Search Documents

By Roger Storry, Donald Bruce, Arnaud Hochart

"INTRODUCTIONThe Port of Miami Tunnel (POMT), designed and constructed by Bouygues Civil Works Florida between 2009 and 2014, was a Public Private Partnership between the Miami Access Tunnel Concessionaire, Florida Department of Transport, Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami. The project comprises dual 11.3m internal diameter, 1.27km long, twin lane road tunnels running between Watson and Dodge islands and under the main shipping channel in Biscayne Bay (Figure 1).The POMT was a unique project which embodied many technical firsts and involved the first large diameter tunnels constructed through Florida’s challenging sedimentary carbonate strata. At the outset, a comprehensive ground investigation was performed, using both conventional and less conventional investigation techniques, to characterise the highly heterogeneous ground conditions.The findings of the investigation had a major impact on the tunnelling methods, triggering a series of mitigation works to ensure that the tunnels could be excavated safely and effectively. The mitigations included modifications to the already designed Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM), to facilitate an innovative excavation process, and a unique grouting campaign (Storry et. al. 2013a). The project was completed and opened to traffic in August, 2014 and has significantly alleviated traffic congestion in Downtown Miami.GEOLOGICAL CONTEXTThe geological conditions at the project site consist of carbonate sediments which can be divided into distinct geologic units; the Miami Limestone Formation (Layers S3, S4), the Fort Thompson Formation (Layer S5), the Anastasia Formation (Layer S6), the Key Largo Formation (Layer S7) and the Tamiami Formation (Layer S8). Multiple changes in sea level over a relatively short geologic time scale have resulted in a heterogeneous profile consisting of interbedded sedimentary rocks and sediments, which vary widely, both vertically and laterally (Figure 2)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Manuel Arnáiz, Pedro R. Sola, Rogelio Baudot, Manuel Herrera, Carlos S. Oteo

The aim of this paper is to describe and analyze the ground treatment performed between January and May 2002 in order to increase safety during excavation and reduce instability problems along 180 m of tunnel, during the construction works associated with line 10 extension to the Madrid Metro. The tunnel was excavated using the traditional Madrid Method and in the section considered in this paper layers of sand were detected around the tunnel crown area with a significant presence of water, the in?ow of which needed to be controlled with a minimum impact on the surrounding environment.

Jan 1, 2003

By W. Sharkey Bowers

This study was undertaken in order to determine a conservative estimate of the attenuation rate of vibrations through the shallow limestone in South Florida due to quarry blasting.

Feb 1, 2020

By Albert Roberts

Summary In response to a growing intolerance towards ground vibrations and noise as environmental pollutants the engineer must consider the effects of his operations as they are likely to be judged subjectively by the public at large. Much work has been done on the study of vibration damage to structures, but the damage criteria normally applied do not take into account any resonance effects, nor do they embody any subjective criterion. Mu1tiple criterion techniques of subjective appraisal have proven to be of value .in the assessment of environmental comfort in relation to ventilation, air conditioning, and lighting. One such scale, the Reiher-Meister Scale, has also been applied to ground vibrations and noise, and an attempt has been made to correlate this scale with objective criteria, using the parameters of frequency and displacement. This paper quotes examples and compares ground vibrations resulting from blasting, the operation of, vibrating and impact-hamner pi1e drivers, forge hammers, and railway and road traffic. The Reiher- Meister Scale was applied to a subjective-objective correlation in relation to vibrations from railway traffic and gave results which did not conflict with experience.

Jan 1, 1971

Much attention in controlling blast vibrations has been centred on the probability of causing damage to structures in the area adjacent to where blasting is carried out. In most cases these structures are residential properties and the effect of the vibrations on the occupiers has not been studied to any great extent. This paper looks at the sources of disturbance caused by blasting and their psychological effect. A comparison of ground vibration levels for compliance is examined within the framework of structural and human response.

