Raya Valley Complete Well Completion Report - Doc Rec

Tekeze deep water wells drilling plc
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The Tekeze deep water wells drilling P.L.C, operation department

supported this work. I am great full to Ato Asmelash Abay, operation
department head, for his dedication and willingness to share me his
knowledge and experience. Moreover Ato Asmelash Abay contribute a lot
of information during the preparation of this report, thus this report
greatly benefited from the reviews and comments of Ato Asmelash abay.
Raya valley well completion report 1

CHAPTER ONE
1. INTRODUCTION
Ground water exists in economic quantities in virtually most parts of

Tigray, however, it is not evenly distributed with respect to its quantity
and quality. Rising standards of living and the adoption of industrial
expansion in the last two decades have increased water demands. In
1
response to these demands, the development of groundwater resources
for domestic and industrial uses has greatly accelerated since the last
few decades. Federal, state, and provincial expenditures for ground water
studies have soared these days to solve the often need of the resource.
Although many remarkable works are done in the development of

groundwater for water supply and industrial uses, the development of
our precious ground water resource for large scale irrigation schemes
have been overlooked in the region for the last decades.
Nowadays small scale irrigation agriculture (micro irrigation) which

began in the last few years, precariously dependant on diversions of
stream flow and shallow local hand dug wells, are giving way to large
scale irrigation and cultivation of valley lowlands using motorized
pumps.
Recently, REST (Relief Society of Tigray) is making great efforts to

introduce modern and pressurized irrigation activities by developing the
huge ground water resource of Raya valley, through the construction of
deep bore holes in the valley’s different well fields.

The so-called Raya valley is found in the southern zone of Tigray nestled
between parts of Mohoni and Alamata occupying a very vast plain area.
The western mountain ranges are the principal source of recharge for the
valley. Most of the precipitation falls on these mountain and supplies
streams, which recharge the alluvial aquifers through out the valley.
These alluvial basins are filled with unconsolidated materials consisting
of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and boulders. The sand and gravel beds of this
basin are found to be the most productive aquifers of the valley.
Hence, as per the plan of the project about 30 high capacity wells
have been sunk (drilled and constructed) in the valleys potential well
fields since the restart of the former raya valley project (2003).
Table,1a - Location of boreholes
Sub Well
Sr.No Easting Northing Elevation Remark
basin designation
1 Alamata WF9/BH1 569908 1401180 1645
2 Alamata WF9/BH2
3 Alamata WF9/BH3
4 Alamata WF9/BH4 570532 1400156 1626
5 Alamata WF6/BH1 563850 1364700 1477
6 Alamata WF6/BH3 563250 1366400 1483
7 Alamata WF6/BH2 563450 1366900 1489
8 Alamata WF5/BH1 563800 1367200 1479
9 Alamata WF5/BH3 563800 1367800 1474
10 Alamata WF5/BH4 564000 1368000 1482
11 Alamata WF5/BH2 564200 1368800 1474
12 Alamata WF1/V9 562800 1372074 1489
13 Alamata WF1/V1 562973 1371847 1488

14 Alamata WF1/V12 163165 1373954 1507

15 Alamata WF1/V10 562800 1371450 1492
16 Alamata WF0/BH1 562800 1371000 1495
17 Alamata WF0/BH2 563000 1370600 1488
18 Alamata WF0/BH3 564015 1370022 1470
19 Alamata WF0/BH4 162801 1369200 1487
20 Alamata WF0/BH5 562000 1370000 1497
21 Alamata WF0/BH6 561500 1371000 1511
22 Alamata WF0/BH7 561900 1371000 1502
23 Alamata WF0/BH8 561500 1370000 1512
24 Alamata WF7/BH1 564500 1363300 1482
25 Alamata WF7/BH2 564000 1364300 1478
26 Alamata WF6/BH4 564000 1364900 1484
27 Alamata WF7/BH3 565000 1364100 1472
28 Alamata WF5/BH5
29 Alamata WF5/BH6 560992 1368018 1545
30 Alamata WF2/V9 565978 1376505
31 Alamata WF4/BH1 567230 1381300 1475
32 Mehoni WF13/BH1 574600 1409500 1645
33 Mehoni WF13/BH2 575889 1407832 1620

CHAPTER TWO
2. DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY
2.1GENERAL
It is obvious that, successful drilling is both an art developed from long
experience and application of good engineering practice. Thus based on
the previously done hydro geological studies and related investigation
works in the valley, a due attention was given to the well design works.
From the preliminary design the suitable drilling machine and drilling
method for the alluvial aquifers in the valley was found to be a rotary
drilling machine that uses mud circulation. Consequently, most of the
boreholes sunk in the different well fields of the valley since the restart of
the project (2003) are drilled using a high capacity direct rotary drilling
machine (speed star 30 K).
Finally even though there are some variations in depth, and type and
diameter of casing installed, from well to well in a well field and from one
well field to another. Each individual borehole is completed based on the
actual field findings of the drilling and related construction works. Hence
the blind and screen casings are placed in their appropriate position in
accordance with the facts gained from the log report. Moreover, most of
the productive boreholes are filter packed and thoroughly developed to
ensure a sand free operation at a maximum yield.

2.2 DRILLING DEPTH AND DIAMETER
Because the intended purpose of each drilled borehole is for large-scale

irrigation, enough and sustained quantities of water is required till the
life span of the well. As result prior to the construction of the boreholes,
attention was given to the type of geological formation, drilling depth and
drilling diameter in order to get a general insight on how to execute the
drilling activities.
The initial drilling depth of each borehole is proposed based on the

geophysical works (studies) done in the valley. However, the final depth
of each borehole is decided based on the actual field findings of the
geological and hydro geological conditions of the respective sub surface
formation. I.e. the drilling process is executed in such a way to avoid Un
necessary drilling depth and partial penetration.
With regard to the well diameter it is chosen in a manner to

accommodate the selected casing diameter and the pump permanently to
be installed. Moreover, emphasis is also given to the annular space for
filter pack and grouting while specifying the well diameter.
Generally the drilling penetrates, through a variety of consolidated and

unconsolidated deposits consisting of clay, silt, sand, gravel and boulder.
The depth of most of the boreholes varies from 70m in areas where the
bedrock is encountered at shallower depth, and up to 180m in the
central parts of the valley and in areas where there is a thick alluvial
cover. Finally two sizes of drilling diameter are used to complete the
entire depth of each borehole. A171/2 -inch drilling bit is used for the top
most 6 meters and the remaining portion of the borehole is drilled using
a 143/4–inch-drilling bit.

