OIP) (25) or fuel fluorescence detector perform this practice.
probe (26) that uses ultraviolet light for the detection of fuels
and related organic contaminants by fluorescence. 6. Apparatus
5.8 DP methods are not designed to penetrate consolidated 6.1 General—The following discussion provides descrip-
rock (for example, granite, basalt, gneiss, schist, limestone or tions and details for the Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT) and

A) injection logging probe, B) electrical conductivity array, C) screen mounted in probe, D) close up of removable screen, E) down-hole pressure sensor, F) trunkline
FIG. 2 Common Components of an Injection Logging Tool

5
 D8037/D8037M − 16
system components (Fig. 1). Additional details on the HPT A shut off valve on the module permits the operator to stop
components and system described here are available in the flow to the injection screen when desired (for example, during
manufacturer’s operating procedure (7). Other injection log- a pressure dissipation test).
ging systems may have different specifications and compo- 6.9 Field Instrument (FI)—The primary function of this
nents. electronic component (Fig. 3) is to acquire the analog signals
6.2 Hydraulic Profiling Tool—A steel probe with a screened from the down-hole pressure sensor, flow meter, line pressure
port on one side. The HPT screen allows for the injection of sensor, EC array and other optional down hole sensors and
water into soils and unconsolidated formations as the probe is convert the signal to digital data for output to a laptop
advanced steadily at a rate of approximately 2cm/s to depth. A computer. The FI also supplies regulated voltage to the EC
down-hole pressure sensor monitors the total pressure required array for electrical conductivity logging.
to inject water into the formation while simultaneously an 6.10 Laptop Computer—A portable computer (Fig. 3) is
up-hole flow meter measures the rate of water injection (Fig. used to acquire and display the digital log data on screen as the
1). log is obtained using the data acquisition software. The data is
6.2.1 The screen is set in a removable insert. It is con- saved for later review, plotting and reporting.
structed of stainless steel wire mesh and the orifice has a
diameter of approximately 0.4-in. [10mm]. 6.11 Acquisition Software—A software package designed to
6.2.2 The down-hole pressure sensor operates in a pressure receive digitized HPT log data and plot it graphically on screen
range of 10 psi to 100 psi [70kPa to 700kPa] with an accuracy versus depth as the probe is advanced. Some software packages
rated at 61 % full scale. Sensor accuracy at lower pressures can display the injection pressure, water flow rate, electrical
generally exceeds manufacturer’s specifications. conductivity log, depth and rate of probe advancement as the
6.2.3 Plastic tubing is used to supply clean water to the log is obtained (27). The line pressure also may be displayed.
screen. The tubing is usually included in the trunkline (Fig. 2). Quality assurance tests also are performed with the acquisition
software. Data for all of these parameters are saved in the log
6.3 Trunkline—This cable (Fig. 2) consists of electrical file.
wires for the down hole pressure sensor, EC array and other
6.12 Viewing Software—A software package that allows the
optional probes or sensors (for example, CPT, MIP, LIF, OIP).
log file to be displayed graphically on screen and printed for
The trunkline also contains the water supply line for the
reporting purposes from the saved acquisition file. Some
injection screen. This trunkline is packaged in a durable,
software packages enable the user to review pressure dissipa-
protective jacketing and is pre-strung through the steel drive
tion test files to determine the piezometric pressure at the given
rods prior to logging.
depth and plot piezometric profiles (28). Some viewing soft-
6.4 Pressure Sensor—A replaceable pressure transducer as- ware packages also may be used to create simple 2D cross
sembly installed just above the injection probe in the tool string sections from multiple logs. Log data also may be exported to
to measure the pressure required to inject water into uncon- other software programs for analysis and plotting and for
solidated materials while the probe is being advanced by direct creation of 2D and 3D representations of log data.
push methods.
6.13 Global Positioning System—GPS connections for ac-
6.5 Reference Tube—A cylinder, closed on the bottom and quiring latitude and longitude coordinates of log locations are
open on the top, of specified height and diameter with a valve provided in some hardware/software systems. GPS data may
6-in. [150mm] below the top edge of the cylinder. The injection be saved with the log file.
probe is submerged under water in the reference tube to
6.14 Stringpot—A depth measuring potentiometer (Fig. 4).
conduct a calibration check (reference test) on the down-hole
It is mounted to the direct push machine or anchored to the
pressure sensor.
ground. The stringpot transfers voltage to the data acquisition
6.6 EC Test Jig and Test Load—Devices used to perform the system as the length of the string changes during probe
quality assurance test of the electrical conductivity array. Some advancement. This allows for accurate measurement of the
arrays require only a test jig. probe depth below ground surface and also rate of probe
6.7 Water Container—A plastic or metal container, clean movement. When location elevations are surveyed elevations
and free of any particulates or contaminants, used to hold at may be input to some viewing software packages to convert
least 5 gallons [20 liters] of clean water. The water is pumped depth to elevation.
down hole to inject into the formation for injection logging. 6.15 Drive Rods—Steel rods having adequate strength to
6.8 Flow Module—The flow module (Fig. 3) is used to sustain the force required to advance the probe into the
control and measure the rate of water flow delivered to the subsurface. The rods are sequentially added to the tool string to
injection port. The water supply pump and flow meter are advance the probe to depth. The trunkline is pre-strung through
included in the module. A bypass line is included on the pump all rods before the logging process is started. Typical diameters
so when downhole pressure exceeds pump capacity flow for percussion probing applications are 1.5, 1.75 and 2.25 in.
bypass is permitted to prevent pump damage. An inline [38, 44 and 57mm]. When operated with a CPT system either
pressure sensor inside the module monitors the water pressure 36mm or 44mm diameter CPT rods can be used.
in the injection line (line pressure). A pressure gauge on the 6.16 Direct Push Machine—A track or vehicle mounted
flow module allows for visual verification of the line pressure. machine with hydraulic rams supplemented with vehicle

6
 D8037/D8037M − 16

(A) The flow module, contains pump, flow meter and line pressure transducer:
(1) flow shut-off valve
(2) pump on-off switch
(3) pump flow control valve
(4) line pressure gauge
(B) Field instrument: converts analog signal to digital output for computer
(C) Laptop computer with acquisition and viewing software installed
FIG. 3 Common Electronic Components of an Injection Logging System

weight and/or a hydraulic hammer used to advance drive rods 7. Reagents and Materials
and tools into unconsolidated formations. Rotary drilling rigs
7.1 Injection Fluid—Clean water, free of any potential
can be modified to perform direct push advancement of tools
and for injection logging, often by addition of a suitable direct contaminants, is used for the injection fluid during injection
push hydraulic hammer system and/or hydraulic rams. Depth logging. Distilled or de-ionized water may be used as the
of penetration is dependent on local formation conditions, but injection fluid if desired. Water is usually injected at a rate of
depths in excess of 20 to 30 meters are routinely achieved. 200mL/min to 300mL/min but higher or lower injection rates
Review site specific soil and geological data to determine if may be used if desired. For a typical 60 ft [20m] depth log
direct push logging is an appropriate method on a site-by-site about 10 to 15 gal [40 to 60L] of water is required. This
basis. includes continued flow during retraction of the probe that is

7
 D8037/D8037M − 16

(A) Stringpot assembly.

