Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · ofr20191104

Instructions for running the analytical code PAT (Purge Analyzer Tool) for computation of in-well time of travel of groundwater under pumping conditions

Abstract

Introduction Understanding the optimal time needed to purge a well while pumping to collect a representative groundwater sample requires an understanding of groundwater flow in wells (in-well flow). Parameters that affect in-well flow include the hydraulic properties of the aquifer, well construction, drawdown from pumping, and pump rate. The time of travel relative to in-well flow is affected by the pump’s intake location. The Purge Analyzer Tool (PAT) incorporates hydraulic calculations to help assess the optimal purge times required to vertically transport groundwater in the well to the pump intake (Harte, 2017). Harte (2017) includes a discussion on the rationale for determining in-well groundwater flow and time of travel and also discusses the limitations inherent in the PAT; an understanding of the limitations is important to ensure proper use. The PAT calculates flow by use of the Dupuit-Theim equation (Lohman, 1979) that assumes steady-state radial flow and a total inflow from the well opening or screen equal to the pumping rate (eq. 1). A bulk average hydraulic conductivity (K avg ) is derived from this relationship. Once K avg is calculated, the program calculates incremental (layered) horizontal radial inflow into the well over user defined increments (layers). These defined increments represent the screen or well opening as a fraction of the total inflow. The amount of inflow per layer is proportional to the user-defined layered distribution of hydraulic conductivity (K layer ) because drawdown is assumed to be uniformly distributed in the well. The water budget equation that guides the solution of the PAT (eq. 1) is specified as: Q p = Q v + Q H + Q w (1) where Q P is pumping rate, Q v is vertical flow entering the boundary of the mixing zone (M z ) from the summation of layered radial flow (∑ Q hl-n ) where l-n denotes number of layers, Q H is horizontal radial flow into the mixing zone (M z ), and Q w is flow from wellbore storage effects. The in-well flow is computed from the convergence of incremental (layered) radial inflows (Q hl-n ) summed to the total vertical flow (Q V ) entering the adjacent zone to the pump intake (called mixing zone [M z ]) as shown in figure 1. The Q v is transported as one-dimensional piston flow. Within the M z , it's assumed that flow to the pump is dominated by horizontal radial flow (Q H ) when the pump is in the open interval of the well. Flow from the wellbore storage (Q w ) is computed from the volume of water pumped from the well at the time of the drawdown (s) measurement(s). Aquifer storage effects are unaccounted for but are likely to be problematic when (1) dewatering within the well opening occurs or (2) when the water table is close to the top of the well screen or open interval where additional flow into the upper portion of the well opening may occur. For fully saturated wells tens of feet below the water table, storage effects are likely to be more uniformly distributed across the well screen or open interval (regardless of confined or unconfined conditions). Therefore, radial inflow from storage will be less prominent under pump rates commonly used in groundwater sampling either for volumetric sampling ( < 3 gallons per minute) or low-flow sampling ( < 0.5 liters per minute). A major benefit of the use of the PAT is the understanding of time-varying, vertical integration of captured pump water. The analytical model computes aquifer (formation) capture intervals relative to the open interval of the well. This information is displayed graphically (called aquifer fraction graphs) and can be used to assess the likely formation intervals contributing water to the sample at any time.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P.T. Harte, B. J. Huffman, Tomas Perina, Herb Levine, Daewon Rojas-Mickelson. 2019-11-01. Instructions for running the analytical code PAT (Purge Analyzer Tool) for computation of in-well time of travel of groundwater under pumping conditions. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20191104

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

ECCOE Landsat quarterly calibration and validation report—Quarter 2, 2026

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Calibration and Validation (Cal/Val) Center of Excellence (ECCOE) focuses on improving the accuracy, precision, calibration, and product quality of remote-sensing data, leveraging years of multiscale optical system geometric and radiometric calibration and characterization experience. The ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team continually monitors the geometric and radiometric performance of active Landsat missions and makes calibration adjustments, as needed, to maintain data quality at the highest level. This report provides observed geometric and radiometric analysis results for Landsats 8 and 9 for quarter 2 (April–June), 2026. All data used to compile the Cal/Val analysis results presented in this report are freely available from the U.S. Geological Survey EarthExplorer website: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov.

Open-File Report↗

ECCOE Landsat quarterly calibration and validation report—Quarter 1, 2026

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Calibration and Validation (Cal/Val) Center of Excellence (ECCOE) focuses on improving the accuracy, precision, calibration, and product quality of remote-sensing data, leveraging years of multiscale optical system geometric and radiometric calibration and characterization experience. The ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team continually monitors the geometric and radiometric performance of active Landsat missions and makes calibration adjustments, as needed, to maintain data quality at the highest level. This report provides observed geometric and radiometric analysis results for Landsats 8 and 9 for quarter 1 (January–March) of 2026. All data used to compile the Cal/Val analysis results presented in this report are freely available from the U.S. Geological Survey EarthExplorer website: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov . One specific activity that the ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team closely monitored was a Landsat 8 Thermal Infrared Sensor encoder alerts anomaly. On March 18, 2026, the Thermal Infrared Sensor instrument’s mechanism control electronics board reset, driving several parameters to default power-on values. Subsequent telemetry and analysis determined that no persistent hardware misconfiguration was present and no radiometric or geometric degradation was observed.

Open-File Report↗

Floods of June 20–July 6, 2024, in the Big Sioux River, Rock River, Little Sioux River, Ocheyedan River, and Floyd River Basins, northwestern Iowa

Major flooding occurred on June 20–July 6, 2024, in northwestern Iowa affecting the Big Sioux, Rock, Little Sioux, Ocheyedan, and Floyd River Basins. Heavy rain fell in northwestern Iowa, southwestern Minnesota, and southeastern South Dakota on June 20–22, 2024. Parts of northwestern Iowa recorded 2–6 inches of rainfall and localized amounts exceeding 12 inches. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 175,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Big Sioux River at Akron, Iowa (06485500), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at four locations along the Big Sioux River between U.S. Interstate 29 at Sioux City, Iowa, upstream to Iowa Highway 10 north of Hawarden, Iowa, a distance of 75.7 river miles. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 157,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Rock River near Rock Valley, Iowa (06483500), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability of less than 0.2 percent. High-water marks were measured at eight locations along the Rock River between County Road B30 east of Hudson, South Dakota, upstream to Iowa Highway 9 at Rock Rapids, Iowa, a distance of 39.3 river miles. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 63,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Little Sioux River at Correctionville, Iowa (06606600), was recorded on June 24, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at 11 locations along the Little Sioux River between Iowa Highway 31 west of Correctionville, Iowa, upstream to U.S. Highway 18 north of Spencer, Iowa, a distance of 134.8 river miles. A maximum streamflow of 24,500 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Ocheyedan River near Spencer, Iowa (06605000), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at three locations along the Ocheyedan River between County Road M38 west of Spencer, Iowa, upstream to U.S. Highway 18 west of Everly, Iowa, a distance of 12.8 river miles. A maximum streamflow of 41,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Floyd River at Alton, Iowa (06600100), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 1–1.99 percent. High-water marks were measured at six locations along the Floyd River between Iowa Highway 3 at Le Mars, Iowa, upstream to Iowa Highway 10 at Alton, Iowa, a distance of 27.5 river miles. The high-water marks were used to develop flood profiles for the Big Sioux, Rock, Little Sioux, Ocheyedan, and Floyd Rivers.

Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota↗