2.3 CASING INSTALLATION
The exact procedures followed during casing installation are firstly; close
examination of the formation sampled during the process of drilling is
undertaken by proper washing of each representative sample. In addition
to this visual inspection and comparison is made among the samples
representing each sediment layer, and the relative transmssivity of each
layer is estimated from the observed coarseness, lack of silt, and clay
and thickness of each layer. Finally the accompanying well log report is
prepared in such away to indicate the most porous and permeable water
bearing horizons. Hence the blind and screen casings are installed to
each borehole based on the facts gained from the log report of the
respective well.
Even though, the length of a well screen in a given borehole is

determined by the aquifer thickness and the nature of its stratification.
Due to some variations in hydraulic conductivity and porosity among the
sediment layers with in the aquifer (certain horizons are more
transmitive than others), the aquifers of most of the drilled boreholes are
not fully screened. As a result most of the screens installed to each
borehole are placed parallel to the most permeable and porous zones of
the aquifer.
Regarding the type and diameter of casing used, except for some of the
early drilled boreholes which are installed with 8”and10” inch PVC
casing, most of the bore holes are constructed using 8’ and10’inch steel
casing.

Table 2.3.a A summary of the permanently installed blind and screen

casings of each borehole is listed in the tables below.
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF5/BH3/V3
Depth in meters
Casing type and size
From To
0 30 10" blind steel casing
30 42 10" screen steel casing
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF/BH
Depth in meters
From To
0 31 8" blind PVC casing
31 61 8" screen PVC casing

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF/BH
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF1/V12
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF1/V10
Depth in meters
From To
37 43 10"screen PVC casing

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF7/BH1
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF9/BH1
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF9/BH2
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF9/BH3
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF9/BH4
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF6/BH1
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF6/BH3
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF6/BH2
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF5/BH1
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF0/BH1
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF5/BH4/V5
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF5/BH2/V8
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF0/BH6
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF0/BH3
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF0/BH2
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF0/BH4
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF0/BH5
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF0/BH7
Depth in meters
From To

ASING ARRANGEMENT
WF0/BH8
Depth in meters
From To
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF7/BH2
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF2/V9
Depth in meters
From To
0 18 8"blind steel casing
18 48 8"screen steel casing
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF5/BH5
Depth in meters
From To

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF7/BH3
Depth in meters
From To
104 138 Left un cased
CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF13/BH1
Depth in meters
From To
0 65.5 8" blind steel casing
65.5 77.5 8"screen steel casing
77.5 83.5 8" blind steel casing

CASING ARRANGEMENT
WF13/BH2
Depth in meters
From To
2.4 FILTER PACK
In order the pumped water to be sand free, and increase the hydraulic
conductivity of the aquifer in the near vicinity of the well, and in some
cases to prevent the borehole wall from caving. Most of the productive
wells sunk in the different well fields of the valley are filter packed with
selected and properly washed 6-9 mm size river gravel. With respect to
the nature of the pack material it is moderately sorted, rounded to sub
rounded basaltic river gravel.
During the gravel packing stage special emphasis was given to the
roundness and uniformity of grain size. Angular rock fragments and

grain sizes out of the range of the selected gravel size (6-9mm) are
removed from the pack material through sieving. Moreover, during
pouring of the pack material in to the annulus, a slow and step wise
pouring of the gravel material is undertaken, in order to fill the space
between the casing and borehole wall properly from right bottom of the
well up to the desired depth. Thus bridging and segregation of the filter
pack material is hardly observed in most of the boreholes during the
application of gravel.
2.5 WELL DEVELOPMENT
Since most of the productive wells are drilled in areas of thick alluvial
deposits, which are stratified and relatively young and have not been
thoroughly compacted or cemented by a geologic process. It is evident
that the actions of drilling bit to cause some intermixing of sediments
(compaction) near the borehole, resulting in a severe reduction of the
hydraulic conductivity close to the well bore. Moreover, the use of drilling
fluid [high grade clay (Bentonite) mixed with water] during the execution
of drilling found to produce a powerful plugging effect once it enters the
aquifer.
As a result each productive borehole is thoroughly mechanically

developed using the airlift development method, in order to repair the
damage done to the formation by the drilling operation so that the
natural hydraulic conductivity is restored, and to clean the mud cake or
drilling fluid that coats the borehole.
During the development period, compressed air is introduced to the

borehole to lift the water to the ground surface. The sudden strong air
pressure applied to the well screen and to the surrounding strata causes

a rapid break down of the mud cake formed at the borehole wall and the
consequent removal of the fine materials from the gravel pack and the
formation in the immediate vicinity of the well. Subsequently airlift
pumping is used to pump the well periodically to remove sediments from
the well screen or the borehole. This procedure is repeated for a certain
length of time in a step wise fashion, starting from the top positioned
screen down to the entire depth of the borehole until the water is
virtually sand free.
Generally, the total development hours taken to develop each productive

borehole varies from 16to 24 hours depending up on the amount of silt
present in the aquifer and depth of the borehole.
A summary of the development hours of each borehole and the respective

screen and aquifer thickness are given in the table below
Table –2.5.a Total depth and development hours of boreholes
Static Total
Well Screen Aquifer Total
Sr.no water development
designation thickness thickness depth
level hours
1 WF1/V10 17.31 30 66 102 17
2 WF6/BH1 30.29 54 79 126 24
3 WF6/BH3 20.77 30 54 96 24
4 WF5/BH1 29.32 36 69 96 24
5 WF5/BH2 22.9 42 47.1 108
6 WF9/BH4 25.84 78 100 150 24
7 WF5/BH4 19 48 48 108
8 WF1/V1 17.03 30 50 78 16
9 WF1/V9 18 30 41.5 73 18

10 WF0/BH1 17.9 30 55 98 17
11 WF9/BH2 19.06 54 107 150 24
12 WF5/BH3 17.45 36 40 84 18
13 WF9/BH3 21.73 62 88 128 24
14 WF0/BH2 10.66 42 67 88 16
15 WF0/BH6 30.48 42 50 93 21
16 WFO/BH5 14.32 80 48 136 23
17 WFO/BH7 21.1 42 73 102 18
18 WF0/BH3 12.15 42 54 80 24
19 WF0/BH4 10.4 52 62 106 22
20 WF7/BH2 28.7 64 132 162 28
21 WF0/BH8 28 48 96 132 22
22 WF7/BH1 26.28 48 104 137 23.5
23 WF9/BH1 28.9 54 96 151 24
24 WF5/BH5 23.45 36 48.5 78
25 WF6/BH4 26.9 48 76 78
26 WF2/V9 2.15 42 56 78
27 WF13/BH1 51 48 138 21.5
28 WF13/BH2 31.16 168
29

