Date post: | 02-Mar-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | naveen-bansal |
View: | 240 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 38
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
1/38
MARTIN MARIETTA
ENERGY
SYSTFMS
I IRP191cc
b
3 4 4 5 b 02bb32L 3
...
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
2/38
-
his report was prapared as
an
accnoiit of wotk sponsored by
ar,
acJwcy
of
the
IJnrteilStates Govcrnariant Nettheiihei nited StatesGounrnmw t nor aity aosncy
thereof, nor a n y of
their
employees makes
any warranty,
exi)ioss
or implied.
or
asstimes any legal
liability
or responsibility for ih:: accuracy.
compicteness.
or
usefulnsss
of
any
infoiii-iatlon,
arwiatus. product,
0 1 proce;s
dwloszd . o r
rmresents
that i s
use
~ u ~ ~ l dot infringi.
p r ~ v a t d ~
cwned rights
Referevce herpin
to
any
specnfic
comtrrerclal
product.
process. or sawiceb y fr?do n a r m ~ radpwark
manufacturer. or otherwise, do52 pot necasswtly constitutc or imply its
endorsement. rac omn mdat ion . or favoring by the Il mtnd States Governmerri
o i
any agency
thereof The views , a ~ r l i)inions of
authors
expressed h c r m do
not
necessarily state
or
reflect
those
of
the United States Governnor it
01-any
agency
th-o?f
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
3/38
C h e m i c a l
TechnDlogy D i v i s i o n
COST ESTIMATE
OF GROUTING rm PROPOSED
TEST PITS
AT
IDAHO
NATIONAL ENGINEERING JABORATORY USING
THE
ORNL- RE
C O W
DED GROUTS
R.
D. Spence
Date Issued
-
August
1987
Prepared by
the
OAK RIDGE
NATIONAL LABORATORY
Oak Ridge,
T e n n e s s e e
37831
O p e r a t e d
by
MARTIN
W I E T T A ENERGY S YS TE MS , I NC .
f o r
t h e
U .S .
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
under
c o n t r a c t
D E - A C O E . 8 4 0 R 2 1 4 0 0
MARTIN
MARIFTrA ENERGY SYSTENS I
iR i lAR lES
3 4 4 S b 0 2 6 6 3 2 3 3
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
4/38
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
5/38
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Page
A B S T R A C T .
1
1. I N T R O D U C T I O N .
.
.
1
2. P I T D E S I G N .
.
. .
3
3. E S T I M A T I O N OF
VOIDS.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4 .
GROUT EMPLACEMENT.
e e 5
4.1
LANCE INJECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2
J E T
GROUTING.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1 2
4 . 3
OTHER COSTS 16
5.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1 7
6 . REFERENCES m
.
e
2 1
A P P E N D I X E S .
e e 2 2
A P P E N D I X A .
23
A P P E N D I X B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
APPENDIX C
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 9
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
6/38
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
7/38
COST ESTIMATE OF GROUTING THE
PROPOSED
TEST PITS AT
I D A H O NATIONAL
ENGINEERING LABORATORY USING THE
ORNtRECOWdENDED
GROUTS
R.
D.
Spence
ABSTRACT
EGdG I da ho p l a n s t o c o n s t r u c t t h r e e e x p e ri m e n t a l p i t s t o
s i n u l a t e t h e TRU
waste
t r e n c h e s a t I d ah o N at i o n a l E n g i n e e ri n g
La bo ra to ry (INEL). Two of t he se p i t s w i l l be grouted and then one
w i l l b e d e s t r u c t i v e l y e x a m i n e d as soon as t h e g ro u t c u r e s a nd t h e
o t h e r will be m o n i t o r e d f o r
10
years . Oak Rfdge Nat ional Laboratory
(ORNL) i s e v a l u a t i n g g r o u t s a n d w i l l recommend a g r o u t t o EG&G
I d a h o t o r ed u c e t h e p e r m e a b i l it y of t h e p i t , f i l l t h e l a r g e v oi ds ,
a n d e n c a p su l a t e t h e
waste.
A p r e v i o u s
ORNL
r e p o r t (ORNL/TM-9881)
di s cu ss es th e gr ou ts ev aluat ed and the gro ut recommended based on
tho se eva lua tons . This rep or t eva lua tes th e economics of g rou t in g
t h e e x p er i m en t a l p i t s .
The co st of double grout ing two
of
t h e E G G I d a h o d e s i g n p i t s
a t t h e I d a h o N a t i o n a l E n g i n e e r i n g L a b o r a t o r y u s i n g l a n c e i n j e c t i o n
was est imated t o be $100,000. Je t g r o u t i n g t h e same t w o p i t s was
e s t im a te d t o c o s t 85,000. Both tech niqu es have advantages, and i t
i s s u g g es t e d t h a t b o t h b e t r i e d as p a r t o f the
t e s t EG&G
Idaho is
conduc t fng.
1. INTILODUCTION
Approximately 2.2 x lo6 f t 3 of t r an s u ra n ic
(TRU) waste i s
b u r i e d i n
s h a l l o w l a n d b u r i a l a t th e Idaho Nat ion al Engin eer ing Laborator y (INEL).
EG&G I d ah o , I n c . , p ri me o p e r a t i n g c o n t r a c t o r a t t h e INEL, has developed a
long-term management plan
f o r
INEL Buried
TRU Waste.
F Y - 1 9 8 6 ,
t h e im p ro v et i co n fi n em e nt t e ch n o lo g y i n - s i t u g r o u t i n g w i l l be
i n v e s t i g a t e d by t h e EG&G Idaho Waste Technology Programs Branch. Oak Ridge
Nat iona l Labora tory
(ORNL)
i s
p r o v i d h g t e c h n ic a l s u p p or t and c o n s u l t a t i o n
s e r v i c e s t o EG&G I da ho i n t h e area of g r o u t s e l e c t i o n . ORNL w i l l provide
(1) t h e r a t i o n a l e ,
( 2 )
l a b o r a t o r y c o m p a r a t i v e r e s u l t s of d i f f e r e n t g r ou t
formula t ions and grout c h em i ca l s w i t h I d ah o s o i l s ,
( 3 )
cost comparisons,
and
4)
h e f i n a l s e l e c t i on
of
t h e recommended grou t fo rmu la t ion s f o r t he
INEL i n - s i t u g r o ut i ng t e s t . A p r e v i o u s O W e p or t d e a l t s p e c i f i c a l l y with
g r o u t f o r mu l a ti o n and s e l e c t i o n ' , b u t t h i s r e p o r t d e a l s s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h
cost comparisons and grout placement . ,
During
FY-1985
and
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
8/38
2
L a b or a to r y s t u d i e s o f (1) c o a rs e p a r t i c u l a t e g r o u t s ,
( 2 )
s o i l g r o u ts ,
and
( 3 )
f i n e p a r t i c u l a t e g r ou ts were r e p o r t e d p r e v i o u s l y . 1
g r o u t s w er e d i s c u s s e d as a n a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e f i n e p a r t i c u l a t e g r ou ts .
S i n c e t h a t s t u d y h a d a l i m i t e d s co p e, s o l u t i o n g r o u t s
were
n e v e r s t u d i e d
i n
t h e l a b o r a t o r y ; b u t t he y
were
kept
as
a n a l t e r n a t i v e i n
case
t h e m i c r o f i n e
p a r t i c u l a t e g r o u t w a s c o n s i d er e d u n sa t i s f a c t o r y . A c c ep t a bl e g r o u t s were
ones t h a t
m e t
t h e fo l low ing per formance
c r i t e r i a :
so,
s o l u t i o n
Q 7
d d r a i n a b l e water
0 v o l
e
2 8
d compress ive s t reng th
50 p s i , e x p e c t e d
200-800
p s i
e
Compress ive s t re ng th a f t e r f reeze i thaw >200 p s i
e
H y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y
i 1 0 ~ m/s
e
10
min g e l s t r e n g t h -
e
S h r i n k a g e d u r i n g c u r i n g
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
9/38
3
2. PIT
DESIGN
T h e p i t d e s i g n u se d as
a
b a s i s f o r t h i s c o s t
estimate was
t aken
from an EG&G Idaho document. Three id en t i ca l t e s t p i t s
w i l l b e
c o n s t r u c t e d
for t h i s
i w s i t u
grou t ing exper iment w i th one se rv ing
as a
con t r o l and che
other two w i l l be grou ted . The p i t s will be 6 f t w id e, 18 f t l o n g , a nd
e x ca v at ed t o t h e b a s a l t u n d e rl y in g the e n t i r e
area.
The basa l t w i l l . be
covered wi th the e xc av at ed s o i l t o a dept h of approximate ly 3 f t , i . e . , t h e
underburden. The next 10 f t w i l l b e t h e waste zone, followed by 3 ft of
overburden. One w a l l of t he p i t w i l l have a
45
s l o p e , u n l i k e t h e
a c t u a l
waste p i t s . T h i s s l o p e w a s r e q u i r ed f o r s a f e t y r e a so n s d u r in g c o n t a i n e r
emplacement and w i l l b e b a c k f i l l e d .
One end of t h e
waste
zone w i l l conta in s t acked boxes wi th
h o r i z o n t a l d i m e n s i o n s o f 4 f t w id e a nd
8 f t long.
The
p i t w i l l
be widened
t o 8 f t f o r t h i s s e c t i o n t o a ccommodate t h e long dimensions
of
the boxes.
Three boxes
w i l l
be st ac ke d t o make up t h e 10 f t
waste
zone: two 4 f t high
wi th one
2
f t high on top. Adjacent to th e s tack ed boxes w i l l be s t acked
drums followed by dumped drums. The volumes as s o ci at ed wi th one of
t h e s e
p i t s i s given
in
Table 1.
