Predicting Water Mounds Under Subsurface

Disposal Drainfields
P. M. Brooks, P.E.
Bureau of Wastewater Engineering
Introduction
When liquid is placed below the ground surface in subsurface absorption systems (SAS)
it will move downward, under the influence of gravity, and horizontally under the effects
of pressure (head) differences. The driving force which causes the liquid to move
laterally away from the SAS can be predicted by Darcy's Law, provided several
assumptions (collectively known as the Dupuit-Forcheimer assumptions) are made: (1)
vertical flow below the drainfield is ignored; (2) all flow in the aquifer is horizontal and
laminar; and (3) flow is uniformly distributed with depth. The head which develops
between a point below the drainfield and another point some distance away on the water
table supplies the driving force that moves water away from the area. The difference in
heads between these two points is referred to as the "groundwater mound" (Bouwer 1978,
Fielding 1977). The maximum height of the water mound is equal to maximum elevation
difference between the heads.
The most critical site factors effecting head differentials (and therefore, groundwater
mounding) are the various hydraulic conductivity values ("K") of the soils underlying the
drainfield area, the depth of the unsaturated soils (vadose zone), and the depth of
saturated soils (aquifer). The accuracy of any prediction of a groundwater mound height
is directly related to the accuracy of the measurements of these parameters. Other factors
effecting water mounding include slopes, trench depths, and the geometric shape of the
drainfield. All these factors are addressed in the mounding equations.

Figure 1
Groundwater Mound Formation
According to Darcys Law, the velocity of the fluid mass transport within the soil is a
function of both the vertical and horizontal hydraulic conductivities of the soil(s).
Different conductivity values will yield different velocities and consequently, a variable
mass of water will move through any given soil area over fixed time periods.
If, all other things being equal, the hydraulic conductivities of the soil(s) in the vadose
zone are greater (i.e. soil is more porous) than those in the aquifer, then effluent will
reach the aquifer faster than it can leave. Pressure differential will increase and the water
will begin to rise (i.e. "mound") above the groundwater surface. If, all other things being
equal, the conductivities in the vadose zone are less than those in the underlying aquifer
than only the upper zones need to be evaluated for mounding above the perching strata.
Health Implications Associated with Water Mounding Below SAS's
State Health Department concerns with water mounding beneath drainfields are threefold:
1) If the pressure differentials (due to differing "K" values) are large, then the
mound may rise high enough to submerge the drainfield system or break out onto
the ground surface; the occurrence of either one of these events being defined as
system failure. Exposure of sewage on the ground surface is a health hazard.
2) The lateral extent of the water mound indicates the potential extent of encroach
of effluent upon surrounding features such as wells, streams, basements, roadway
ditches, et cetera, and the contamination with microbiological or chemical
pollutants of these features. The depth of the vadose zone and its associated
horizontal conductivity values, as well as the slope and direction of any hydraulic
gradients, are the major parameters effecting this phenomenon.
3) All the soil(s) within the water mound (as well as the aquifer) are saturated, and
renovation of the wastewater is retarded. Anaerobic conditions develop under
saturated soil conditions. Micro-organisms can travel longer distances and survive
for longer times under these conditions and therefore, their health significance
also increases.
Evaluation of Water Mounds
Any analysis of water movement in soils and underlying geologic materials is of
necessity approximate at best, due to the complex geometry and large variability of earth
materials (Parker, 1982). Several authors (Bouwer, Fielding, Brock, and Hantush) have
carried out extensive analysis of groundwater mounding and computer based solutions to
predict groundwater mounding exist.
However, the simplistic solutions deal with seepage beds and do not address SAS's and
the computer models are too complex to serve as a useful feasibility tool. Accordingly,
the Department informally requested technical assistance from VPI&SU to see if they
could help provide us an evaluation of mass drainfield proposals. Dr. J. C. Parker,
Assistant Professor in the Agronomy Department developed a series of equations
designed to predict the phenomenon under different site and soil conditions. An empirical
review by the Bureau of Wastewater Engineering of Dr. Parker's equations indicated that
they predict reasonable values and, therefore, until further research indicated otherwise,
Dr. Parker's equations will be utilized to evaluate water mounding potential below
subsurface drainfields. A summary of Dr. Parker's work is contained in Appendix A.

