TRAQUA

𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡? 🤔 Modelling #groundwater flows and performing a fluorescent dye tracer test are two methods to analyse hydrodynamics in #hydrogeology. But when should you model, and when should you trace? And what are the pros and cons of each? 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 📐 Groundwater modelling uses computational tools to simulate groundwater flow and transport based on available data and hypotheses such as aquifer properties, boundary conditions, and recharge rates. ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Cost-effective compared to field tests; Scalable to large areas or complex systems; Allows future predictions. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Very reliant on the accuracy of input data; Sometimes an oversimplification of actual complexities of a system; Requires expertise to calibrate and validate. 𝗙𝗹𝘂𝗼𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗗𝘆𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 🧪 Tracer tests involve injecting a non-toxic dye into a water source and monitoring the dispersion and movement of the tracer to determine flow paths, velocities, and dispersion characteristics. ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Provides direct, field-based evidence of flow dynamics; Highly effective in fractured or karst systems; Can uncover unexpected subsurface connections. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Requires careful planning and monitoring; Potential adsorption can complicate the interpretation results; Results are site-specific and can not be generalised. 💡 Modelling is perfect for preliminary assessments and strategic planning, but tracer tests can offer field validation of flow assumptions. 💡 The two methods often complement each other, to improve the understanding of groundwater systems and future behaviour under changing circumstances. 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹𝘀, 𝗱𝘆𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀, 𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗯𝗼𝘁𝗵 𝗶𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸? 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀! Image credit: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Modflow model by Waterloo Hydrogeologic, fluorescent dye tracing by TRAQUA. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ At TRAQUA we provide field expertise in ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 💧 and ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 🌊, with 10 years of knowhow in 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑑𝑦𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 🧪! We also offer hydrological studies for 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠 (100+ so far). Contact us at contact@traqua.be

🚨 New Edition Alert! 🚨 We're excited to announce the latest edition of our TRAQUA 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬 on all things #groundwater 🌊💧! We hope you find it insightful and informative 💡. 𝐃𝐨𝐧'𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐲 𝐮𝐩𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧!

𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡? 🤔 Current meters and fluorescent dye tracer tests are two methods to measure water flow rates in streams, rivers, and groundwater systems. But when should you use one over the other? What are the pros and cons? 🎐 𝗖𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 A current meter measures water velocity directly by placing a rotating element or electromagnetic sensor in the water flow. Combined with the area of the cross section of the stream, it calculates discharge. This method is ideal for streams, open channels, or shallow wells. ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Provides direct, real-time flow velocity measurements; Straightforward to use in steady and accessible water bodies; Portable and flexible for multiple sites. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Requires physical access to the waterbody; Not suitable for very low flows or underground systems; Accuracy can be affected by debris or turbulence. 🧪 𝗙𝗹𝘂𝗼𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗗𝘆𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 Fluorescent dye tracer tests involve injecting a non-toxic dye and monitoring the transport and dilution through a system. Dye tracing work well for both surface water and groundwater flow, especially in complex geological settings. ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Effective for mapping flow paths and identifying subsurface connections; Suitable for measuring flow in karst systems or fractured rocks, or streams that are not easily accessible; Less intrusive than direct measurements. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Requires prior understanding of the system for effective test design; Adsorption on sediments or organic matter may skew results; Interpretation of results is more challenging that the direct discharge measurement with a current meter. 💡 Both methods are valuable, and the choice depends on the site conditions, scale of investigation, and specific objectives. They can complement each other in certain cases to achieve a comprehensive understanding of water flow dynamics. 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗱𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀? 𝗢𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝘆𝗯𝗲 𝗯𝗼𝘁𝗵? 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀! Image credit: Flow measurement using a current meter, and by using the dye tracing dilution method, both performed Amaël Poulain. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ At TRAQUA we provide field expertise in ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 💧 and ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 🌊, with 10 years of knowhow in 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑑𝑦𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 🧪! We also offer hydrological studies for 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠 (100+ so far). Contact us at contact@traqua.be

We're looking forward to bring you a fluorescent dye tracing summer training. Don't forget to subscribe to stay informed! 👉https://lnkd.in/eJFRth5k

After hiring maurel Landry LEUNTE, we have MORE good news 🥳!   We can now also call Romain Deleu part of the ✨ TRAQUA dream team ✨!   He is an old colleague from when we were still a developing spin-off from the Université de Namur, where we shared an office. He's a very early adopter of our fluorometers, having tested the very first FLUO-G prototypes. He knows the ins and outs of our STREAM fluorometers as he had the "honour" of helping us assemble them 😅.   Romain recently completed his PhD research on "Multi-point dye tracing in karstic environments and tracer dispersion", which he combined with a position as a teaching assistant. He is a field and dye tracing expert and we're happy to have him on our team for all our future tracing campaigns 💧🧪. Ø https://lnkd.in/dTZQy_5   We can count on Romain for our quarry, mine, geothermal and training projects.   Welcome 🙌. Image credit : Gaëtan Rochez from Université de Namur

𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡? 🤔 In #hydrogeology, 2 tracing techniques are commonly used to investigate #groundwater flow and characteristics: (𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲) 𝗶𝘀𝗼𝘁𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 ⚗️ and 𝗳𝗹𝘂𝗼𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗱𝘆𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 🧪💧. But when to use one or the other and what are the pros and cons? 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗶𝘀𝗼𝘁𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 ⚗️ ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Info on water sources, recharge areas and processes such as evaporation and mixing; No chemical interaction with the environment, signals remain unchanged over long distances; Stable isotopes can be natural tracers (no need for artificial injection); Isotopes can provide temporal information on hydrogeological processes over very large timescales. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Higher cost: isotopic analysis requires specialised laboratory equipment and expertise; Interpretation of isotope tracing data can be complex; Collecting, preserving, and analysing samples without contamination can be a technical challenge; Sample analysis can take longer than the immediate results of dye tracing. 𝗙𝗹𝘂𝗼𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗱𝘆𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 🧪💧 ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Fluorescent dyes can be detected in situ at very low concentrations, allowing precise tracing; Tracer dyes are generally inexpensive and readily available; Tracer dyes often provide rapid results, ideal for real-time monitoring; Modern dyes are typically toxicologically safe and do not occur naturally in the environment, making them safe to handle and reducing the risk of contamination. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Dyes can adsorb in rocks and soil, which can skew results in long-term studies; Some dyes degrade over time or when exposed to light, which must be taken into account in longer-term studies; Dyes are primarily used to study flow paths and velocities and do not provide information on the chemical properties of the water; Natural fluorescence in the environment can interfere with dye detection, making analysis difficult. 💡 𝐹𝑙𝑢𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑑𝑦𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 is ideal for a quick, cost-effective characterisation of flow paths and velocities but can be limited by environmental factors and doesn't provide chemical information. 💡 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑝𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 is more expensive and complex but can provide info on hydrogeological processes over long distances and timescales. 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗶𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲? Image credit: Stable Isotopes Water Analyzer at Penn State University - Institute of Energy and the Environment, fluorescent dye tracing and STREAM fluorometer by TRAQUA. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ At TRAQUA we provide field expertise in ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 💧 and ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 🌊, with 10 years of knowhow in 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑑𝑦𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 🧪! We also offer hydrological studies for 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠 (100+ so far). Contact us at contact@traqua.be

♨️ Dye tracing to optimise open-loop #geothermal systems An open-loop geothermal system, using an aquifer 💧, a lake 🏞️ or #minewater from an abandoned mine, is one method that can be used for heating/cooling or to store geothermal energy. Open-loop systems are usually preferred to closed-loop systems because #water is the best carrier of thermal energy, making them more efficient and comparatively less costly. However, borehole yields are influenced by geology and the permeability of the aquifer. Thermal interference can also occur, either between abstraction and injection boreholes or between different open-loop systems, particularly in areas of denser installation 🌁, reducing performance. Models 📊 attempt to mitigate these risks but are highly dependent on the quality of the data. Fluorescent dye tracer tests 🧪 can provide field data and map flow paths within the subsurface, providing insight into the actual #groundwater movement 🌊, particularly useful in a heterogeneous or fractured subsurface 🪨. TRAQUA was asked by AGT nv Advanced Groundwater Techniques (groundwater and geothermal consultancy) to carry out fluorescent dye tracing in an open-loop geothermal doublet to compare models with real-time data. This allows them to adjust and optimise the geothermal system. Images: (1) Injection of fluorescent dye tracer by Dr. Amaël Poulain and maurel Landry LEUNTE, (2) By-pass developed by Malcourant Mécanique S.A. for 2 STREAM fluorometers. Interested in our expertise? Meet Sofie de Volder today at the Cluster TWEED/Cluster H2O Heat2Net Winter Event in Waterloo, Belgium, or contact us here 👉 contact@traqua.be

𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡? 🤔 The Renewable Energy Directive sets rules for the EU to achieve a target of 32% renewables by 2030. Geothermal energy stands out as a promising technology. A good understanding of the geology and #hydrogeology plays a pivotal role within some types of geothermal energy⚡ or heating🌡️ & cooling ❄️ systems to optimise the performance and ensure the long-term viability. Shallow closed and open-loop geothermal projects or mine geothermal projects are some examples that require knowledge of #groundwater flows or heat transfer, which can be achieved through a fluorescent dye tracer test or thermal response test to feed the models. But when to use one or the other and what are the pros and cons? 🔥 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 A thermal response test is used the analyse the thermal fluxes in a closed-loop geothermal system. ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Direct info on heat transfer mechanisms and valuable data to optimise geothermal system design and operation; Minimal environmental risk and is not influenced by physicochemical factors. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Lower sensitivity, requiring larger injection volumes or longer monitoring periods; Interpretation of thermal response test data can be complex, requiring expertise in heat transfer modeling; Thermal response tests might require a continuous injection of heat at a certain temperature for a longer period of time, requiring a lot of energy and driving up the cost. 🧪 𝗙𝗹𝘂𝗼𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗱𝘆𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 Fluorescent dye tracer tests are used to analyse groundwater flows and potential interference or recycling in geothermal systems making use of groundwater (open-loop geothermal, mine water thermal energy storage, etc.). ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Precise tracking of groundwater movement; Minimize disruption to the environment and reduced costs; Rapid assessment and adjustment of geothermal systems, optimizing efficiency. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Thermal behavior is influenced by, but not equal to, water movement, potentially missing crucial data for thermal optimization; Fluorescent dyes can be thermally or chemically unstable, leading to rapid decay (mostly an issue in high temperature geothermal systems or in water with very low pH). 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗮𝗹𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘆 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁? 𝗢𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝘆𝗯𝗲 𝗯𝗼𝘁𝗵? More info on geothermal energy in Europe ➡️ GeoERA MUSE project (https://lnkd.in/d_seQ8Ve) and factsheets on shallow geothermal energy concepts 👉https://lnkd.in/dy_j4iUv Image credit: thermal response test by Thermia AB, fluorescent dye tracing by TRAQUA. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ At TRAQUA we provide field expertise in ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 💧 and ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 🌊, with 10 years of knowhow in 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑑𝑦𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 🧪! We also offer hydrological studies for 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠 (100+ so far). Contact us at contact@traqua.be

𝗪𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴...⛈️💧☔🌊 so high time to plan your hydro(geo)logical study! 👀🔎 The rainy season provides a unique opportunity for hydrological and hydrogeological studies, especially flood risk assessments. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲'𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝘆 👉 Heavy winter rainfall provides real-time conditions for analysing the response of water networks. Winter in-situ data helps to make flood risk assessment models more accurate and to better understand drainage patterns. Winter rainfall and reduced evapotranspiration lead to higher surface and groundwater levels. Studying these peak flows provides important information on flood scenarios and vulnerability. 💡 In short, winter in-situ data collection allows for better planning, modelling and implementation of flood mitigation strategies. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝘂𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁. Image : Amaël Poulain prospecting a muddy terrain to plan a hydrogeological field campaign. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ At TRAQUA we provide field expertise in ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 💧 and ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 🌊, with 10 years of knowhow in 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑑𝑦𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 🧪! We also offer hydrological studies for 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠 (100+ so far). Contact us at contact@traqua.be

𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡? 🤔 Well pumping tests and fluorescent dye tracer tests are two investigative methods commonly used in #hydrogeology to analyse some characteristics of the aquifer. But when to use one or the other and what are the pros and cons? 🚰 𝗣𝘂𝗺𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀 A well pump test, or aquifer test, involves pumping groundwater from a well at a constant rate while monitoring water levels in nearby wells, ideally continuously using automatic loggers. It provides data on aquifer properties such as hydraulic conductivity and storage capacity, and can be used to understand contaminant transport or aquifer connectivity. ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Gives direct estimates of aquifer parameters; Well established and widely accepted method. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Can be time consuming and costly; May disrupt local groundwater balance; Less effective in heterogeneous aquifers. 🧪 𝗙𝗹𝘂𝗼𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗗𝘆𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗿 𝗧𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀 Fluorescent dye tracer testing involves injecting a non-toxic fluorescent dye into a water source, tracking its movement through groundwater systems and measuring the restitution curves (travel time vs. dye concentration). This is used to determine flow paths, velocities and potential contaminant dispersion. ✅ 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑠 Effective for visualising flow paths; Suitable for complex geology;  Less intrusive than pump testing. ❌ 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠 Requires specific conditions to be effective;  Possible dye adsorption on soil particles may affect results;  Interpretation can be complex in fractured rock systems. 💡 Both types of tests require some key stages such as: defining objectives, developing a conceptual site model (CSM) or tracer test campaign, designing the test, collecting data and analysing results. 💡 Both methods provide valuable information and often complement each other in groundwater characterisation projects. 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗮𝗹𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘆 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁? 𝗢𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝘆𝗯𝗲 𝗯𝗼𝘁𝗵? More info on field investigation methods ➡️ Hydrogeology 101 by Neven Kresic (https://lnkd.in/ey6fmQ9F) Image credit: well pumping test by GEODesign, Inc., fluorescent dye tracing by TRAQUA. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ At TRAQUA we provide field expertise in ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 💧 and ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 🌊, with 10 years of knowhow in 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑑𝑦𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 🧪! We also offer hydrological studies for 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠 (100+ so far). Contact us at contact@traqua.be