Table
1.
Volumes
of
p a r t s
of
one
EG&G
Idaho des ign
p i t
D e sc r i p t i o n
Volume
f t 3 >
Waste zone
Box sec t ion
Drum section
S u b t o t a l
Unde rbu r de n
Overburden
T o t a l or t e s t p i t
320
840
1160
324
348
1832
45' Slope (excava ted) 1 5 2 2
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
10/38
4
3. ESTIMATION OF
V O I D S
The fol lowing assumpt ions2 were used to
est imate
the void volume i n t h e
d e s i g n p i t .
1.
2.
3 .
4.
5.
6.
7.
8 .
9.
Dis turbed s o i l b u l k d e n s i t y i s 85% of u n di s tu r be d s o i l bu lk d e n s i t y ,
i . e . , 85% compaction fa c t or .
Volume of waste a n d b a c k f i l l
s o i l
i s 30% less t han
ihe
volume exca-
v a te d i n t h e waste zone.
The bu lk dens i ty of t h e as -r ec ei ve d I da ho s o i l t e s t e d by OKNL i s t h e
d i s t u r b e d s o i l b u lk d e n s i ty .
The m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t of t h e as - r e ce i v ed I d ah o s o i l i s t y p i c a l .
The boxes co nt a i n 80% voids.
The drums c ont a in ing s cr ap
metal,
c o m b u s t l b l e s , c o n c r e t e / a sp h a l t ,
and
f i l t e r s
are
80% voids .
The drums con ta i n in g s lud ge
a re
20% voi ds.
N o b a c k f i l l
soil
i n the box s e c t i o n of t h e waste zone.
The volume
of
one drum i s 7.4 ft3.
Measurement re su l t s on
t he
Idaho s o i l received by ORNL i n c l u d e a t r u e
den s i t y (d ry and vo id les s ) of 2.75 g /cm3, an a s - rece ived bu lk den s i t y
( s t i l l m oi s t )
of
1.17 g/cm3, and an as- rece ived mois tu re con te n t nf
13.0
w t
.
p p l y i n g t h e s e r e s u l t s f o r t he s o i l samples and th e a ssumpt ions
l i s t e d abo ve t o t h e d e s l g n
p i t
r e s u l t e d i n t h e v o i d vo lu mes g i v e n i n T a bl e
2.
From Tables 1 and 2, 671 f t 3
of
l a r g e v o id s r e s i d e w i t h i n t h e 1160 f t '
o f the
waste zone,
or 57.8%. The b a c k f i l l s o i l i s e s t i m a te d t o c o n t a i n
143 fc 3 , o r 12.3%,
of
t i g h t a i r voids.
70.1% of t h e waste zone. The di st ur be d s o t 1 areas are e s t i m a t e d t o c o n t a i n
47.8%
a i r
voids and th e undi s tu rbed s o i l 38.4%
a i r
voids.
Toge the r the se vo ids account fo r
The e f f e c t i v e g r a i n d i a m e t er of t h e I da ho s o i l
is 0.03
mm ( s e e
Appendix A)
which
i m p l i e s a h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t iv i t y of about LO- c m / s . 3
The l a rg e vo ids
a r e
e s t i m a t e d t o i nc r e a se the ringrouted p i t h y d r a u l i c
c o n d u c t i v i t y t o 4 x cm/s (see Appendix
A) .
F i l l i n g t h e la rge voids
w i t h c o a r s e g r o u t d e c re a s e s t h e h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y t o a b ou t
2.4
x loe5
c m / s and g r o u t i n g f u r t h e r w i t h
a
f i n e g ro u t w i l l r e du c e t h e h y d r a u l i c
c o n d u c t i v i t y t o a b o ut
1Cr6 c m / s ,
e s t i m a t e d u s i n g a simple model. and
m ea su re d g r o u t h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t i e s ( s e e Ap pen dix A ) . J e t g r o u t i n g i s
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
11/38
5
assumed to g ive
a
s o l i d bl o ck h a vi ng t h e h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i ty of s o i l
g r o u t
o r
c o a r s e g r o u t (-10-9 cm/s).
Tab le
2.
Es tim ate d void vo;Lumes c on tai ne d i n and arou nd
one
EG&G
I d a h o d e s i g n p i t
De sc ri pt io n Void volume
t t 3 )
1. Waste
zone
L a r g e v o i d s
Drum sect ion
B a c kf i l l s o i l
Sludg e drums (13)
Oth er drums (32)
S u b t o t a l
Boxes
Pack ed s o i l v o i d s
A i r
H20
Subto
t
a1
2.
Underburden
A i r
H20
S u b t o t a l
3
Overburden
A i r
H 2 0
S u b t o t a l
4. 45 S l o p e s i d e w a l l
A i r
p e r
f t 3 of s i d e w a l l
H 2 0 p e r
f t 3
o f s i d e w a l l
S u b t o t a l p e r f
t
of s i d e w a l l
5. U n d i s t u r b e d s i d e w a l l s
A i r
p e r
f t 3 of s i d ew a l l
H 2 0 p e r f t 3
of
s i d e w a l l
S u bt o ta l pe r f t 3 of s i d e w a l l
207
19
189
256
67
1
143
46
189
155
49
2
04
166
53
2
19
_
0.478
0.152
0.630
0.384
0.179
0.563
~
4
GROUT
3MPLACEMENT
The grou t ing
of
t h e p i t s c an be done i n e s s e n t i a l l y t h r e e ,
OF
perhaps
more , ways. The th re e th a t
were
c o ns i de r ed f o r t h i s r e p o r t
were
(1)
i n j e c t i o n w e l l s , ( 2 ) i n j e c t i o n l a n c e s , and ( 3 ) j e t g r o u t i n g .
The
f l e x i b i l i t y and m o b i li t y of t h e l a t t e r two techniques were cons ide red
d e s i r a b l e e n o u g h
t o
r e j ec t t h e f i r s t t ec hn iq ue
f o r
t h e p u r p o se s
of
t h i s
ana lys i s . Th i s does no t imply tha t tha t t echn iqu e would no t work and
s h o u l d b e r e j e c t e d f o r a l l s u c h a p p l i c a t i o n s . B u t, f o r t h e l i m i t e d s c op e
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
12/38
6
of t h i s p ro je c t , some se le c t io ns had t o be made - p r i o r i , b as ed o nl y on
r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n and su b j e c t i v e ju dg me nt . Bot h of t h e o t h e r
t e c h n i q u e s w a r r an t c o n s i d e r a t i o n
o r
t h i s exper iment and
a r e
d i s c u s s e d
s e p a r a t e Ly below.
4 . 1 LANCE
I N J E C T I O N
T he l an c e t e c hn i q u e b a s i c a l l y i n v o l v e s f o r c i n g
a
h o l l o w l a n c e i n t o t h e
s o i l
o r
m a t r i x t o t h e d e s i r e d d e p t h and pressixre i n j e c t i n g t h e grout f rom
tha t po in t and up as t h e l a n c e i s withdrawn ( o r th e process can be revers ed
a n d g r o u t i n j e c t e d as t h e l a n c e i s forced down). 4 d o u b l e i n j e c t i o n
has
been suggested t o accompl ish
EG&G
Idaho 's goals . '
would be with
a
c o a r s e
p a r t i c u l a t e
g r o ut t o f i l l t h e l a r g e v oi ds e xp ec te d
i n s i d e and around the waste conta ine rs . Th i s in j e c t io n would be fo l lowed
by a sec on d i n j e c t t o n w i t h a p e n et r at i ng g ro u t t o f i l l t h e smalL v o i d s ,
i n c o r p o r a t e as much of t h e b a c k f i l l so f l as p o s s i b l e i n t h e g r o u t
s t r u c t u r e , a n d t o p e n e t r a t e t h e s i d e w a l l s t o f orm
a
g r o u t c u r t a i n .
4.1.1 Coarse Grout Quant i ty
The f i r s t i n j e c t i o n
To est imate the amount of coarse grout needed,
assume
t ha t a l l of the
l a r g e v o i d s
are
a c c e s s i b l e and c h a t t h e c o a r se g r o u t w i l l n o t p e n e t r a t e any
p ac ke d s o i l s ( b a c k f i l l , o v e r b ur d en , u n de r bu r d en , o r s i d e w a l l s ) .
From
Table
2 , 671 f t 3 o r about 5020 g al of g ro ut
w i l l
be r e q u i r e d t o f i l l
t h e
l a r g e
void s i n one exp erim enta l p i t . The gro ut f ormula recommended t o I X & G Ld,iho
c o n s i s t s o f 35 wt. t ype I,II Por t l and cement, 25 w t c l a s s C f l y
a sh ,
5
w t
b e n t o n i t e , and 35 w t water an d f l u i d i z e r ( f l u i d i z e r rnakes up 0 . 5
wt
o v e r a l l ) . 2
73,000
lb
of coa rse g rou t w i l l b e r e q u i r e d f o r o ne
p i t ,
or
a
t o t a l of
146 ,000 l b Table 3 g iv es th e qu an t i t y r equ i red of each component t o make
up
146,000
l b of t h i s c o a r s e g r ou t .
