This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles

for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

Designation: D6634/D6634M − 14

Standard Guide for

Selection of Purging and Sampling Devices for Groundwater
Monitoring Wells1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation D6634/D6634M; the number immediately following the designation indicates the
year of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last
reapproval. A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.

1. Scope* values from the two systems may result in non-conformance

1.1 This guide describes the characteristics and operating with the standard. Dimensions provided are typical.
principles of purging and sampling devices available for use in 1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the
groundwater monitoring wells and provides criteria for select- safety problems, if any, associated with its use. It is the
ing appropriate devices for specific applications. The selected responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
device(s) should be capable of purging the well and providing priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
valid representative samples of groundwater and included bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
dissolved constituents. The scope does not include procedures
for purging or collecting samples from monitoring wells, 2. Referenced Documents
sampling devices for non-aqueous phase liquids, diffusion-type 2.1 ASTM Standards:2
sampling devices or sampling from devices other than moni- D653 Terminology Relating to Soil, Rock, and Contained
toring wells. Fluids
1.2 This guide reviews many of the most commonly used D3740 Practice for Minimum Requirements for Agencies
devices for purging and sampling groundwater monitoring Engaged in Testing and/or Inspection of Soil and Rock as
wells. The practitioner should ensure that the purging and Used in Engineering Design and Construction
sampling methods used, whether or not they are addressed in D5088 Practice for Decontamination of Field Equipment
this guide, are adequate to satisfy the monitoring objectives at Used at Waste Sites
each site. D6452 Guide for Purging Methods for Wells Used for
Groundwater Quality Investigations
1.3 This guide offers an organized collection of information
or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course 3. Terminology
of action. This guide cannot replace education or experience 3.1 Definitions: For definitions of general terms used within
and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. this guide, refer to Terminology D653.
Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circum-
stances. This ASTM guide is not intended to represent or 4. Summary of Guide
replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given
4.1 The primary objective of groundwater sampling pro-
professional service must be judged, nor should this document
grams is to obtain samples that are representative of existing
be applied without consideration of the many unique aspects of
groundwater conditions retaining the physical and chemical
a project. The word “Standard” in the title of this document
properties of the groundwater in a specific water-bearing zone.3
means only that the document has been approved through the
Depending on the purging and sampling protocol, this may
ASTM consensus process.
require that the well is purged of stagnant water, or until
1.4 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units
are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in
2
each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
contact ASTM Customer Service at [email protected]. For Annual Book of ASTM
system shall be used independently of the other. Combining Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
the ASTM website.
3
For example, the plasticizers in flexible PVC can contaminate samples with
phthalate esters. The use of silicone rubber tubing, which contains no plasticizers,
1
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D18 on Soil and Rock can obviate this problem; however, the potential for sample bias due to sorption/
and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D18.21 on Groundwater and desorption exists with both materials (1). These pumps can be used with the
Vadose Zone Investigations. intermediate vessel system described above, so that the sample contacts only the
Current edition approved Feb. 1, 2014. Published February 2014. Originally intake tubing and vessel avoiding contact with the pump mechanism tubing.
approved in 2001. Last previous edition approved in 2006 as D6634 – 01 (2006). Alternatively, using silicone rubber tubing at the pump head only can minimize this
DOI: 10.1520/D6634_D6634M-14. problem (2, 3).