2.6 CHRONOLOGICAL RECORD
WF9/BH1
N DATE
ACTIVITIES Total hours
o From To
1 Mobilization
2 Rigging up and mixing of bentonite
3 Drilling to the depth of
Dismantling of drill pipes, casing and
4
observation pipe installation
Gravel packing
Well development
Total working hours
Total idle hours
Down time
Planned hours
Accomplishment
WF9/BH2
N DATE
o From To
1 Mobilization
4
Gravel packing
Well development
Total working hours
Total idle hours
Down time
Planned hours
Accomplishment

WF9/BH3
N DATE
o From To
1 Mobilization
4
Gravel packing
Well development
Total working hours
Total idle hours
Down time
Planned hours
Accomplishment
WF9/BH4
N DATE Total
ACTIVITIES
o From To hours
1 15-03-04 16-03-04 Mobilization
2 17-03-04 17-03-04 Rigging up and mixing of bentonite
3 18-03-04 4-04-04 Drilling to the depth of
4 5-04-04 6-04-04
7-04-04 7-04-04 Gravel packing
Well development
Total working hours
Total idle hours
Down time
Planned hours
Accomplishment

WF6/BH1
N DATE Total
ACTIVITIES
o From To hours
1 14-04-04 15-04-04 Mobilization
4 25-04-04 26-04-04
27-04-04 29-04-04 Well development
Total working hours
Total idle hours
Down time
Planned hours
Accomplishment
WF6/BH3
N DATE Total
ACTIVITIES
o From To hours
1 30-04-04 1-05-04 Mobilization
4 11-05-04 12-05-04
15-05-04
13-05-04 Well development
Total working hours
Total idle hours
Down time
Planned hours
Accomplishment

WF6/BH2
N DATE Total
ACTIVITIES
o From To hours
1 15-03-04 16-03-04 Mobilization
4 5-04-04 6-04-04
Well development
Total working hours
Total idle hours
Down time
Planned hours
Accomplishment
WF5/BH1/V4
N DATE Total
ACTIVITIES
o From To hours
1 10-06-04 12-06-04 Mobilization
4 18-06-04 20-06-04
5 20-06-04 20-06-04 Gravel packing
6 20-06-04 21-06-04 Well development
Total working hours(A)
Total idle hours(B)
Down time(C)
Total hours in the site (A+B+C)=D
Planned hours
Accomplishment

WF5/BH3/V3
N DATE Total
ACTIVITIES
o From To hours
1 17-05-04 18-05-04 Mobilization
3 19-05-04 5-6-04 Drilling to the depth of 84m
4 6-06-04 6-06-04
5 6-06-04 6-06-04 Gravel packing
Total idle hours(B)
Down time(C)
Planned hours
Accomplishment
WF5/BH4/V5
N DATE
o From To
1 12-07-04 13-07-04 Mobilization
4 2-08-04 3-08-04
Total idle hours(B)
Down time(C)
Planned hours
Accomplishment

WF5/BH2/V8
N DATE
o From To
1 5-08-04 6-08-04 Mobilization
3 7-08-04 16-08-04 Drilling to the depth of 108
Dismantling of drill pipes, casing
4 16-08-04 18-08-04
and observation pipe installation
5 18-08-04 18-08-04 Gravel packing
Total idle hours(B)
Down time(C)
Planned hours
Accomplishment
F1/V9
N DATE Total
ACTIVITIES
o From To hours
1 10-10-04 12-10-04 Mobilization
4 21-10-04 23-10-04
5 23-10-04 23-10-04 Gravel packing
Total idle hours(B)
Down time(C)
Planned hours
Accomplishment

WF1/V1
N DATE
o From To
1 26-10-04 26-10-04 Mobilization
Rigging up and mixing of
2 27-10-04 28-10-04
bentonite
4 6-11-04 6-11-04
Total idle hours(B)
Down time(C)
Planned hours
Accomplishment
WF1/V12
N DATE
o From To
1 9-11-04 13-11-04 Mobilization
2 13-11-04 13-11-04
bentonite
4 18-11-04 19-11-04
5 19-11-04 19-11-04 Gravel packing
Total idle hours(B)
Down time(C)
Planned hours
Accomplishment

WF1/V10
N DATE
o From To
1 20-11-04 21-11-04 Mobilization
2 22-11-04 22-11-04
bentonite
4 2-12-04 2-12-04
Total idle hours(B)
Down time(C)
Planned hours
Accomplishment
WF0/BH1
N DATE
o From To
1 5-12-04 5-12-04 Mobilization 8
2 6-12-04 7-12-04
Rigging up and mixing of bentonite 2
3 8-12-04 17-12-04 Drilling to the depth of 98m 75
4 17-12-04 17-12-04 6
5 18-12-04 18-12-04 Gravel packing 4
6 18-12-04 19-12-04 Well development 17
Total working hours(A) 112
Total idle hours(B) 49
Down time(C) 16
Total hours in the site (A+B+C)=D 177
Planned hours 85.2

Accomplishment 48.145%
WF0/BH2
N DATE
o From To
1 19-12-04 20-12-04 Mobilization 10
2 20-12-04 20-12-04 2
bentonite
4 26-12-04 27-12-04 13
5 28-12-04 28-12-04 Gravel packing 8
Total idle hours(B)
Down time(C)
Planned hours
Accomplishment
WF0/BH3
N DATE Total
ACTIVITIES
o From To hours
1 29-12-04 30-12-04 Mobilization 10
2 30-12-04 30-12-04 Rigging up and mixing of bentonite 10
4 12-01-05 13-01-05 14
5 13-01-05 13-01-05 Gravel packing 3
Down time(C) 60
Planned hours 69.56

WF0/BH4
N DATE
o From To
1 15-01-05 15-01-05 Mobilization 8
2 15-01-05 15-01-05
4 25-01-05 26-01-05 16
5 26-01-05 26-01-05 Gravel packing 6
Down time(C) 81
Planned hours 92.17
Accomplishment 34%
WF0/BH5
N DATE
o From To
1 28-01-05 28-01-05 Mobilization 10
2 29-01-05 29-01-05
4 3-02-05 5-02-05 22
5 5-02-05 5-02-05 Gravel packing 4
Down time(C) 0
Planned hours 118.26

WF0/BH6
N DATE
o From To
1 8-02-05 8-02-05 Mobilization 4
2 8-02-05 8-02-05
4 14-02-05 15-02-05 14.5
5 15-02-05 15-02-05 Gravel packing 2
6 15-02-05 16-02-05 Well development 22.5
Down time(C) 0
Planned hours 80.8
WF0/BH7
N DATE
o From To
1 17-02-05 17-02-05 Mobilization 4.5
2 17-02-05 17-02-05
4 25-02-05 26-02-05 21
5 28-02-05 28-02-05 Gravel packing 5
Down time(C) 0
Planned hours 88.69