T h i s g r o u t h a s
a
de ns i t y of 14.5 l b / g a l l , meaning about
T a l l e n t
e t
a1.2
f ou nd i n s i m p l e l a b o r a t o r y
t e s t s
t h a t
this
coarse
g r o u t
would f i l l 37% of t h e v o id s i n d i s t u r b e d I da ho s o i l . We s h a l l assume t h i s
would b e i n d i c a t i v e of p e n e t r a t i o n i n t o t h e b a c k f i l l s o i l f o r t h e a c t u a l
grout emplacement (i .e . , n o p e n e t r a t i o n of c o a r s e g r o u t i n t o o v e r b ur d en ,
underburden, o r si de wa l l s) . From Table 2 , 189 f t 3
of
voids
p e r
p i t a r e
a v a i l a b l e i n t h e p acked s o i l v o i d s ; and t h e n u s in g T a l l e n t ' s v oi d
b a s i s
( i . e . , i n c l u d i n g w a t e r v o i d s ) a b ou t 7 0 f t 3 p e r p i t r e p r e s e n t s 37X of
t h i s vo id volume, a n i n c r ea se of about 10% i n th e amount of gro ut needed.
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
13/38
7
Thus, i n c r e as i n g t h e q u a n t i t i e s i n Ta b le
3
by 10%o r m u r e w i l l e n s u r e
enough c o a r s e gr o u t t o f i l l t h e l a r g e v o i ds i n s i d e t h e c o n t a i n e r s and
o u t s i d e t h e c o n ta i ne r s p l us f i l l i n g 37%
of
t h e s m a l l v oi ds i n t h e b a c k f i l l
s o i l .
4.1.2 Fi ne Grout Quant i ty
From t h e f i r s t s e t
of
a s su m pt i on s i n
Sect.
4 . 1 . 1 ,
a l l o i
t h e v o i d s
i n s i d e t h e c o n t ai n e r s and t h e l a r g e v oi d s i n t h e b a c k f i l l a ro un d t h e
c o n t a i n e r s w i l l b e f i l l e d w i t h c o a r se g r o u t . T h i s a s su m p ti o n i s t o o
o p t i mi s t i c f o r t h e rea l
case ,
though we hope t o approach i t ; but
is
reas onab le f o r e s t i ma t ing how much coa r se g ro u t w i l l be needed. F o r t h e s e
a s su m p t i o n s , t h e
small
v o i d s i n t h e u n d er b ur d en , o v e r b ur d e n , s i d e w a l l s , arid
b a c k f i l l w i l l
s t i l l
ne ed t o be f i l l e d by t h e f i n e g r o ut . Also, assume that
t h e water p r e s e n t i n t h e s o i l c an n ot b e f o r c ed o u t by t h e g r o u t. With
t h e se a s su m p t i o n s a n d u s i n g T a b l e
2 ,
464 f t 3
of
voids a r e p r e se n t in t h e
u n d er b ur d en , t h e o v e r b u rd e n , a nd t h e b a c k f i l l .
I n
a d d i t i o n , t h e b a s a l t
w i l l ta ke up some gro ut
i n
e x i s t i n g f i s su r e s . Assum ing t h e
p i t s
are
l o c a t e d o v e r t i g h t b a s a l t ( i . e ., no l a v a t u b e s , e t c . ) , w e fu r the r a ssume
t h a t t h e b asa l t
w i l l
t a k e
10% of wha: th e under burden t ake s4 which adds
a b o u t a n o t h e r 16 f t 3 of v o id s .
T a b l e 3 Component q u a n t i t i e s f o r c o a r se g r o u t t o f i l l a l l
t h e Large vo ids i n two EG&G I d a h o p i t s
Q u a n t i t y r e q u i r e d
Component W t ( l b ) ( t o n )
-
Type
1,II
Portland cement
3 5
51,000 25.6
Class
C f l y a s h 25 36,500
1 8 . 3
B e n t o n i t e 5
7,300 3 . 7
F l u i d i z e r 0 5 7 30 0.4
T he amount r e q u i r e d f o r t h e s i d e w a l l s r e q u i r e s
a n es t imate of
how f a r
t h e g r ou t
w i l l
p e n e t r a t e t h e s i d e w a l l . No
one
can say d e f i n i te l y how and
where
a
g r o u t
w i l l
p e n e t r a t e i n t o a s i v e n s o i l matr ix .
The
g r o u t w i l l
f o l l o w t h e p a t h o f
l e a s t
r e s i s t a n c e , w h e t h e r
i t is
a s o l u t i o n g r o u t o r
a
p a r t i c u l a t e g r ou t. Thus, i t could e:id up as
a
s t r in ge r many f ee t f rom
where one wants
i t
r a t h e r t h a n
as a
m i f o r m c u r t a i n
o r
f r o n t .
N e v e r t h e l e s s , w e sh a l l a s su m e a u n i fs r m p e n e t r a t i o n of 6 i n . o r t h e
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
14/38
u n d i s t u r b e d s i d e w a l l s a n d
7
i n . f o r t h e d i s t u r b e d s i d e w a l L 5 T hi s
assumpt ion g ives about 2 8 0 f t 3 of u n d i s tu r b e d s o i l and 177 f t 3 of
d i s tu r b ed s o i l
( 4 5
s l op e ) pen e t r a t e d by grou t . On t h i s bas i s and us ing
T a b l e
2 ,
192 f t 3
of
voids
a re
p r e s en t i n t h e s i d e w a l l s t o be f i l l e d .
A l t o g e t h e r , a b o u t 6 7 2
f t 3
of voids a r e p r e s e n t i n t h e g r o u t a b l e r e g io n o f
o n e p i t .
What f r a c t io n of t h i s volume w i l l a c t u a l l y b e f i l l e d w i th g r o u t c an
only
be
guessed
a t a t
t h i s
t i m e .
T a l l e n t e t
al.
assumed that a f i n e
cement g rou t would be used fo r th i s second grou t ing .2 The p os s ib i l i t y of
s y n e r e s i s l e d t o t h e r e j e c t i o n o f s o l u t i o n g ro u t s i n f a vo r of p e n e t r a t in g
cement g rou t s . Th i s conc lus ion w a s a r e a s o n a b l e as s um p ti on f o r t h e
l i m i t e d s c o p e of t h i s s t u d y , a nd i t does not imply t h a t s o l u t i o n g r o u t s
w ou ld d e f i n i t e l y n ot work f o r t h i s o r any o t h e r a p p l i c a t i o n . The f i n e
g r o u t t e s t e d b y
T a l l e a t
e t a l . f i l l e d a b ou t 5 2 % of the a i r and water voids
o r
ahou t 69% of th e
a i r
v o i ds ( i . e . , t h e v o i d s
used as
a b a s is f o r t h i s
s e c t i o n ) . 2
would be requ i red f o r one exper imenta l p i t . O f c o u r s e , a d d i t i o n a l v o id s
may b e a v a i l a b l e i n t h e c o n t a i n e r s t h a t t h e c o a r s e g r o u t f a i l e d t o
pe ne tr at e. On th e o th e r hand, how
w e l l
can a secondary gro u t i ng be done?
W i l l t h e l a n c e s be a b le t o p en e tr a t e t he f i r s t g r ou t a f t e r i n i t i a l
s e t ?
Are
s e t
r e t a r d e r s r e q u i r e d ?
T h e i m p l i c a t i o n i s t h a t a b o u t 464 f t 3 of T a l l en t ' s f i n e gr ou t
The
excess
f i n e g r o u t q u a n t i t y u se d as
a
b a s is f o r t h i s r e p or t was
based
on
t h e l a c k of q u i c k a v a i l a b i l i t y of t h e f i n e l y g ro un d ce me nt s.
Both types of cement cons ide red f o r t h i s r ep or t come f rom Japan wi th
a
d e l i v e r y
t i m e
of t h r e e weeks or more compared t o th e 24-h de li ve ry t i m e
f o r t h e P o r t l a n d cem ent u se d i n t h e c o a r s e g r o ut . A lt ho ug h t h e f i n e
cements are much more expensive tha n t he P or t la nd c e m e n t , severe economic
p e n a l t i e s r e s u l t f ro m u n d er o rd e ri n g s i n c e t h e g r o u t i n g c o n t r a c t o r
m st
be
p a i d w h i l e w a i t i n g f o r d e l i v e r y . The o n ly a l t e r n a t i v e i n s u ch a
case
i s
t o n o t g r o u t c o mp le te ly w i t h t h e f l n e g r o u t w hich i s n o t t e c h n i c a l l y
a c c e p t a b l e . F o r t h i s r ea so n , t h e vo i d volume e s t i m a t e d , 6 72 f t 3 o r 5027
g a l
p e r
p i t ,
w a s
used as t h e q u a n t i t y of f i n e g r o u t r e q u i r ed . T hu s,
1 0 , 0 5 4 g a l
of f i n e g r o u t w i l l be required.
The f i n e g r o u t t e s t e d by T a l l e n t e t a l .
w a s
a w a t e r c e m e n t m i x t u r e o f
8
t o 1 0 l h cement/gal water c o n t a i n l n g 0.02 w t CFR-1 sugar . Using a mix
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
15/38
9
r a t i o of 8 l b / g a l , t h e d e n s i t y of t h e g r o u t is 12.5 1 b / g a l e 2
approx imate ly
125,000 l b of g r o u t are needed con ta in ing 61,190 l b 30.6
to n ) of cement and 25 l b of C F S 1 .
T h e r e f o r e ,
4.1.3
Cost of Lance In je c t io n
T h e c o s t s
of
g r o u t i n g t h e two e x p e r i m e n t a l t r e n c h e s i n c l u d e : (1)
materia l , ( 2 ) sh i p p i n g , 3 ) c o n t r a c t o r ' s m o b i l i z a t i o n , a n d
4)
h e
co nt rac to r ' s emplacement cos t s . Grout materials may be bought and su pp li ed
by
EG&G
Idaho o r t h e c on t r ac t or may b e r e s po n s ib l e f o r h i s own su p p l i e s .
