Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Percolation test

A percolation test, commonly referred to as a perc test, is a field-based evaluation procedure that measures the rate at which clean infiltrates and percolates through saturated under controlled conditions, providing an approximation of how would move in a subsurface system. This test is essential for determining the capacity of to ensure the effective and dispersal of from onsite systems, such as septic tanks, preventing environmental and system failure. The procedure typically involves excavating test holes in the proposed absorption area, with dimensions of 4 to 12 inches in width and depth corresponding to the intended bottom, ensuring they are placed in undisturbed to reflect natural conditions. After roughening the hole walls to remove smeared and adding a layer of at the bottom, the holes are saturated with —often maintained at 12 inches for several hours or overnight to simulate wet conditions—and then the rate of water level drop is measured over fixed intervals, usually 30 minutes, to calculate the percolation rate in minutes per inch (mpi). At least three test holes are required, with results averaged unless significant variability (over 20 mpi) occurs, in which case the slowest rate is used for conservative design. Percolation tests have been a standard practice in environmental and for over four decades, particularly for septic system permitting, and are conducted by qualified professionals such as registered engineers or certified soil evaluators to comply with local regulations. Results guide the sizing of drain fields, with suitable rates typically ranging from 5 to 60 mpi; faster or slower rates may require engineered alternatives or deem the site unsuitable without modifications. While primarily used for residential and small-scale disposal, the test also informs management and infiltration practices in broader contexts.

Overview

Definition

A percolation test, also known as a perc test, is a field-based absorption evaluation that measures the rate at which infiltrates and percolates through under controlled, saturated conditions. This rate, typically expressed in minutes per inch (min/in) of drop or converted to inches per hour (in/hr) of infiltration, indicates the soil's capacity to transmit vertically and horizontally, serving as a key indicator for systems requiring dispersal. The core scientific principle underlying the percolation test is , which governs through porous media like . states that the volumetric flow rate Q (in volume per time) is proportional to the K (a measure of the soil's ease of transmitting , in length per time), the cross-sectional area A to , and the hydraulic gradient \frac{dh}{dl} (the change in h over distance l): Q = K A \frac{dh}{dl} To derive this, consider a soil column where water flows downward under gravity and pressure differences; experiments by Henry Darcy in 1856 showed that flow is directly proportional to the head difference and area but inversely proportional to length, yielding the linear relationship above (the negative sign is often omitted for downward flow where head decreases with depth). In a percolation test, the observed rate of water level drop in a test hole approximates this flow: the volume lost from the hole equals the water entering the surrounding soil, so Q = -A_h \frac{dh}{dt}, where A_h is the hole's cross-sectional area and \frac{dh}{dt} is the drop rate; equating this to Darcy's expression and assuming a unit gradient (common in saturated field tests) simplifies to estimating K from the drop time, relating directly to the percolation rate. The percolation rate thus reflects K, influenced by soil porosity (void space fraction, higher in coarse soils allowing faster flow), particle size (larger grains like sand increase interconnected pores versus fine clays that restrict flow), and saturation (full wetting maximizes K by filling air voids). Unlike analysis, which compositionally classifies based on (e.g., , , clay percentages via lab sieving), a percolation test is a functional of dynamic movement, providing practical infiltration metrics rather than static proportions.

Primary Applications

The primary application of percolation tests lies in the design and siting of onsite systems, commonly known as septic systems, where they measure soil infiltration rates to determine the appropriate size of drain fields or leach fields. These tests ensure that effluent from septic disperses effectively through the without surfacing or causing backups, thereby preventing contamination by pathogens, nutrients, and other pollutants. Percolation rates guide hydraulic loading calculations, with design loading rates often adjusted by empirical factors, such as long-term acceptance rates, to account for long-term performance. This application is essential in areas without centralized sewer infrastructure, where improper sizing can lead to system failure and risks. In , percolation tests are routinely required for obtaining building permits, as they assess suitability for subsurface dispersal systems like leach fields or infiltration basins. Local health departments and environmental agencies mandate these tests to verify that proposed construction sites can support septic systems without compromising or , often integrating results with soil profile evaluations to classify sites as suitable or requiring alternative designs. For instance, in many U.S. jurisdictions, a percolation rate between 5 and 60 minutes per inch indicates moderate permeability suitable for standard leach fields, influencing permit approval and development feasibility. Percolation tests also play a key role in management, particularly for designing permeable pavements and retention ponds, where they evaluate infiltration capacity to promote and reduce runoff pollution. The EPA recommends field-verified infiltration rates of 0.5 to 3 inches per hour for infiltration basins, using percolation or similar tests to confirm and permeability, ensuring these structures detain and filter effectively without underdraining or contamination risks. In , such tests support initiatives by sizing permeable pavements to handle intense storms, with maintained rates exceeding 1 inch per hour sufficient for typical events. A practical case illustrating these applications occurs in rural areas, where percolation tests determine whether a can accommodate a , directly affecting its value and marketability. Properties failing these tests may require costly alternatives like advanced units or connection to distant sewers.