*A Summary of Changes section appears at the end of this standard

Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
1
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
pre-determined purging criteria are met. Therefore, device(s) Based on these criteria, each device has a unique set of
selected for use in groundwater sampling programs must be advantages and limitations that define suitability to site-specific
capable of purging the well as needed or delivering to the applications.
surface, or both, a sample representative of in-situ groundwater 7.2 Outside Diameter of the Device—If the well(s) to be
conditions. A number of factors can influence whether or not a purged and sampled is (are) already in place, the initial
particular sample or set of samples is representative, and one of consideration in selecting a device is whether or not the well(s)
the significant elements of sample collection protocols is the will accommodate the device. It is important to consider that
sampling mechanism (4, 5, 6).4 the wells may not be plumb, may have constrictions in the
4.2 In selecting a purging or sampling device, or both, for casing (that is, at joints), or may contain other obstructions that
use in a groundwater monitoring well, a number of factors make the effective inside diameter of the well smaller than the
must be considered. Among these are 1) outside diameter of the inside diameter of the casing. Alternately, if the monitoring
device; 2) materials from which the device and associated wells are not in place, it may be more prudent to first select a
equipment are made; 3) overall impact of the device on device that meets the requirements of the sampling program
groundwater sample integrity with respect to the analytes of and then select the size of the casing to be used in the wells.
interest; 4) ability to regulate the discharge rate of the device; The smaller the inside diameter of the well, the more limited
5) depth to water; 6) ease of operation and servicing; 7) the selection of devices becomes. The majority of groundwater
reliability and durability of the device; 8) portability of the monitoring wells installed at various types of sites are small-
device and any needed accessory equipment, if applicable; 9) diameter wells, or wells with inside diameters of 100 mm [4
other operational limitations of the device; and 10) initial and in.] or less. All of the devices described herein will fit into a
operating cost of the device and accessory equipment. Based 100 mm [4 in.] inside diameter well, most can be installed in
on these considerations, each of the devices available for a 50 mm [2 in.] inside diameter well, and several can be used
purging or sampling groundwater, or both, from monitoring in wells of 19 mm [0.75 in.] inside diameter or less.
wells has its own unique set of advantages and limitations. 7.3 Materials and Manufacture—The choice of materials
NOTE 1—The quality of the result produced by this guide is dependent used in the construction of purging and sampling devices
on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the should be based upon knowledge of the geochemical environ-
equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice ment and how the materials may interact with the sample via
D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective
testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this guide are cautioned that
physical, chemical, or biological processes. Materials used in
compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself ensure reliable results. the manufacture of purging and sampling devices and associ-
Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means ated tubing, hoses, pipes and support lines (for example, rope,
of evaluating some of those factors. cable or chain) may be a source of bias or error. Materials used
5. Significance and Use should not sorb analytes from samples, desorb previously-
sorbed analytes into samples, leach matrix components of the
5.1 Appropriate purging and sampling equipment must be material that could affect analyte concentrations or cause
used to make sure that samples collected from monitoring artifacts, or be physically or chemically degraded due to water
wells represent the groundwater chemistry of the desired water chemistry. Materials commonly used in the manufacture of
bearing zone. sampling devices include rigid polyvinyl chloride (Type I
5.2 This guide is intended to be a common reference for PVC), stainless steel, polytetrafluorethylene (PTFE),5 polyeth-
purging and sampling devices. It can be applied to groundwater ylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), flexible polyvinyl chloride
quality sampling from monitoring wells used for groundwater (Type II PVC), fluoroelastomers5 polyvinylidene fluoride
contamination evaluation, water supply characterization, and (PVDF), and Buna-N, ethylene-propylene diene monomer
research. (EPDM) and silicone rubbers. Studies are available which
5.3 This guide includes a number of general guidance indicate the relative sorption/desorption rates of these
statements that are not directly related to the operating prin- materials, their potential for alteration of the sample chemistry,
ciples or characteristics of the equipment. These statements are and their ranking of desirability for use in sampling devices (4,
given to assist the user in understanding the application of the 7, 8, 9, 1, 10). Extrusions and molded parts made of polymeric
equipment, which could ultimately affect the selection process. materials may contain surface traces of organic extrusion aids
or mold release compounds. Also, some formulations of
6. Apparatus polymeric materials may contain fillers or processing additives
6.1 The apparatus described in this guide is commonly that can leach from the material and alter sample quality.
available from commercial suppliers. Traces of cutting oils, solvents or surface coatings may be
present on metallic materials. These should be removed and,
7. Criteria for Selection of Purging and Sampling once removed, should not affect sample chemistry. It is
Devices generally preferable to use materials produced without the use
7.1 When selecting purging or sampling device(s), or both,
a number of criteria must be evaluated as discussed below. 5
PTFE is also commonly known by the trade name Teflon®, which includes
other fluoropolymer formulations. Teflon is a registered trademark of E. I. DuPont
4
The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to a list of references at the end of De Nemours & Company. Fluoroelastomers (FPM, FKM) are commonly known by
this standard. the trade name Viton®, a registered trademark of DuPont.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
2
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
of these processing or surface coatings. Metallic materials are tion of available purging and sampling devices is more limited
subject to corrosion; electropolishing or other surface passiva- with increased depth to water.
tion processes can improve corrosion resistance. Corrosion and
7.7 Operation and Servicing—Ease of operation and servic-
residues from unfinished metallic materials could affect sample
ing are important but frequently overlooked considerations in
quality.
the selection of purging and sampling devices. A common
7.4 Impact on Sample Integrity—While it is not particularly source of poor precision in sampling results is sampling device
important to preserve the chemical integrity of water purged operating problems (16). This could be due to any one of
from a monitoring well, the device(s) chosen for purging and several factors either: 1) the device and accessory equipment
sampling should be evaluated to make sure that they minimize are too complicated to operate efficiently under field condi-
physical or chemical alteration of the water in the well and the tions; 2) the operator is not familiar enough with the device to
subsequent sample by their methods of delivering water to the operate it properly; or 3) the operating manual supplied with
surface. Because the subsurface environment is under different the device does not clearly outline the procedures for proper
temperature, pressure, gas content, and redox potential condi- use. Thus, it is not only important to select a device that is
tions than those at the surface, precautions must be taken so simple to operate, but also to provide proper training for the
that these conditions are preserved as much as possible as operator(s) of the device. Since mechanical devices are subject
sample water is transported to the surface. Devices that to malfunction or failure, it may be desirable to service the
introduce air or non-inert gas into a sample or that cause a device in the field or have a replacement device available.
sample to undergo significant temperature or pressure changes Some of the devices described herein may be too complex for
from the sampling depth to the surface are less desirable from field repairs, requiring servicing by the manufacturer or a
the standpoint of preserving the chemical quality of the sample qualified service facility.
(5, 11). For example, systems that allow air to contact the
sample could cause oxidation of the samples, which can have 7.8 Reliability and Durability—Reliability and durability
a significant impact on both organic and inorganic chemical are two additional factors related to maintenance that warrant
constituents (5, 11, 12). In general, the rate at which a sampling attention. Devices used in some monitoring programs must be
device is operated could affect sample quality, with higher rates capable of operating for extended periods of time in subsurface
having greater effect. Turbulence and depressurization could environments containing a variety of chemical constituents that
result in significant changes in dissolved oxygen, carbon may cause corrosion of metallic parts or degradation of plastic
dioxide, dissolved metals and volatile organic compounds materials (9). This is especially true where devices are dedi-
(VOCs) in a sample (4, 5). Inserting a device into the water cated to wells and thus are continually exposed to potentially
column, withdrawing the device, and the rate at which water is aggressive chemical environments.
removed from a well can often affect sample turbidity (13, 14).
7.9 Portability vs. Dedication—In practice, purging and
This can impact concentrations of some analytes or interfere
sampling devices are employed in one of two modes: portable
with some analytical determinations (15).
(used in multiple wells) or dedicated (installed for use in a
7.5 Water Removal Rate and Flow Rate Control— single well). Dedicating sampling equipment eliminates the
Consideration should be given to appropriate water removal need to decontaminate this equipment after each use, and can
rates when selecting purging and sampling devices. For eliminate the potential for cross-contamination of wells and
example, samples collected for analysis of some sensitive samples and possible contamination from handling or improper
parameters (that is, VOCs and trace metals) should be taken at storage of portable equipment. Dedicated equipment can also
low flow rates. Sampling rates should be high enough to fill be more cost effective to use in routine monitoring programs
sample containers efficiently but low enough to minimize due to reduced field labor and the elimination of the cost of
sample alteration. Additionally, the use of low flow rate decontamination and analytical blanks. Portable equipment
purging techniques may require adjusting the pumping rate to must be cleaned between use in each monitoring well or
account for the hydraulic performance of the well. Therefore, it discarded after use to avoid cross-contamination of wells and
is generally desirable to have the ability to control the flow rate samples. In addition, the components must withstand the
of a purging or sampling device. Throttling down the device necessary cleaning processes. Some devices, by virtue of their
using a valve in the discharge line reduces the flow rate, but design, may be difficult to disassemble to clean. It may be more
creates a pressure drop across the valve, and does not neces- practical to clean these devices by circulating cleaning solu-
sarily reduce the speed of the device in the well. Another tions and rinses through the device and any associated tubing,
method of reducing flow rate is to divert a portion of the hose or pipe in accordance with Practices D5088, or to replace
discharge stream. the associated tubing, hose or pipe. Field decontamination
7.6 Depth to Water and Lift Capability—The greater the operations can be difficult due to the need for sufficient
depth to water, the more pumping head the device must decontamination supplies, exposure of the equipment to poten-
overcome to deliver water to the surface. Thus, the pumping tial contaminants, and the handling and disposal of the decon-
lift capability of the device determines whether or not the tamination waste water and supplies. Where field decontami-
device is suitable for individual applications. In addition, the nation is not practical or possible, it may be simpler to use
greater the depth to water, the more time-consuming the dedicated devices or take a number of portable sampling
purging and sampling operation becomes. Generally, the selec- devices into the field and decontaminate them later at a more