I n t h e
l a t t e r case,
an ad di t i on al hand l ing f e e may be added by th e
c o n t r a c t o r . I n t h e f o rm e r case, l o g i s t i c s and t im i n g
( i.e. ,
t h e materials
must be th er e when th e co nt ra c t or needs them)
must
be handled by
EG&G
Idaho, The same su pp l i er s used by
ORNL
f o r t h e
materials
i n t h e i r l a b
t e s t s i s recommended f o r t h e a c t u a l g r o u t i n g s i n c e any su b s t i t u t i o n c an
c h a n g e g r o u t p r o p e r t i e s .
p r o c e d u r e s t h a t r e q u i r e them t o p u r c ha se t h e m a t e r i a l s . T h e r e f o r e , i t
w a s
assumed that
EG&&
Idaho would pur chase th e materials and have them
a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e c o n t r ac t o r . T ab le 4 g i v es t h e s u p p l i e r s , prices , and
f r e i g h t c o s t s f o r t h e gr o u t
materials.
Also,
EGSG I da ho may wi sh t o ha ve
QA/QC
S ac k c o s t s r a t h e r t h a n bu l k c o s t s are u se d i n t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s in t h i s
repor t . Sacks
w i l l
i n c r e a s e t h e l a b o r f o r g r o u t i n g , b u t t he y w i l l
e l i m i n a t e
t h e n eed f o r b u l k s t o r a g e and h a n d l i n g o n - s i t e .
do
g i v e a n i d e a of t h e c o s t s a v i n gs f o r s c a l i n g up t o t h e TRU tr en ch es . Of
c o u r s e , a c t u a l
TRU
t r e n c h e s w i l l a dd o p e r a t i o n a l c o s t s n o t Co n si d er e d f o r
t h e e x p er i me n ta l p i t s , j u s t f ro m t h e f a c t t h a t
TRU
waste is involved.
The bu lk cos t s
T h e m o b i l i z a t i o n c o s t
w i l l
be
$5000 t o
$10,000
depending OQ t h e
c o n t r a c t o r and h i s l o c a t i o n . T h i s c o s t c a n be c o n s i d e r e d
a
f i x e d c o s t , b u t
i t
would l i k e l y i n c r e a s e i f a c t u a l
TRU
t r e n c h e s were involved. The co st
f o r e m pl ac in g
t p l e
g ro ut i n t h e p i t s
ranges f rom $2000 t o $3000 per day wi th
t i m e
estimates
r a n g i n g
from
10
t o
25
d
2
t o
5
work weeks).
c o n t r a c t o r s c o n ta c te d f o r t h e s e c o s t s are l i s t e d i n t h e Appendix. T h i s
l i s t is by no means a complete l i s t
oE
t h e g r o u t i n g c o n t r a c t o r s i n t h e
country and does not imply b idd ing should be l imi t e d t o these few. The
c o n t a c t s
were
l i m i t e d t o
a
few w e l l - e st a b l i s h ed names i n t h e f i e l d j u s t f o r
g e n e r a l cos t i n format ion .
A
m o b i l i z a t i o n cost of $10,000, a d a i l y c h a r g e
of $2500, arid 20 d t o comple te the g r ou t ing of two E G G I d a h o p i t s were
The
g r o u t i n g
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
16/38
10
T a b l e
4 .
Grout mater ial s u p p l i e r s a n d c o s t s
Mat
e r i a
1
S u p p l i e r P r i c e s F r e i g h t C o s t s
Type
I,II
P o r t l a n d
cement
Class
C
f l y a s h
(Laramie Rive r
f l y a s h )
MC103 Bentonite
D o w e l l D-65
F l u i d i z e r
Col lo ida l Cement
Microfine Cement
and NS-200
d i s p e r s a n t
(add -1% to the
l i s t e d c os t f o r
t h e d i s p er s a n t)
Coarse Grout
Ash Grove Cement Co. $4.40/94 l b $0.32194 l b
Poc a te l lo , Idaho sac k sack (min.
B i l l
Mahorney 50,000 l b )
Bois e . Idaho $73/ ton bul k $7.8O/ton bulk.
(2 08 ) 344-8460 (min. chg.
-24 h n o t i f i c a t i o n 50,000
Ib)
Pozza lan ic Nor thwes t , $47 .80 /ton bu lk
I n c . , M e rc er I s l a n d ,
Washington
Tom Fox
( 8 0 0 ) 4 2 6 5 1 7 1
24 h n o t i f i c a t i o n
Ro s s I s l a n d
Dry
Mix $2.85180 l b
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
17/38
1 I
assumed. Table 5 summarizes the
c0st.s
f o r
a
d o u b l e g r o u t i n g of two EG&G
I da ho e x p e r im e n t al p i t s u s i n g l a n c e I n j e c t i o n .
T a b l e
5.
Cost
est imate
f o r l a n c e i n j e c t i o n g r o u ti n g
a t
two EG&G Idaho des ign p i t s
D e sc r i p t i o n
c o s t
( 1
~
_ _
Material c o s t s :
Coarse g rou t
Por t l and cement ; 1 t ruck load ;
532
s a c k s
Fly ash ; p a r t i a l t ruck load ; 500 sacks
Be n t o n i t e ; p a r t i a l t r u c k l o a d ; 80 s a c k s
F l u i d i z e r ;
p a r t i a l
t r u c k l o a d ; 1 6 s a c k s
2 , 5 1 1
1,700
3,610
300
Subtot a1 8,121
F ine grou t :
Col lo ida l cement ; 2 c o n t a i n e r s ; 7 6, 00 0 l b
Sugar ; 25 l b
E m p l a c e m e n t c o s t s :
F i x e d ( m o b i l i z a t i o n )
Co a r se g r o u t ; 3 d / p i t
C
$2500/d
31,440
-...
10,000
15,000
Fine
g r o u t ;
7
d / p i t
@
$2500 /d
35,000
Subt o
t
a1
60,000
T o t a l
99,561
-100,000
The quantity of Portland cement i n Table 5 i s l e s s t ha n t h a t l i s t e d i n
Table 3 because of the awkwardness
of
t h e size
o f a
t r u c k l o a d a n d t h e
q u a n t i t y e s t i m a t e d t o b e r e q u ir e d.
I t
was assumed that one t ruckload would
be used and th a t t he su pp l i e r would qu ick ly re spond
i f
more
was
needed.
Cons ide r ing t he cheapness
o f
t h e c o a r s e g r o u t , EG&G Idah o may op t t o
p u r c h a se two t r u c k l o a d s ( o r
an
a d d i t i o n a l p a r t i a l t r u ck l o a d) . The o t h e r
components of t h e c o a r s e g ro u t are l i s t e d i n g r e a t e r a mounts i n T a b l e
5
t h a n i n T a bl e
3.
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
18/38
1 2
T he two se a t r a f n c o n t a i n e r s u sed i n T ab l e 5 g i v e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y more
f i n e ce me nt t h a n i s e s ti m at ed t o b e re qu i re d t o f i l l a l l of th e vo ids
r e a c h a b l e d u r i n g f i n e g r ou t in g . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e r e i s some doubt t h a t
a
s e c o n d a r y i n j e c t i o n w i l l work that w e l l . I n o t h e r words, t h e i n i t i a l s e t
of th e coa rse g rou t may preven t the l a nce s f rom pe ne t r a t i ng i n some
areas
t h a t r e qu i r e f i n e g rou t . Thus, t h e amount of
f i n e
gr ou t may be gr os sl y
o v e r es t i m at e d . Of c o u r se , t h e l a n c e s may b e d e s ig n ed t o p e n e t r a t e ,
f r a c t u r e i f n e c e s sa r y , t h e h a rd e n in g c o a r se g r o u t . T h at would c rea te voids
t h a t t h e f i n e g r o u t s ho u ld t h e n f i l l . Such s p e c i a l l a n c e s
may
r e q u i r e
development and w i l l i n c r e a s e t h e c o n t r a c t o r s c o s t s . I n o u r o p in i on , t h e
r e q u e s t f o r b i d s s h o ul d s p e c i f y t h a t s uc h p e n e t r a t i o n i n t o t h e c o a r s e g r o u t
w i l l b e e x p e c t e d f o r
a
d ou b le l a n c e i n j e c t i o n .
Prom Table
5,
t h e c o s t of t h e g r o u t s i s about $ 4 0 , 0 0 0 wi th more th an
75% be ing the f i n e g rou t . I f t h e supposedly more pen e t r a t ing mic rof ine
cement s o l d by Geoch emical Corp. i s u se d, t h e n 57 p a l l e t s (57 metric t o n s )
would be requ t red a long wi th
i t s
d i s p e r s a n t a t a c o s t of 5 7 , 5 7 0 . Thus,
t o t a l c o s t f o r c o a r s e a nd f i n e g r o u t would i n c r e a s e t o a bo u t $ 6 6 , 0 0 0 .
S i n c e T a l l e n t s r e p o r t * i s b ased o n A v a n ti s c o l l o i d a l ce me nt , t h i s c o s t
a n a l y s i s Ls b ased on t h a t c em en t. S u b s t i t u t i o n wo uld r e q u i r e t e s t i n g o f
t h e new cement i n th e same manner as t h e o ne i n T a l l e n t s r e p o r t . 2
I n c o n c l u s i on ,
a
d o u b l e l a n c e i n j e c t i o n g r o u t i n g
of
two of
t h e
E666
I da ho d e s i g n p i t s i s e s t i m a t e d t o c o s t a b o u t $100,000.