Jan 1, 1998

By K. Rainer Massarsch, Bengt H. Fellenius

"Abstract Vibrations generated during the driving of piles or sheet piles can affect buildings or installations in the ground. However, observed building damage is not always caused directly by dynamic effects, but can also be related to foundation conditions. The importance of geotechnical conditions is usually not taken into consideration in most vibration standards. This paper describes how building foundations, and in particular mixed foundation types, are especially sensitive to ground vibrations. A method is presented for assessing the risk of settlement due to vibrations in granular soils. Also, a simple concept is proposed for estimating settlements in the vicinity of driven piles.1. INTRODUCTIONUnder unfavorable conditions, the installation of piles or sheet piles can cause damage to buildings or other structures on the ground. Frequently, such damage is attributed to vibrations of the building itself. In many countries, national or international standards are used to assess the risk of vibration damage to buildings. As such standards are often prepared by engineers with little or no geotechnical knowledge, the effects of ground conditions on vibration propagation and damage to building foundations are generally not recognized, and damage criteria based solely on the dynamic response of buildings neglect the importance of damage mechanisms governed by geotechnical conditions. One potentially important damage mechanism is differential settlement below buildings, especially when these are founded on loose granular soils. When seeking guidance in the literature, little or no information can be found regarding methods to assess permissible levels of ground vibrations with respect to risk for settlement.This paper focuses on building damage that can be attributed to foundation conditions. In the case of ground vibrations due to pile and sheet pile driving, differential settlements are of particular importance as the ground vibrations attenuate relatively rapidly from the source. Consequently, settlement below part of the building, which is located close to the vibration source, can be significantly larger than at a distance further away.Piles are often a cost-effective foundation solution for buildings on loose and compressible soil, frequently located in urbanized areas. Sheet piles are commonly used as support for deep excavations. While impact driving is most commonly used to install piles, vibrators are frequently used for driving (and extraction) of sheet piles. It is important to recognize the fundamental differences between impact and vibratory driving. During impact driving, the pile is subjected to stress waves of short duration. The driving process creates vibrations, which radiate from the shaft and/or the toe of the pile into the soil. The larger the intensity of the stress wave, the larger the dynamic force and the intensity of ground vibrations. In addition to the vibration intensity, which often is expressed in terms of particle velocity, also the vibration frequency is important. When the dominant frequencies of the generated vibrations harmonize with the resonance frequency of buildings or building elements, the risk of building damage increases."

Jan 1, 2014

By K. Rainer Massarsch, Bengt H. Fellenius

"Abstract Vibration limits for buildings with respect to ground vibrations from pile driving published in international standards are reviewed. At first, relevant vibration parameters are defined and the evaluation of vibration records is described. The sensitivity of structures to different vibration parameters (displacement, velocity and acceleration) is discussed. Most vibration standards relate to blasting activities, the dynamic characteristics of which can be significantly different to those from construction activities and in particular, pile driving. Several vibration standards are reviewed. The Swedish vibration standard is described in detail, as it is the only one accounting for several important factors, such as ground conditions, building material, and type of building foundation. Many standards limit the guidance to values based on the dominant vibration frequency and a wide scatter of frequency-dependent vibration limits exists. It is difficult to compare limiting values of ground vibrations proposed in different standards.1. INTRODUCTIONFor poor ground conditions, placing structures on piles is the most common foundation solution, while sheet piles are widely used to support deep excavations. Piles and sheet piles must often be installed in the close vicinity to buildings, structures or installations in the ground, which can be affected by ground movements and vibrations, (Massarsch and Fellenius, 2014). In many areas, environmental concerns with respect to noise and ground vibrations can restrict or even prohibit driving of piles or sheet piles or reduce the efficiency of installation. The design engineer must prescribe – often at an early stage of a project — the permissible levels of ground vibrations in order to minimize the potential risk of building damage. When seeking guidance from the literature, little or practically no applicable information can be found on how to assess permissible levels of ground vibrations."

Jan 1, 2014

By R. L. Loofbourow

R. L. LOOFBOUROW 26.1-WATER FLOW, USE, EFFECTS, CONTROL Sec. 4 discusses ground water as a mineral resource. This section deals wits its control. 26.1.1-IMPORTANCE Flows of water have an important effect on the cost and progress of many deep excavations. The existence of water limits the methods which can be used in some and presents hazards in others. Lowering the water table may reduce the flow of springs and wells, with legal liability. Some mine water is used directly, some must he treated before discharge, and some contains dissolved solids which can be recovered profitably. Loss of life, property and production from flooding is grim, yet scores of mines have worked safely for generations under ground-water reservoirs, lakes and even the sea. The need for better control of mine water is measured by the severity of recent floodings, concern with the quality of the effluent, and direct and indirect costs of working wet ground. There are improvements in freezing in shaft sinking. pumps and their controls, treatment of mine water before it is pumped, bulkhead construction and certain efforts to reduce inflow. 26.1.2-PUMPING COST VS. COST OF WET WORK Direct operating and capital costs of pumping are more evident than indirect items, such as provision of extra standby power and maintenance facilities, The total of all these items is the cost of pumping water from an excavation. This is only a part of the extra cost of working wet as compared to dry ground. Less productive methods, less efficient equipment and more expensive explosives may have to he used in wet work. Wet rock plugs certain equipment. Maintenance is higher and labor less efficient. The cost of any means of keeping work drier should he weighed against the higher cost of working wet. The true difference in the cost of working wet ground, compared with dry, probably is known at only a few places (see checklist of cost items. Sec. 26.4.13). An extreme comparison of mining wet and dry ore is available from Ambrosia Lake, N.M. (Fig. 26-1). Between 1963 and 1967, a wet and a dry mine were worked by the same company under conditions otherwise comparable. Average operating cost at the wet mine, pumping 1,600 to 1,800 gpm. was $16.06 per ton of ore. The comparable figure for the dry mine was $7.50. Principal differences included the fact that the wet mine was worked from drainage levels below the, ore with rail haulage, the dry mine in the ore with off-track equipment loading and hauling to the shaft. In the wet mine, ore packed in chutes, cars and skips and froze in surface bins, stockpiles and trucks. Wet-mine costs included drilling drain holes, building and maintaining ditches and pumping water containing abrasive solids.