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
3
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
appropriate location. Following any cleaning procedure, equip- chosen for purging or sampling groundwater, or both, be used on a
ment blanks should be collected to assess the effectiveness of consistent basis in the future for a given sampling location. Some devices
the cleaning procedure. may have a greater variability than others (for example, the use of bailers).
The more consistent the sampling methodology, the less sampling
7.9.1 The remote location of some monitoring wells or variability will be introduced for chemical and other results. If changes are
rough terrain may require that the sampling device and made in the purging or sampling equipment or methodology, the users of
accessory equipment selected (that is, tubing or tubing bundles, the data should be informed that there may be differences in the results
hose reels, battery packs, generators, compressed air source, from the analysis. This is not to infer that any changes that may have an
controlling devices, decontamination equipment and supplies, effect on sample data are to be avoided, but an evaluation of the results is
purge water containers, etc.) be highly portable. While some recommended.
devices can be hand-carried to remote sites, some manufactur-
ers have mounted their equipment on backpack frames, small 8. Purging and Sampling Devices
wheeled carts and specialized vehicles in an effort to improve 8.1 A wide variety of purging and sampling equipment is
portability. Other equipment is too bulky and heavy to be available for use in groundwater monitoring wells and bore-
transported in the field without being vehicle-mounted.
holes. Available devices can be classified into four general
7.10 Other Operational Characteristics—Operational char- categories: grab mechanisms (including bailers, syringe and
acteristics such as solids handling capability, ability to run dry, thief samplers), suction-lift mechanisms (including surface
cooling requirements, and intermittent discharge must be centrifugal and peristaltic pumps), centrifugal submersible
considered in the application of some purging and sampling pumps, positive displacement mechanisms, (including gas
devices. Some devices may experience increased wear or displacement pumps, bladder pumps, piston pumps, progres-
damage as solids pass through the device causing reduced sive cavity pumps and gear pumps) and inertial lift pumps.
output or failure. Solids may also clog check valves or Though frequently used in the groundwater industry for well
passages, or both, which can reduce discharge rate or, in the
development, the gas-lift method is generally considered un-
case of grab samplers, cause the retained sample to leak out.
suitable for purging and sampling because the extensive
7.10.1 Running dry can occur when water level in the well
mixing of drive gas and water is likely to strip dissolved gasses
is drawn down below the pump intake. In some pump designs,
from the groundwater and alter the concentration of other
typically those with rotating or reciprocating mechanisms, this
can cause damage to or failure of the device. dissolved constituents (17). This method is not discussed for
7.10.2 Some purging/sampling devices may alter the tem- this reason.
perature of the surrounding groundwater. For some devices, 8.2 Each of the purging and sampling devices described
this heat exchange prevents the device from overheating and herein has specific operational characteristics that, in part,
possible damage or failure. The resultant change in water determine the suitability of each device for specific applica-
temperature could alter sample chemistry in a number of ways. tions. These operational characteristics are listed in Tables 1
Heating water reduces the solubility of dissolved gasses in and 2, which summarize information derived from manufac-
water. The resultant loss of dissolved CO2 and O2 can induce turers’ specifications for the various devices.
a shift in pH and possibly in redox state, which then causes
precipitation of carbonates (calcium, magnesium) and dis- 8.3 Grab Sampling Devices:
solved metals, most readily iron. The precipitation of iron can 8.3.1 Bailers, syringe and thief samplers (for example,
then cause co-precipitation of other metals such as nickel, messenger samplers) are examples of grab sampling devices.
copper, and chromium. Heating will also reduce the solubility These devices are lowered into the well bore on a cable, rope,
of VOCs in water, resulting in greater volatilization. (5, 11). chain or tubing to the desired sampling depth and then
7.10.3 Intermittent discharge from some purging and sam- retrieved for purge water discharge, sample transfer or direct
pling devices must be considered when measuring indicator transport of the device to the laboratory for sample transfer and
parameters with in-line monitoring devices or performing analysis.
in-line filtration. Indicator parameters should be measured
during pump discharge cycles. When filtering, care should be 8.3.1.1 The most commonly used grab samplers are bailers,
taken to prevent air from entering the filter during pump refill in single check valve and dual check valve designs. A
cycles. schematic of these two designs is illustrated in Fig. 1. Bailers
are typically constructed of stainless steel, various plastics (for
7.11 Cost—Both the initial capital cost and the operating example, PVC and PE, and fluorocarbon materials).
cost (including maintenance cost) of the sampling device and
accessory equipment are important considerations. However, 8.3.1.2 The single check valve bailer is lowered into the
cost considerations should not result in the selection of devices well and water entering the bailer opens the check valve and
that compromise data quality objectives. Proper selection and fills the bailer. Upon retrieval, the weight of the check valve
use of purging and sampling devices will more than pay for the and water inside the bailer closes the check valve as the bailer
capital and operational costs by providing proper collection of exits the water column. The water in the bailer is retained from
samples, resulting in cost savings from fewer false positive the greatest depth to which the bailer was lowered. There is
analytical results, resampling costs, investigations, and prob- some potential for the contents of the bailer to mix with the
lems with regulatory or scientific goals and objectives. surrounding water column during retrieval, depending on the
NOTE 2—Consideration should be given that the device or devices design of the bailer top.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
4
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
TABLE 1 Operational Characteristics of Purging and Sampling Devices (SI Units)
Device Type Approximate Maximum Maximum Typical Flow Minimum Power Source
Minimum Lift (m) Design Flow Rate @ Achievable
Well Rate (lpm) Maximum Lift Flow
Diameter (lpm) (Discharge)
(mm) Rate
(lpm)
Bailer GS 19 No Limit Highly Variable Highly Variable <0.1 Manual or Mechanical
Messenger GS 38.0 No Limit Highly Variable Highly Variable <0.1 Manual or Mechanical
Syringe GS 38.0 No Limit 1.0 litreA 1.0 litreA <0.1 Pneumatic
Centrifugal Pump CP 25.0 7.6 115 to 150 Highly Variable Same as IC Engine or Electric
Max.
Peristaltic Pump SL 12.0 8.8 45.0 0.4 <0.1 Electric
Centrifugal Submersible Pump CP 50.0 80 34.0 2.0 <0.1 Electric
100 520 322 4.5 <0.1 Electric
Gas Displacement Pump PD 19 75.0 34.0 4.0 <0.1 Pneumatic
Bladder Pump PD 19 305 13.0 0.4 <0.1 Pneumatic
Single-Acting Piston Pump PD 50.0 125 19.0 17.0 <0.1 Pneumatic/Mechanical
Dual-Acting Piston Pump PD 38.0 305 7.5 1.5 <0.1 Pneumatic
Progressive Cavity Submersible Pump PD 50.0 55.0 4.5 1.0 <0.1 Electric
Gear Submersible Pump PD 50.0 40.0 5.3 0.4 <0.1 Electric
76.0 5.0 6.4 0.4 <0.1 Electric
Inertial Lift Pump IL 19.0 80.0 15.0 15.0 <0.1 Manual, Electric
or IC Engine

GS = Grab Sampler
CP = Centrifugal Pump
SL = Suction Lift Pump
PD = Positive Displacement Pump
IL = Inertial Lift Pump
IC Engine = Internal Combustion Engine
A
Not a flow rate. This is the maximum capacity of the device.