WF0/BH8
N DATE
o From To
1 2-03-05 2-03-05 Mobilization 4
2 2-03-05 2-03-05
4 12-03-05 13-03-05 18
5 14-03-05 14-03-05 Gravel packing 7
Down time(C) 4
Planned hours(E) 114.7
Accomplishment(E/D)% 42.6%
WF7/BH1
N DATE
o From To
1 17-03-05 17-03-05 Mobilization 8
2 17-03-05 17-03-05
3 18-02-05 2-04-05Drilling to the depth of 137m 98
4 3-04-05 10-04-05 23.5
5 10-04-05 10-04-05 Gravel packing 2
Down time(C) 280
Total hours in the site (A+B+C) 497

WF7/BH2
N DATE
o From To
1 13-04-05 13-04-05 Mobilization 8
3 14-04-05 22-04-05 Drilling to the depth of 162m 131.5
4 22-04-05 25-04-05 29
5 25-04-05 25-04-05 Gravel packing 3
Down time(C) 0
WF6/BH4
DATE
No ACTIVITIES Total hours
From To
1 27-04-05 6-05-05 Mobilization 4
4 15-05-05 18-05-05 18
5 18-05-05 18-05-05 Gravel packing 2
Down time(C) 0
Planned hours 106

WF7/BH3
DATE
No ACTIVITIES Total hours
From To
1 20-05-05 20-05-05 Mobilization 6
4 1-06-05 3-06-05 28
5 10-06-05 10-06-05 Gravel packing 2
Down time(C) 102
Planned hours 120
Accomplishment 32%
WF5/BH5
N DATE
o From To
1 12-06-05 12-06-05 Mobilization 7
3 12-06-05 24-06-05 Drilling to the depth of 78m 69.5
4 25-06-05 26-06-05 16
5 26-06-05 26-06-05 Gravel packing 3
Down time(C) 159
Planned hours 67.8

WF5/BH6
N DATE
o From To
1 18-07-05 18-07-05 Mobilization 6
2 18-07-05 18-07-05
4 1-08-05 2-08-05 10
5 Gravel packing -
DRY
6 Well development -
Down time(C) 109
Planned hours 63.47
Accomplishment 26%
WF2/V9
N DATE
o From To
1 3-08-05 3-08-05 Mobilization 9
4 12-08-05 13-08-05 12.65
5 13-08-05 13-08-05 Gravel packing 2
Total working hours(A) 128.15
Down time(C) 75
Total hours in the site (A+B+C) 224.15
Planned hours 67.8

WF4/BH1
N DATE
o From To
1 17-08-05 17-08-05 Mobilization 8
4 30-08-05 1-09-05 35
5 1-09-05 1-09-05 Gravel packing 3
Down time(C) 32
Planned hours 149.5
WF13/BH1
N DATE
o From To
1 30-09-05 30-09-05 Mobilization 8
3 1-10-05 15-10-05 Drilling to the depth of 118.5
4 15-10-05 17-10-05 19.5
5 17-10-05 17-10-05 Gravel packing 2
Down time(C) 2
Total hours in the site (A+B+C) 183.5
Planned hours 166

WF13/BH2
N DATE
o From To
1 20-10-05 20-10-05 Mobilization 4
4 11-11-05 13-11-05 28
5 14-11-05 14-11-05 Gravel packing 5
Total idle hours(B) -
Down time(C) 134.5
Planned hours 146
Accomplishment 38%

CHAPTER THREE
PUMPING TEST OPERATION, DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
3.1 GENERAL
Although there are several types of pumping tests which can give a
complete figure of the subsurface groundwater condition. Due to cost
factors, the test conducted so far to each productive borehole in the
valley is a single well test. The lowering of the ground water level is
measured in the pumped borehole only i.e. no observations are done in
other boreholes and piezometers. Moreover, except for the full discharge
pumping of the well done for a very short duration of time to determine
the maximum anticipated drawdown, prior to the actual test no complete
provisional (pre test) is done.
During the pumping test operation the test duration for each of the tests
conducted is made compatible with the intended purpose of the wells.
Similarly, while taking measurements careful static water level readings
are under taken and water level measurements for both drawdown and
recovery are measured correctly and properly recorded on the data
collection sheet according to the designed time intervals. In addition to
this the discharge-measuring device is prepared in such away to fit the
expected yield and frequent discharge measurements are taken during
each test in order to cross check the pump is working at the designed
yield. Apart from this the discharged pumped water is piped far enough
up to 2oom in order not to re-circulate and recharge the aquifer (it is
kept down stream through a canal coated by a geomembrane in to a
natural drain or in to areas where re-circulation in to the aquifer is not
expected).

Among the problems so far encountered during the execution of the

pumping test include improper control of the discharge rates during the
initial stage of the test, discharge variation which arises from variations
in engine or pump speed are found to cause erratic drowdown data in
some of the boreholes during the pumping test. Moreover, the inability to
fully visualize the physical nature of the aquifer and how it deviates from
the basic assumptions on which the well hydraulics equations are based
is another problem encountered during the analysis of some pumping
test data.
With regard to the analysis, even though there are several pumping test
analysis methods most of them require data of an observation well for
their analysis, which is out of the scope of our current pumping test
operation. Thus most of the reliable data collected from the conducted
pumping tests are analyzed using the Jacob method, which makes use of
a single well test data for the determination of aquifer parameters.
Moreover, the Brieschenk (1964) graphical method is used to determine
the well loss parameters from the step drawdown test. Finally the real
well efficiency of each productive borehole is calculated using the
formula developed by Mogg (Driscoll)
I.e. Efficiency = Actual specific capacity *100

Theoretical specific capacity
Where - Actual specific capacity = Q/S and

Theoretical specific capacity = T/1500 for unconfined aquifer
Q = yield in m3/day
S =draw down in meters and

T= Transmissivity
3.2 PURPOSE
Despite the evident complexities and limitations of pumping test data

collection and analysis, conducting a pumping test is a critical task
where very important information and data are acquired regarding the
overall subsurface condition of a given area. Moreover, proper analysis
and evaluation of pumping test results helps in properly defining the
groundwater condition of a certain target area. In light of this the
pumping test conducted so far to each productive borehole are aimed in
achieving the following general and specific objectives.
3.2.1 General objectives:
 To determine the performance characteristics and efficiency of the well

 To determine the hydraulic parameters of the aquifer
3.2.2 Specific objectives
To check the well efficiency (construction performance)

To determine the potential of the well and the sustainable discharge of
the specific well
 To select the appropriate type of pump and its position in the well