Historical Development

Origins

The emerged in the early as a critical in rural initiatives, driven by engineers seeking to mitigate failures in early septic systems and privy designs. Following , a surge in rural housing and expanded access to indoor , dramatically increasing wastewater volumes from decentralized systems and overwhelming rudimentary methods, which often led to contamination and risks. These challenges prompted empirical approaches to evaluate suitability, with the test's addressing the need for reliable, site-specific assessments in areas lacking centralized . A pivotal advancement came in 1926 when Henry Ryon, a sanitary with the New York State Department of Health, developed the first practical percolation test procedure. Ryon's method involved excavating test holes, presaturating the to mimic real conditions, and measuring infiltration rates to correlate permeability with system performance, directly responding to observed failures in suburban and rural septic installations. This innovation built on earlier concerns about and hydraulic loading, providing a standardized field evaluation that influenced subsequent designs nationwide. Public health authorities, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture through its 1920s rural sanitation guides, played a key early role in promoting soil evaluation criteria for privy and septic tank design, emphasizing empirical soil testing amid the post-war rural population growth, where a majority of rural households relied on onsite systems. The first documented regulatory adoption appeared in state health department guidelines, such as New York's 1932 rules requiring percolation tests for septic approvals, marking the transition from ad hoc practices to enforced standards.

Standardization Efforts

Following the initial development of percolation testing methods in the early , formal standardization efforts began in the post-1940s era to establish consistent procedures for onsite systems. A key milestone was the adoption of guidelines in the 1959 U.S. Service (USPHS) Manual of Practice, which specified standardized hole dimensions of 4 to 12 inches in horizontal cross-section for percolation tests and outlined techniques involving presaturation and timed drop rates to assess soil absorption capacity. This manual provided the first national framework in the U.S. for reliable site evaluation, influencing subsequent state and local codes by emphasizing reproducible testing to ensure protection. International standardization efforts drew from these U.S. advancements, adapting them to regional contexts. For instance, Australia's AS/NZS 1546:2008 standard for onsite domestic units relies on percolation tests to determine subsoil drainage capacity, specifying procedures for effluent disposal and integrating them with profile assessments for . Key organizations have continued to refine these standards to address evolving challenges. The National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association () promotes standardized practices through technical guidelines and advocacy, including evaluation protocols that incorporate percolation data for decentralized s. Complementing this, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 2002 Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual updated percolation rate calculations to account for climate variability, such as regional and effects on hydrology, recommending integration with broader site analyses for more accurate sizing. A significant evolution in the 1970s involved shifting from single-hole tests to multi-hole arrays to better capture heterogeneity, recognizing that isolated measurements often failed to represent variable subsurface conditions. This change, reflected in updated guidelines like the 1980 EPA Design Manual, typically required 3 to 6 test holes spaced across the proposed area to provide a representative percolation rate and reduce design errors.

Testing Procedures

Site Preparation

Site preparation for a percolation test begins with careful to ensure the test reflects the conditions of the proposed drain . Representative locations are chosen within or adjacent to the intended absorption area, avoiding disturbed or compacted soils such as high-traffic zones, , or areas below the 10-year flood level. Slopes exceeding 15% are unsuitable due to increased risk and uneven . Typically two or more test holes, spaced uniformly across the proposed to account for variability. Test holes are then dug using hand tools such as shovels or mechanical augers to minimize further disturbance. Standard dimensions include a of 6 to 12 inches and a depth of 2 to 4 feet, extending to the proposed bottom of the absorption trench, refusal (e.g., ), or the seasonal high , whichever is shallower. The bottom and sides of each hole must be scarified with a knife or sharp tool to remove smeared or glazed surfaces, which could artificially slow infiltration; approximately 2 inches of coarse or pea is added to the bottom to protect the interface. Holes are spaced to allow independent testing without interference, and any used for excavation must be positioned to prevent compaction of surrounding areas. Following excavation, a presoaking process simulates soil to achieve realistic rates. Holes are filled with to a depth of 6 to 12 inches above the gravel layer and allowed to stand undisturbed for 4 to 24 hours, enabling clays to swell and stabilizing moisture levels while preventing glazing effects from dry soil contact. For coarse soils like , shorter soak times may suffice if initial drops rapidly, but monitoring ensures equilibrium before testing. This step is critical for mimicking long-term loading conditions. Safety measures and are integral throughout preparation. Sites are marked with stakes or flags by a qualified , such as an or surveyor, to delineate test locations and prevent accidental disturbance. Open holes pose hazards like collapse or falls, so they must be fenced, barricaded, or covered, and backfilled promptly after use; deeper excavations require if exceeding 4 to 5 feet. Environmental checks include assessing depth via observation pits, and soil profiles are recorded, noting layers such as , clay, or for context on permeability variations. All steps, including dates, depths, and observations, are logged to support and future analysis.