Current Criteria for Evaluating Water Mound Potential Beneath Mass Drainfields
1) Separation distances from the trench bottom to the maximum mound height
(Ho) shall, as a minimum, meet the requirements of Table 12.2 of the Sewage
Handling and Disposal Regulations. An unsaturated zone of at least 3 to 6 feet
below the drainfield is desirable.
2) The allowable lateral extent (Ld) of the water mound shall be evaluated using the
requirements of Table 12.1 "Minimum Separation Distances" of the Regulations.
3) Prior to final approval of mass drainfield values for hydraulic conductivities should be
either measured in situ or in the laboratory by a person qualified to perform these tests.
Values should be determined for each soil horizon below the proposed trench bottom
down into the unconfined aquifer, bedrock or sea level.
4) The "effective" depth (W) of the unconfined aquifer shall be considered to equal the
effective width (Lc) of the drainfleld.
5) The vadose zone (D) shall be considered to equal the depth from the ground surface to
either the seasonal water table as indicated by grey mottles (chroma 2 or less on the
Munsell Chart) or free water is reached.
Design Analysis
If preliminary analyses show promise, more detailed site Investigations should be
undertaken to proceed with system design.
A. Fixed parameters
Values of minimum depth of vadose zone (D Min), and maximum allowable
lateral extent of water mound, slopes, aquifer depths,
B. Site parameters
The site investigation should involve augering a sufficient number of holes
uniformly dispersed over the proposed SAS site to a depth of 30 ft. or to a layer of
high hydraulic resistance (e.g. rock or dense clay) or to sea level, whichever is
less. A visual description of the texture, structure and consistence of the material
should be made by a qualified soil scientist, engineer or sanitarian. Measurements
of hydraulic conductivity should be made in each textural layer below the depth D
min or at depths no further apart than 3 ft., for holes of 10ft depth or less and 6 ft.
apart, for holes deeper than 10ft. Measurements may be made in situ using any
accepted methods (see references) or In the laboratory on core samples taken with
a sampler having a wall thickness to sample diameter ratio of no greater than 0.07.
Conductivity values for each depth used In calculations of Lc shall be the
arithmetic mean of the individual values for that depth. (Parker, 1982)
The average minimum water table depth will be taken as D min (equal to the
depth to the grey mottles). From the absolute water table elevations, both water
table slope and flow hydraulic gradients will be estimated.
C. Calculations
Calculations are performed using the same equations developed by Dr. Parker.
The permit applicant should have the option of using more sophisticated
numerical models ifhe chooses; however, these results should be evaluated on a
site-by-site basis and should include a comparison with the method employed in
these recommendations.
References for Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Measurements
In situ:
Boersma, L. 1965. Field measurement of hydraulic conductivity below a
water table. In C. A. Black (ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis. ASA No.9
2:222-233.
Boersma, 1. 1965. Field measurement of hydraulic conductivity above a
water table. In C. A. Black (ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis. ASA No.9.
1:234-252.
Laboratory:
Klute, A. 1965. Laboratory measurement of hydraulic conductivity of
saturated soil. In C. A. Black (ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis. ASA No.9
1:210-221.
References
Bouwer, H. 1978 Groundwater Hydrology (Chp. 2 & 3) McGraw-Hill Book Co.
New York, N.Y.
Hantush, M.S. 1967 "Growth and Decay of Groundwater Mounds in Response to
Uniform Percolation." Water Resources Research, Vol. 3, No.1 (referenced in
Bouwer).
Fielding, M.B. "Groundwater Mounding Under Leaching Beds."
Parker, J.C. 1982 "Analysis of Water Table Mounding and Recommendations for
Mass Drainfield Design" unpublished correspondence.