TABLE 2 Operational Characteristics of Purging and Sampling Devices (Inch-Pound Units)

Device Type Approximate Maximum Maximum Typical Flow Minimum Power Source
Minimum Lift (ft) Design Flow Rate @ Achievable
Well Rate (gpm) Maximum Lift Flow
Diameter (gpm) (Discharge)
(in.) Rate
(gpm)
Bailer GS 0.75 No Limit Highly Variable Highly Variable <0.026 Manual or Mechanical
Messenger GS 1.5 No Limit Highly Variable Highly Variable <0.026 Manual or Mechanical
Syringe GS 1.5 No Limit 0.26 galA 0.26 galA <0.026 Pneumatic
Centrifugal Pump CP 1.0 25.0 30.0 to 40.0 Highly Variable Same as IC Engine or Electric
Max.
Peristaltic Pump SL 0.5 29.0 12.0 0.1 <0.026 Electric
Centrifugal Submersible Pump CP 2.0 270 9.0 0.5 <0.026 Electric
4.0 1700 85.0 1.2 <0.026 Electric
Gas Displacement Pump PD 0.75 250 9.0 1.0 <0.026 Pneumatic
Bladder Pump PD 0.75 1000 3.5 0.1 <0.026 Pneumatic
Single-Acting Piston Pump PD 2.0 400 5.0 4.5 <0.026 Pneumatic/Mechanical
Dual-Acting Piston Pump PD 1.5 1000 2.0 0.4 <0.026 Pneumatic
Progressive Cavity Submersible Pump PD 2.0 180 1.2 0.3 <0.026 Electric
Gear Submersible Pump PD 2.0 125 1.4 0.1 <0.026 Electric
3.0 175 1.7 0.1 <0.026 Electric
Inertial Lift Pump IL 0.75 260 4.0 4.0 <0.026 Manual, Electric
or IC Engine

GS = Grab Sampler
CP = Centrifugal Pump
SL = Suction Lift Pump
PD = Positive Displacement Pump
IL = Inertial Lift Pump
A
Not a flow rate. This is the maximum capacity of the device.

8.3.1.3 A dual check valve bailer is intended to prevent 8.3.1.4 In the case of both single and dual check valve
mixing of the sample with the water column upon retrieval. bailers, the sample water is decanted into a sample container
Water passes through the bailer as it is lowered. Upon retrieval, following retrieval of the bailer. A bottom discharge device
both check valves seat, retaining the aliquot of water inside the with flow control may be used to provide improved control
bailer. over the discharge of water from the bailer into the sample

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
5
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
valve bailer unless the design allows for release of the upper
check valve during use.
8.3.1.5 Another type of grab sampler called a thief sampler
employs a mechanical, electrical or pneumatic trigger to
actuate plugs or valves at either end of an open tube to open or
close the chamber, or both, after lowering it to the desired
sampling depth, thus sampling from a discrete interval within
the well. Fig. 3 is an example of this type of sampler.
8.3.1.6 The syringe sampler illustrated in Fig. 4 is divided
into two chambers by a moveable piston or float. The upper
chamber is attached to a flexible air line that extends to the
ground surface. The lower chamber is the sample chamber. The
device is lowered into the well, and activated by applying a
suction to the upper chamber, thereby drawing the piston or
float upward and allowing water to enter the lower chamber. In
situations where the pressure exerted on the lower chamber by
submergence is great enough to cause the piston or float to
move upward prior to achieving the desired sampling depth,
the upper chamber can be pressurized to prevent piston
movement. The device is then activated by slowly releasing the
pressure from the upper chamber, allowing water to fill the
lower chamber.
8.3.2 Samples collected with grab samplers, especially vari-
ous types of bailers, exhibit variable accuracy and precision in
sample chemistry, often due to operator technique (15, 16, 18,
19, 20). Grab samplers can aerate or agitate, or both, a sample,
FIG. 1 Example of Single and Dual Check-Valve Bailers
causing sample oxidation, degassing and stripping of VOCs
from the sample. Care should be taken to avoid sample
container. Fig. 2 illustrates an example of this type of device. agitation during transfer of the sample from a grab sampler to
A bottom discharge device may not work with a dual check the sample container. Pouring water from the top of a bailer
either directly into the sample container or to a transfer vessel

FIG. 2 Example of Single Check-Valve Bailer with Bottom

Discharge Device FIG. 3 Example of a Grab Sampler (Kemmerer Type)

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
6
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
8.4 Suction-Lift Pumps:
8.4.1 Surface centrifugal and peristaltic pumps are two
common suction-lift pumps. These pumps, typically located at
or above ground level, draw water to the surface by applying
suction to an intake line through the use of impellers or rotors
driven by an electric motor or an engine. Surface centrifugal
pumps use impellers that are typically constructed of metal
(brass or mild steel), plastic, or synthetic rubber. Fig. 5A shows
a representative design for this type of pump. A peristaltic
pump (Fig. 5B) consists of a rotor with ball-bearing rollers that
squeeze flexible tubing as they revolve within a stator housing.
This action generates a reduced pressure at one end of the
tubing and an increased pressure at the other end. Several types
of elastomeric material can be used for the tubing, although
flexible PVC and silicone rubber are most common.
8.4.1.1 One method of collecting a sample by suction
consists of lowering one end of a length of tubing into a well
and connecting the opposite end of the tubing to an interme-
diate vessel to which a suction is applied using a suction
(vacuum) pump (Fig. 6). A sample can then be drawn directly
into the intermediate vessel without contacting the pump
mechanism.
8.4.2 Suction lift pumps may be unacceptable for some
groundwater sampling applications. Exertion of a reduced
pressure on the sample can cause volatilization or may result in
degassing which can cause changes in the pH, oxidation-
FIG. 4 Example of Grab Sampler (Syringe Type)
reduction potential (ORP), and other gas-sensitive parameters
(16, 2). Peristaltic pumps may be satisfactory for some analytes
may agitate/aerate the sample and cause alteration of sample that are not affected by changes in the sample that can be
chemistry. These devices can also increase the turbidity of a caused by application of reduced pressure when used under
sample and the potential for mixing with stagnant water low flow rate and low lift conditions (16, 22, 23).
through the surging action created in the well as the device 8.4.2.1 Because surface centrifugal pumps can cause
moves through the water column. Grab samplers generally do cavitation, they may not be appropriate for collection of
not subject the sample to pressure changes, though some samples to be analyzed for VOCs or gas-sensitive parameters
change may be imparted to a sample when using a syringe such as trace metals. Because the pumped water contacts the
sampler activated with a suction. A potential for sample pump mechanism, artifacts from sample contact with these
contamination exists due to exposure of the grab sampling materials should be considered when evaluating these pumps
device to the surface environment during repeated removal and for sampling. In addition, these pumps can mix air from small
reinsertion of the device during use. Also, the suspension cord leaks in the suction circuit into a sample, which can cause
or cable used with grab samplers could contribute contami- sample bias. These pumps may be difficult to adequately
nants to groundwater samples (21). decontaminate between uses. To avoid the limitations posed by
8.3.3 Grab sampling devices are generally not limited to a the effects of pumping or undesirable pump materials, an
maximum sampling depth, though use in very deep wells may intermediate vessel could be used on the suction side of the
be impractical. Because grab samplers can be manufactured in pump circuit (Fig. 6).
very small diameters, they are usually not limited in use to a 8.4.2.2 Peristaltic pumps do not usually cause cavitation,
particular diameter of well casing. The rate at which water can but as in all suction-lift pumps the exertion of a reduced
be removed with a grab sampler will depend on the volumetric pressure on the sample can bias the sample. The flexible tubing
capacity of the device and the time required for lowering, required for use in a peristaltic pump mechanism may cause
filling, and retrieval. Generally, single check valve bailers are sample bias.
the only type of grab sampler practical for well purging;
however, it may be impractical to use bailers to purge large NOTE 3—Water that remains in a monitoring well for a period of time
may not be representative of formation water due to physical, chemical or
quantities of water. biological changes that may occur as the water remains in contact with the
8.3.4 Some grab samplers are prone to malfunction or well casing, dedicated sampling equipment and the air space in the upper
damage by sediment in the well. Operational difficulty may be casing. In addition, this stagnant water may not represent formation water
experienced in sandy/silty water due to check valve or seal at the time of sampling due to temporal changes in the groundwater
leakage. When used portably, the ability to clean or decontami- chemistry in the water-bearing zone, whereas water within the well intake
may be representative of formation water chemistry due to natural
nate a grab sampler between wells will vary depending upon movement of groundwater through the intake zone. Water within the well
design. Bailers are generally easier to clean than other types of intake zone may be representative of formation water chemistry due to
grab sampling devices. natural movement of groundwater through the intake zone. To make sure