Jan 1, 1973

By Robert G. Lenz

Control of ground water for construction purposes is an everyday occurrence in the U.S. Thousands of pumps are in service at any given time. Most of these applications simply consist of pumping water out of an excavation, generally with the aid of sumps. Modern hydraulic and electric submersible pumps permit these procedures because of their ability to pump solids and take air without losing their prime. These procedures work fine up to a point and permit the contractor to control his ground water problems adequately and at minimal cost. When that point is exceeded, the ground water problems sometimes are compounded. Over-application of open pumping techniques can result in slope failures, cofferdam instability, bottom heaving, boils, loss of ground, damage to adjacent structures and utilities, and assorted other maladys which could and should be avoided. This paper will deal with the options involved in ground water control, a discussion of the unwanted side effects of dewatering, and examples of ground water control projects in various cities around the U.S.

Jan 1, 1988

By W. M. Ma, Daniel W. H. Su, K. Centofanti, Yi Luo, W. L. Zhong, Syd S. Peng

10.1 I~RODUC1'ION In order to understand the effects of surface subsidence due to underground mining on the ground water hydrology, a brief introduction to the rate, direction, and general pattern of ground water movement in aquifers is necessary. Ground water movement in an aquifer is controlled by aquifer lithology, structure, permeability, water levels, topographic set¬ting, and pumping patterns (Sgambat et al., 1980). Fig. 10.1 shows an idealized flow pattern of ground water in a hilly terrain (Coe and Stowe, 1984). The hill is made up of a series of interbedded permeable aquifers (mostly sandstone) and confining units (mostly shale). Since sandstone is porous and permeable, ground water moves through it downward and laterally until it reaches the interbeddings of the confining unit immediately below. The ground water then moves laterally along the interbeddings, be¬cause the confining unit is less permeable, and comes out as springs on the surface at the intersection of the aquifer and the confining unit. If there is a ground water table in each aquifer, it is a perched water table (e.g., right side of Fig 10.1). On the other hand, if the ground water recharge is larger than can be drained out, the interbedded permeable aquifers and confining units will be filled with water and a ground water table will exist only at the uppermost permeable aquifer. This is the semi-perched water table (e.g., left side of Fig. 10.1). There are three ground water flow systems: shallow, interme¬diate, and deep. Shallow flow systems occur near the land surface and the surface drainage system. The flow depth ranges from a few to several hundreds of feet with a resident time of a few weeks to a few years after entry, depending on the permeability of the rock strata. In a shallow flow system, the drainage coincides with sur¬face run-off water divides. Intermediate flow systems occur in minor hills some distance away from surface drainage. The travel distance ranges from several hundreds to several thousands of feet, the travel time from several months to tens of years. These systems are less dependent on seasonal recharge or discharge. In deep flow systems, the ground water travels from thousands of feet to miles, and transfers between surface basins. The travel time ranges from several tens to several hundreds of years. The systems generally receive recharge over a large area on major mountains and dis¬charge into major stream systems. 10.2 CASE STUDIES There are two ways of monitoring water wells for studying the effects of dewatering due to underground mining, i.e., water level and piezometric level. The water level is the water elevation in a water well that has penetrated two or more aquifers. Thus it indi¬cates the combined flow of all the aquifers that the water well intersects during the time of measurement. The piezometric level is the level to which water rises in a piezometer cased to a specific aquifer, and coincides with the pressure level of water in that aquifer. Therefore piezometric level reflects the water condition in that particular aquifer to which it is confined, while the water level represents the total yield of a water well without regard to the source of water. For instance, if a water well intersects two aqui¬fers, and if the lower aquifer is affected by undermining and goes dry while the upper aquifer does not, the water level in the well will drop, but may never go dry. Under this condition, the data obtained by monitoring the water level do not indicate the true behavior of the individual aquifers, especially if they are located at widely separated heights. 