Conducting the Test

Following site preparation, the percolation test involves refilling each test hole with water to a depth of approximately 6 inches above the bottom or layer after the initial presoaking period has allowed . Measurements of the water level drop are then taken from a fixed reference point, such as the top of the hole or a stake, at regular intervals of 15 to 30 minutes until a steady infiltration rate is achieved, typically indicated by consistent drops over successive readings. Tests should be performed during dry weather conditions to ensure representative levels and avoid influences from recent that could alter permeability. The observation protocol requires recording water level data over at least four timed intervals after the initial , with the early "lag" —characterized by rapid initial water uptake as the adjusts—discarded to focus on the stabilized rate. Percolation rates from multiple test holes, often a minimum of three to six depending on site variability, are averaged to determine an overall site suitability, excluding any anomalous holes that dry out prematurely. Procedural variations account for the intended wastewater system type; for septic leach lines or fields, shallow test holes are used at the proposed trench depth, typically 12 to 24 inches, to evaluate lateral drainage. In contrast, for seepage pits, deeper vertical tests are conducted, extending up to 10 feet or the full proposed pit depth, to assess multi-layer soil absorption capacity. Essential equipment includes a 2-inch layer of coarse or washed backfilled at the bottom to prevent sidewall and scouring during addition.

Analysis and Interpretation

Calculating Rates

The percolation rate is calculated from the observed drop in during steady-state conditions in the test , typically after and when successive measurements show consistent infiltration. The basic formula for the rate, expressed in minutes per inch (min/in), is the time interval in minutes divided by the water level drop in inches over that interval. This yields the time required for to percolate one inch through the . For instance, if the water level drops 5/8 inch in 30 minutes, the rate is 30 / (5/8) = 48 min/in. To ensure reliability, only data from steady-state intervals—where two consecutive drops vary by no more than 1/16 inch—are used for calculation. The rate for each interval is computed individually, and the mean is taken from these valid readings across multiple test holes (at least three). If rates among holes vary by more than 20 min/in, the slowest rate is conservatively used, or additional testing is required to account for heterogeneity. Outliers indicating unstable conditions, such as initial rapid drops during , are discarded to avoid skewing results. An example dataset from four test holes yielding steady-state rates of 14.9, 20.4, 20.9, and 18.7 min/in would average to (14.9 + 20.4 + 20.9 + 18.7) / 4 = 18.7 min/in for the site. Adjustments to the calculated rate incorporate soil texture and structure, often via lookup tables that refine the effective rate for design purposes rather than direct multiplication. For loamy soils (e.g., or silty clay loam), empirical tables reduce the allowable loading compared to sandier types; for example, a measured rate of 16–30 min/in in corresponds to an adjusted hydraulic loading of 0.6 gallons per day per (gpd/ft²), while the same rate in sandy loam allows 0.8 gpd/ft². These adjustments account for long-term clogging and soil-specific infiltration dynamics, ensuring conservative system sizing. The final percolation rate is converted to a loading rate in gpd/ft² to determine absorption area requirements for systems. Rates faster than 6 min/in or slower than 60 min/in may require further , but for moderate soils, a rate below 30 min/in typically supports loadings of 0.6–0.8 gpd/ft², enabling standard or designs. For example, a site rate of 15 min/in in sandy loam translates directly to 0.8 gpd/ft², guiding the calculation of required leach field square footage based on daily volume.