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
7
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14

FIG. 5 Example of a Suction Lift Pump

accomplished using packers located above the well screen, or through the
use of low flow rate purging techniques (13, 14); removal can be
accomplished using any of the devices described in the standard. Purging
practices are described in greater detail in Guide D6452.
8.4.3 In theory, suction-lift pumps are limited to lifting
water approximately 10.4 m [34 ft], depending on altitude and
barometric pressure. In practice, a lift of 4.6 to 7.6 m [15 to 25
ft] is the typical upper limit. The diameter of wells to which
these devices are applicable is limited only by the size of the
intake tubing used. Sediment has only a minor effect on suction
lift pumps, though large solids may plug the pump intake line.
8.4.4 Surface centrifugal pumps can pump at rates of 7 to
150 lpm [2 to 40 gpm] with 20 to 60 lpm [5 to 15 gpm] being
more typical. Peristaltic pumps operate at rates of less than
0.004 lpm [0.001 gpm] to over 45 lpm [12 gpm].
8.5 Centrifugal Submersible Pumps:
8.5.1 A centrifugal submersible pump (CSP) consists of
impellers housed within diffuser chambers that are attached to
a sealed electric motor, which drives the impellers through a
shaft and seal arrangement. Water enters the CSP by pressure
of submergence, is pressurized by centrifugal force generated
by the impellers, and discharged to the surface through tubing,
hose, or pipe. A CSP is suspended in a well by its discharge line
or a support line, or both. Electric power is supplied to the
motor through a braided or flat multiple-conductor insulated
FIG. 6 Example of a Suction Lift Pump (Vacuum Type) cable. Fig. 7 is a diagram of a CSP. CSPs are available in both
fixed-speed and variable-speed configurations.
that samples collected from a monitoring well are representative of 8.5.1.1 CSPs are driven by electric submersible motors.
formation water, all stored water must be either removed or isolated from Most designs require that water continually pass over the motor
the sampling zone within the well prior to sampling (7). Isolation can be to cool it, while some designs can cool sufficiently by free

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
8
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
restrictor, which could cause sample degassing and loss of
VOCs. In lieu of this, a portion of the discharge stream can be
diverted to reduce the discharge rate for sampling (25).
8.5.3 CSPs may be damaged when used in wells containing
silty or sandy water, requiring repair or replacement of pump
components or motor, or both. If overheating occurs, there are
three possible consequences. First, where the motor has inter-
nal water or oil in it for improved cooling characteristics, some
of this liquid may could be released into the well, which could
potentially contaminate the well or samples. Because of this,
motors that contain oil should not be used if the oil could
interfere with the analytes of interest. Further, water used in
motors should be of known chemistry. Second, when this type
of motor eventually cools, it can draw in water from the well,
which could cause future cross-contamination problems.
Proper decontamination of the pump should include changing
internal cooling fluid if the pump is to be used in non-dedicated
applications. As an alternative, dry sealed motors can be used
to avoid these potential problems. Third, extensive or long-
term overheating problems may result in motor failure, usually
requiring replacement of the motor. CSPs should not be
allowed to operate dry, or damage may occur to the pump seals
or motor, or both. Some CSP designs may be difficult to
disassemble in the field for cleaning or repair. For these pumps,
if used portably, cleaning is usually performed by flushing the
FIG. 7 Example of an Electric Submersible Pump pump and discharge line and washing the exterior surfaces in
accordance with Practices D5088.
convection in applications up to 30°C [86°F] provided that the 8.6 Gas-Displacement Pumps:
pump motor is installed above the well intake zone. For
8.6.1 Gas-displacement or gas-drive pumps are distin-
designs that require flow for cooling, manufacturers of these
guished from gas-lift pumps by the method of water transport.
pumps typically specify a minimum flow rate and velocity over
A gas displacement pump forces a discrete column of water to
the motor to prevent overheating. If the pump is located within
the surface via pressure-induced lift without the extensive
the screen zone of the well or the well casing diameter is too
large to provide sufficient flow over the motor, the use of a mixing of drive gas and water produced by gas-lift devices.
shroud may be required to achieve the necessary flow rate and The principle of operation of a gas-displacement pump is
velocity. shown schematically in Fig. 8. Hydrostatic pressure opens the
8.5.1.2 Flow rate and depth capability for designs is wide inlet check valve and fills the pump chamber (fill cycle). The
ranging (see Tables 1 and 2). For fixed-speed CSPs, flow rate inlet check valve closes by gravity after the chamber is filled.
is typically controlled through the use of a flow restrictor Pressurized gas is applied to the chamber, displacing the water
device, such as a gate valve or reducing orifice, in the discharge up the discharge line (discharge cycle). By releasing the
line. For variable-speed CSPs, the discharge rate can be pressure, the cycle can be repeated. A check valve in the
reduced by regulating the frequency of the electrical power discharge line maintains the water in the line above the pump.
supply, controlling the motor speed to reduce flow rate. A pneumatic logic unit, or controller, is used to control the
8.5.2 Fixed-speed CSPs are considered to be acceptable for application and release of the drive gas pressure. The lift
sampling a variety of groundwater parameters, including capability of a gas displacement pump is directly related to the
conductivity, major ions, and radioactive constituents (24). pressure of the drive gas used.
Studies comparing fixed-speed CSPs with other sampling 8.6.2 Within gas-displacement pumps, there is a limited
devices have found that these pumps produce samples compa- interface between the drive gas and the water. There is,
rable to those from centrifugal and peristaltic suction-lift however, a potential for loss of dissolved gases and VOCs
pumps, piston pumps, and progressive-cavity pumps for sev- across this interface (16, 17). This potential greatly increases if
eral VOCs (25, 26). While there is no available peer-reviewed the pump is allowed to discharge completely, which would
literature addressing the sampling effects of small-diameter cause drive gas to be blown up the discharge line. Contamina-
variable-speed CSPs on VOCs, one study found these pumps tion of the sample may result from impurities in the drive gas.
produced samples for some dissolved metals that were com- Typical lifts for gas displacement pumps rarely exceed 75 m
parable to samples from bladder pumps (27). Heat generated [250 ft] using single-stage compressors; greater lifts can be
by the CSP motor could increase sample temperature. For achieved using two-stage compressors or compressed-gas cyl-
fixed-speed CSPs, the use of a flow restrictor to control the inders. Gas-displacement pumps can be used in wells as small
flow rate for sampling can create a pressure drop across the as 19 mm [0.75 in.] in diameter.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
9
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14