3.3 EQUIPMENTS AND MATERIALS USED FOR TESTING
A pumping test crew consisting of one pump technician, one electrician

and a water level recording personnel are deployed to the test site with
all the necessary equipments and accessories. The pumping test
equipments and its accessories and other necessary materials are
checked whether they are in a working condition before the starting of
each test, in order to avoid or minimize the pumping test problems that
arise after the pumping test commences. Moreover, prior planning and
experimentation with the equipment and personnel was done to
eliminate potential errors that may occur during the actual pumping
test.
3.3.1 Submersible pump and generator
A submersible electrical pump, which gives a maximum capacity of 44l/s

at a full gate valve and a power of 45Kw, is used to pump the water
during each pumping test. During the test the pump is placed in the
blind part of the casing at the desired depth determined from preliminary
analysis, to avoid the distorted flow patterns that will occur in the
vicinity of the well screen, which intern result in higher incrustation
rates and silt and sand pumping due to the increased velocities. A power
source of volt diesel generator that uses gasoline was used to derive
the pump in most of the conducted pumping tests.
3.3.2 Water level measuring device
An electrical water level indicator was used to measure water level

(drawdown) in each borehole. It consists of an electrode, two wire cable, a

light and sound dials, which indicate a closed circuit when the electrode
touches water. This instrument is powered by a 1.5volt of four medium
sized batteries to give an electrical signal.
3.3.3 Discharge measuring device
A container of known volume was used for measuring the discharge rates
of the earlier tested boreholes. In this method the pumping rate is
measured by observing the time required to fill the container. This
method was practical, however, due to its limitation in measuring
properly large discharges, a v-notch weir, which makes use of a weir,
ruler, and notch chart to determine the required discharge rate, was
used for most of the later tested boreholes. Moreover, a commercial water
meter is also used simultaneously to cross check the discharge rate
determined by the above methods in some of the tests.
3.4 PUMPING TEST OPERATION
3.4.1 Step draw down test
A step drawdown test each consisting of 4 steps of equal duration is

conducted to each productive borehole during the early part of the actual
test. The length of time used for each of the steps during the execution of
this test is 90 minutes. During this test the discharge rates are arranged
in a manner the initial steps to have lower discharge rates than the
expected yield. However, the increments of discharge from the preceding
to the next step are not properly designed due to problems related with
gate valve control. Frequent discharge measurements are taken during
each step to check its constancy. Moreover, careful drawdown readings

are under taken during each step according to the following designed
time intervals.
Time measurement intervals

1- 10 Every 1-minute
10-20 Every 2 minutes
Accordingly, the collected water level readings and the accompanying

discharge rates of the respective steps are properly recorded on a
pumping test data sheet and are made ready for analysis.
Finally the collected step draw down data of each borehole is analyzed
using the Jacob and Hantush-Bierschenk (1964) graphical methods.
During the analysis a field plot of drawdown against time was developed
for each of the conducted step drawdown tests on a semi log paper, and
representative drawdown for each of the steps are determined.
Subsequently from the plot on a linear paper of the pumping rate and
the ratio of the drawdown and the pumping rate the respective aquifer
loss and well loss parameters of each of the productive boreholes are
determined.
I.e. Sw/Q= B + CQ
Generally from the analysis of this test information concerning on the

hydraulic characteristics of each well (borehole performance) and
suitable discharge for the constant test are obtained. In addition to this
the response of the well to different discharge rates was clearly visualized

from this test, and the respective specific capacities of each of the steps
are calculated in order to get clues on the optimum yield of the
boreholes. Last but not least the percentage of the total head losses
Attributed to laminar flow of each of the productive boreholes is
calculated using the following equation. (Driscoll)
LP = BQ *100%
BQ+CQ2
The collected step draw down data and the accompanying time draw
down graphs developed for each borehole are annexed as annex
A summary of the specific capacity of each of the steps, calculated well

loss parameters and well efficiencies with their respective percentage of
laminar and non-laminar head losses of each the boreholes are given in
the tables below.

Table 3.4.1.a – Summary of specific capacity and well loss parameters

calculated from step draw down test
Specifi Well loss

S Static Dynami No c factors
Well Draw
r. water c water of Yield capaci
designa down
n level level ste m3/d ty B*10- C*10-
tion (m)
o (m) (m) ps (m2/d) 4 7
1 3.08 1728 561

WF1/ 2 3.46 2160 624.27 0.012
1 17.31 20.5 5.07
V10 3 3.93 2592 659.54 23
4 4.3 3024 703.25
1 6.99 2332.8 333.73
2816.6
WF6/ 2 10.35 272.11
2 30.29 42.67 4 14 4.38
BH1
3 11.36 3326.4 292.8
4 12.38 3931.2 317.5
1 3.75 1728 460.8
WF6/ 2 4.48 2160 482.14
3 20.77 27.7 16.6 1.53
BH3 3 5.56 2592 466.18
4 6.46 3024 468.11
1 7.93 1728 217.9
WF5/ 2 9.07 2160 238.14
4 14.51 29.1 40 6.23
BH1 3 9.9 2592 261.8
4 13.26 3024 228.05
1 2.54 1728 680.3
WF5/ 2 3.32 2160 650.6
5 22.9 28.03 14 1.99
BH2 3 3.92 2592 661.22
4 4.48 3024 675
1 1.97 1728 877.15
WF9/ 2 2.49 2160 867.46
6 25.84 29.34 6.74 0.59
BH4 3 2.94 2592 881.63
4 3.24 3024 933.33
1 9.19 1728 188.03
WF5/ 2 11.38 2160 189.8
7 19 34.64 25 2.3
BH4 3 13.87 2592 186.88
4 15.07 3024 200.66
8 WF1V1 17.03 32.72 1 12.39 1728 139.46 39.38 4.86
2 13.46 2160 160.47