4 .2 J E T GROUTING
J e t g r o u t i n g w a s developed t o cement g rou t f i n e sands or s i l t s , i . e . ,
s o i l s th a t cou ld no t normal ly be pene t ra t ed by
a
cement grout . Us ual ly ,
t h e j e t
i s
mounted on a d r i l l r i g j u s t above t he d r i l l b i t . Th is d r i l l b i t
b o r e s
a
h o l e s l i g h t l y b i g ge r t ha n t h e
j e t
t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e d e pt h . N ex t,
t h e g r o u t ( u s u a l ly a water-cement mixture) i s f o r c e d
a t
v e r y h i g h p r e s su r e
t h r o u g h t h e
j e t as
t h e
j e t
i s
ro ta te d i n t he h ole and sLowly wi thdrawn from
t h e hole . The j e t c o n v e r t s t h e p o t e n t i a l e n er gy of t h e hi g h p r e s s u r e i n t o
k i n e t i c e n e r g y t h a t c h u rn s t h e su r r o un d i n g s o i l an d f or ms a well -def ined
column of s oiL -cce te,
s imi lar
t o t h e s o i l g r o ut s t e s t e d
by
T a l l e n t e t a l . 1
A cc o rd in g t o o ne c o n t r a c t o r , t h i s t e c h n iq u e w i l l form columns 3
f t i n
diameter composed of 20 wt cement,
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
19/38
I.3
The ques t ion
i s
w h et he r t h i s t e c h ni q u e
w i l l
work on
a
waste t r e n c h
f i l l e d w i th
la rge
v o i d s , s c r a p
metal , metal,
drums, and
a
p o t p o u r r i of o t h e r
i t e m s . W i l l metal shadow voids and /or s o i l ? One con t ra c to r e s t ima ted
t h e cos t of making one
EG&G
I d a h o p i t i n t o a s o l i d b l o c k u s i n g
j e t
g r o u t i n g
a t
$30,000 t o $33,000 ( inc lud i ng the cos t of cement ). Tab le
6
c o n t a i n s t h e
breakdown of t h i s co s t es t imate .
T h e f o l l o w i n g o p t i o n s w e r e c o ns i de r ed i n t h i s s t ud y :
1. Je t g r ou t t h e e n t i r e p i t as
a
E ' o il g r o u t ,
2. Je t g r o u t t h e c u r t a i n as a s o i l gro ut and th e remainder of th e p i t
w i t h t h e c o a r s e g r o u t .
A
v a r i s t i o n of t h i s o p ti o n
i s
t o
u s e
t h e s a i l
g r o u t
as
t h e b a s i s f o r t h e o v e rb u r de n an d un d er b ur de n as w e l l ,
T a b l e
6 .
Cost
est imate
of
j e t
g r o u t i n g t u o EGdG Idaho
d e s i g n
p i t s
u s i n g
a
cement-water grout
M o b i l i z a t i o n , 1400 miles
Personne l
Mixing and pumping equipment
Port land cement ,
2200
f t 3
T o t a l
Es t ima ted t i m e - 11 d
6,900
12,650
37,950
7,590
65,090
3.
Je t g r ou t t h e e n t i r e p i t w i t h t h e c o a r s e g r o u t ,
4 .
Lance double g rou t the waste zcne and j e t g r o u t t h e res t of t he p i t
( i n c l u d i n g t h e p e r i m e t e r ),
5. L a n c e i n j e c t g r o u t w i t h t h e c o a r s e g r o u t
f i r s t
i n t h e
waste
zone t o
f i l l t h e l a r g e v o id s f ol lo we d by j e t g r o u t i n g of t he e n t i r e p i t .
Opt ion 2 I .s f a vo r ed i f b o th l a n c e i n j e c t i o n a nd j e t g r o u t i n g w i l l be t r i e d
i n separa te p i t s a nd O p ti o n 5 i f o nl y t h e o r i g i n a l t h r e e p i t d e s ig n
w i l l
be
t r i e d . O p t i o n 5 reduces some of the unc e r t a in ty i n us ing j e t g r o u t i n g i n
waste t r e nc h e s by f i l l i n g t h e l a r g e v oi d s w i th c o a r se gr o u t p r i o r t o j e t
grout ing . P resumably th e emplaced coa r se g rou t w i l l
be
c u t up and blended
i n wi t h t h e f r e s h g r o ut u se d
in
t h e j e t grout ing . The d i sadvan tage of t h i s
o p t i o n
i s
t h a t
one
c o n t r a c t o r may not be ab le t o do bo th , which cou ld
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
20/38
14
s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n cr e a s e t h e c o s t . S i n ce t h i s s e c t i o n a d d r es s e s
j e t
g r o u t i n g s e p a r a t e l y fr om l a n c e i n j e c t i o n , o n ly O p ti o n
2
is a n a l y z e d f o r
i t s c o s t s in t he remainder of t h i s s e c t b o n .
The g r ou t c u r t a i n f o r t h i s t e ch n iq u e
is
assumed t o be
a
s o i l - C r e t e
e x t e n s i o n 3 f t beyond the nomina l p i t d imens ions
of
18
x 6
f t . T h e
c o n t r a c t o r u s u al l y u s es
a
cement-wa te r mix ture , bu t he be l i ev es the
j e t
can
h a n d le f l y a s h i n t h e g r o u t and b e n t o n i t e t o o
i
properly homogenized
(meaning ext ra equipment nay be required) .
Also,
t h e c o n t r a c t o r b e l i e v e s
t h e
j e t
c an b e h y d r a u l i c a l l y i n s e r t e d down t o t h e b a s a l t l a y e r f o r t h i s
a p p l i c a t i o n . T h u s , no c u t t i n g s f ro m t h e p i t
w i l l
h e br o u gh t t o t h e su r -
f a c e . To c a l c u l a t e t h e q u a n t i t y of g r o u t r e q u i r e d , any
soil
i n t h e g r o u t e d
r e g i o n
is
assumed 20 vol g r o u t a nd t h e l a r g e v o i d s are assumed
100%
g r o u t .
r e q u i r e d f o r
j e t
gro ut in g , compared t o the
2200
f t 3 t o t a l used
in
Table
4 .
The pe rsonne l cos t , equ ipment cos t , and t i m e est imate f rom Table 6 w i l l be
i n c r e a s e d by t h e r a t i o of t h e s e two t o t a l q u a n t i t i e s t o es t imate t h e c o s t s
based on the above assumpt ions fo r
j e t
g r o u t i n g t h e EG&G I d a h o p i t s .
From Table 7 ,
1 4 2 7
f t 3 of g r o ut p er p i t , o r
2 8 7 4
f t 3 t o t a l ,
w i l l
be
T a b l e
7.
E s t i m a t i o n of g r o u t q u a n t i t y r e q u i r e d f o r on e
EG&G
Idaho
d e s i g n
p i t
f o r
j e t
g r o u t i n g
Volume Gro ut volume
D e s c r i p t i o n
ut3
U t 3 )
S o i l
G r o u t c u r t a i n
2880 576
Underburden
324
65
Overburden
324 6 5
Backf
i
11
300
60
Large vo ids
T o t a l
67 P 47
1
1437
T h e c o s t b a s i s
w i l l
b e f o r t h e g r o u t s s t u d i e d b>- T a l l e n t e t
a l .
o r t h e
c l o s e s t a pp ro xi ma ti on . F o r t h e s o i l g r o u t s , t h e d x t u r e s u se d by
T a l l e n t e t a l . w i l l n o t b e d u p l i c a t e d w i t h t h i s ir. s i t u m ix in g t e ch n i qu e .
I n s t e a d , a grout made from a mixture of P o r t l a d c ement and f l y a s h ( t h e
r a t i o of th es e two component q u an t i t i es based on T a l l e n t e t d . s s o i l
g r o u t ) w a s assumed for t h e g r o u t c u r ta i n . T a l l e n t e t al.'s p a z t i c u l a t e
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
21/38
g r o u t
w a s
assumed f o r t h e p i t p r op e r, (The c o n t r a c t o r
may
b e a b l e
t o u s e
t h e so i l g r o u t f o r t h e o v er b ur d en and u n de rb ur d en
as
i n Option
2 ,
but
su c h was not assumed here . ) The gr ou ts sugges ted by Ta l l en t et
al.
meet
c e r t a i n s p e c i f i c a t i o n s t h a t a s u b s t i t u t e d g r ou t
may
n o t ,
e.g.,
t h e
b e n t o n i t e w i l l b e i m p or t a n t i n o r d e r t o h av e no bleed
water
f o r t h e g r o u t
in
t h e l a r g e v o id s . Any su b s t i t u t t o n
requires
t h e
same
t e s t i n g T a l le n t et
a l . performed on h i s recommended gro ut s. ('Chis m e a n s t h a t t h e g r o ut
a ssum ed f o r t h e g r o u t c u r t a i n n ee ds t o be t e s t e d . ) T a b l e
8
c o n t a i n s t h e
estimate
of component quant i t ies f o r j e t g r o u t i n g t o f o r m a
3
f t s oi l.
g r o u t c u r t a i n and a block of p a r t i c u l a t e g r o u t e n c a p su l a t i n g t h e w a st e
i n s i d e t h i s c u r t a in . Combining t h e q u a n t i t i e s e s t i m a t ed i n T a bl e 8 w i t h
t h e c o s t i n f or m a ti o n
in
Tables 4 and
6
l e d t o t h e c o s t
est imate
summarized
i n T ab le 9 f o r j e t g r o u t i n g tw o of the EG&G Idaho
de s ign
p i t s .
From
Table
9,
t h e g r o u t c o s t s less than $10,000, t h e emplacement cos ts more than
$75,000,
and t h e t o t a l c o s t s o r j e t g r o u t i n g
i s
about $85,000.
