HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Yoon, H. Articles by Werth, C. J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Yoon, H. Articles by Werth, C. J. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Yoon, H. Articles by Werth, C. J. Related Collections Coupled Flow/Transport Models Organic Compounds

Modeling the Influence of Water Content on Soil Vapor Extraction

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 205 N. Mathews Ave., MC-250, Urbana, IL 61801

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Conceptual model of mass transfer processes during soil vapor extraction.

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Ratio of nonaqueous phase liquid (NAPL)–gas mass transfer coefficient to initial mass transfer coefficient as a function of water saturation (Eq. [7] and [8]) at different remaining NAPL saturations.

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Capillary pressure–saturation curves of Rossi and Nimmo model (RNM) fitted to experimental data of two Hanford soils for Case I and Case II.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Predicted dimensionless mass remaining and effluent gas concentration with time (Case I, Run 1).

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Spatial profile of mass remaining and concentration after 4 d (Case I, Run 1).

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Spatial profile of water saturation at different times (Case I, Run 1).

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Spatial profile of temperature at different times (Case I, Run 1).

View larger version (32K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Spatial profile of water saturation at different times for Case I, Run 16 (symbols) and Case I, Run 17 (symbols with line).

View larger version (71K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Comparison of cleanup times in Case I.

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Predicted dimensionless mass remaining and effluent gas concentration with time (Case II, Run 1).

View larger version (32K): [in a new window]   Fig. 11. Spatial profile at different times for Case II, Run 1 simulated in Fig. 10; (a) 100 d, (b) 300 d, (c) 600 d, and (d) 700 d.

View larger version (39K): [in a new window]   Fig. 12. Comparison of cleanup times in Case II.