Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Of all the buried landmine identification technologies currently II. CHEMICALS IN THE SOIL ENVIRONMENT
available, sensing the chemical signature from the explosive
components found in landmines is the only technique that can
Soils are porous media with a number of physico-chemical
classify non-explosive objects from the real threat. In the last two properties that affect the transport of explosive chemicals.
decades, advances in chemical detection methods have brought Soil bulk density is a measure of the compaction of the soil
chemical sensing technology to the foreground as an emerging and is defined as
technological solution. In addition, advances have been made in M
the understanding of the fundamental transport processes that ρb = s [1]
Vs
allow the chemical signature to migrate from the buried source to
the ground surface. A systematic evaluation of the transport of the where ∆b is the soil bulk density (g/cm3), Ms is the mass of
chemical signature from inside the mine into the soil environment, soil particles (g), and Vs is the volume of soil (cm3). Soils
and through the soil to the ground surface is being explored to under natural conditions have bulk densities ranging from
determine the constraints on the use of chemical sensing 1.0 to 1.8 g/cm3. However, soils that have been excavated
technology. This effort reports on the results of simulation and replaced, such as during the emplacement of a
modeling using a one-dimensional screening model to evaluate the landmine, may have bulk densities much less than 1. The
impacts on the transport of the chemical signature by variation of soil bulk density is inversely proportional to the soil
some of the principal soil transport parameters.
porosity as follows
landmines, chemical sensors, soil transport φ = 1 − ρb / ρs [2]
where ∆s is the soil particle density (ranges from 2.6 to 2.8
I. INTRODUCTION g/cm3 for most soils). The soil porosity, or void volume, is
defined as
The organic chemicals of the explosives in the buried Vw + Va
landmine environment can exist in or on four phases: solid φ= [3]
Vs
phase of the neat explosive material, vapor phase in the soil
air, aqueous phase in the soil water solution, and sorbed where Ν is the soil porosity (cm3/cm3), Vw is the volume of
onto soil solid phases. The chemical signature begins as a soil water (cm3) and Va is the volume of soil air (cm3). Soil
surface coating from production or depot storage and porosity values range from 0.3 for sands to 0.6 for clay rich
through continuous emission by permeation through the soils. The volumetric moisture content describes how much
mine case or through leaks in seals and seams. Once the water is present in the soil and changes greatly during
chemicals enter the soil environment, they experience phase precipitation/drainage events and evaporation conditions.
transitions, partitioning into the soil air, soil water and Volumetric water content is defined as
sorbing onto soil particles. The impact of temperature and Vw
chemical gradients, and precipitation/evaporation will cause
θ= [4]
Vs
movement of the chemical signature. Part of this transport
where 2 is the volumetric water content (cm3/cm3). Soil
is upward to the soil surface where chemical detection
moisture contents have values from near zero up to the soil
technology is envisioned to be used. Simulation modeling
porosity value. When the soils are not fully saturated, the
is a technique that can evaluate the impacts of many of the
balance of the soil pore space not filled with water is termed
environmental variables that can dampen or accentuate the
the air filled porosity, and is defined as
surface expression of the chemical signature. Model results
will be shown that describe the magnitude of the changes Va
a= [5]
that accompany variations due to chemical properties of the Vs
explosive and properties of the soil environment.
where Va is the volumetric air content (cm3/cm3).
The above model results in a closed form solution as a Table 2. Simulation Parameters
function of space and time; the results are rather lengthy and parameter units base case variant
will not be presented here but are given by Jury et al. (1983, cases
1990). In the present simulation, the assumption of constant θ cm3/ cm3 0.25 0.375
water flux in time will be relaxed. Therefore, sequences of
water fluxes representing desired conditions (rainfall φ cm3/ cm3 0.5 *
followed by evaporation) can be simulated to determine the ρb g/cm3 1.5 *
effect of water flux variations on the location of TNT in the Kd cm3/g 1.6 3.8
soil and the surface TNT vapor flux. A numerical solution 6.0
was developed and verified by comparison to the results KH -- 5.9E-7 4.73E-10
given by Spencer et al. (1988) and Jury et al. (1990) air boundary cm 0.5 *
(Phelan and Webb, 1997). layer
t1/2 days 365 180
Using this solution, simulations were performed using a 60
landmine that has contributed an initial soil concentration Co µg/cm3 4.6E-3 0
(Co) based on the surface contamination of the landmine. It Jc µg/cm2-day 8.6E-6 0
has been assumed that the entire surface contamination was Dlw cm2/day 0.432 *
completely and uniformly transferred to the soil just prior to
Dga cm2/day 4320 *
the beginning of the simulation runs. Surface contamination
data (Hogan et al., 1992) showed a median surface burial depth, cm 10 *
contamination of 15 ng/cm2 from 42 domestic and foreign top
landmines. Using the dimensions of an anti-tank (AT) mine burial depth, cm 20 *
of 30 cm diameter by 10 cm high, the surface contamination bottom
would provide 3.5x10-5 g of TNT for initial distribution in cycles/yr -- 45 *
the soil. Using the volume of the AT mine that this mass of precipitation days 1 *