Table 8. Component q ua n t i t i e s fo r j e t grout ing two
EG&G Idaho
d e s i g n p i t s
Q u a n t i t y r e q u i r e d
Component
W t
( l b ) (ton)
Cu rt a i n grouta (assume 13.5 I b / g a l ,
125,814 l b g r o u t ) :
Type 1,II Portland cement 42 52,842 26 .4
Class C f l y a s h
16 20,130 10,
1
P i t g r o u t b ( 14.5 lb/gal ,
186,511
L b
g r o u t ) :
Type 1,II Portland cement 35 6 5 , 2 9 3 32,7
C la ss C
f l y
a sh 2 5 4 6 ,6 3 8 23. 3
Bent
m i
t
e
5 9,328 4.7
F l u i d i z e r
0.
5
933 0 5
_ _
~~~
_ _
Basis:
bBased on T a l l e n t
e t a l . ' s
se r ies 1 3 . p a r t i c u l a t e g r ou t mix No.
1 , s a m e as
t h e c o a r se g r o u t f o r S e c t. 4.1 i n T a b l e 3.
1160 f t 3
of c u r t a i n
grout arid
1 7 2 0 E t 3 of p i t gruut .
un te s t ed g rou t mix , bu t based on Ta l l en t e t al.'s soil g r o u t mix No. 1.
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
22/38
16
Table 9. Cost
estimate
f o r j e t g r o u t i n g two EG&G Idaho des ign p i t s
cost
D e sc r i p t i o n
( 1
Material
c o s t s :
Por t l a nd cement ; 2 t ruck loa ds ; 1064 sack s
Fly ash; 1 .34 t ruck loa ds; 835 sack s
B e n t on i t e; p a r t i a l tr u c k l o a d ; 94 s a c k s
F l u i d i z e r ; p a r t i a l t r u c k l o ad ; 19 s a c k s
S u b t o t a l
Emplacement c o s t s :
Fixed (mobf.Lization)
P e r s o n n e l f o r 1 5 d
Equipment o r 15 d
S u b t o t a l
5,022
2,650
848
300
8,820
6,900
17,250
51,750
75,900
TOTAL 84,720
4.3 OTHER COSTS
The o t h e r c o s t s , m ai nl y i n v o l v e d i n t h i s e x p e r i m en t ,
are
t h e QA/QC
c o s t s a nd e x p e r i m e n t a l m o n i to r i n g an d a n a l y s t s c o s t s . EG&G Idaho w i l l
deve lop t h e i r own programs o r t he se a sp ec t s o f th e exper iment and no
a t t empt was made t o
assess
t h e c o s t s i n vo l ve d . N e v e r t h e l es s , t h e f o l l o w i n g
two
items
were c o n s id e r ed : ( 1 ) a c c e p t a b i l i t y
of
t h e mater ia ls purchased
an d ( 2 ) h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y of t h e p i t s .
Since EG&G Idaho may no t have th e l ab ora tor y ca pa b i l i ty
t o
t e s t t h e
purchased grou t mater ia ls , ORNZ may be asked
t o
p er fo rm t h i s s e r v i c e f o r
EG&G
Idaho. Since a quick answer may be nec ess ary , samples may have t o be
hand d e l i v e r e d t o ORNL and then
a
t e c h n i c i a n u se d t o p er fo rm t h e 24-h
t e s t s .
Although t h i s may s uf f i c e fo r th e qu ick answer ,
EG&G Idaho
may want
the comple te se t of t e s t s f o r t h e p u r ch as ed mater ia l (i n cl u di ng t h e 2%-d
c u r e t i m e and long
term
f r e e z e - t h aw t e s t s ) . N e g o t i a t io n s b et we en
ORNL
and
EG&G
Idaho w i l l s e t t l e what i s n e c e s sa r y an d t h e c o s t .
To h e l p a s c e r t a i n t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of g r o u t i ng t h e p i t s , t h e h yd ra uL ic
c o n d u c t i v i t y of the p i t s can be measured be f ore and a f t e r g rou t ing . One
way
t o d o t h i s w ould u s e t h e a p p a r a t u s a c t u a l l y u se d i n t h e g ro u t in g .
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
23/38
17
Co n c e p t u a l l y , s e v e r a l p r o b es w ou ld b e f o r c e d i n t o t h e p i t a nd u nc ou pl ed
f rom th e hyd rau l i c and pumping equipment. Then, th e hyd rau l i c cond uc t iv i ty
w ou ld b e m ea su re d u s i n g t h e p r o b e s s t u c k i n t o t h e p i t . I f a p r o b e c a n n o t
be
i n s e r t e d a f t e r g r o u t i n g , t h e n t h a t would b e c o n s id e r e d a s u c c e s s f u l l y
g r o u t e d
area
and re l a t i ve ly impermeable. However, t h i s appraach req u i r es
two a d d i t i o n a l t r i p s
by
t h e c o n t r a c t o r w i t h t h e a t t e n d a n t m o b i li z at i o n
c o s t s a n d a t l e a s t o ne d a y ' s o p e r a t i n g c o s t s ( i .e . , about $25,000 f o r both
h y d r a u l ic c o n d u ct i v it y t e s t s ) .
t e s t s a p p e a r s more a t t r a c t i v e an d may o n l y c o s t a t e n t h as much. This
d e s t r u c t i v e e x a m i n a t i o n
t e s t
should be conduc ted on ly
on
t h e sh o r t - t e r m
grou ted t rench . The second hydr au l fc Condu c t iv i ty t e s t could be done
s h o r t l y b e f o r e t h e d e s t r u c t i v e e xa mi na ti on of t h i s p i t .
A g e o t e c h n ic a l f i r m s p e c i a l i z i n g i n such
Another method that could be
u s e d
i s s o n i c e v a l u a t i o n oE t h e
p i t .
With
th e des igned and documented p i t s p roposed , so n ic eva lua t io n of one p i t
b e f o r e g r o u t i n g
w i l l
h e l p e v a l u a t e t h e t e c h n i q u e a nd
a f t e r
g r o u t i n g
w i l l
h e l p e s t a b l i s h t h e s u c c es s of g r o u t i n g .
O t h er m i s c el l a ne o u s c o s t s i n c l u d e t h e c o s t and a v a i l a b i l i t y
of water.
Not b e i n g f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e s i t e , i t
was
unknown whether an adequate supply
w a s a v a i la b l e a t t h e t e s t s i t e .
A d d it i o na l c o s t s t h a t need t o be c o ns i de r ed f o r a c t u a l
TRU
wastes
i n c l u d e h e a l t h p h y s i c s p e r so n n e l, c o nt a in m en t s t r u c t u r e s , a nd p e r s o nn e l
p r o t e c t i o n .
I n
add i t io n , bo th emplacement t echn iques w i l l r e s u l t i n f l u i d s
a n d / o r g r o u t com ing t o t h e su r f a c e ( a r o u nd t h e p r o b e s , i nowhere e l se ) .
E G G Idaho should be p repa red
f o r
t h i s and have t h e c o n t r a c t o r c a p t u r e t h i s
material
and recyc le
i t
i n t o t h e p i t o r d is p os e
of i t
i n some
acceptable manner . I n ad di t i on , one way of i n c r e a s i n g t h e s u c c e s s of t h e
l a n c e i n j e c t L o n i s t o a dd t o t h e o v e rb u rd e n s o h i g h e r p r e s su r e s c a n be
used. Thi s co s t w a s not eva lu a te d , though i t would l i k e l y be minor , un les s
t h i s e x t r a o v er b ur de n n e ed s t o be reaoved (which cou ld be cos t ly
i n
t h e
case of
TRU
waste t r e nc h e s, b u t n o t i n t h e case of the exper ime nta l p i t s ) .
5. CONCLUSIONS
AYD RECOMMENDATIONS
Based
on
t h e g i v e n as s u mp t io n s an d t h e g r o u t s t h a t h av e be en t e s t e d
t h u s f a r , l a nc e i n j e c t i o n g r o ut i ng
of
two
of
t h e
EG&G
I d a h o d e s i g n
p i t s
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
24/38
18
w i l l c o s t a b o u t $100,000 and j e t g r o u t i n g o f t h e same p i t s
w i l l
c o s t a b o u t
$85,000. The advantages
of
t h e l a n c e t e c h n i q u e are :
1.
I t
i s
developed
for
p r e s s u r e i n j e c t i o n i n t o l o o s e and vo idy s o i l s ;
2.
deve loped f o r shal low grou t ing , though l anc es a r e a v a i l a b l e
40
f t
long ;
3 has been used fo r g rou t ing waste t r e n c h e s ;
4
machines a r e a v a i l a b l e t h a t h a n d le m u l t i p l e l a n c e s ; a nd
5.
l a n c e s are m o b il e , a l l o w i n g an o p e r a t o r t o t h or o ug h ly c o v e r a n
a rea
as
needed.
The advantag es of th e j e t g r o u t i n g t e c h n i q u e are:
1.
The placement of th e gro ut i s p o t e n t i a l l y w e l l - d e f i n e d ;
2. no p e n e t r a t i n g g r o u t i s r e q u i r e d ;
3 waste, s o i l , a n d g r o u t will p o t e n t i a l l y b e on e so l i d m at r i x ; a n d
4 . th e placement probe
i s
mobile.
The d i sadvantag es of th e l an ce t echn ique
are:
1. The placement t h e g r o u t i s u n c e r t a i n s i n c e t h e g r o u t f o l l o w s t h e
path of
l e a s t
r e s i s t a n c e . L a r g e voids u s u a l l y fill f i r s t ;
2.
a n e x p e n s i v e p e n e t r a t i n g g r o u t i s n ee de d t o g r o u t t h e s o i l m a t r i x
( u n de r bu r de n , ov e rb u rd e n, b a c k f i l l , a nd c u r t a i n ) ;
3 ooz ing of g r o u t t o t h e s u r f a c e ar ou nd t h e l a n c es ; and
4. t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e f i r s t g r o ut i ng w i th t h e c o ar s e g r o ut
will
i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e s e co nd g r o u t i n g wi t h t h e f i n e g r o u t.