Suitability Classification

Percolation rates from soil tests are classified into suitability levels to determine their appropriateness for onsite wastewater systems, such as septic absorption fields. These classifications guide whether a site can support conventional systems or requires alternatives, based on the time in minutes per inch (min/in) for water to infiltrate the soil. Common categories include excellent for rates under 5 min/in, typically associated with sandy soils that allow rapid drainage; good for 5–30 min/in, suitable for most loamy soils; fair for 31–60 min/in, indicating moderately permeable conditions; and poor for 61–120 min/in, often linked to clayey soils with slower infiltration. The following table summarizes standard rate categories and their implications for soil permeability, drawn from county-level guidelines aligned with broader regulatory practices:
CategoryRate (min/in)Typical Soil Texture (USDA Classes)Permeability Level
Excellent<5, loamy sandHigh
Good5–30Sandy loam, Moderate to high
Fair31–60Silt loam, clay loamModerate
Poor61–120Silty clay loam, clayLow
Rates exceeding 120 min/in are generally unsuitable for conventional septic systems, as they indicate insufficient drainage capacity, leading to potential backups and contamination risks; in such cases, alternatives like mound systems or advanced treatment are recommended to elevate the absorption field above restrictive layers. Classifications integrate soil texture per USDA classifications with other site factors, such as depth to the seasonal high water table; a separation of less than 2 feet between the absorption trench bottom and the water table disqualifies the site for standard installations, as it risks groundwater contamination and system failure. State-specific tables, like Virginia's, further refine this by specifying absorption area needs based on rates—for instance, high-permeability soils with 0–10 min/in require only about 110–120 square feet per 100 gallons of daily flow for gravity-fed systems, allowing compact designs in sandy conditions. For example, a percolation rate of 20 min/in classifies as good suitability for standard trench fields in loamy soils, typically requiring sizing of approximately 100 linear feet per bedroom to handle estimated daily flows while ensuring adequate treatment.

Alternatives and Advancements

Traditional Alternatives

Traditional alternatives to the standard for assessing soil suitability in onsite wastewater systems emphasize qualitative and semi-quantitative evaluations based on soil properties, offering simpler field procedures that avoid the need for prolonged water saturation and measurement. These methods, developed primarily in the mid-20th century, rely on direct soil examination to infer permeability and loading capacity, making them particularly useful in preliminary site screenings or where water-based testing is logistically challenging. Soil texture and profile analysis involves hand-augur sampling to extract soil cores, typically from pits or borings 4-6 feet deep, allowing classification using the USDA soil texture triangle, which categorizes soils by percentages of sand, silt, and clay. This approach estimates hydraulic conductivity and wastewater loading rates without conducting water infiltration tests, as texture directly correlates with permeability—coarse-textured soils like sands permit higher rates, while fine-textured ones like clays restrict flow. For instance, in Kansas, soils with high clay content (e.g., more than 50% clay) often have percolation rates exceeding 60 minutes per inch and are unsuitable for conventional systems, requiring alternatives. Long-term acceptance rate (LTAR) tables provide pre-derived infiltration capacities from laboratory and field studies, assigning fixed loading rates to soil textural classes for septic design. In Wisconsin, these tables guide system sizing by specifying rates such as 0.8 gallons per day per square foot for coarse sands under standard wastewater conditions (BOD >30 mg/L), derived from biomat formation models and empirical data to ensure long-term performance without site-specific testing. This method simplifies design by using standardized values, often integrated with texture analysis for states mandating morphology evaluations. Percolation variants like constant-head methods adapt the core principle for challenging terrains, maintaining a fixed in a or permeameter to measure steady-state flow, yielding saturated values more reliably in low-permeability or rocky soils where standard falling-head holes are difficult to excavate. Dry well tests, involving excavation of a gravel-filled to simulate , serve as practical alternatives in rocky areas by assessing overall without precise hole depths, though they require adjustment for effective head. These variants maintain simplicity over full setups while providing comparable data for system viability. Overall, these traditional methods are faster and less costly than percolation tests, often completable in a single site visit with basic tools, and excel in ruling out poor sites via texture alone, though they may require supplementary verification for precise loading rates.