TNT is distributed into, the initial concentration (Co) would evaporation days 7 *
be ~5x10-3 µg/cm3. precipitation cm/day 0.44 *
rate
The constant source term emanation rate was derived from evaporation cm/day - 0.063 *
vapor collection chamber experiments on two mines rate
(Spangler, 1975). Values ranged from 10-16 to 10-18 g/cm2- total cm/year 20 *
s. The higher rate of 10-16 g/cm2-s (8.6x10-6 µg/cm2-day) precipitation/
was used in these simulations. If the top of the AT mine evaporation
was buried at a depth of 10 cm, the burial zone of the initial * - same as the base case
contamination is from 10 to 20 cm, and the constant source
term is placed at a depth of 15 cm. V. DISCUSSION
a For each of the figures shown, there is a distinct oscillation
The diffusivity of gas in air ( Dg ) and diffusivity of liquid of the surface vapor flux. This feature is a result of the
w
in water ( Dl ) were selected from Jury et al. (1983). The cycling of precipitation and evaporation. To evaluate the
effect of the Henry’s Law constant, two simulations were
biochemical half-life value of 365 days was selected from a performed where all parameters were kept constant with one
long term field experiment (Dubois and Bayton, 1991). case using a KH equal to that of TNT and one for RDX
(both at 20°C). Figure 1 shows the results and indicate that
The precipitation/evaporation rates and periods followed in
the TNT surface vapor flux would be expected to reach a
all the simulations here were the low desert scenario from
greater steady state value than RDX, approximately
Phelan and Webb (1997). This scenario was derived from
proportional to the ratio of Henry’s Law constants. For
data found in HELP (Hydrological Evaluation of Landfill
TNT, a temperature increase from 0°C to 40°C will increase
Performance) model (Schroeder et al., 1994a and 1994b). .
the KH value by a factor of about 100. It appears that
The HELP model showed that the low desert had 1 day of seasonal and diurnal soil temperature changes could make a
precipitation followed by 7 days of evaporation. For significant effect on the subsurface transport and surface
simplicity, total precipitation and total evaporation for each flux of explosive signatures.
cycle are assumed to be equal and for these simulations the
cycles were continued for approximately four to ten years.
1.00E+00
1.00E-01
1.00E-02
1.00E-03
1.00E-04
1.00E-05
1.00E-06
1.00E-07
Depth concentration profiles at the end of the simulation Next, simulations were performed to evaluate small changes
period show that for both cases the concentration of TNT in the soil water partitioning coefficient. The Kd values for
and RDX are essentially equal. This implies that most of TNT, DNT and RDX have values from about 1.5 to 7.
the transport upward to the ground surface is within the Figure 2 shows the surface flux over time for Kd values of
aqueous phase and that the release of the chemical into the 1.6, 3.8 and 6.0 cm3/g.
vapor phase above the ground surface is directly
proportional to the Henry’s Law constant.
1.00E+00
1.00E-01
1.00E-02
1.00E-03
1.00E-04
1.00E-05
1.00E-06
1.00E-07 Kd
Surface Vapor Flux (ug/cm2-day)
1.00E-08
1.6
1.00E-09
1.00E-10
1.00E-11 3.8
1.00E-12
6.0
1.00E-13
1.00E-14
1.00E-15
1.00E-16
1.00E-17
1.00E-18
1.00E-19
1.00E-20
1 2 3
1.00E-21
1.00E-22
1.00E-23
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (days)
These simulations show that even though the soil water evaporation cycles becomes more pronounced. This is
partitioning coefficients appear to vary only slightly among consistent with the lower Kd value, since more of the mass
many soils, there is a significant impact to the transport of of the chemical is found in the aqueous phase and is
the chemical to the ground surface. As the Kd value affected by the upward and downward flux of water. Figure
increases, the lag period becomes much longer and the 3 shows the depth profiles from the simulations varying the
steady state concentrations stabilize at much lower levels. soil water partitioning coefficients. These curves show that
Also with the lower Kd values, the effect of precipitation/ the simulations with lower Kd values have more significant
transport of the chemicals to soils both above and below the source zone than the higher Kd values.
2.50E-03
Kd = 6
2.00E-03
Kd = 3.8
Kd = 1.6
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
0.00E+00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Depth (cm)
The next simulations were an evaluation of the source term and the amount from the surface emission flux (0.02
parameters. Very little data is available on the initial ug/day), it would take about 4.8 years for the total mass of
concentration of explosives coating the outer surface of a explosive from the surface emission flux to equal the
mine and even less so on the surface emission flux. Figure amount from the initial surface contamination. Curve two
4, curve one shows the effect of reducing the surface in Figure 4 shows the effect where the initial concentration
emission flux to essentially zero (a value of 1E-20 ug/cm2- on the mine is essentially zero (a value of 1E-20 ug/cm3
day was used). This curve is essentially the same as curve was used). This shows a significantly longer lag time and
one in Figure 1 where the surface emission flux (Jc) was about four orders of magnitude lower steady state surface
equal to 8.6E-6 ug/cm2-day. This implies that the surface vapor flux at the end of the simulation period. Figure 4
emission flux makes very little contribution to the overall indicates that the initial concentration is a much more
mass transport in the soil. If one considers the total mass of important parameter than the surface flux for the mass
explosive contributed by the initial concentration (35 ug) transport of chemicals to the ground surface.