175.84
3 14.74 2592
8
195.22
4 15.49 3024
2
1243.1
1 1.39 1728
6
2 1.79 2160 1206.7
9 WF1/V9 18 20.51 1162.3 7 1.09
3 2.23 2592
3
1244.4
4 2.43 3024
4
1 2.76 1296 469.56
1 WFO/ 2 3.48 1728 496.55
17.9 22.58 14.2 0.89
0 BH1 3 3.73 2160 579.08
4 4.49 2592 577.28
1 9.06 2160 238.4
1 WF9/ 2 10.44 2592 248.27
19.06 35.88 18.8 7.95
1 BH2 3 11.78 3024 256.7
4 14.31 3456 241.5
1 2.44 1728 708.2
1 WF5/ 2 2.81 2160 768.68
17.45 23.41 10.5 3.25
2 BH3 3 3.06 2592 847.05
4 5.42 3024 557.9
1 6.97 1728 247.92
1 WF9/ 2 8.26 2160 261.5
21.73 36.66 28.2 6.12
3 BH3 3 10.4 2592 249.23
4 12.15 3024 248.88
1 1.72 1728 1004.6
1043.4
2 2.07 2160
7
1 WF0/
10.66 13.72 1084.5 6.13 0.86
4 BH2 3 2.39 2592
2
1046.3
4 2.89 3024
6
1479.4
1 1.46 2160
5
1228.4
2 2.11 2592
1 WF0/ 3
30.48 33.88 8.15 1.59
5 BH6 1083.8
3 2.79 3024
7
1016.4
4 3.4 3456
7
1 WF0/ 14.15 19.18 1 3.61 2160 598.34 6.45 2.6
6 BH5 2 4.09 2592 633.74

3 4.52 3024 669.03

4 5.03 3456 687.07
1 1.34 2160 1611.9
2 1.47 2592 1763.3
1 WF0/
21.1 22.76 1926.1 3.375 0.32
7 BH7 3 1.57 3024
1
4 1.66 3456 2081.9
1 10.6 1728 163.01
1 WF0/ 2 11.8 2160 183.05
12.1 22.76 17.7 8.25
8 BH3 3 12.67 2592 204.57
4 14.22 3024 212.66
1 7.38 2160 292.68
2 8.63 2592 298.61
1 WF0/
10.1 22.82 3 11.01 3024 274.65 14.3 7.96
9 BH4
271.69
4 12.72 3456
8
1 1.16 1728 1489.6
1393.5
2 1.55 2160
2 WF7/ 5
28.67 30.89 6.19 0.13
0 BH2 3 1.83 2592 1416.4
1362.1
4 2.22 3024
6
1 5.95 2160 363.05
2 WF0/ 2 6.14 2592 422.15
27.6 33.97 6.59 2.39
1 BH8 3 6.27 3024 482.3
4 6.37 3456 542.54
1 1.37 2160 1576.6
1787.5
2 1.45 2592
2 WF7/ 8
26.15 27.69 3.52 0.21
2 BH1 3 1.5 3024 2016
2244.1
4 1.54 3456
5
1 1.38 1296 939.13
2 WF9/ 2 2 1728 864
28.9 33.18 7.94 1.43
3 BH1 3 2.7 2160 800
4 3.29 2592 787.84
1 2.67 2246.4 841.35
2 3.2 2419.2 756
2 WF5/
23.45 27.07 3 3.31 3067.2 926.6 6.93 0.83
4 BH5
3784.3
4 3.62 1045.4
2
2 WF6/ 26.9 29.73 1 2.18 1900.8 871.9 5.87 0.76
5 BH4 2 2.58 2419.2 937.67
3 2.74 2937.6 1072.1

4 2.83 3456 1221.2

1 4.88 2246.4 460.33
2 2 5.31 2678.4 504.4
WF2/V9 2.15 8.11 8.85 1.98
6 3 5.82 3196.8 549.28
4 8.11 3801.6 468.75
2 WF13/
7 0.5
7 BH1
2 WF13/
8 BH2

Table3.4.1.b – calculated well efficiencies and the respective % of head

losses attributed to linear and non-linear flow.
%
Static
Well Draw %Linear Non Efficiency
Sr.no water Yield
designation down losses linear %
level
losses
1 WF1/V10 17.31 4.64 3024 42 58 42.14
2 WF6/BH1 30.29 12.29 3931.2 44.78 55.22 44.8
3 WF6/BH3 20.77 6.43 3024 78 22 78.15
4 WF5/BH1 29.32 14.56 2592 83 17 71.42
5 WF5/BH2 22.9 6.06 3024 69.86 30.14 69.98
6 WF9/BH4 25.84 3.42 3801.6 74.9 25.1 74.99
7 WF5/BH4 19 16.15 2160 33.43 66.86 33.64
8 WF1/V1 17.03 16.36 3024 72.8 27.2 72.8
9 WF1/V9 18 3.12 3024 67.8 32.2 67.95
10 WF0/BH1 17.9 5.12 3024 83.8 16.2 84
11 WF9/BH2 19.06 12.6 3024 45 55 40.4
12 WF5/BH3 17.45 6.15 3024 51.6 48.4 51.6
13 WF9/BH3 21.73 11.44 2592 63.9 36.1 64
14 WFO/BH2 10.66 3.15 3456 67.2 32.8 67.3
15 WFO/BH6 30.48 4.79 3456 58.8 41.2 58.6
16 WF0/BH5 14.32 5.34 3456 41.7 58.3 41.8
17 WF0/BH7 21.1 1.76 3801.6 72.9 27.1 72.9
18 WF0/BH3 12.15 16.01 3456 38.2 61.8 38.37
19 WF0/BH4 10.4 14.48 3456 34 66 34.3
20 WF7/BH2 28.7 2.51 3240 79.9 20.1 80
21 WFO/BH8 28 5.97 3801.6 41.9 58.1 42
22 WF7/BH1 26.28 1.65 3801.6 81.1 18.9 81.12
23 WF9/BH1 28.9 5.1 3801.6 59.1 40.9 59.26

24 WF5/BH5 23.45 3.87 3784.32 67.7 32.3 67.78

25 WF6/BH4 26.9 2.95 3456 68.7 31.3 68.8
26
WF2/V9 2.15 6.24 3801.6 53.9 46.1 53.92
27 WF13/BH1 51.85 2.56 2937.6 82.8 17.2 82.8

28 WF13/BH2 31.6 4.34 3240 95 5 95
3.4.2 Constant pumping test
A constant pumping test is conducted to each well after the water level
has returned to the normal static level following the step drawdown test.
The yield maintained during the constant pumping test of the boreholes
is determined from the results of the respective step draw down test and
is kept constant through out the pumping period. The duration of the
conducted constant pumping test to most of the productive boreholes
varies from 48 to72 hours depending up on encountering repeated
identical readings and productivity of the aquifer. Similar to the step
drawdown test water level measurements are taken at frequent time
intervals during the initial stages and at comparatively larger time
intervals during the later stages of the test. The designed water level
measurement intervals used during this test are given as fellows.
Time measurement intervals
1 –10 every one-minute