Modern Techniques

Modern techniques in testing have shifted toward non-invasive, technology-driven approaches that enhance accuracy, scalability, and efficiency in assessing permeability for applications like septic system design and . These methods leverage geophysical imaging, automated sensors, computational modeling, and emerging to minimize site disturbance while providing detailed subsurface insights. Geophysical methods, such as (GPR) and (ERT), enable large-scale mapping of subsurface properties without extensive excavation. GPR transmits electromagnetic waves into the ground to detect variations in , , and layering, which indirectly inform permeability by identifying zones of potential flow restriction or enhancement over areas spanning several acres. Similarly, ERT measures electrical resistivity through arrays to delineate infiltration pathways and detect anomalies like impermeable layers or high-permeability zones, proving effective for monitoring seepage in profiles up to several meters deep. These techniques are particularly valuable in preliminary site assessments, where traditional digging is impractical, allowing for rapid across expansive sites. Sensor-based testing has advanced through automated infiltrometers equipped with transducers and loggers, which provide of infiltration to reduce observational errors inherent in manual methods. Devices like the Guelph permeameter operate on a constant-head , inserting a reservoir into the soil to measure field-saturated by tracking changes over time, often yielding results in under two hours with minimal operator intervention. Modern iterations incorporate sensors for automated logging, enabling continuous collection and immediate calculation of infiltration rates, which enhances precision in variable soil conditions. This is crucial for replicating percolation test conditions while capturing transient dynamics that manual timing might overlook. Integration of geographic information systems (GIS) and modeling software, such as , allows for simulation of percolation processes using satellite-derived data, facilitating predictions for large-scale projects. employs finite element methods to model variably saturated water flow, incorporating inputs like remote sensing-derived and maps to estimate deep rates under diverse scenarios. Since the , this approach has been applied in agricultural and , where GIS layers from satellites enable spatial extrapolation of site-specific tests to scales, optimizing designs for . Recent advancements as of 2025 also incorporate , such as increased variability due to , into models for onsite systems to ensure long-term . As of 2025, drone-assisted sampling and AI-driven predictions represent cutting-edge advancements, streamlining permeability assessments for urban efficiency. Drones equipped with multispectral sensors collect data on surface properties, such as and , across inaccessible terrains, providing high-resolution maps that can inform models for estimation without extensive ground-based labor. algorithms, trained on global datasets of characteristics, predict and rates with high accuracy—often outperforming traditional pedotransfer functions—by analyzing variables like and from remote sources. These tools have improved by enabling rapid, predictive evaluations that reduce development timelines and costs.

Limitations and Regulations

Key Limitations

Percolation tests primarily measure short-term infiltration rates in but fail to account for long-term reductions caused by biomat formation, a microbial layer that develops at the -effluent interface and clogs pores, often decreasing by 70-90% over time. This limitation leads to overestimation of system performance, as initial test results do not reflect sustained operation where biomat restricts effluent flow. heterogeneity further exacerbates inaccuracy, with spatial variations in and causing significant differences in test outcomes even within small areas, resulting in differences between and field measurements due to factors like entrapped air and uneven . Environmental factors introduce additional variability that can skew percolation results. Rainfall and seasonal fluctuations alter levels, with antecedent wet conditions slowing infiltration and requiring compensatory adjustments that may not fully mitigate discrepancies. influences , which decreases approximately 2-3% per °C rise around 20°C, affecting flow rates during testing; conversely, cold conditions increase and can invalidate results in seasonally frozen soils where impedes movement. For instance, tests conducted in frozen or near-frozen ground overestimate permeability by ignoring reduced . Site-specific issues, such as in small test holes and preferential flow paths, often lead to unreliable data. In narrow excavations, water flow is artificially enhanced along hole walls, causing overestimation of rates compared to actual field performance in larger drain fields. Preferential channels like root voids or cracks further distort results by channeling water unevenly, yielding rates that do not represent bulk behavior and contributing to discrepancies between test predictions and long-term efficacy. Recent analyses highlight how amplifies these limitations, particularly through increased frequency of heavy precipitation events alongside warmer temperatures that may decrease across much of the U.S., altering hydrologic patterns and potentially affecting the reliability of tests for suitability. According to USGS projections, these changes could exacerbate seasonal biases, necessitating updated protocols to maintain accuracy amid shifting conditions.