(B) Anchoring the stringpot at ground surface and attaching the string to the sliding mast of the direct push machine to track
depth as the probe is advanced into the subsurface.
FIG. 4 Stringpot Used to Track Probe Depth

required to keep the screen open and prevent damage to the water or other fluids into the subsurface. Some agencies may
down hole pressure sensor. require at least limited oversight during initial logging and
water injection to verify procedures are acceptable. Water
8. Preparation of Apparatus injection volumes may be below minimum reporting require-
8.1 General—The injection probe and logging system must ments in many jurisdictions.
be assembled and set up properly to obtain valid log data. 8.3 HPT System Assembly—The following subsections pro-
Quality assurance tests must be performed before and after vide a brief overview of the HPT probe and system assembly.
each log and at the end of the working day to verify pressure Refer to the manufacturer’s operating procedure (7) for com-
transducer and system performance. The following provides a plete details and guidance.
brief overview of system preparation and QA test procedures 8.3.1 HPT Probe to Trunkline Assembly—The electrical
for the HPT injection logging system, for complete details refer conductivity and down-hole transducer connections are made
to the manufacturers operating procedure (7). If a different after the trunkline is strung through the drive rods, probe drive
injection logging system is used follow the manufacturer’s head and connection tube (Fig. 5).
specifications for that system. At this time the HPT system is 8.3.1.1 Electrical Conductivity—Thread the male and fe-
the only commercially available injection logging system. male connectors together. Snug the connectors gently and then
8.2 Regulatory Considerations—Contact the appropriate wrap them with electrical tape as strain relief against vibration
state and local agencies to obtain drilling licenses and permits as the probe is driven to depth.
that may be required to conduct the logging operation. Local 8.3.1.2 Down-Hole Pressure Transducer—Using appropri-
and state regulations also may control injection of clean water ate tools and fittings connect the down-hole transducer to the
or any fluids into the subsurface. Contact the appropriate water supply line (Fig. 5). Next connect the tubing at the top of
agencies to evaluate permitting requirements for injection of the probe to the barb fitting on the base of the down-hole

8
 D8037/D8037M − 16

FIG. 5 Assembly of an Injection Logging Probe and Attachment to the Trunkline

pressure sensor. Before assembly cut the water supply tubing 8.3.2 Attach Trunkline to Flow Module and FI—
as required to prevent kinking of the tube during probe Connections between the trunkline and up hole electronics and
assembly and logging. Attach the electrical connector for the water supply are made following manufacturers specifications.
pressure sensor to the appropriate electrical connector at the 8.3.2.1 Down-Hole Sensor Connection—The trunkline con-
end of the trunkline. Snug the connectors gently and then wrap nection for the down-hole pressure sensor is installed in the
them with electrical tape as strain relief against vibration as the receptacle on the back of the flow module. Refer to the
probe is driven to depth.
manufacturer’s operating procedure for details (7).
8.3.1.3 Seal and Probe Body Assembly—Thread the connec-
tion tube onto the HPT probe (Fig. 5) being sure not to twist or 8.3.3 Power and Communication Connections—The power
kink the water supply tubes or damage any electrical connec- cords for both the FI and Flow Module are connected to a
tions. The water seal assembly is placed over the trunkline clean, grounded power supply. The power supplied by genera-
above the connection tube and below the drive head. Apply tors or landline must be properly grounded and free of
water to the seal to make assembling the drive head to the excessive noise, both of which can impair signal integrity and
connection tube easier. Snug all threaded connections with pipe quality. Connect the field instrument to the flow module using
wrenches. the serial cable between the ports on the back of each

9
 D8037/D8037M − 16
instrument. A USB cable is then used to connect the FI to a system is used follow the manufacturer’s specification for that
laptop computer in which the acquisition software has been system. Both the EC array and the HPT pressure sensor circuits
installed. must be tested before and after each log to verify the log data
8.3.4 Stringpot Setup and Connection—Anchor the string is valid. If CPT or other sensors are run in tandem with
pot to the ground (Fig. 4) or use a machine specific bracket to injection logging then pre-log QA tests should be run on those
attach the stringpot to the DP machine probe derrick. The string systems.
is then attached so that the string length changes as the HPT 9.2 Electrical Conductivity QA Test—Assemble the EC test
probe and tool string are advanced into the subsurface. Be sure load and test jig (Fig. 7) and attach the test jig to the EC array
string movement is free and unencumbered so depth tracking is on the probe and perform the QA test as specified in the
accurate. The stringpot and string must be mounted so that if manufacturer’s operating procedure. The QA test results are
the DP machine foot is lifted off the ground during tool captured by the software and saved. If the readings are all
advancement depth is correctly tracked. The stringpot cable is within specified limits of the target values the EC array passes
then used to attach the stringpot to the field instrument for the QA test. If the system fails the QA test, then follow the
depth tracking. onscreen instructions to select a dipole EC array for the probe.
8.4 System Startup—When all plumbing and electrical con- If the system indicates that no valid dipole arrays are available,
nections are completed initiate power to the flow module, field then troubleshoot the system per the manufacturer’s instruc-
instrument and portable computer. Also start the injection tions and repeat the process until a valid EC array passes the
pump to pump water into the trunkline and purge all air from QA test. For complete details refer to the manufacturer’s
the trunkline and probe plumbing and injection port. operating procedure (7).
8.5 Start Acquisition Software—Initiate the acquisition soft- 9.3 Entry of System Operating Parameters—Once the EC
ware and start a new log (Fig. 6). Assign filename for the log test is completed the acquisition software opens a window for
and provide other requested information as prompted. Once the the entry of operating parameters including the selection of the
initial operating data is entered the software will then begin the injection probe model, desired EC array (Wenner; top, middle
quality assurance pre-log test sequence. or bottom dipole), rod length, string pot cable length, and
down-hole sensor calibration data. Select the appropriate
9. Quality Assurance Testing options and follow prompts in the software for adding calibra-
9.1 The following steps outline the pre-log quality assur- tion parameters for a new down-hole pressure transducer when
ance tests required for the down-hole pressure sensor, EC array required. If a new down-hole pressure sensor has been installed
and EC system. For complete details refer to the manufactur- the calibration information for that sensor must be entered in
er’s operating procedure (7). If a different injection logging the software to obtain accurate pressure data.