--- -------------
 Appendix A
Predicting water table mounding (after Dr. J. C. Parker's November 22, 1982 report
"Analysis of Water Table Mounding and Recommendations for Mass Drainfield
Design").
Dr. Parker developed a series of equations to predict water mounding under various site
conditions (Figures 2, 3. 4 and 5). These equations are summarized on page A-2;
identification of the terms in these equations follows:
Term Definition
Ho Maximum height of water mound, ft (m).
a Ratio of drainfield length to drainfleld width, LtiLc
J Total volume of effluent applied to the drainfield
per unit time, ft 3/day (m 3/d)
Hydraulic conductivity in vadose zone, ft/d (mid).
Hydraulic conductivity in aquifer, ft/d (mid).
Note: Kl = K2> 10 and qlK l < 0.2 (where q =
volume per unit time per unit area) for equation 1 to
be valid.
Weighted mean conductivities K(Z)= L Li
LLjIKj
Where Kj = conductivity of layer i.
Where Lj = thickness of layer i.
Width of drainfield, ft.(m)
Total effective width of drainfield area, ft (m).
Length of drainfield, ft. (m)
Total effective length of drainfield area, ft (m).
Lateral extent of water mound from edge of
drainfield, ft (m).
W Aquifer thickness, ft (m).
B Difference in elevation between the local
topographic high and average drainfield elevation,
ft (m).
Z Average soil depth to an impermeable lower
boundry, ft (m).
N Correction factor, equals 1 for (BIZ ~ 1) or N=2 -
BIZ for (BIZ <1)
 Appendix A continued
D Depth of vadose zones ft (rn).
S Fractional slope.
F Depth of percolation line
e Angle of effluent spreading (typically 300 )
 Equations

Equation 1

Equation 2

Equation 3 Ho

Equation 4 Ld Lc2/4W - Lc/2 .~ - 4

Equation 5

Equation 6

(
Equation A c
LC L + 2(D - F - Ho) Tan 9
r
-1
Equation B Lf' - x-c ; [C- [1 + Lc' (D -F - Ho/2 tan 8]
r:c T

A-3
 ......... ---J - - -

1--.:"1!:...e_s---l Slope mearl, level! l---~-o--;

....- . .1-- ,_ . ~

Per.manent water table ~/Z < 1 '~

above biBb 1mpec!anee layer! i

110 ,es 11D

.
Case 1: lJse Case 2: Use Case 3: lJs. Ca se It: Us
Eq l ~ 2 Eqs. 3 ~ &.f Eqs. 5' ~ b Eq s. 5' I 6
\."it.h I: - 2-~/Z ld tb N - 1

( (

..1IIIIIL:1IIIt---1..tS---~
..
'Layer 1.. E - ~

1.ayer 2. E - ~

Til. 3 Ceometr:Y of perch Ircnmdvater .OUDa

. '
 VAdose zone ,0 ~ _ ~

Ii
~o

W Aquifer

-;: :;r.,;-: ,~<"~ :- ":',~.,-" " "':,:-:.~ ---:'~--::."':'.

1'11."
... ..
Ceomet.r)' of 1DoU%u!1nI
.
'::'".--:-::
.
.~ove
:-:.:-:.:---=_~_l
:-:.--.. ,..
permanent water
...,
~.~~e.
. .

S Ull e

aquifer and v ~os.

aone, conductivit)

:imperme.~le subst1
", ...
ApPENDIX B
:t
Prc:dlc..i.lf\g Wo..:t..e"r Mounds - EXb.mp\e. Problems
C~5e. I
FLC)",-, = 5" S OD GspP
S~nc!1 Lc~ -(rt:>m 0- ~s".) S~y (,~~ -f.rem &.i~1\ +0 be&C'b~ o..~
He". There.. ,~ 0.. fr'o..ce'pQ.f\ a."\. lt~" ~t'ld, 0.. ~e.A~~,.,C).L wQ.te~
t.o.~\<- ~\so e~,~-l~ At H-,<.. f>o.n. -n,~ ~~-L~~d pet"'colo:t:.JOf'\ n
-br~c.. S~rd'i loa.f-' 14b 3D ~Ja~c..~.
The. fcHo\.t,;'nCf, ~,,>pc~~\ ~c.he'P\-e. ,$ l'n:::.po~ea. ~~o.LJ.:>Cl~Li ht
pote.-",'bo..\ -br ~na\l)~~

O.F: 0.1=".