FIG. 8 Example of an Air Displacement Pump FIG. 9 Example of a Bladder Pump

8.6.3 The maximum flow rate of a gas-displacement pump drive gas pressure to the pump. The lift capability of bladder
is based on the pump chamber volume, the pressure and pumps, like gas-displacement pumps, is directly related to the
volume of the drive gas source, the depth of the pump, and the pressure of the drive gas source.
submergence of the pump inlet. The flow rate can be controlled 8.7.2 Bladder pumps provide representative samples under
either by adjusting the pressure of the drive gas or the time a wide range of field conditions. There is no contact between
allowed for the refill or discharge cycles to occur. the drive gas and the water in a bladder pump, greatly reducing
8.6.4 Gas-displacement pumps are not generally damaged the potential for stripping of dissolved gasses and VOCs and
by sediment, though it may reduce the maximum flow rate or eliminating the potential for sample contamination by the drive
temporarily clog the check valves and interrupt flow from the gas. Pressure gradients applied to the sample can be controlled
pump. These pumps are not damaged by pumping dry, so they by reducing the drive gas pressure applied to the bladder, thus
ideally suited for pumping in low-yield wells. They are minimizing disturbance to the sample chemistry. Bladder
typically easy to disassemble for cleaning, service or repair. pumps are acceptable for sampling of all parameters under field
8.7 Bladder Pumps: conditions (5, 6, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 24).
8.7.1 Bladder pumps, also known as gas-operated squeeze 8.7.3 Bladder pump flow rates are dependent upon the same
pumps or diaphragm pumps, consist of a flexible membrane factors as gas-displacement pumps, and are controlled by
tube (bladder) enclosed by a rigid housing. A schematic is adjusting the drive gas pressure or the discharge and refill cycle
shown in Fig. 9. Water enters the bladder under hydrostatic timing. Where maximum flow rates are too low for purging,
pressure through a check valve at the pump bottom. The inlet secondary purging pumps or packers can be used in conjunc-
check valve closes by gravity after the bladder is filled. tion with bladder sampling pumps in order to reduce purge
Compressed gas is applied to the annular space between the time requirements.
outside of the bladder and pump housing, which squeezes the 8.7.4 Bladder pumps are susceptible to bladder damage or
bladder. This action forces the water out of the bladder and up check valve malfunction, or both, from sediment; the use of
the discharge line. By releasing the gas pressure, this cycle can inlet screens can minimize or eliminate these problems. Blad-
be repeated; a check valve in the discharge line prevents der pumps can be run dry without damage. Depending on
discharged water from re-entering the bladder. In some bladder design, they may be difficult to disassemble and clean for
pump designs, the water and air chambers are reversed, with portable use applications.
water entering the annular space between the pump housing 8.8 Piston Pumps:
and bladder; the bladder is then inflated to displace the water. 8.8.1 There are two common piston pump designs, single-
A pneumatic logic controller, such as is used for gas- acting and dual-acting. The most common type of single piston
displacement pumps, controls the application and release of pump is the mechanical piston pump, referred to as the

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
10
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
stationary barrel type (Fig. 10). Pumps of this type consist of a
plunger or set of plungers (pistons) moving inside of a
stationary submerged barrel (cylinder). As the piston travels
back and forth in the cylinder, it alternately draws water into
the cylinder under suction, then displaces the water from the
cylinder. In a single-acting piston pump, water is displaced in
only one direction of piston movement; as water is displaced,
the pump simultaneously refills. The piston can be cycled
manually, or through the use of a pneumatic or mechanical
actuator.
8.8.1.1 In a dual-acting piston pump (Fig. 11), water is
simultaneously discharged and drawn in both directions of
piston travel. A check valve in each discharge port or in the
discharge line is used to prevent discharge water from re-
entering the pump. The piston can be cycled manually, or
through the use of a pneumatic or mechanical actuator.
8.8.2 Piston pumps can provide representative samples for
some parameters (16, 24, 25). Samples may be altered due to
the suction produced during refill of the pump; this effect is
reduced as the pump cycling rate is decreased. Likewise,
reducing the pump cycling rate also reduces the pressure
applied to the sample, minimizing the potential for sample
alteration. If a flow restrictor or valve is used to reduce the
discharge rate, the resultant pressure changes could alter
sample chemistry (16, 17).
8.8.3 The flow rate of a piston pump depends on the inside FIG. 11 Example of a Pneumatic Dual-Acting Piston Pump
diameter of the pump cylinder and the stroke length and rate.
The ability to control the minimum flow rate for sampling is
8.8.4 Piston pumps are susceptible to damage from
dependent on the degree to which the stroke rate can be
sediment, which can score the pump cylinder and piston seals.
controlled.
Inlet screens can reduce or eliminate this damage. These pumps
may also be damaged by running dry, depending on design.
Due to the use of rigid discharge pipe and actuator rod that is
used with mechanically-actuated piston pumps, their use in
portable applications may be difficult and impractical.
Pneumatically-actuated piston pumps do not require rigid
discharge pipe; however, due to a more complex design, they
are difficult to disassemble for cleaning.
8.9 Progressive Cavity Pumps:
8.9.1 Progressive cavity pumps, also referred to as helical
rotor pumps, utilize a down-hole rotor and stator assembly
driven by an electric motor to displace water to ground surface.
A schematic is shown in Fig. 12. Rotation of the helical rotor
causes the cavity between the rotor and stator to progress
upward, thereby pushing water in a continuous flow upward
through the discharge line. In some progressive cavity pumps,
the discharge rate can be varied by adjusting the speed of the
pump motor between 50 and 500 rpm. The progressive cavity
pump is typically suspended in a well by its discharge line. A
two-conductor cable supplies electric power (typically from a
12-volt DC power supply and control box to the pump motor).
8.9.1.1 Progressive cavity pumps are commonly constructed
of stainless steel with PTFE or PE materials, or both, used as
seals. The rotors are generally constructed of stainless steel
while the stator material may consist of EPDM or Buna-N.
8.9.2 The operating principle of progressive cavity pumps
may make them suitable for collection of samples to be
analyzed for VOCs (28). There is some evidence these pumps
FIG. 10 Example of a Mechanical Piston Pump may not be suitable for sampling inorganic analytes at higher