1.00E+00
1.00E-01
1.00E-02
1.00E-03
1.00E-04
1.00E-05
1.00E-06
1.00E-07
Surface Vapor Flux (ug/cm2-day)
Co = 4.6E-3 ug/cm3
1.00E-08
Jc = 1E-20 ug/cm2-day (approximates zero)
1.00E-09
1.00E-10
1
1.00E-11
1.00E-12
1.00E-13
1.00E-14
1.00E-15
2
1.00E-16
1.00E-17
1.00E-18
Co = 1E-20 ug/cm3 (approximates zero)
1.00E-19
Jc = 8.6E-6 ug/cm2-day
1.00E-20
1.00E-21
1.00E-22
1.00E-23
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (days)
1.00E+00
1.00E-01
1.00E-02
1.00E-03
1.00E-04
Co = 4.6E+2 ug/cm3
1.00E-05
1
Surface Vapor Flux (ug/cm2-day)
1.00E-06
1.00E-07
1.00E-08
Co = 4.6E-2 ug/cm3
1.00E-09
2
1.00E-10
3
1.00E-11
1.00E-12
Co = 4.6E-3 ug/cm3
1.00E-13
1.00E-14
1.00E-15
1.00E-16
1.00E-17
1.00E-18
1.00E-19
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (days)
Another parameter where there is very little data is the (curve 2). Figure 6 shows that over the long-term, the
biochemical half life (t1/2). There are many influences on shorter half-life will significantly decrease the steady state
the magnitude of this parameter and the variability is surface flux. Biochemical decay constants that are very
expected to be large. Simulations over ten (10) years were large (e.g. RDX values over 30 years) appears to have
completed to assess the impact of decreases in the minimal impact to the short term soil transport phenomena
biochemical half-life from 365 days (curve 1) to 180 days evaluated in these simulations.
1.00E+00
1.00E-01
1.00E-02
1.00E-03
1.00E-04
1.00E-05
1.00E-06
1.00E-07
Surface Vapor Flux (ug/cm2-day)
1.00E-19
3
1.00E-20
1.00E-21
1.00E-22
1.00E-23
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Time (days)
Initial simulations using this approach showed that for a greater steady state concentrations. Figure 7 shows how
particular scenario, the constant moisture content value had increasing the soil saturation from 0.5 to 0.75, decreases the
a significant impact on the lag period (when the vapor flux lag period substantially and increases the steady state
reached the ground surface) and the steady state surface flux by two orders of magnitude. The constant
concentrations (Phelan and Webb, 1997). Higher moisture moisture content assumption in this screening model allows
contents showed significantly shorter lag periods and for a simplified mathematical solution to complex transport
phenomena. One must recognize this assumption and not transport phenomena of chemical signatures from buried
over generalize the information gleaned from these landmines in more detail and with fewer simplifying
simulations. Future efforts will include the development of assumptions.
a numerical simulation capability that can explore the
1.00E+00
1.00E-01
1.00E-02
1.00E-03
1.00E-04
1.00E-05
1.00E-06
1.00E-07 Sl=0.75
1
Surface Flux (ug/cm2-day)
1.00E-08
1.00E-09
1.00E-10
2
1.00E-11
1.00E-12
Sl=0.5
1.00E-13
1.00E-14
1.00E-15
1.00E-16
1.00E-17
1.00E-18
1.00E-19
1.00E-20
1.00E-21
1.00E-22
1.00E-23
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (days)
In some parts of the world, minefields are located in areas followed by -0.5 cm/day of evaporation for 60 days. This
that experience very distinct wet and dry climatic periods. shows the immediate drop in the steady-state surface flux
Figure 8 shows the result of a simulation to assess the effect after precipitation begins. Once the evaporation period
of a short-term continuos precipitation period followed by a begins, there is a short lag period where the surface vapor
short-term evaporation period. The baseline simulation flux stays nearly constant before rising to just above the flux
(Figure 1, curve 1) was run for 1440 days followed by 1 before the precipitation began.
cm/day of precipitation for 30 days which was then
1.00E+00
1.00E-02
1.00E-04
Precipitation begins
1.00E-06
1.00E-08
Surface Flux (ug/cm2-day)
1.00E-10
1.00E-12
1.00E-14
1.00E-16
1.00E-18
1.00E-20
Evaporation begins
1.00E-22
1.00E-24
1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550
Time (days)