The disadvantages
of
t h e j e t g r o u t i n g t e c h n i q u e are:
1. I t is d ev el op ed f o r u s e i n t i g h t s o i l s b u t n o t w i t h l a r g e v o i d s;
2. flow a ro un d l a r g e o b j e c t s su c h
as
drums i s u n c e r t a i n ;
3 .
waste w i l l be well-mixed wi th gr ou t (which may be an advant age or
d i sadvantage ) ; and
4 f l ow of g r o u t t o t h e su r f a c e a r ou nd t h e p ro be .
From the se advantages and d i sadvan tages , t h e l ance t echn iqu e seems t o
have an ed ge i n g r o u t i n g l a r g e v o i d s , b u t t h e j e t t eehn ique seems t o be
b e t t e r for g r o u t i n g t i g h t l y pack ed s o i l s or matrices. Se lec t ion depends o n
o n e ' s o b j e c t i v e s as w e l l as the p a r t i c u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n . The outcome of
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
25/38
19
n e i t h e r t e c h n i q u e
is
c e r t a i n ,
a
p r i o r i , an d b o th s h o ul d be t e s t e d b e f or e
r e j e c t i o n of g r o u t i n g
as
a s o l u t i o n f o r s t a b i l i z i n g t h e INEL
TRU
t r enches .
Both tech nique s can be expected t o have gro ut (ca rr yin g some waste)
p ush t o t h e su r f a c e a ro un d t h e pr o be p e n e t r a t i o n . T h i s material should be
captured and disposed
of
proper ly . I t i s su g g e s t e d t h a t su c h mater ia l be
recyc l ed back in to the p i t . One method t o he lp co n t ro l such emiss ions
and
i n c r e a s e t h e p r e s s u r e f o r l a n c e i n j e c t i o n ) would b e t o
increase
t h e
o ve rb ur de n l a y e r f o r t h e g r o u tl n g o p s r a t i o n ( b u i l d i n g a s o i l c ap ar ou nd t h e
j e t gr ou t probe may reduce th e flow from th e ov er si ze d probe hol e). Some
emiss ions should
s t i l l
be p lanned f o r and t rapped . De ta i l s such as t h i s
should be inc luded in t h e
request
o r b i d s , and t h e g r o u t i n g c o n t r a c t o r s
should propose
a
s o l u t i o n a nd g i v e c o s t s .
The disadva ntage of mixing waste wi th t he g ro ut , mentioned f o r
j e t
gro ut in g , concerns com pa t i b i l i t y of :he
waste
wi th the g rou t . Both
techniques a re faced wi th a problem
a t
t h e g r ou t -w a st e i n t e r f a c e , b u t
j e t
g r o u t i n g i n c r e a s e s t h i s i n t e r f a c e by e s s e n t i a l l y making t h e
waste p a r t
of
t h e g r o u t ( l o c a l l y ) . T h i s a s p e c t
of
t h e g r o u t t o be s e l e c t e d ha s n o t been
addressed , as y e t ; b u t i t must be before a f i n a l g r o u t f o r m ul a c an be
s e l e c t e d , r e g a r d l e s s of which technique
i s
chosen. Cement gr ou ts us ua ll y
r e q u i r e a d d i t i v e s f o r u s e w i th a c i d s , b a s e s , o r o rg a ni cs . No i n t e r a c t i o n
problem
i s
a n t i c i p a te d f o r t h e
metal,.
wood, combu st ibl es , concr e te ,
o r
f i l t e r s . However, s l u d g e w i l l be th e main prob lem and aspha l t cou ld a l so
be a problem i n j e t g r o u t i n g . Th e e x p e r i m en t a l p i t s
w i l l
c o n t a i n
a
s imula ted s ludge (wi th a c o mp o si t io n g i v e n i n t h e
p i t
design) which should
h e t e s t e d f o r c o m p a t i b i l i t y w i t h t h e g r ou t .
Based on t h e a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m at i o n , t h e f o l l o w i n g su g g e s t i o n s are
recommended:
1. The number of
t e s t
p i t s t o be g r o u t e d sh o u l d b e do ub le d so t h a t b o t h
l a n c e i n j e c t i o n a nd j e t gro ut i ng can be t r i e d and compared.
t h e f e a s i b i l i t y of t h i s su g g e s t i o n i s u n ce r t ai n ( s i t e a v a i l a b i l i t y ,
e t c . )
i t
c an b e s t a t e d t h a t i t would be desi rable .
Although
2. Of th e above recommendat ion i s re j ec ted , cons i de r ways
of
e v a l u a t i n g
both t echn iques ( such as g r o u t p a r t one way and p a r t t h e o t h e r ).
S e l e c t i o n of o n ly one technique depends on EGCG I d a h o ' s o b j e c t i v e s .
.
4 . The com pa t i b i l i t y of the waste and grout needs t o be eva lua ted .
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
26/38
2 0
5. The a b i l i t y of t h e g ro u t in g co n t r a c t o rs t o h an dl e e d s s i o n s t o t h e
s u r f a c e and t o pr op os e i d e a s f o r b e t t e r p e n e t r a t i o n ( r e v e r s e
g r o u t i n g , e x t r a o v e rb u r de n , e t c . ) sh o u l d b e p l a nn e d
f o r ,
a n d e v a l u a t e d
i n , t h e
t e s t .
6 . E v a l u a t e as b e s t
as
p o s s i b l e ) t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of a c co m pl is h in g EG&G
I d a h o ' s g o a l s
by
s t u d y i n g t h e
p i t s
w i t h a v a i l a b l e n o n d e s t r u c t i v e
exper imenta l t echn iques . (EG&G Idaho is w or ki ng h a r d t o d o t h i s , b u t
a u n iq u e o p p o r t u n i t y e x i s t s t o e v a l u a t e n o n d e s t r u c t i v e t e s t s on a
p re de s ig n ed p i t t h a t w i l l be d e s t u c t i v e l y e v a l ua t e d s h o r t l y a f t e r
grou t ing .
)
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
27/38
1. 0 K. Ta
21
REFERENCES
lent et al., Grout Testing an1 Characterization f o r Sha
Land Burial Trenches
a t
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory,
ORNL/TW9881, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, September 1986.
low
2.
J. 0
Low,
EGdG
Idaho, personal communication, August
1985
3.
J.
Herndon et al., Grouting i n S o i l s , Volume I: A S t a t e - o f - t h e A r t
Report, Halliburton Services,
U , S .
Department of Commerce, June
1974.
4.
T.
Tamura,
O W L ,
personal communication, August 1985.
5.
Steven Jaques,
W. G.
Jaques Co., personal communication, August 1985.
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
28/38
2 2
APPENDIXES
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
29/38
2 3
APPENDIX A: ESTIMATION OF
P I T HYDRAULIC
CONDUCTIVITY
The p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n
of
t h e Idaho s o i l sample rece ived by
ORNL
i s
g i v e n i n Ffg
1.
From t h i s f i g u r e , t h e e f f e c t i v e g r a i n d i a me t er ,
d l o ( i . e . ,
10
by w t
of
t h e s o i l p a r t i c l e s are
smaller
t h a n t h i s d i a m e t er ) ,
i s
about 0.03 m.
Herndon e t a1.3 g i v e a h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y of a b o u t
cm/s i n t h e i r Fig.
34 f o r t h i s d lo . D is tu rb in g t h i s s o i l
w i l l
i n c r e a s e
i t s
hydr au l i c cond uc t iv i ty some, bu t the hyd rau l i c condu c t iv i t y
w i L L
d e c r e a se
o v e r t i m e
as
t h e s o i l r e se t t l e s and recompacts. The pres ence of th e l a rge
voids
w i l l
have a much g r e a t e r e f f e c t t h a t i s not easy t o eva lua te . Some
of t h e l a r g e v o i d s w i l l not be immedia te ly , i f e v e r , a v a i l a b l e . Water
w i l l
permeate through t he path of
l e a s t
r e s i s t a n c e an d t hu s t e n d t o f o l lo w t h e
la r ge vo ids . The l a r ge vo ids
w i l l
o f f e r l i t t l e r e s i s t a n c e t o p er me at io n,
so t h e h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y
w i l l
b e d i c t a t e d by t h e ov e rb u rd e n, b a c k f i l l ,
underburden, and sid ewa l ls . Assume t h a t t he ove rburden
i s i n
se r ies w i t h
t h e l a r g e
voids
and t h a t t h e b a c k f i l l
i s
i n p a r a l l e l w i th l a r g e v oi ds . F or
r e s i s t a n c e s i n ser ies , t h e r e s i s t a n c e s ( i n v e r s e h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c ti v i t y f o r
t h e p r es e n t c a s e) a r e a d d i t i v e . For p a r a l l e l r e s i s t a n c e s , t h e i n v e r s e
of
t h e r e s i s t a n c e s ( t h e h y d r a u li c c o n d u c t i v i r i e s ) a r e a d d i t i v e . Co n c e p t u a l l y
f o r t h i s m od el , t h i s m eans water flow t h rough the
waste
zone
i s v i a
t h e
l a rge
voids and the f low
ra te
i s
d i c t a t e d by t h e su r r o u n di n g
matrices
(ove rburden , underburden , and s idewa l l s ) .
Co n s i d e r t h e
case
of permeat ion through t he overburden and
waste
zone
and ignore th e pa thways ou t of t h e waste zone ( i . e . , t h e water
w i l l
permeate
i n t o t h e b o t t o m
of
s i d ew a l ls o r c o l l e c t
a t
th e bot tom). Permeat ion w i l l
o n ly e f f e c t i v e l y o cc u r i n
the
area represen ted by l a r ge vo ids and the
permeat ion
w i l l
be d i c t a t ed by the ove rburden i n t h a t area.