., " ... , ,.",1

'T
I I
I I

S_l__ i ~~'-'lj
(
Dt=: . O.F:
se. '5"

k ~ '-.I
~--15C:~

PlANV'EW
.
E'AGIi d~lJf,c14(P.~) hA~ Twc.I\I~ 2.oCT loo.t>PI" 1TT~L.Me'~. ENbj1(,

ced flo~ dt~-I:nbui:hn "'" t\\ bc. \St.ecl & Go r-c.w,f"\I(,. Q.f"C.O.. ,~
~v.,.., \Atb \<.
 .

.;. A) E'vo:.Lvc..t~ 0.0 \"a,v, ~ vo..L O. f: U~\(')Cb Eq\JD..-t.lbOS ~ ; '2 6r

Re... A-3.
P", fit ~ N\!'T["1\S Re9UHl~E't>
Lc.. = [~FT lC ~ x (''2.-:l~J t 'l y:T:: bB Fr
l5 : 100 FT

CL. = 100::. 1."Ii

bB
Q :: :r:: 5.15'00
'="L/o~Y X .1~'"!>~CO
, -FT'5 = 18LJ Fr'
.., ..;..;,.--
1.1 p, F: C:>~ \.. 0"'1 - ~. F:

K,= 5~
Ditty

K" =: ,02. F
f>A.y

t~~o:bon

SuOs-eLi.ui.c..- \n Y~",I\\~lers .
l-\ =(I ... 1.'l'11. ~~ r. 'ca~~' _ (r.lI'1XIB~)l
-0 (1)(1.""'1.') )(. ~5X.O'L':("'6'1.) 5 '-J
111.. ~
= (S.lE
( 'I. 1.2.)
~ ['3~/';-"
~~'l.
_
ttJ
1~.1I~l :z....

~el" Nen-f Z
=(0. 'i 1 ~ li.""It 1 )
IR =. 1.''1 FT" I
 5 c lve -t(:)\ Le "'tth of Mound
"'J Lc.'
Ld. = a.lc. K2. - Y E" ua..L co 2.
1~ Lot bB
::.(\,"'X'~'Xo'l.) - T.
IL.J =- S> ~ I
B) E"alua.-te. tnbrc. 5 i.i:.e. 8, De-b:.rm,n~ Whac..h Dml~le
Con"'ju,.a..-bcn '~1nOC;t.. C rl-bco.-L
po.ro..mc:..tet-s ~ '-', t-ecl
l = \ '5'=:. F'r
'" . .....
L; ~ 1.50
0.= 2150= 1.bO
J5b
~
:T= 5,> 500 bpel "" O.1'S3b~ = I~S.'2. !I.
- dor

K," 5. ~ } M t', .t J.....

A'f ~""~ "cla. Vo.r.,.1lAl;.ICY)
.:z.
l<
d.,
o. ott l r
 ,

~ jJ"1..
-~

I,

CHfC.K A~~uM-~i;,o":S Lc..' = Lc.. G 4'= l!--

U,e fqU,","OJoJ A -b E.VAlvoJ.. ~ \...e.-
(( ~ro.f\"'\e.te.r 1\~u,,,,e.d
0= &.fS" 3.1'13"
F ~ 0- Ho ~ ('3.1S-I.'~) ~ 2.bl S~'1 Z.Fr
e: '!to

lc.. = L~ T 2(O-F- ~ )+AO e

lc. = be to z('!.,s- 2. - .,~~)....". :"0

= b8 + '(.8~)~n ~o
=b~+ -z. ('~\X.'S,,)
:. b~+ ). C>llD
Ilc.:: ",q. 01.. FT I
~ u
------------- ------------- --------
 ,
l~ = o.-c.
\- ~

l~ ' -
J.'I1- .os~
----- (-.05'"1

( (

Fl~URE ~.
W' If 'I' ftc "e
I......_~r
I<. ~". )I< ".Ol.'~

~ -i "'::: :~"-LC."---1
NOT 'TO ~c.,...lr:

NoTE "3. The.. ,"iUG.\ ~1tSU~r-t:..'on wo.~ '"tho.t tht. ~'fCc.:t.\vE

\tJ\~+h) "'~ = -&c.. f\c.TU4.L ~ \.1. t:~ ) L.~ \(J e. rY\ut. ~ c~c.t. ~.~
o.~\J~pbon -tb ~(c.. .~C"c.. L-c-'~ not ~t~~l\ l.or~~ ~
Lc..'. AI~o Gnec..( L~ ~ L.~' c1t"t.. \.Va"'h\n tca..~orL
- - - -----
~-~
- - - - .. - . __ .- -----
.,
TRE~'-~ dfr"H~ Mur..r Nor EX~ 2."1" (3.iS'-I.,~/)
. If the. wo.-t.e r 1'1\O\:>f'\d tC; noi -+c e"'c.roOJ:..h uf'O!' -lh(. perco\Cl.
1:1on unes. Any \N(.\l~" Lo..Ke~.J ~+rCAM~ ~~'{ afi.C.heo.l I

e:te... s h oc,)\ d be. at ~~i:. '5 CO Fr o..VJO.'t 1-rtnl Grt-t odca. err ~ I~I")
+rc nc'h
Ca~E ]I
Lo'wtV 1.200 r:,PD
1i~ -c, ':Jo.nJy c.l""y LOllfW\ -from
7CRQ To 35' FIn- ) WAoI-t:,. blc
Itt I '!> F~r:J ~"T'h')RTT:> perc-c/o:i:Jen -rc.k I~ #5 M VINc..U.
-~~ .

wA low Fr~~"t.>I(c... d,c,-lrlbvfJon Sc.hcMe . frofOseJ.

. .. -- ..
Sc

-1:-.;.----
~(
WN '-;Q4lri\" "<'i.Oil

~-
NOT To
2.25 ~r
F~c.~ o. F; CO"S.,~~. TWenty fIIF)<. 100.0 ~ tReNCHE.
ThE. RE~VE -AREA.IS tJr SHoWN i=b1: Iry. EVALuATC THE
FWTIAE' SY5TZ'M. ~AJ'r/" L.

A) tV.LUAt s'1"~-lc:Tr\ u~ln9

A-3
~ro.f1"c.~rs Reql.\ ,,,"cd
Lc... =. [2. "Z.SI=f 2\ 3 1C.( l.e- 50)] + L.l.SPr' = 1"30. S
,
l~ = I.C)O.o
pr
...
Co..~e 11
G.v-co th<... +cll~,(\~ .,,-fon"l)o.uoo.. evo.lLJb..l:-c-ihe.. F':yl..e~ltJ
ft:>r v.>~ r YY\O"",a \,,~ bed ~ iht. ciro..vr{', ~ cl.
'-&PCEoSEtsnvE S(:). L P~eF.l

App hoa ~e.f'.e.s re:.rc..

'~
IT 'l
VA.lu E( AP'P't"I!,
Cot'\o~t..Irw
~ (

Ap o. ,'f ('l.S YR. II/fl.) sL

B1 b-1S (i.s YR ~/b) Sc.L liS '7! ""/dt'(
B2- '. 5- '2. ~ ( 5 YR. 5!b) cL 50 6
Btt iLq-35" ~ 5YR 'SIb} cL w,"rb(2.S'(R '1/8) 5_
...
...

7.
O-nd (7.5 y~ 5/') S1~e5
E>~ 3S5D (5 '(I\ 'il(.) c.l wft.h (I.S YI\ 5/10) 60. 1.
And (1.5' YR 7/~) h.oteles
c ~IID (SYR'i/') seL w.th ('oYR ~q) ~5 10
0." cl (7. 5 YF.. 5/'') me> t:t/(. ~

AppLIC.J).l)f propo,*e4 i:c c:J.,,:rcw::- erf ~200 9 r d. (of Se""'A~c.