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
11
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14

FIG. 12 Example of a Progressing Cavity Pump FIG. 13 Example of a Gear Drive Pump

flow rates due to increased turbidity (15); a variable speed of the pump motor. As with many other submersible pumps, the
pump controller should be used to reduce flow rate. The gear pump is usually suspended in a well by its discharge line.
pressure applied to a sample is directly related to the motor Electric power is typically supplied to the 24-volt DC motor
speed, and can be controlled in designs using variable-speed through cables from the power source and control box at
motor controls. Overheating of the motor may raise the ground surface.
temperature of the sample, (5, 11). 8.10.1.1 Gear pump bodies are commonly constructed en-
8.9.3 The relatively low discharge rates attainable with most tirely of stainless steel materials while the gears are constructed
progressive cavity pumps may make them most useful in of PTFE.
applications where purging does not require removal of large 8.10.2 Gear pumps may provide adequate recoveries of
volumes of water from monitoring wells. With variable flow VOCs and mobile colloids (23, 28). However, there may be
rate progressive cavity pumps, once purging is complete the potential for cavitation under certain conditions if the pump is
discharge rate may be reduced before samples are collected. run at high rpm. In addition, prolonged pumping under high lift
Where intermittent discharge has been determined to be or low flow conditions may cause the motor to overheat and
undesirable, the continuous flow produced by progressive raise the temperature of the sample. The pressure applied to a
cavity pumps may be advantageous. sample is directly related to the motor speed, and can be
8.9.4 Due to their design and construction, progressive controlled by controlled in designs using variable-speed motor
cavity pumps may be susceptible to damage by suspended controls. Gear pumps are available that are constructed of
solids in the pumped water. It may be difficult in the field to materials acceptable for sampling of sensitive groundwater
disassemble the pump mechanism to replace or repair damaged parameters.
parts, repair malfunctioning or failed pump motors, or, if the 8.10.3 Due to their relatively low discharge rates, gear
pump is used portably, disassemble and reassemble the pump pumps may not be useful in applications where purging large
for decontamination. volumes of water is required. With variable flow rate gear
8.10 Gear Pumps: pumps, once purging is complete the discharge rate may be
8.10.1 Another type of positive displacement electrical reduced for sample collection.
submersible pump is the gear pump, which is shown schemati- 8.10.4 If gear pumps are used extensively for pumping
cally in Fig. 13. In this type of pump, an electric motor drives water high in suspended solids, the PTFE gears may clog or
a pair of PTFE gears. As these gears rotate, their advancing wear, or both, thereby reducing the discharge rate. Disassembly
teeth draw water into the pump and push it upward in a of the pump and replacement of these gears is a procedure
continuous flow through the discharge line. With some gear easily accomplished in the field. As a result, gear pumps are
pumps, the discharge rate can be varied by adjusting the speed generally easy to decontaminate when used in a portable mode.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
12
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
8.11 Inertial Lift Pumps: the upward motion of the pump is stopped, the inertia of the
8.11.1 Inertial lift pumps (Fig. 14) consist of a discharge water column inside the pump carries it out of the discharge
line (either flexible tubing or rigid pipe) with a foot valve of a line. As the pump is pushed downward the foot valve opens,
ball-check or other type design attached to the lower end of this allowing the pump to refill.
line. In operation, the pump is lowered into a water column and 8.11.1.1 Inertial lift pumps can be constructed of any
cycled through reciprocating motion, either through manual flexible tubing material or rigid discharge pipe that has
action or the use of a reciprocating mechanical arm mechanism sufficient strength to undergo the pump cycles. Typically, these
driven by an electric motor or internal combustion engine, to materials include rigid and flexible PVC, PE, PP, and PTFE.
achieve discharge of water. As the pump is moved upward, 8.11.2 Available literature on inertial lift pumps indicates
water that has entered the pump under hydrostatic pressure is that they provide similar accuracy and precision to positive
lifted upward, held in the pump by the seated foot valve. When displacement bladder pumps for sampling of several volatile
aromatic hydrocarbon compounds (3). If inertial-lift pumps are
cycled rapidly prior to or during sample collection, some loss
of VOCs or dissolved gasses, or both, could occur in the
discharge stream. Inertial lift pumps do not cause pressure
changes in the sample. The action of an inertial lift pump in a
well can increase sample turbidity and mix water within the
well bore, potentially altering analyte concentrations or inter-
fering with analytical determinations.
8.11.3 The flow rate of an inertial lift pump is directly
related to the cycling rate of the pump. Flexing of the tubing in
the well can also affect the flow rate, causing it to drop. To
achieve low discharge rates for sample collection, it is often
necessary to insert a short length of small-diameter flexible
tubing into the discharge line to divert a portion of the
discharge stream into sample containers.
8.11.4 By nature of their simple design, inertial lift pumps
are not susceptible to damage by suspended solids or dry
pumping, though check valve clogging will reduce the flow
rate during operation. Some wear or damage may occur on the
outer surface of the foot valve or discharge line, or both, as it
comes in contact with the well casing or screen, or both, or
open borehole during cycling. These pumps are easily disas-
sembled in the field for repairs if needed, though the mechani-
cal cycling mechanisms may be difficult or impossible to repair
in the field.

9. Keywords
9.1 groundwater; groundwater monitoring; groundwater
monitoring wells; groundwater sampling; groundwater sam-
FIG. 14 Example of an Inertia Lift Pump pling devices; purging devices