10 –20 every 2-minute
20 – 60 every 5-minute
240 – 300 every ½ hour

300 – 600 every hour

600 – 1440 every 2 hours
1440 – Last every 4 hours
Hence during the constant pumping test each productive borehole is

pumped in the above discussed way and measurements of drawdown are
taken carefully according to the above designed time intervals and are
properly recorded on a pumping test data sheet.
Finally, analysis of the collected constant pumping test data of each

borehole using the Jacob straight-line method results in the
determination of aquifer performance and hydraulic characteristics of the
respective aquifer system. During the analysis of this test using the
Jacob method a plot of the drawdown versus time was developed for each
borehole on a semi-log paper, and an approximately straight-line graph
was obtained from most of the tests. As a result the coefficient of
transmissivity of each borehole is calculated from the pumping rate and
the slope of the time drawdown graph using the following relationship.
T = 2.3Q
4S
Where Q = pumping rate in m3

S = slope of the time drawdown graph (change in drawdown
per log cycle) and
T = the coefficient of transmissivity

N.B During the analysis early time drawdown data are not included in
order to avoid the effect of casing storage.
Apart from this the sustainable abstraction rates of each of the

productive boreholes are determined from the analysis of this test.
Moreover, a preliminary analysis of the aquifer type is made through the
preparation of a field plot of the collected drawdown data versus time on
a semi-log and log- log papers and finally comparing them with the well
known developed theoretical curves.
The collected constant pumping test data and the accompanying time
drawdown graphs of each of the boreholes are annexed as annex
Table 3.4.2.a: summary of calculated aquifer hydraulic parameters from

constant test
Transmissivity
Well Draw Yield Specific
SWL DWL (m2/d) Aquifer Perme
designati down (m3/d capacit
(m) (m) Constan Recover thickness ability
on (m) ) y
t y
WF1/V10 17.31 21.95 4.64 3024 2517 1582.16 66 24.0 651.7
WF6/BH4 26.9 29.85 2.95 3456 1037.7 1037.7 76 13.7 1171.5
WF6/BH3 20.77 27.2 6.43 3024 738.34 615.28 54 11.4 470.3
WF5/
14.51 29.07 14.56 2592 230.4 245.9 69 3.6 178.0
BH1/
WF5/
22.9 28.96 6.06 3024 971.5 729 47.1 15.5 499.0
BH2/
3801.
WF9/BH4 25.84 29.26 3.42 2327.9 1515.36 100 15.2 1111.6
6
WF5/BH4 19 35.15 16.15 2160 106.58 80.57 73 1.1 133.7

WF1/V1 17.03 33.39 16.36 3024 291.45 259.59 50 5.2 184.8

WF1/V9 18 21.12 3.12 3024 1318.5 1458.1 41.5 35.1 969.2
WF0/BH1 17.9 23.02 5.12 3024 1628.85 719.2 55 13.1 590.6
WF9/BH2 19.06 32.02 12.6 3024 851.5 1496.7 107 14.0 240.0
WF5/
17.45 23.6 6.15 3023 436.06 454 40 11.4 491.5
BH3/
WF9/BH3 21.73 33.17 11.44 2592 316.43 362.4 88 4.1 226.6
WF0/BH2 10.66 13.81 3.15 3456 3433.6 4867.7 67 72.7 1097.1
WF0/BH6 30.48 35.27 4.79 3456 1582.2 2344.7 50 46.9 721.5
WF0/BH5 14.32 19.66 5.34 3456 659.65 1582.2 80 19.8 647.2
3801.
WF0/BH7 21.1 22.86 1.76 3026.75 3031.78 73 41.5 2160.0
6
WF0/BH3 12.15 28.16 16.01 3456 194.13 186.7 54 3.5 215.9
WF0/BH4 10.4 24.88 14.48 3456 208.08 213.1 62 3.4 238.7
WF7/BH2 28.7 31.21 2.51 3240 1977.7 1648.67 120 13.7 1290.8
3801.
WF0/BH8 28 33.97 5.97 1420.6 1547.55 96 16.1 636.8
6
3801.
WF7/BH1 26.28 27.93 1.65 2901.02 2320.48 104 22.3 2304.0
6
3801.
WF9/BH1 28.9 34 5.1 2402 2673.9 96 27.9 745.4
6
3931.
WF6/BH1 30.29 42.58 12.29 253.48 202.78 79 2.6 319.86
2
3784.
WF5/BH5 23.45 27.07 3.87 2389.6 1475.1 48.5 30.41 977.86
32
3801.
WF2/V9 2.15 8.39 6.24 1313.5 1160.25 56 20.71 609.23
6
WF13/ 2937.
51.85 54.43 2.56 1494.46 1416.45 76 18.64 1147.5
BH1 6

WF13/
31.6 35.5 4.34 3240 714.8 706.35 132 5.35 746.54
BH2
3.4.3 Recovery test
Even though, no recovery measurements are taken at the end of each

step drawdown test, water level recovery measurements are done to most
of the productive boreholes right after each constant pumping test has
been stopped. The recovery measurements are taken with the same
frequency as those taken during the pumping portion of the test. The
duration of the recovery tests conducted to each borehole lasts till the
water level recovers to less than 5% of the total drawdown.
During the analysis and interpretation of the recovery test the same
procedures and methods are followed as the constant rate test and this
test serve a similar purpose in determining the aquifer parameters
(transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity). However, due to the
reliability of the data collected during the recovery period, it is used to
verify the accuracy of the pumping test data and confirm the results of
the aquifer parameters determined by the constant rate. Consequently
aquifer parameters calculated from this test are taken as representative
values of the respective aquifer system.
Collected recovery data of each borehole and the accompanying time-

recovery plots are annexed as annex-
CHAPTER 5
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Conclusion

An account of the local geology, lithology of penetrated section, and

aquifer type is obtained during drilling and site observation. Further
information is gathered from literature reviews of conducted geological,
hydro geological and geophysical studies in the valley. Analysis of these
studies, and from the hydrogeologic condition and actual findings of the
drilling operation, it seems that the most productive and exploitable
horizons of the alluvial aquifer in most of the productive boreholes are
the sand and gravel beds. (Refer lithological logs attached). And the
groundwater condition and flow regime are supposed to be controlled by
the interconnected system of primary pore spaces with in the sand and
gravel beds. Moreover, from the plot of time-draw down data of each
productive borehole on log-log paper and referring to the lithological logs
of the boreholes, clues are obtained on the type of the aquifer. And the
ground water system in the area found to occur in unconfined to semi
confined conditions.
It is obvious that the maximum yield of a well is controlled by the

available draw down and the specific capacity. From the conducted
pumping tests, values of available draw down and specific capacity for
each productive well are determined. The available draw down of the
wells is determined at the time of construction of the well, and consists
of the difference between the SWL (non pumping water level) and the
lowest practical pumping level. The lowest practical pumping level taken
in most of the well is two meters above the top of the upper most screen
(which is mostly used in most screened wells). Finally these three items
of data (swl, lowest practical pumping level, pumping rate) are analyzed
as fellows to determine the maximum yield of each well.
Specific capacity = Pumping rate (m3/d)