This is an example of one software system used for injection logging. Other similar systems may be used.
FIG. 6 Initiate Acquisition Software and Start New Log File to Prepare for Logging

10
 D8037/D8037M − 16

FIG. 7 Electrical Conductivity Quality Assurance Test Screen and Setup for a Typical Injection Logging System

9.4 Quality Assurance Test of the Down-hole Pressure 9.4.2 Down-hole Pressure Transducer Quality Assurance
Transducer—The following basic steps are required to test the Testing Procedure—The QA test of the down-hole pressure
down-hole pressure transducer to verify it is operating cor- transducer verifies the ability of the pressure transducer to
rectly before the log is started. Quality assurance testing is an accurately measure a known height difference in a water
integral part of ensuring the quality of pressure data obtained column (typically 6-in. [150mm]). This test also acquires the
from the injection logging system. A pressure transducer QA down-hole transducer measurement of atmospheric pressure at
test must be conducted before and after each log is run in the the time of logging. The atmospheric pressure as measured by
field. Without a pre-log QA test for each log it is not possible the down-hole pressure transducer is critical data required to
to verify the accuracy of the down-hole pressure data. obtain accurate water levels, piezometric profiles, corrected
9.4.1 Trunkline and Probe Purge—Air and air bubbles pressure logs and estimated hydraulic conductivity logs.
(which are compressible) must be purged from the water 9.4.3 Reference Tube—The injection probe is inserted in the
injection system, probe and line to obtain accurate pressure reference tube (Fig. 8) and the tube is filled with water as
logs. With the water flow line connected to the supply port on described below to perform the reference test. The reference
the back of the Flow Module open the line valve and turn on tube is fitted with a valve located 6 in. [150mm] below the top
the water pump (Fig. 3). Use the pump flow control knob to rim. When this valve is closed and the Reference tube is
adjust the injection flow to the desired rate, often 250mL/min completely filled with water, then the water level is at the
is used. It may require two to three minutes for water to begin “Top” level for the reference test. When the valve is open and
flowing from the injection screen. Sputtering and air bubbles the water level fills the tube to the level of the open valve, then
are usually observed. Once flow begins to stabilize place the the water level is at the “Bottom” level for the Reference Test.
thumb or finger over the injection screen and restrict flow to The Reference Tube must be sufficient height so that when the
increase pressure in the trunkline then release. Repeat several tube is filled to the height of the open valve (Bottom Level) the
times for 2 to 3 minutes to surge the line pressure and dislodge water level completely covers the HPT injection port of the
and remove all air bubbles from the trunkline and probe. probe. The distance from the screened injection port to the

11
 D8037/D8037M − 16

FIG. 8 Injection Probe Submerged in the Reference Tube for Pressure Sensor Quality Assurance Testing (A) and the Reference Test
Window (B) in a Typical Acquisition Software System

Bottom Level of water in the reference tube must be known record the “top with flow” pressure value when flow has
and entered into the acquisition software either manually or stabilized. In general the pressures observed during the flow
automatically according to the injection probe model to allow tests will exceed atmospheric pressure (about 14.7 psi
for completion of the QA test. [101kPa]) due to the internal system friction with water
9.4.4 Flow Tests—Set the water flow at the rate to be used flowing. Also, the difference observed between the top and
during the logging operation (for example, 250mL/min). Allow bottom flow tests will often exceed 0.22 psi [1.5kPa] of
the reference tube to fill until water flows from the open valve pressure exerted by the 6-in [150mm] difference in the water
at a stable rate. Capture/record the “bottom with flow” pressure column height. If the pressure observed during the flow tests
value in the QA test window (Fig. 8). Close the valve and allow exceeds 20 psi [140kPa] then corrective measures should be
the reference tube to fill with water until overflowing. Capture/ taken. Occasionally the screen becomes clogged with mud