Regulatory Frameworks

In the United States, percolation tests are required by most states for obtaining permits to install onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS), such as septic systems, to ensure soil suitability and prevent groundwater contamination. Local health departments typically administer these permits under state-specific regulations, with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) providing overarching guidance through documents like the Homeowner's Guide to Septic Systems (2002, updated periodically) and reports on decentralized wastewater management. For example, in California, the State Water Resources Control Board's Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Policy (adopted 2013, revised 2023) mandates that percolation tests in effluent disposal areas yield rates between 1 and 120 minutes per inch (MPI), and they must be conducted or supervised by qualified professionals, including registered environmental health specialists, professional engineers, geologists, or certified soil scientists. Internationally, regulatory approaches vary but emphasize integration with broader water management frameworks. In the , the (2000/60/EC) promotes sustainable drainage and pollution prevention, indirectly supporting percolation testing through national implementations for onsite systems; for instance, Ireland's Environmental Protection Agency Code of Practice for Wastewater Treatment Systems (2021) requires falling-head percolation tests (T-tests) with acceptable T-values of 3–120 minutes per 25 mm to classify soil suitability and determine treatment needs. In , where drives stricter controls, site and soil assessments including percolation evaluations are mandatory for septic approvals under state codes like South Australia's On-site Systems Code (2013), which specifies effluent percolation rates (e.g., 10–15 L/m²/day based on ) and requires oversight, with additional considerations for limited water resources in arid regions to minimize environmental impact. Certification and oversight ensure test reliability, with licensed professionals—such as engineers, geologists, sanitarians, or state-certified onsite evaluators—required to perform or supervise tests across U.S. jurisdictions, varying by state (e.g., mandates registered professionals under R18-9-A310). Non-compliance, including unpermitted installations or failed tests, results in permit denial, system removal orders, and fines; civil penalties can reach up to $66,712 per day per violation (as of 2024, adjusted for inflation under the Clean Water Act), enforced by local health authorities or the EPA. As of 2025, regulatory updates reflect climate vulnerabilities, particularly in hurricane-prone areas. In , the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has assumed OSTDS permitting authority through a phased transition (starting January 2025 for northwest counties, completing by December 2026), mandating comprehensive site evaluations that combine testing with profiling to assess saturation risks exacerbated by storms, using forms like DH4015 for and suitability determinations. Recent trends in U.S. regulations emphasize integrated evaluations, including and , beyond alone, as outlined in updated EPA guidance.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] Percolation Test Procedure - Virginia Department of Health
    Definition-The percolation test is a field procedure conducted in the soil horizon(s) selected for installation of the proposed subsurface soil absorption ...
  2. [2]
    [PDF] Soil Percolation - Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy
    Sep 2, 2022 · Soil percolation tests are conducted to help determine the amount of soil absorption area required for a soil absorption system. The percolation ...
  3. [3]
    [PDF] percolation testing - for septic tank drainage - CT.gov
    Hill. INTRODUCTION. Field percolation tests have been used for nearly forty years to assess the capacity of soil for sewage effluent disposal.
  4. [4]
    [PDF] Percolation and Infiltration Testing Guidelines
    Infiltration is defined as the downward entry of water into the soil or rock surface and percolation is the flow of water through soil and porous or fractured ...
  5. [5]
    Conducting a Soil Percolation Test - Nebraska Extension Publications
    The percolation test measures the amount of time it takes for water in a test hole to drop 1 inch. The Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ) Title ...
  6. [6]
    [PDF] Percolation Testing of Soils for On-site Wastewater Treatment
    Darcy's law (Equation 3.1) describes the linear. (one-dimensional) ... Determination of saturated hydraulic conductivity from soil percolation test results.
  7. [7]
    Infiltrating Stormwater - Penn State Extension
    Sep 17, 2025 · Darcy's Law relates the rate of water movement to the soil's permeability and the driving head as II = KK dddd dddd, where I = infiltration rate ...
  8. [8]
    [PDF] Residential Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Design Handbook
    ... a percolation rate slower than 60 minutes per inch, such as clay or clay loam, overlays a useable soil with a percolation rate faster than 60 minutes per inch;.
  9. [9]
    None
    ### Summary of Percolation Tests History
  10. [10]
    SOIL PERCOLATION TESTS - jstor
    In 1926, Henry Ryon, a sanitary engineer with the New York State. Department ... State Univ., Pullman. 186. Journal ofEnvironmental Health. Vol. 42, No. 4.