SWL – PWL (m)
Available draw down = (SWL – Lowest practical pumping level)
Maximum yield = (Specific capacity)*(Available draw down)
Maximum
Well SWL LPWL Avail.
SP.CAPA(m2/d) yield
designation (m) (m) Draw down
(M3/d)
WF1/V10 17.31 21.95 651.7 14 9123.8
WF6/BH1 26.9 29.85 1171.5 35 41002.5
WF6/BH3 20.77 27.2 470.3 18 8465.4
WF5/BH1 14.51 29.07 178.0 26 4628
WF5/BH2 22.9 28.96 499.0 5.1 2544.9
WF9/BH4 25.84 29.26 1111.6 10 11116
WF5/BH4 19 35.15 133.7 9 1203.3
WF1/V1 17.03 33.39 184.8 10 1848
WF1/V9 18 21.12 969.2 12 11630.4
WF0/BH1 17.9 23.02 590.6 9 5315.4
WF9/BH2 19.06 32.02 240.0 50 12000
WF5/BH3 17.45 23.6 491.5 15.5 7618.25
WF9/BH3 21.73 33.17 226.6 10 2266
WFO/BH2 10.66 13.81 1097.1 16 17553.6
WFO/BH6 30.48 35.27 721.5 16 11544
WF0/BH5 14.32 19.66 647.2 12 7766.4
WF0/BH7 21.1 22.86 2160.0 13 28080
WF0/BH3 12.15 28.16 215.9 10 2159
WF0/BH4 10.4 24.88 238.7 10 2387
WF7/BH2 28.7 31.21 1290.8 12 15489.6
WFO/BH8 28 33.97 636.8 12 7641.6

WF7/BH1 26.28 27.93 2304.0 12 27648

WF9/BH1 28.9 34 745.4 50 37270
WF5/BH5 30.29 42.58 319.86 5 1599.3
WF6/BH4 23.45 27.07 977.86 10 9778.6
WF2/V9 2.15 8.39 609.23 14 8529.22
WF13/BH1 51.85 54.43 1147.5 14 16065
WF13/BH2 31.6 35.5 746.54 27 20156.58
Generally analysis of the conducted pumping test data of most of the

wells dictates us, the draw down observed is very small as compared to
the available draw down present. This may be due to the use of small
capacity submersible pump during the test .However; since the aquifers
of most of the boreholes has higher transmissivity value the wells can
yield 30 to 40 l/s if higher capacity pump is used during the production
life of the well. This can be evidenced by the above calculation of
maximum yield of the well. More over the relation of determined well loss
coefficient value of this well to the well condition is clearly visualized as
fellows.
Table - Relation of well loss coefficient to well condition

(After Walton)
Well loss coefficient (m2/d5)*10-6 Well condition

< 0.25 Properly developed and designed

0.25 –0.5 Mild deterioration or clogging

0.5 - 2 Severe deterioration or clogging
Difficult to restore well to original
>2
capacity
As can be seen from the analysis of the constant yield test of this well,
the well have high specific capacity value and the computed well loss
coefficient follows a similar trend which have a lower value in the range
of <0.25 (0.16) hence this well fits to the category of properly designed
and developed.
5.2 Recommendation
Groundwater systems are dynamic and adjust continually to short term

and long term changes in climate, groundwater withdrawal, and land
use. Water level measurements from observation wells are the principal
sources of information about the hydro geologic stresses acting up on
aquifers and how these stresses affect groundwater recharge, storage,
and discharge. Hence it is important to establish a long term systematic
measurements of water levels from observation wells that will provide
essential data needed to evaluate changes in the resource over time.
Moreover in predicting the long-term yield of the well it is also necessary

to consider changes in SWL resulting from seasonal and long term
variations in recharge and declines due to other withdrawals from the
aquifer. Hence it is necessary to estimate how much the SWL and thus
the available draw down may decline from the position that is occupied
during the well acceptance test. Thus records of water level fluctuations

in long-term observation wells in the area will also be useful in this

effort.
Finally values of available draw down and specific capacity of this well
should be carefully preserved as part of the permanent file of this well.
They should be analyzed at least quarterly to determine if changes in
either are occurring and hence suggested causes and corrective actions
can be made.

Raya Valley Complete Well Completion Report - Doc Rec

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Raya Valley Complete Well Completion Report - Doc Rec

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Raya Valley Complete Well Completion Report - Doc Rec

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tekeze deep water wells drilling plc

The Tekeze deep water wells drilling P.L.C, operation department

Raya valley well completion report 1

Ground water exists in economic quantities in virtually most parts of

Although many remarkable works are done in the development of

Nowadays small scale irrigation agriculture (micro irrigation) which

Recently, REST (Relief Society of Tigray) is making great efforts to

Raya valley well completion report 2

Table,1a - Location of boreholes

Raya valley well completion report 3

14 Alamata WF1/V12 163165 1373954 1507

Raya valley well completion report 4

2. DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

Raya valley well completion report 5

2.2 DRILLING DEPTH AND DIAMETER

Because the intended purpose of each drilled borehole is for large-scale

The initial drilling depth of each borehole is proposed based on the

With regard to the well diameter it is chosen in a manner to

Generally the drilling penetrates, through a variety of consolidated and

Raya valley well completion report 6

2.3 CASING INSTALLATION

Even though, the length of a well screen in a given borehole is

Raya valley well completion report 7

Table 2.3.a A summary of the permanently installed blind and screen

Raya valley well completion report 8

Raya valley well completion report 9

Raya valley well completion report 10

Raya valley well completion report 11

Raya valley well completion report 12

Raya valley well completion report 13

Raya valley well completion report 14

Raya valley well completion report 15

Raya valley well completion report 16

Raya valley well completion report 17

Raya valley well completion report 18

Raya valley well completion report 19

Raya valley well completion report 20

Raya valley well completion report 21

Raya valley well completion report 22

2.4 FILTER PACK

Raya valley well completion report 23

2.5 WELL DEVELOPMENT

As a result each productive borehole is thoroughly mechanically

During the development period, compressed air is introduced to the

Raya valley well completion report 24

Generally, the total development hours taken to develop each productive

A summary of the development hours of each borehole and the respective

Table –2.5.a Total depth and development hours of boreholes

Raya valley well completion report 25

Raya valley well completion report 26

2.6 CHRONOLOGICAL RECORD

Raya valley well completion report 27

Raya valley well completion report 28

Raya valley well completion report 29

Raya valley well completion report 30

Raya valley well completion report 31

Raya valley well completion report 32

Raya valley well completion report 33