12
 D8037/D8037M − 16
during retrieval from a previous log. In this case remove the lines in the area that may require independent clearance and
screen, flush out the HPT probe and clean and replace the contact for clearance as needed. Also, remember that privately
screen. If the screen has been damaged, install a new screen. If owned, site specific subsurface structures and utilities usually
the pressure reading continues to exceed 20 psi [140kPa] other will not be covered by one-call service providers. Coordinate
corrective measures are required, this may include replacement with the property owner for appropriate site specific clearances
of the down-hole pressure transducer. For complete details (if any) before advancing tools into the subsurface. Some
refer to the manufacturer’s operating procedure (7). federal, state or local agencies may require utility clearance
9.4.5 No-Flow tests and Quality Assurance Test Result— with an air-knife or hand auger before probe advancement may
With the reference tube full turn off the water pump and close begin.
the flow valve on the front of the flow module. Allow the 10.1.2 Most operators will place a rod wiper “doughnut” on
pressure to stabilize and capture/record the “top with no-flow” the ground at the logging location. The probe and drive rods are
pressure value in the QA test window of the software. Now advanced through the rubber doughnut as logging is per-
open the valve on the reference tube and let the water drain formed. When the log is completed the drive rods and probe are
until it stops flowing. When the pressure is stable capture the retracted through the rubber doughnut which is held in position
“bottom no-flow” pressure value in the QA test window. The by a metal weldment placed under the foot of the direct push
software will subtract the “bottom no-flow” pressure value or rotary drilling machine modified for DP operation. The rod
from the “top no-flow” pressure value to determine the ∆P wiper greatly reduces decontamination effort and also signifi-
value and check the result against the QA criteria of: cantly minimizes worker exposure to potentially contaminated
∆P = (observed pressure at top no-flow) – (observed pressure soil.
at bottom no-flow) = 0.22* psi [1.5kPa] 6 10%
10.2 Logging Procedures:
(* Depending on the logging system used different ∆P and
10.2.1 Establishing Log Zero Depth—With injection flow
QA ranges may be specified by the manufacturer.)
set at the desired rate place a slotted drive cap on the assembled
If the ∆P value calculated lies within the QA test window of
probe and position the probe beneath the DP machine hammer
610% the pressure sensor passes the QA test and logging may
or hydraulic ram. Plumb the machine mast and plumb the
begin. If the pressure sensor does not pass the QA test
probe for vertical advancement. Slowly push and gently
corrective action must be taken before logging may begin.
hammer the probe (if needed) until the injection screen bisects
Sometimes mud collects behind the injection screen and this
the ground surface. This is zero depth for the log. Re-plumb
will cause pressure anomalies during the QA test. Remove the
machine and probe as needed for vertical advancement.
injection screen and flush the system and clean the screen,
replace and re-test. If the pressure QA test continues to fail 10.2.2 Software Trigger On for Logging—Once the injec-
other corrective measures may be required, up to and including tion screen is set at ground surface for logging click on the
replacement of the pressure sensor. See the manufacturer’s “Trigger Standby” icon on the software screen so that it
operating procedure (7) for further details. Following correc- changes to “Trigger Logging.” Now depth and log data will be
tive measures the QA tests must be repeated successfully acquired, saved and plotted onscreen as the probe and tool
before logging may begin. Also observe the “bottom no-flow” string are advanced.
pressure result. If this value exceeds 20 psi [140kPa] after the 10.2.3 Probe Advancement—The DP machine hydraulic
injection port and screen have been cleaned and flushed the slides and percussion hammer are now operated manually to
down-hole sensor must be replaced, regardless of passing the advance the injection probe at an approximate rate of 0.1 ft/s
∆P QA test described above. [2cm/s] into the formation. The rate of penetration (speed)
graph may be displayed onscreen to assist the operator in
9.5 Trouble Shooting—If problems persist with either the advancing the tool at the desired rate. Avoid exceeding the
EC QA test or the HPT sensor after initial corrective measures 2cm/s rate so that the pressure and flow data will be consistent
trouble shooting of the system may be required. See the down the log. Modest variations in rate of advancement have
manufacturers operating procedure (7) for information on not been found to impact log quality. Note any pauses or
system trouble shooting. irregularities in the advancement of the tool besides the rod
break pauses below.
10. Field Procedures 10.2.4 Logging—The tool string is advanced until the top of
10.1 General Requirements: The following section de- the rod is 3 to 5 in. [80 to 120mm] above grade. The probe
scribes the general procedure for HPT logging once the quality derrick is raised and the next rod is slid over the pre-strung
assurance tests have been successfully completed. If a different trunkline and threaded onto the top of the tool string. Be sure
injection logging system is being used follow that manufactur- to snug each rod with a pipe wrench as it is added to the tool
er’s specifications. string, this will minimize thread damage to the tooling. Place
10.1.1 Prior to driving the HPT probe into the subsurface, the slotted drive cap on the tool and use the probe and machine
ensure that the proper utility clearances for direct push equip- hydraulics to advance the tool string to depth. Repeat process
ment have been obtained. Be sure that hazards from under- until desired depth is obtained or refusal occurs. Hammer only
ground and overhead utilities are accounted for in the clearance as needed to increase tool life.
process. Not all utilities or underground pipelines may be 10.2.5 Trunkline Management and Tool Maintenance—
covered by the local One-Call utility clearance service pro- Proper management of the trunkline through each drive rod as
vider. Obtain a list of potential subsurface utilities and pipe- it is added or removed from the tool string can improve logging

13
 D8037/D8037M − 16
efficiency. Keeping threaded fittings clean and free of burrs pressure should mimic one another in pressure increase and
also will facilitate the logging process. Regularly check decrease as the probe is advanced. However, the line pressure
threaded fittings for burrs, damage or wear and touch up with does not see the piezometric pressure while the down-hole
a file or grinding tool as needed. Replace worn or damaged pressure sensor does see this increase. Thus, as the probe is
rods to prevent loss of tooling and probe down hole. advance below the local water level the injection pressure and
10.2.6 Real Time Observation of Logs—As the probe is line pressure will diverge due to the increasing piezometric
advanced into the subsurface the HPT pressure, flow rate and pressure. For additional information on HPT log interpretation
electrical conductivity or other logs are observed onscreen and cross sections of logs see Appendix X1.
(Fig. 9). Data is recorded every 0.05 ft [~15mm] in the log file
and stored for later retrieval, viewing, printing and presenta- 10.3 Dissipation Testing—Pressure dissipation tests (Fig.
tion. Line pressure and rate of penetration may be viewed 10) are typically performed below the water table at one or
onscreen if desired. The line pressure can be used as a general more depths during log advancement. Pressure dissipation tests
log quality control parameter. The line pressure and injection are used to establish the ambient piezometric pressure at the

This log was obtained in an alluvial aquifer in approximately two hours, including tool retraction, with a two person crew. From left to right the graphs display: 1) electrical
conductivity (EC), 2) total injection pressure and piezometric profile line with measured dissipation pressures (triangles) and calculated water level (circle) 3) corrected
injection pressure (Pc) and water flow rate (dashed line) and 4) estimated hydraulic conductivity. Elevated EC readings and injection pressures indicate lower permeability
(increased clay content at this site) while lower EC and lower injection pressure correlate with more permeable sands and gravels in the formation. Note good correlation
between the EC and injection pressure in this log, in some settings EC and injection pressure will not always correlate.
FIG. 9 Typical Hydraulic Injection Pressure Log

14
 D8037/D8037M − 16

In dissipation test (A) the pressure quickly drops and stabilizes at the ambient piezometric pressure in the local formation, the quick drop and stabilization indicates a
permeable formation. The stabilized dissipation pressure observed here can be used to plot the potentiometric profile and calculate the static water level for the zone tested,
as displayed above (Fig. 9). Dissipation test (B) shows an initial rapid drop in formation pressure when the injection flow is first turned off. However, the pressure continues
to slowly drop for over 1300 seconds, showing no sign of stabilization. This test indicates a low permeability formation and may require hours to reach full stabilization.
Pressures observed in this test should not be used to plot the potentiometric profile as the pressure observed is still falling and is not in equilibrium with the formation
potentiometric pressure.
FIG. 10 Pressure Dissipation Tests

selected depth(s). The ambient piezometric pressure may then 10.3.1 Where to Conduct a Dissipation Test—It is generally
be used to calculate the local static water level and piezometric most useful and efficient to perform pressure dissipation tests
profile at the given location. Dissipation tests also may be used in permeable zones of the formation (sands and gravels). In
to calculate the corrected injection pressure over the log. The permeable zones any induced pressure from water injection
corrected injection pressure is a function of the formation and insertion of the probe will dissipate quickly to the
hydraulic conductivity (K) at each depth increment. potentiometric pressure (Fig. 10). A good zone for dissipation
Furthermore, the corrected injection pressure log and flow log testing is usually identified by having low injection pressure
may then be used to estimate K (5) at each depth increment in and low electrical conductivity (in fresh water formations).
the saturated zone (Fig. 9). Occasionally it may be useful to conduct a pressure dissipation