(1)
PA
Permeat ion
r a t e
a-
L
where
P
= h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y ,
A =
area of
permeation, and
L = l e n g t h
of
permeation.
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
30/38
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
31/38
2 5
S e r i e s
P a r a l l e l
where
P A =
a v e r ag e h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y
f o r
t r e n c h ,
Po = o v er b u rd e n h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y ,
Pw =
waste
z o n e h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y ,
PL
= l a r g e v oi d h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y ,
PR remainder of waste z o n e h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y ,
A
= area
of p i t ,
AL
=
area
o f la rge
v o i d s ,
AR = area
of remainder ,
L
= h e i g h t of p i t above underburden ,
Lo =
h e i g h t
of
overburden , and
= h e i g h t of
waste
zone.
S i n c e
PL >> ' w e
c an n e g l e c t t h e s ec o n d
term of
Eq.
3
a n d d e r i v e ,
AL
Pw
= L
A
S u b s t i t u t i n g i n
Eq. 2 , we
o b t a i n
S i n c e
PL >>
t he second term
of
Eq. 5 may be ne gl ec te d, and
( 4 )
Po
PA --.
LO
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
32/38
26
A s
e x p e ct e d , t h e h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y
i s
i n c r e a se d by t h e l a r g e v o i d s
r e d u ci n g t h e d i s t a n c e of p e rm e at i on and b y p a ss in g t h e b a c k f i l l ( a ssu mi ng
l a r g e v o i d s a r e i n t e r c o n n e c t e d as i n t h i s s i m p l e m odel). W it h a n
o v er b u rd e n h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y of
loe4 c m / s ,
a t o t a l h e i g h t of 13 f t and
an overburden he igh t of 3 f t , t h e e f f e c t i v e hy d r a u l ic c o n du c ti v i ty i s
e s t i m a t ed t o b e 4 x
c m / s .
Apply ing th i s same model
t o
a
p i t
w i t h t h e l a r g e v oi d s f i l l e d by
c o a r s e g r o u t , i . e , PL - 1 ~ 9 m / s , l r e s u l t s i n PR >> PL,
p0
>> PL ( t h e
r e v e r s e
of
t he p rev ious a ssumpt ions) , and
*K
Pw
= - -
PR , and
A
( 7 )
Assume
Po
-.
PR
and AR = 2 3 f t 2 ( a r e a f o r b a c k f i l l s o i l o nly) .
l T 4
c m / s ,
Lo = 3
f t , L =
13
f t , I ,,
= 10
f t , A = 116 f t 2 ,
Thus, PA
= 2.4
x l C r 5 cm/s.
F u rt h er m o re , i f 52% of t h e s o i l ' s water and a i r v o i d s
are
assumed
f i l l e d w i t h f i n e g r ou t1 , i .e . , t h e area a v a i l a b l e f o r permeat ion reduces
by
69%
i n t h e o ve rb ur de n and b a c k f i l l , t h en s u b s t i t u t i n g i n Eq s .
7
and 8
0 .3 1AR
A
P = PR , and
PA
= 0.31c2.4 x lr m/s) = 7.4 x
c m / s .
11)
The r e d u c t i o n i n a r e a p r o p o r t i o n a l l y r e du c es t h e h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y
w i t ho u t t a k i n g c r e d i t o r
a
l ow e r s o i l h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y by v i r t u e of
f i l l i n g t h e bi gg er s o i l v oi ds l e av in g
a
s o i l m a tr ix w i t h a r e d u c e d e f f e c t i v e
g r a i n d ia m et e r. Assume t h a t 6 9% ( d r y w t ) of t h e l a r g e r s i z e s i l L u s t r a t e d
i n F ig . 1 i s g r o u te d l e a v i n g 3 1% of t h e f i n e r mater ia l as t h e lo o se s o i l
matrix
t o de te rmine th e approx imate hydr au l i c conduc t iv i ty . Thus , t h e
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
33/38
2 7
D3.1
of 0.006 mm from Fig.
1
rep res en t s the new Dlo g i v l n g a new hydraulic
c o n d u c t i v i t y o f a b o u t 5 x
lo-
c m / s f o r t he remain ing ungrou ted s o i l com-
p a r e d t o a b ou t
l T y
cm/s f o r t h e c o a r se g r o u t a nd a b ou t T8 m/s,
f o r
t h e
f i n e g r o u t. Th us k e ep i ng t h e
same
a s sum p ti o ns ( i n c l u d i n g t h e h y d r a u l i c
c o n d u c t i v i t y of s o i l b ei ng much greacer t h an e i t h e r g ro u t ) and s u b s t i t u t i n g
t h e new h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y
f o r s a i l s
into Eq. 10 g i v e s
a
h y d r a u l i c
c o n d u c t i v i t y
of
4 x
lT
cm/s f o r t h e p i t g r o ut e d f i r s t by c o a r s e g ro u t
than
by f i n e g rou t .
For j e t grout ing, assume
a
s o l i d b lo c k of s o i l g r o u t o r
coarse
g r o u t ,
g i v i n g
a
h y d r a u l i c c o n d u c t i v i t y
of
about 10-
cm / s .
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
34/38
28
APPENDIX
B :
L I S T OF GROUTING CONTRACTORS CONTACTED
Gelco Grout ing Service
Salem, Oregon
Steve Warig
Kent, Washington
( 206 ) 872 - 2550
H a l
1
bu
r
t o
n
E r n i e
Carter
Duncan, Oklahoma
( 405 ) 25 I- 2095
Dr.
Paul P e t t F t
Gaithersburg, Maryland
( 3 0 1 ) 2 5 8 - 6 0 4 5
W . G.
Jaques Co.
Steven Jaques
Des Moines, Iowa
( 5 1 5 ) 2 7 6 5 4 6 4
Woodbine, Inc.
A r t
Penge l ly
Fo rt worth, Texas
( 8 1 7 ) 6 2 % 4 24 2
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
35/38
29
APPENDIX C: EXTRAPOLATING THE COSTS FOR GROUTING
THE
TEST PITS
INTO COSTS
FOR
GROUTING THE TRU WASTE TRENCHES AT
INEL
The volume sca le up f a c t o r go i n g f ro m t h e two e x p e r i m e n ta l p i t s
t o t h e a c t u a l
T R U
t r e n c h e s
i s 1000.
T hu s, t h e s i m p l e s t e x t r a p o l a t i o n g i v e s
$85,000,000
t o
$100,000,000
t o gr0L.t t h e TRU tr en ch es . Th is si mp le
a pp ro ac h i g n o r e s s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n c l u d i n g (1) t h e f a c t t h a t TRU waste
is now inv ol ve d which will I n c r e a s e c o s t s , ( 2 ) a t i m e sp a n of s e v e r a l
years
i s i nvo lved , (3) economies of s c a l e w i l l apply, and 4) some of t h e c o s t s
a re f i x e d a nd do n o t sca le up p r o p o r t i o n a l t o t h e j o b s i ze . Tak ing
into
a cc ou n t t h e f i x e d c o s t s i n Ta b le s 5 and
9 w i l l
d e c r e a se t h e s i m pl e
e x t r a p o l a t i o n a bo ve
$7,000,000 t o
S10,000,000 t o make the ex t rap o la t ed
estimate
$80,000,000
t o
$90,000,000.
Any such
est imate
u s i n g t h e
cos ts
in
t h i s r e p o r t w i l l be much more i n a c c u r a t e t h a n a n a l yz i n g t h e a c t u a l c o s t s i n
g r o u t i n g t h e d e s i g n p i t s .
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
36/38
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
37/38
ORNL/TM-
10025
INTERNAL
D I S T R I B U T I O N
1. D . A.
Costanzo
2 .
L .
R. Dole
3.
T. M.
G i l l i a m
4. R. W. Glass
5 . T. T.
Godsey
6. R.
A. Wannaford
7 .
F.
J .
Homan
8 .
E .
K. Johnson
9. R. S. Lowrie
10-12.
E.
W. McDaniel
13. C. P. McGinnis
14.
M. M.
Osborne
15.
W. W.
P i t t
16
T.
H. Row
17.
18.
19-23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
2 8 .
2
9.
3 0 .
31.
32.
33
EXTERNAL, D I S T R I B U T I O N
T .
L. Sams
F.
M.
S c h e i t l i n
R. Spence
M.
G. Stewar t
D . P. S t i n t o n
s. H stow
0.
K.
T a l l e n t
R. G. Wymer
Ce n t r a l Re se a r c h L i b r a r y
ORNL-Y-12 Tech. Library
(Doc. Ref.
Sect.)
Laboratory Records
Laboratory Records-RC
O W L P a t e n t S e c t o n
34. R. L. Berger, University uf I l l i n o i s a t Urbana, 208 N. Romaine
35. O f f i c e of As si st an t Manager f o r Energy Resea rch and Development,
36.
T.
L.
Clements, Jr . , EGdG Id ah o, In c. , P. 0 . Box 1525, Idaho
37.
J. 0 Low,
EG&G Idaho, Inc., P. 0. Box 1525, Idaho F a l l s ,
ID
83415
38.
C.
L.
Miller,
EG&G
Idaho,
Inc.,
F. 0.
Box
1525,
Idaho F a l l s ,
I D
39. T. H. Smith, EG&G Idaho, Tnc. ,
E .
0. Box 1525, Idaho F a l l s , ID
S t . , Urbana, I L 61801
DOE-ORO, E'.
0
Box E , Oak Ridge, TN 37831
F a l l s , I D
83415
834 5
834 5
40-69. Tech nica l Inf orm at io n Cen ter , Oak Ridge, TN 37831
7/26/2019 Grout Cost
38/38