REFERENCES

(1) Barcelona, M. J., Helfrich, J. A., Garske, E. E., 1985. Sample Tubing (5) Parker, L. V. 1994a. The Effects of Ground Water Sampling Devices
Effects on Ground Water Samples, Analytical Chemistry, 57 (2), 1985, on Water Quality: A Literature Review. Ground Water Monitoring and
pp. 460-464. Remediation, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 130-141.
(2) Ho, J. S-Y., 1983. Effects of Sampling Variables on Recovery of (6) Parker, L. V. 1994b. Correction. Ground Water Monitoring and
Volatile Organics in Water, Journal of the AWWA, December 1983, Remediation, Vol. 14, No. 3, p. 275.
pp. 583-586. (7) Barcelona, M. J. and Helfrich, J. A., 1986. Well Construction and
(3) Barker, J. F., and Dickhout, R., 1988. “An Evaluation of Some Purging Effects on Ground-Water Samples, Environmental Science
Systems for Sampling Gas-Charged Ground Water for Volatile Or- and Technology, Vol.20, No. 11, pp. 1179-1184.
ganic Analysis,” Ground Water Monitoring Review, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. (8) Gillham, R. W. and O’Hannesin, S. F., 1990. Sorption of Aromatic
112-120. Hydrocarbons by Materials Used ]in Construction of Ground-Water
(4) Barcelona, M. J., Gibb, J. P., and Miller, R. A., 1983. A Guide to the Sampling Wells, Ground Water and Vadose Zone Monitoring, ASTM
Selection of Materials for Monitoring Well Construction and Ground STP 1053, D. M. Nielsen and A. I. Johnson, Eds., American Society
Water Sampling, Illinois State Water Survey, Contract Report CR-327. for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 108-122.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
13
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
(9) Parker, L. V., 1992. Suggested Guidelines for the Use of PTFE, PVC purging ground-water monitoring wells and sampling ground water
and Stainless Steel in Samplers and Well Casings, Current Practices in for volatile organic compounds. In Ground-Water Contamination:
Ground-Water and Vadose Zone Investigations, ASTM STP 1118, Field Methods, ASTM STP 963, ed. A. G. Collins and A. I. Johnson,
David M. Nielsen and Martin N. Sara, Editors, American Society for pp. 240-252. Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and
Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 217-229. Materials.
(10) Holm, T. R., George, G. K., and Barcelona, M. J., 1988. Oxygen (20) Tai, D. Y., Turner, K. S. and Garcia, L. A. 1991. The Use of a
Transfer Through Flexible Tubing and Its Effects on Ground-Water Standpipe to Evaluate Ground-Water Samplers. Ground Water Moni-
Sample Results, Ground Water Monitoring Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. toring Review, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 125-132.
83-89. (21) Canova, J. L. and Muthig, M. G. 1991. The Effect of Latex Gloves
(11) Stuum, W. and Morgan, J. J., 1996. Aquatic Chemistry: Chemical and Nylon Cord on Ground Water Sample Quality. Ground Water
Equilibria and Rates in Natural Waters, Third Edition. John Wiley & Monitoring Review, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 98-103.
Sons, Inc. (22) Puls, R. W. and Powell, R. M. 1992. Acquisition of Representative
(12) Lee, G. F. and Jones, R. A., 1983. Guidelines for Sampling Ground Ground Water Quality Samples for Metals. Ground Water Monitor-
Water, Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 55, ing Review, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 167-176.
No. 1, pp. 92-96. (23) Backhus, D. A., Ryan, J. N., Groher, D. M., MacFarlane, J. K. and
(13) Puls, R.W. and Barcelona, M. J. 1996. Low-Flow (Minimal Draw- Gschwend, P. M., 1993. Sampling Colloids and Colloid-Associated
down) Ground-Water Sampling Procedures. U.S. Environmental Contaminants in Ground Water. Ground Water, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp.
Protection Agency, Publication Number EPA/540/S-95/504. 12 466-479.
pages. (24) Pohlmann, K. F., and Hess, J. W., 1988. Generalized Ground Water
(14) Kearl, P. M., Korte, N. E. and Cronk, T. A., 1992. Suggested Sampling Device Matrix, Ground Water Monitoring Review, Vol. 8,
Modifications to Ground Water Sampling Procedures Based on No. 4, pp. 82-84.
Observations from the Colloidal Borescope, Ground Water Monitor- (25) Knobel, L. L. and Mann, L. J. 1993. Sampling for purgeable organic
ing Review, Vol.12, No.2, pp.155-161. compounds using positive-displacement piston and centrifugal sub-
(15) Puls, R.W., Clark, D. A., Bledsoe, B., Powell, R. M. and Paul, C. J., mersible pumps: A comparative study. Ground Water Monitoring and
1992. Metals in Ground Water: Sampling Artifacts and Remediation, Vol. 13, No.2, pp. 142-148.
Reproducibility, Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials, Vol. 9, (26) Pearsall, K. A. and Eckhardt, D. A. V., 1987. Effects of Selected
No.2, pp. 149-162. Sampling Equipment and Procedures on the Concentrations of
(16) Barcelona, M. J., Helfrich, J. A., Garske, E. E. and Gibb, J. P., 1984. Trichloroethylene and Related Compounds in Ground Water
A Laboratory Evaluation of Ground Water Sampling Mechanisms, Samples. Ground Water Monitoring Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 64-73.
Ground Water Monitoring Review, Vol. 4, No.2, pp. 32-41. (27) Pohlmann, K. F., Icopini, G. A., McArthur, R.D. and Rosal, C.G.,
(17) Gillham, R. W., Robin, M. J. L., Barker, J. F. and Cherry, J. A., 1983. 1994. Evaluation of Sampling and Field Filtration Methods for the
Ground Water Monitoring and Sample Bias, American Petroleum Analysis of Trace Metals in Ground Water. U.S. Environmental
Institute Publication 4367. Protection Agency, Publication No. EPA/600/R-94/119, 79 pages.
(18) Pohlmann, K. F., Blegen, R. P., and Hess, J. W., 1990. “Field (28) Imbrigiotta, T. E., Gibs, J., Fusillo, T. V., Kish, G. R., and Hochreiter,
Comparison of Ground-Water Sampling Devices for Hazardous J. J., 1988. Field Evaluation of Seven Sampling Devices for
Waste Sites: An Evaluation Using Volatile Organic Compounds,” Purgeable Organic Compounds in Ground Water, Ground Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Publication No. EPA/600/4- Contamination: Field Methods, ASTM STP 963, A. G. Collins and
90/028, 102 pages. A. I. Johnson, Editors, American Society for Testing and Materials,
(19) Unwin, J. and Maltby, V. 1988. Investigations of techniques for Philadelphia, PA, pp. 258-273.

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Committee D18 has identified the location of selected changes to this standard since the last issue (D6634–01
(Reapproved 2006)) that may impact the use of this standard. (Approved Feb. 1, 2014.)

(1) Corrected the spelling of groundwater throughout docu- (8) Swapped Tables 1 and 2 to make SI units first.
ment. (9) Editorial corrections throughout.
(2) Corrected absolute, limiting, jargon and other grammatical (10) Incorporated prior 5.1 into the Significance and Use
errors. Section.
(3) Added new Section 3 on Terminology. (11) Created new Section 6 Apparatus.
(4) Added new section on Summary of Changes. (12) Added non-mandatory Note 2 regarding consistency in
(5) Converted to combined SI/Inch-pound standard. equipment used.
(6) Added new 1.4 and renumbered following sections.
(7) Added Practice D3740 to list of referenced ASTM
standards, and added note to Significance and Use Section.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
14
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 D6634/D6634M − 14
ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.

This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.

This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org). Permission rights to photocopy the standard may also be secured from the Copyright Clearance Center, 222
Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, Tel: (978) 646-2600; http://www.copyright.com/

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat May 29 03:25:49 EDT 2021
15
Downloaded/printed by
Al muhandis nizar Al kurdi al milli (Al muhandis nizar al kurdi al milli engineering consultants) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.