15
 D8037/D8037M − 16
test in a lower permeability zone where injection pressure is probe advancement is halted. Acquisition of depth and log data
high (for example, >20 psi [140kPa] over hydrostatic pres- is stopped by the acquisition software and cannot be resumed.
sure). This may be done to demonstrate that slow to very slow Retrieval of the tool string may begin.
dissipation of the induced pressure does occur to verify a zone 10.5 Post Logging Procedures—These procedures include
is indeed low permeability. In some low permeability zones tool retrieval, post log QA testing, equipment decontamination
complete pressure dissipation could take hours, or even days. and boring abandonment.
In these settings the pressure is allowed to dissipate for a
10.5.1 Probe and Tool Retrieval—There are at least two
reasonable time (for example, 5 to 15 minutes) to demonstrate
options for retracting the tool string and injection probe. Either
that elevated HPT pressure dissipates slowly and does corre-
a slotted pull cap and hammer latch or the rod grip system may
spond to low permeability.
be used to retract the tools. If running a CPT system the rod
10.3.2 Dissipation Test Procedure—Stop advancement of clamp may be used to retract the tools. (Warning—Injection
the injection probe at the desired depth. Start a time file in the water flow must be maintained at all times as the tool string is
acquisition software to acquire the pressure versus time data. advanced or retracted. Water flow through the screen prevents
10.3.2.1 Turn off the water pump to stop the flow of water intrusion of mud into the screen and potential damage to the
to the probe. probe and pressure sensor during advancement and retraction.
10.3.2.2 Close the inline flow valve on the front of the Flow Constant water flow also prevents clogging of the screen while
Module to stop water flow down the trunkline. advancing the probe and measurement of incorrect pressure
10.3.2.3 Observe the injection flow and pressure decrease data.)
on the time file onscreen. Allow the pressure to stabilize and 10.5.1.1 A slotted pull cap may be threaded on the top of the
remain stable for at least one to two minutes in order to verify tool string and the probe derrick is lowered into position. The
ambient piezometric pressure is measured. Check the digital hammer latch is then flipped down into position to grasp the
pressure readout on screen to verify the pressure has stabilized pull cap and pull the tool string back. The hydraulic system is
(there is usually some minor noise in the transducer reading at operated to raise the probe derrick and pull the tool string up.
the third to fifth decimal places). In some settings it is difficult The top rod is removed and the process repeated to retract all
to visually see a continual slow drop or rise in the dissipation tools. This method provides the most power for retraction of
pressure. Waiting an extra minute or two is wise to be sure a tools from difficult to penetrate formations. However, recovery
fully dissipated test is obtained. Also expanding the axis on the with the pull cap/hammer latch method is relatively slow and
pressure plot will help to confirm a stable or drifting pressure. tedious.
Tests that are not fully dissipated will result in incorrect 10.5.1.2 The rod grip system may be used to more effi-
piezometric pressure profiles, incorrect static water level ciently retract and recover the tool string in most formations.
calculations, and incorrect estimates for hydraulic conductivity The probe derrick is retracted and lowered just behind the top
if included in the model and calculations. rod. The detachable rod grip handle is placed over the tool and
10.3.2.4 Once any excess pressure has fully dissipated and latches onto two socket head cap screws on the hammer block.
is stable record the observed pressure. Then open the shut-off As the probe derrick is raised the rod grip handle seats the rod
valve on the flow module and turn the water pump back on. into a V-block on the hammer assembly and the tool string is
You should observe both injection flow and pressure rise in the retracted. The rod grip handle can be moved quickly up and
dissipation time file onscreen. down the tool string to efficiently retract the tools and probe
10.3.2.5 Once the flow and pressure have stabilized end the from the subsurface.
dissipation test. 10.5.1.3 Trunkline and Rod Management—Handling of the
10.3.2.6 Close the time file widow and return to the depth drive rods and management of the trunkline as the tool string
logging screen. See Fig. 10 for additional information on is recovered is important. Sufficient trunkline should be left
dissipation tests. between each rod as it is added to the rod rack so that the
10.3.2.7 Resume logging and advancement of the probe to trunkline is not kinked or damaged. Also, retrieving the probe
the desired depth. Conduct additional dissipation tests at the too quickly through some clay layers may lead to intrusion of
next desired depths. It is often good practice to perform at least clay into the screen and potential transducer damage. A
2 or 3 dissipation tests during each log, especially when high moderate retrieval rate may be most appropriate.
permeability zones are separated by lower permeability layers. 10.5.1.4 Probe Maintenance—Once the probe is recovered
This provides a measure of quality control for the dissipation the probe and screen should be cleaned and brushed with a wire
test and also may be used to evaluate the presence of vertical brush to clean any mud from the face of the screen. Dirt and
gradients across the formation or confined zones. Some forma- mud should be washed off of the EC electrodes for post log
tions may consist entirely of fine-grained materials. Under quality assurance testing.
these conditions it may not be possible to obtain a fully 10.5.2 Post Log QA Tests—Once the injection probe is
dissipated test in a reasonable amount of time. A few partial recovered and cleaned a post log quality assurance test should
dissipation tests, lasting no more than 10 to 15 minutes, may be be performed. Proceed with the post log QA tests in the same
performed at selected locations and depths across the site to manner as the pre-log QA tests were performed (refer to
verify site conditions. Section 9). If another log will be run immediately following
10.4 End Log—Once the probe has been advanced to the completion of the current log, post log QA tests may be
maximum desired depth, or refusal has been encountered, bypassed. In this case the next pre-log QA test may be used as