  11. [11]
    [PDF] An Abridged History of On-Site Wastewater - Environmental Health
    Septic Systems: The Early Years. • 1920's USDA Published Rural ... – Percolation 'Perc' Test. • 1976 First full time. OSW Program Employee. Steve ...Missing: documented US
  12. [12]
    Manual of Septic-Tank Practice - epa nepis
    It is particularly important that proper safety precautions be taken when percolation holes or larger'excavations are dug to install septic tanks or seepage ...Missing: privy | Show results with:privy
  13. [13]
    [PDF] The Building Regulations 2010 - Drainage and waste disposal
    A percolation test should then be carried out to assess the further suitability of the proposed area. 1.34 Percolation test method – A hole. 300mm square ...Missing: 1969 | Show results with:1969
  14. [14]
    [PDF] DOMESTIC ON-SITE FOULWATER TREATMENT - Cloudfront.net
    Note that AS/NZS 1547:2012 relies on soil profile inspections whereas AS/NZS 1546:2008 relies on the percolation test. ∫ Site characteristics such as ...
  15. [15]
    Wastewater Regulations | NOWRA
    Wastewater Treatment Regulations resources for industry professionals including technology fact sheets and EPA manuals.Missing: percolation | Show results with:percolation
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual Wastewater ...
    This manual provides up-to-date information on onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS) siting, design, installation, maintenance, and replacement. It reflects ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] epa 625/1-80-012 design manual onsite wastewater treatment
    This document provi des technical information on onsi te wastewater treatment and disposal systems. It does not contain standards for those systems, nor does it ...Missing: NZS 1546:2008
  18. [18]
    [PDF] APPENDIX 75-A - New York State Department of Health
    (4) A local health department may accept or require other soil tests in lieu of the percolation test when ... soil shall be allowed to stabilize and new ...
  19. [19]
    None
    ### Summary of Site Preparation for Percolation Tests
  20. [20]
    25 Pa. Code § 73.15. Percolation tests.
    ### Summary of Site Preparation for Percolation Tests (25 Pa. Code § 73.15)
  21. [21]
    [PDF] Percolation Testing and Reporting Standards - San Bernardino County
    A soil percolation report uses water absorption rates for specific parcels of land to determine the appropriate onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) ...
  22. [22]
    [PDF] Percolation Test and Vertical Pit Capacity ... - SanDiegoCounty.gov
    Describe test holes soils using the relative amount of sand, clay, silt, and combinations thereof as defined by the soil textural triangle found in the USDA ...
  23. [23]
    [PDF] Percolation Testing - Manual - Division of Environmental Quality
    Aug 1, 2007 · The percolation test is a simple procedure that provides a quantitative measure of how much water the site soils can absorb. The test does not ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  24. [24]
    [PDF] PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS TRANSMITTAL - Marin County
    Based on the soils observed, this area is considered suitable for dry weather percolation testing. On November 7, 2023, a percolation test was performed.
  25. [25]
    [PDF] PERCOLATION TEST PROCEDURE - Uinta County
    Dirt and rocks will be removed from around perc test holes and the ground leveled in a two foot radius from center of hole.Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  26. [26]
    [PDF] Percolation Test Data - New York State Department of Health
    Procedure: 1) At least two percolation tests shall be performed within the proposed absorption area. At least one percolation test should also be performed ...
  27. [27]
    [PDF] Appendix D Geotechnical Engineer Analysis - SanDiegoCounty.gov
    Sep 15, 2020 · D.2.2.2 Temperature Correction Factor​​ The rate of infiltration through soil is affected by the viscosity of water, which in turn is affected by ...
  28. [28]
    [PDF] Division of Environmental Health | Fairfax County, Virginia
    Table 5.2 contains the minimum required septic tank capacities for dwelling units. ... percolation rates is tabulated in Table 5.4. The area requirements are ...
  29. [29]
    12VAC5-610-950. Absorption area design. - Virginia Law
    Suitability of soil horizon. The absorption trench bottom shall be ... percolation rates is tabulated in Table 5.4. The area requirements are based ...
  30. [30]
    Septic Tank/Absorption Field Systems: A Homeowner's Guide to ...
    Oct 1, 2001 · When percolation rate is greater than 45 minutes per inch, backfill above infiltration barrier shall be sand, loamy sand, or sandy loam ...
  31. [31]
    [PDF] SITE AND SOIL EVALUATIONS - KDHE
    The “Perc Test” (short for percolation) is another common method of determining the soil's ability to accept wastewater. The word percolation means movement ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  32. [32]
    Soil Texture Calculator - Natural Resources Conservation Service
    It uses an interactive texture triangle with textures that toggle on and off. Can also be used to determine control section sand, silt, and clay. Download ...
  33. [33]
    Soil Evaluation for Septic System - Illinois Extension
    One of the main advantages of a soil evaluation over a percolation test (a traditional method of testing septic field areas) is that layers within the soil ...