utJ Lt2.f4~ J~ pn:.,,~urt- d,...tr, 6f.,-uon...
ERc..h drAIr{Ie./c1. syt.lt...!K CO"$"-~ oF 40.1 2.25,.r)f.. 5'''.C~ F't
UQe!i> w,-f.h tJ,~ ~.n~folc! r"nn 112~ d"l#n -Ih<. ctn-Y. r DF +1..<-
d rA1r)!',e Ie! ,
.. -,

r .... - - - ..
Tyf
-.J RE~eRVE:
I
c.!
I

I
1
I , I

I
I

SITE' pl.J....N
(,,~ to Ko1 c..)
 fo..,o.rn'C..lcroS oee~e6.
(1noc.h w.l\ bt:. o:t 1E")
L 82. (~~ =.,s fIT J{t: b

LtD. (~Ci)= ~l ~= "

lE,l> (34:t0):. 1:,S" r.~ 1
l~ ("y;::>: 5. 0 l(: 10

LLa l.~\ Fr
". '~:'l' ~) S?l~c. ~r I~Dl.Jnd He'JI,t (He)
H- LI -)'1T :r1....!
't- :r 1.. :r K'"l'4..
2~K
o- [H,,~ + 2.~LL - 0. -I J
~rA.f'(~et.~r~ needed.
Lc.. =. 1'3>0. S FT""

L~ ='3>1(). 0 Fr-

o... = ,';!19
~b.S
= 2. 31
.T = Q= '7..00 6.fJ.Y,~'!a~~ Fr)
~"L.
= ~b1.'5 .!r
~y
J

K:: 3.~9~
1cL = ~"I~. ~ Pt

Ho =

----- - - --------- ------ ----

.- , -it. 'Z. E'...o
~..
_. I
9l..':=.t:~ ~': r, E i:,L:' cJ-

( l-\; - I' ~
Ho
'2" +- "3. '1 S-') .=. C

Sc\vc.. L'':>&'''T ~ -triAl g t. t"'Ib r fY)ct.h~

He~ Solvc.cL 'Cf ""o.--\:.' el1 c ,-' 0-( S ~,.~OJ ~

5".0 ~"- l'~,,' . . ~~ s - 2.&1. ~s ~ ~""C((..

-- ,.
S'
d ,.. 4-0 \ ~ -h. l..~
~'-
fTc... 1"-
1.(.0 ~

3.0 ~'2.._ 'Ire.- ... el,".f.o - -ILl" "2. S" .h,~ ~~l\

-- -1._, S
~

3.~ "3. Sl._ ETc:. +d.-I-ho h>o bMoA\ l

~.4S"

3/~1 3.~c.. _
.r~ _ + J,i:.b - I. ~b -be
.
L"" '1 "C.
-z.:
3. b 3.b. -
i ""'!f
,
+ -- -.~'- ~c f~~e.
Q r (
,
3.(:,S' ~.bS2._ " + - .~Cc 1-cc L.o.r-u.(..'

3.'=a3 3.b~'--
. , i-
"
-- _.0"1'
' \ C&~

Hv"/ '3A I
JH e = "3. b"!> F'l( r

....
,N...
:'
~. ~'"
."
c
-r:-.;

A C, \,..'1 F l,.l(. fit ~

~
S".....I....-,
~
11,1f
....-

S,-~l..E vee.nc.1E' d" = ItO

l-btrn.",a.L No ~A k.
 .
- "
.
'SUN\fftA ,. '1

&Co."~~ th<:.. de.ft1--, of th<. vo.Jo~ 'Z.bt")e (~5'

's 1c..~~... fho.o -\-h-e.. P\oC'rd. Y-Kl!j h-t. C. Y~ . '.;'=."), \t,'<.. 'rf"t)f~t
~1~te.,.\. ~\ WIl( ~o., l Q~d -th<- ?~:\,cc..1 ,~ clcnl~d.

-------~~~~-
,. . Appendix C

ESTIMATED HYDRAULIC CHARACTERISTICS Of SOILI

Soil Texture Permeability Percolation

ft/aa:Y .1n/1n.
Sand >12.0 <10
Sandy loams 0.4-12.0 10-45
Porous silt loams
Silty clay loams
Clays. compact <.4 >45

IFro. -DESIGN MNUAL C*SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL SYSTEMS

(OCtober 1980)
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Office of Water Progra. Operations.
Office of Research and Develo~nt. Municipal Environ.ental Research
Laboratoi-y

C-l