16
 D8037/D8037M − 16
the post log QA test for the log just completed. If the log 11.1.7 Equipment used in the investigation (model number
completed is the last log of the day the post log QA tests should of flow module and field instrument)
be performed to validate the last log and injection probe and 11.1.8 Site and location specific information relevant to the
system performance. project. (For example, Petroleum UST, dry cleaning shop,
10.5.3 Equipment Decontamination—Appropriate decon- dense till with cobbles, etc.).
tamination of the probe, drive rods, trunkline and accessory 11.1.9 Much of the data outlined here can be entered in the
tools should be performed (Practice D5088). Logging equip- digital log information file in the field when the log is
ment decontamination would generally be considered “non- completed. This information is saved with the digital data file.
sample contact” equipment decontamination. Appropriately 11.2 The computer and software system must record at a
contain and dispose of any contaminated cleaning solutions. minimum the following test data (1.6);
10.5.3.1 Decontamination of the drive rods with the pre- 11.2.1 Record and report all depths to the nearest 0.1 ft
strung trunkline requires special consideration. (Warning— [0.05m]. For each depth record the following data:
High pressure sprayers may cut through the trunkline jacketing 11.2.2 Record and report injection pressure to three signifi-
and wire insulation inside the trunkline. This type of damage cant digits.
will quickly render the trunkline useless. Use lower pressure 11.2.3 Record and report electrical conductivity to three
water spray and appropriate cleaning solutions (for example, significant digits.
soapy water) and brushes to clean the tools and trunkline. 11.2.4 Record and report water flow rate to three significant
Some organic solvents at high concentration, or pure product, digits.
may degrade the trunkline jacketing. Avoid exposure of the 11.2.5 Record and report trunkline pressure to three signifi-
trunkline to these conditions.) cant digits.
10.5.3.2 At a minimum, at the end of each day the injection 11.2.6 Record and report other down-hole sensor (CPT,
probe should be disassembled, washed and cleaned and al- MIP, LIF, OIP, etc.) data to three significant digits.
lowed to dry over night. All connections, electrical and
plumbing, should be checked the following morning and the 11.3 The computer and software system must record at a
probe re-assembled properly before logging is resumed. minimum the following QA test data (1.6);
11.3.1 Record and report pressure sensor QA test results to
10.6 Bore Hole Abandonment—Appropriate abandonment three significant digits.
methods and materials (Guide D5299) must be used to seal 11.3.2 Record and report EC QA test results to three
each bore hole after logging is completed. Check with state and significant digits.
local regulators to assure that requirements for sealing and 11.3.3 Record and report other down-hole sensor (CPT,
abandoning bore holes are met. If bottom-up grouting of the MIP, LIF, OIP, etc.) QA test data to three significant digits.
borehole is required a second tool string with expendable point
(or PVC pipe) may be lowered down the boring for tremie or 12. Precision and Bias
pressure injection of grout slurries.
12.1 Precision—Test data on precision is not presented due
11. Report: Records to the nature of this Practice. It is either not feasible or too
costly at this time to have 10 or more agencies participate in an
11.1 Record at a minimum the following general informa-
in situ testing program at a given site.
tion.
11.1.1 Facility name, location and site contacts 12.2 Bias—There is no accepted reference value for this
11.1.2 Name of project manager practice, therefore, bias cannot be determined.
11.1.3 Date and Time the log is obtained
11.1.4 Logging Contractor, field technician and assistants 13. Keywords
11.1.5 File name of the injection log, log location and total 13.1 direct push; electrical conductivity; HPT; hydraulic
depth conductivity; hydraulic profiling tool; injection logging; per-
11.1.6 Down-hole pressure transducer serial number meability; pressure dissipation test; soil investigations

17
 D8037/D8037M − 16
APPENDIX

(Nonmandatory Information)

X1. HYDRAULIC INJECTION LOG INTERPRETATION AND CROSS SECTIONS

X1.1 Interpretation of injection pressure logs is relatively pathways. One transect of pressure logs from a site located in
simple and intuitive. Increasing injection pressure at the same glaciated terrain (Fig. X1.1) revealed that a contaminant plume
flow rate indicates decreasing permeability and conversely was migrating along a buried stream valley.
lower injection pressure at the same flow rate indicates
increasing permeability. Review of the injection pressure log X1.2 Interpretation of electrical conductivity (EC) logs can
and corrected pressure log (Fig. 9) indicates there are high be more complex than injection pressure logs. Several factors
pressure zones centered around 1.5m, 3m, 5.5m, 9m, and 13m influence bulk formation EC. Some of the factors include clay
depth in the profile. Sampling adjacent to the log found these content, degree of saturation, mineralogy, grain size and
zones consisted primarily of silt-clays having low permeability. presence or absence of ionic compounds (for example, salt,
Conversely, lower pressure zones between approximately sodium persulfate, etc.). Generally, in freshwater formations
7-8m, 9-13m and 14-22m consisted primarily of sand and clay content and clay mineralogy are often the primary cause of
gravel of high permeability. So we see the upper 9m of the higher EC readings. Some clay materials exhibit EC of
formation is primarily a fine grained material with increasing 200mS/m and higher. Conversely, clean silica sand has very
silt and sand in some intervals resulting in the lower HPT low electrical conductance and thick layers of clean, dry sand
pressure zones. From just below 9m to about 22m the forma- can exhibit EC below 1mS/m. However, when saturated with
tion is primarily coarse grained sand and gravel with a clay groundwater the EC of such sand formations often will be
layer between approximately 13-14m depth. The coarse higher (sometimes >20mS/m) due to the specific conductance
grained part of the formation between 9-22m is part of an of the pore water (see Fig. 9, 9.5m to 22m). However, it is
alluvial aquifer that provides about eight million gallons of important to note that not all clays exhibit high electrical
water per day to the local community. Injection pressure logs conductance. Some clay minerals have low EC, similar to that
are often run in linear transects across a site to obtain of sand. Under these conditions only the injection pressure log
information on hydrostratigraphy and contaminant migration can distinguish between the clay and sand layers of the

This is a cross section of eleven Injection pressure logs plotted at elevation, the logs were spaced 25 ft [8m] apart. The logs were obtained at a site in Skuldelev, Denmark
which is glaciated terrain. Groundwater is contaminated by perchloroethylene (PCE) and its degradation products at this site. The contaminant plume core was found to
be located around the SK05 and SK07 logs using MIP logs and groundwater profiling. Continuous soil coring at three locations confirmed that the HPT pressure increase
at depth correlated with a gray clay-till underlying the site. Above the till, in the lower injection pressure zone, the formation consisted primarily of sand and gravel with
a few silt-clay layers. A dashed line is drawn along the top of the pressure increase, essentially the contact between the underlying clay-till and overlying sand-gravel. The
dashed boundary appears to outline a buried stream channel cut in the clay-till by a stream, possibly as glaciers receded. The small valley was later filled with sand and
gravel, possibly outwash from the glaciers as they continued receding. The PCE plume is migrating along the buried steam channel (8).
FIG. X1.1 Injection Pressure Log Cross Section