  34. [34]
    None
    ### Summary of Long-term Acceptance Rate (LTAR) Tables from https://soils.wisc.edu/sswmp/pubs/4.43.pdf
  35. [35]
    [PDF] WISCONSIN PRIVATE ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ...
    This handbook and the associated required and recommended reading materials provide the basic knowledge required to perform soil and site verification ...
  36. [36]
    Dry Well Design - Eng-Tips
    Apr 29, 2012 · A perc test is carried out. If a 6" water column was used for perc test we multiply the field result by 2. (to represent a 12" water column).
  37. [37]
    Measuring Soil Water Content with Ground Penetrating Radar: A ...
    Jul 2, 2018 · Three different GPR measurement configurations are widely used: surface, borehole, and off-ground measurements. For low-loss and non ...Missing: assessment percolation
  38. [38]
    Time lapse electric resistivity tomography to portray infiltration and ...
    ERT is a minimum-invasive, advanced geophysical method used to measure the electrical resistivity of the targeted soil/rock volume (Brunet et al., 2010, Loke et ...
  39. [39]
    (PDF) Using electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) to evaluate the ...
    Aug 10, 2025 · The ERT survey shows that there is a non regular horizontal distribution of the infiltration in the shallowest part of the soil, with distinct ...<|separator|>
  40. [40]
    Automated Laboratory Infiltrometer to Estimate Saturated Hydraulic ...
    Dec 17, 2018 · This paper describes the design, calibration and testing processes of a new device named Automated Laboratory Infiltrometer (ALI).
  41. [41]
    A low cost, automated infiltrometer (permeameter) for measurement ...
    The Lithosphere infiltrometer is a low-cost, automated, 3D-printed device for measuring soil infiltration and hydraulic conductivity, using a laser and ...Missing: percolation | Show results with:percolation
  42. [42]
    HYDRUS - PC-PROGRESS
    HYDRUS is a Windows application for simulating water, heat, and solute movement in one-, two- and three-dimensional variably saturated media.
  43. [43]
    Evaluating the Hydrus-1D Model Optimized by Remote Sensing ...
    The Hydrus-1D model optimized using multi-source remote sensing data can effectively simulate SWC in the maize root zone with low working cost.Missing: percolation | Show results with:percolation
  44. [44]
    Students Developing Automated Drone to Measure Soil Quality on ...
    May 27, 2025 · The students came up with an automated drone system that flies to predetermined locations throughout the farm and collects soil data through on- ...
  45. [45]
    Using Machine Learning for Prediction of Saturated Hydraulic ...
    Jun 27, 2019 · High accuracy machine learning-based pedotransfer function models are developed to predict saturated hydraulic conductivity Variable ...Missing: percolation | Show results with:percolation
  46. [46]
    Hybrid Machine Learning Models for Soil Saturated Conductivity ...
    Five different models were built to predict saturated hydraulic conductivity using a dataset extracted from the Soil Water Infiltration Global database.Missing: percolation | Show results with:percolation
  47. [47]
    Microbial Diversity of Septic Tank Effluent and a Soil Biomat - PMC
    The biomat may be important from a purification perspective (42); however, excessive soil pore clogging can be detrimental to long-term hydraulic functioning.
  48. [48]
    Water - Dynamic and Kinematic Viscosity at Various Temperatures ...
    The figures and tables below shows how water viscosity changes with temperature (°C and °F) at water saturation pressure (which for practicle use, ...<|separator|>
  49. [49]
    Insights into freeze–thaw and infiltration in seasonally frozen soils ...
    Feb 5, 2025 · We show how soil moisture, water table depth, snow water equivalent, and air temperature are all significant and confounding factors that ...
  50. [50]
    [PDF] Climate Change and Future Water Availability in the United States
    Jan 17, 2025 · precipitation events is expected to lead to greater flood risk, increasing the estimated 50 million people impacted by floods annually ...
  51. [51]
    Septic Systems Reports, Regulations, Guidance, and Manuals
    Mar 25, 2025 · EPA released numerous documents on decentralized wastewater technology, the management and operation of these systems and other technical information
  52. [52]
    [PDF] 2023 OWTS Policy - State Water Resources Control Board
    Apr 18, 2023 · “Percolation test” means a method of testing water absorption of the soil. The test is conducted with clean water and test results can be used ...
  53. [53]
  54. [54]
  55. [55]
    [PDF] site investigation and soils evaluation for an on ... - Maricopa County
    PERCOLATION TESTS R18-9-A310 (F): Arizona-registered engineers, geologists or sanitarians (with prior MCESD approval) may conduct percolation tests. A ...
  56. [56]
    Understanding Septic Tank Permits and Regulations
    Oct 29, 2025 · Financial Penalties: Fines for non-compliance can reach up to $25,000, plus legal fees and the high cost of emergency repairs.
  57. [57]
    Onsite Sewage FAQ - Permitting | Florida Department of ...
    Sep 3, 2025 · DEP will begin permitting OSTDS in Northwest Florida and transition the remaining 51 counties from July 2025 through December 2026. Transition ...