18
 D8037/D8037M − 16
formation (see Fig. X1.1 and Fig. X1.2, especially log SK04). used to remediate chlorinated volatile organic compounds such
Additionally, silt usually has a low EC, and mixtures of silt as perchloroethylene (PCE). A transect of injection logs run
with clay will result in lower bulk EC readings. A clean silt down gradient of a sodium persulfate injection pilot study
layer, such as a loess deposit, can exhibit low EC but may detected EC anomalies above the underlying clay-rich till at a
display elevated HPT pressure. Carbonate cementing of sands site in Denmark (Fig. X1.2). A continuous soil core obtained at
may also exhibit relatively low EC but elevated injection a background location (SK04) revealed that the clay-till
pressure. Targeted sampling always should be used to confirm underlying a very permeable sand and gravel at this site had
log interpretation. low electrical conductivity and could not be easily distin-
guished from the sand and gravel based only on the EC log.
X1.3 Ionic contaminants, such as sea water, road salt, However, increasing injection pressure clearly defined the
sodium persulfate injections, etc. will increase the EC of a change from the overlying sand and gravel to the underlying
given formation. At sufficiently high concentrations of an ionic clay-till. When the EC logs are overlain with the injection
contaminant, the bulk formation EC can greatly exceed the pressure logs it is apparent that sodium persulfate has migrated
natural formation EC. This makes it impossible to interpret along the top of the clay-till, resulting in an EC anomaly that
formation lithology based solely on EC when elevated levels of can be mapped with the combined EC and injection pressure
ionic compounds are present. In these situations having both logs (Fig. X1.2).
EC data and HPT pressure data will help with accurate
interpretation of the subsurface lithologic conditions and defi- X1.4 Pressure dissipation tests can provide information on
nition of ionic contaminant plumes or areas of seawater the piezometric pressure at the depth they are performed (Fig.
intrusion. Ionic compounds like sodium persulfate are often 10). The tests must be run for sufficient time to completely

This is a cross section of hydraulic injection pressure logs (dashed lines) and electrical conductivity (EC) logs (solid line with gray fill). The logs were obtained at a site
in Skuldelev, Denmark which is glaciated terrain. Groundwater is contaminated by perchloroethylene (PCE) and its degradation products. A sodium persulfate pilot test
was performed on a DNAPL zone just upgradient from this transect of logs. The injection pressure logs and selected soil coring revealed that the injection pressure increase
at depth correlated with the top of a clay-till underlying the site (see Fig. 10). The background log at SK04 reveals that there is little difference between the EC of the
overlying sand and gravel and underlying clay till, confirmed with soil coring. For logs SK05 through SK11 the EC increased above the clay till and then dropped off as
the probe was advanced through the till. The increase of EC above the clay till, and the lack of correlation between the injection pressure and EC response identify an
EC anomaly. Groundwater profiling at location SK05 revealed a significant increase in specific conductance of the groundwater with depth as the EC anomaly was
approached. Samples from nearby monitoring wells displayed elevated specific conductance and also elevated levels of sodium as compared to background conditions.
Here the EC anomaly visible in logs SK05 through SK11 shows where the sodium persulfate injectate has migrated along the surface of the clay-till and began to diffuse
into the clay-till. This demonstrates the effective use of combined injection pressure logs and EC logs to locate and track ionic plumes in the subsurface. Note: repeated
use of the injection probe and steel rods in corrosive environments could lead to degradation and damage of the steel, threaded joints and system parts. Notes: mS/m
= milliSiemen per meter: kPa = kiloPascal.
FIG. X1.2 Hydraulic Injection Pressure and Electrical Conductivity Cross Section

19
 D8037/D8037M − 16
dissipate the excess pressure induced in the formation by increment of the log. The corrected HPT pressure is the
insertion of the probe and injection of water. Even in very pressure required to inject water into the formation at the given
permeable formations dissipation tests should be run for at flow rate and is a function of the formation hydraulic conduc-
least two minutes to assure that pressure equilibrium with the tivity at that depth and location. So the corrected pressure log
formation is achieved. It is wise to run more than one (Fig. 9, graph 3) provides a more accurate view of the changes
dissipation test during a log if time and subsurface conditions in formation permeability with depth than the total injection
permit. If sand layers are separated by clay layers it is useful to pressure. Based on Darcy’s Law (29) we know that hydraulic
run a dissipation test in each sand layer to determine if any conductivity (K) can be defined as a function of flow (Q) and
vertical groundwater gradients may be present. Once the log is pressure (P) in a porous medium. That is K = f (Q/P). An
completed the viewing software allows the operator to use the empirical model was developed to use the corrected injection
dissipation test(s) to plot the piezometric profile and determine pressure (Pc) and the injection flow rate (Q) at a given depth to
the static water level for water table aquifers. If confined zones determine an estimate of hydraulic conductivity (Est. K) (Fig.
are present running a dissipation test in each zone will allow 9, graph 4) for saturated formations (5, 10). This model has a
for the determination of the piezometric level for each zone. Of lower boundary of approximately 0.1 ft/day [0.03m/day] and
course, conducting dissipation tests under artesian conditions an upper boundary of about 75 ft/day [25m/day]. The Est. K
will result in the water level being plotted above ground log can be useful in delineating migration pathways and
surface. locating barriers in the subsurface. The Est. K logs and
corrected pressure logs also may be used to guide additional
X1.5 Corrected pressure logs may be calculated in the testing to obtain quantitative measurements of K in unconsoli-
viewing software when one or more pressure dissipation tests dated formations. This is often accomplished with slug testing
are run to complete pressure dissipation. The viewing software (Practice D7242) of direct push installed groundwater sam-
subtracts the atmospheric pressure (Patm) and piezometric pling devices (Guide D6001) or collection of core samples
pressure (Ppiezo) from the total injection pressure (Ptot) to (Guide D6282, Practice D1587) especially in fine grained
obtain the corrected injection pressure (Pc). That is: Pc = Ptot – zones for laboratory tests of permeability (Test Methods
(Patm + Ppiezo). This calculation is performed for each depth D2434, D5856, D5084)

REFERENCES

(1) Dietrich, Peter, James J. Butler, Jr., and Klaus FaiB, 2008. A Rapid (10) Kejr Inc., 2011. Application of the Geoprobe HPT Logging System
Method for Hydraulic Profiling in Unconsolidated Formations. for Geo-Environmental Investigations, Geoprobe Technical Bulletin
Ground Water, Vol. 46, No. 2. March-April. No. MK3184. February. 36 pages. www.geoprobe.com
(2) Kober, Rolf, Gotz Hornbruch, Carsten Leven, Lars Tischer, Jochen (11) Pitkin, S., et. Al,(2004) “Evaluation of the Waterloo Profiler as a
GroBmann, Peter Dietrich, Holger WeiB and Andreas Dahmke. 2009. Dynamic Site Investigation Tool,” Proceedings of the Fourth Inter-
Evaluation of Combined Direct-Push Methods Used for Aquifer national Conference on Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant
Model Generation. Ground Water, Vol. 47, No. 4, July-August. Pages Compounds, Paper 1B-07, A.R. Gavaskar and A.S.C. Chen (Eds.),
536-546. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, www.battelle.org/bookstore.
(3) Dietze, Michael and Peter Dietrich. 2012. Evaluation of Vertical (12) Liu, Gaisheng, James J. Butler, Jr., Geoffrey C. Bohling, Edward
Variations in Hydraulic Conductivity in Unconsolidated Sediments. Reboulet, Steve Knobbe and David W. Hyndman, 2009. A new
Ground Water, Vol. 50, No. 3. May-June. Pages 450-456. method for high-resolution characterization of hydraulic conductiv-
(4) Reiffsteck, Ph., B. Dorbani, E. Haza-Rozier and J.-J. Fry. 2010. A ity. Water Resources Research, Vol. 45, W08202.
New Hydraulic profiling tool including CPT measurements. Presented (13) Quinnan, J.A., N.R.H. Welty and E. Killenbeck, 2010. Hydrostrati-
at the 2nd International Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing. graphic and permeability profiling for groundwater remediation
Volume 2: Equipment and Procedures, Paper No. 1-11, 8 pages. projects. 2nd International Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing,
www.cpt10.com/cpt10pdfpapers.html Volume 2 & 3, Paper No. 3-33. May.
(5) Geoprobe Systems. 2010. Tech Guide for Calculation of Estimated (14) McCall, Wesley, Thomas M. Christy and Mateus E. Knabach. 2016.
Hydraulic Conductivity (Est. K) Log from HPT Data. Kejr Inc., Applying the HPT-GWS for Hydrostratigraphy, Water Quality and
Salina, Kansas. November. 20 pages. www.geoprobe.com Aquifer Recharge Investigations. Groundwater Mon. and Rem. (In
(6) Sanchez-Vila, Xavier Jesus Carrera and Jorge P. Girardi, 1996. Scale press).
effects in transmissivity. Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 183. Pages 1-22. (15) Schulmeister, M.K., J.J. Butler, Jr., J.M. Healey, L. Zheng, D.A.
(7) Kejr Inc. 2013. Geoprobe Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT) System, Wysocki, and G.W. McCall. 2003. Direct-push electrical conductiv-
Standard Operating Procedure, Technical Bulletin No. MK3137. ity logging for high-resolution hydrostratigraphic characterization.
Salina, Kansas, USA. February. www.geoprobe.com Ground Water Mon. & Rem., V. 23, no. 3. Pages 52-62.
(8) McCall, W., Thomas M. Christy, Daniel Pipp, Mads Terkelsen, Anders (16) Kejr, Inc., “A Percussion Probing Tool for the Direct Sensing of Soil
Christensen, Klaus Weber and Peter Engelsen. 2014. Field Applica- Conductivity,” Technical Bulletin No. 94-100, Geoprobe Systems,
tion of the Combined Membrane-Interface Probe and Hydraulic 1995. www.geoprobe.com
Profiling Tool (MiHpt). Groundwater Mon. & Rem., Vol. 34, No. 2, (17) Liu, Gaisheng, James J. Butler Jr., Edward Reboulet and Steven
pages 85-95. Knobbe. 2011. Hydraulic conductivity profiling with direct push
(9) McCall, Wesley, Thomas M. Christy, Thomas Christopherson and methods. Grundwasser – Zeitschrift der Fachsektion Hydrogeologie.
Howard Isaacs. 2009. Application of Direct Push Methods to Inves- DOI 10.1007/s00767-011-0182-9.
tigate Uranium Distribution in an Alluvial Aquifer. Ground Water (18) Chapuis, Robert P., and Djaouida Chenaf. 2010. Driven Field
Mon. & Rem., Vol. 29, No. 4, pages 65-76. Permeameters: Reinventing the Wheel?Geotechnical News. March.

20
 D8037/D8037M − 16
(19) Chapuis, RP, Morin, R., and Gill, D.E. 1992. Développement et Numerical Modeling. Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 26, No. 3.
évaluation d’un perméamètre autoforeur pour sols silteux (Develop- Paper ID GTJ10411 263. August.
ment and evaluation of a self-boring permeameter for silty soils). (24) Lunne, T., P.K. Robertson and J.J.M. Powell. 1997. Cone Penetra-
Proc., 45th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Toronto, pp. 77A-1 tion Testing in Geotechnical Practice. Spon Press/Taylor & Francis
to -10. Group. London and New York.
(20) Chapuis, R.P., J.J. Pare and J.G. Lavallee. 1981. Essais de permea- (25) Geoprobe Systems. 2016. Optical Image Profiler for UV Induced
bilite in situ a niveau variable (In Situ Variable Head Permeability Hydrocarbon Fluorescence. http://geoprobe.com/geoprobe-systems-
Tests) in Proceeding of the 10th ICSMFE Conference. Vol. 1, pages direct-image-products#news
401-406. Stockhlom. (26) Simoni, G. and V. Giovanni. 2006. Use of a resistivity cone and fuel
(21) Chapuis, Robert P., Marc L;Ecuyer, and Michel Aubertin. 1993. fluorescence detector for the detection and mapping of contaminated
Field Permeability Tests in Mine Tailing. In the Proceeding of 46th sites. Newsletter Associazione Geotecnica Italiana, No. 3. 7 pages.
Annual Canadian Geotechnical Conference(Conference Canadienne (27) Geoprobe Systems. 2016. Windows DI Acquisition Software for
De Geotechnique). Saskatoon, Sask. Pages 51-59. FI6000 v. 1.7. http://geoprobe.com/downloads/windows-di-
(22) Chapuis, R.P. 2001. Extracting Piezometric Level and Hydraulic acquisition-software-for-fi6000-v-15
Conductivity from Tests in Driven Flush-Joint Casings. Geotechni- (28) Geoprobe Systems. 2015. Direct Image Viewer 2.0. http://
cal Testing Journal, GTJODJ, Vol. 24, No. 2. Pages 209-219. geoprobe.com/downloads/direct-image-viewer-20
(23) Chapuis, Robert P., and Djaouida Chenaf. 2003. Variable-Head Field (29) Fetter, C.W., 1994. Applied Hydrogeology, Third Edition. Prentice-
Permeability Tests in Driven Flush-Joint Casings: Physical and Hall, New Jersey.

ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.

This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.

This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or service@astm.org (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org). Permission rights to photocopy the standard may also be secured from the Copyright Clearance Center, 222
Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, Tel: (978) 646-2600; http://www.copyright.com/

21