10.2.1 WATER LEVEL EFFECTS The effects of underground mining on ground water flow have been the subject of many investigations (Booth, 1984; Coe and Stowe, 1984; Owili-Eger, 1983; Rauch et al., 1984). However, the problems are very complicated, as have been exemplified by the conflicting conclusions reached by various investigators in var¬ious case studies. The most dramatic examples were described by Coe and Stowe (1984). In the first case (Fig. 10.2), the coal seam was 5 ft thick with cover from 400 to 800 ft deep. The majority of water supplies came from a sandstone aquifer in most ridge tops. When the face of the Panel No. 3 passed under it, dug well WW-1, which was approximately 670 ft above the coal, went dry, while the water level in Borehole B- 1, which was located at the center of Panel No. 4 with the bottom reaching the coal seam, also dropped about 160 ft. In Panel No. 5, the developed spring DS-2, which originated from the surface of the sandstone/shale contact and was approximately 750 ft above the coal seam, stopped when the face passed under it. The water level in the dug well W-2, which was dug into the shale about 700 ft above the coal seam dropped about 22 ft, but the well did not go dry. Therefore, nearly every spring or well located above or near the active panels was affected by longwall mining. In the second mine (Fig. 10.3), the seam was 5 ft thick with cover from 200 to 400 ft thick. Dug well DW-2, the bottom of which was 35 ft deep and approximately 330 ft above the coal seam in a perched sandstone aquifer, went dry right after the longwall passed under it. Drilled well W-3, in the sandstone aquifer, about 220 ft above the coal seam, experienced a 75-ft drop in water level when the face was under it, but showed some re¬covery after the face had passed under it. Ponds P- I and P-2 were developed in shale bedrock and were spring fed. They were not affected by longwall mining. Pond P-3 was developed in the sand¬stone aquifer, and its water table showed some decline when the face passed under it. Spring ST-1, which originated from Pond P-1 and was fed from several tributary valleys, was affected by longwall mining, probably because it passed across the panel edges where tension cracks drained off the water. Although the overbur¬den in case 2 was about half of that in case 1, the majority of water resources were not affected by longwall mining. Coe and Stowe (1984) attributed this discrepancy to: (1) a higher percentage of clays, shales, and claystones, resulting in a lesser degree of inter¬connected fracturing, and (2) a less rugged topography resulting in a less localized ground water flow system. Therefore, in order to assess the effects of underground mining, the premining ground water flow patterns, topographical, lithological, and meterological conditions must be known. Booth (1984) also monitored the ground water effects of a longwall mine (Fig. 10.4) in a seam 5 ft thick and 300 to 800 ft deep. There were three major aquifers: Morgantown sandstone approximately 30 ft thick and 630 ft above the coal; Saltsburg sandstone of up to 50 ft in thickness and 520 ft above the coal; and

Jan 1, 1992

By B. A. Waite

The new OSH regulations concerning ground ward monitoring of underground coal mines has been the source of many concerns for the mining industry. Because the regulations were initially written at the federal level but are being administered at the state level, considerable confusion exists within the industry as to what is actually required. Based on the preparation and submission of over 30 monitoring plans for existing deep mines in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio, we now have a very good feel for the detail the monitoring plans, as well as the costs to im plement the plans. We do not, however, feel confident in our evaluations of the long-term impact the ground water monitoring regulations may have on the industry.

Jan 1, 1980

By W. L. Cooley, K. Y. Lee, M. M. Hassan

Because power system topographies for surface coal mines are significantly different from those for underground coal mines, the requirements for ground wire monitors for surface systems are somewhat different. This paper analyzes the problems faced by high-voltage ground wire monitors. Based on this analysis, some design requirements for monitors are suggested. Finally, results from laboratory evaluation of some of the commercially available monitors are presented.

Jan 1, 1979

By Yuting Xue, Gamal Rashed, Zoheir Khademian, Morgan Sears

Mining has been recognized among the most hazardous industries in the United States, despite the significant reduction in injury and fatality rates over the past century. This study focuses on the ground-fall incidents classified in the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) database as “fall of roof, back, or brow from in-place” and “fall of face, rib, pillar, side, or highwall.” The main objective of this study is to conduct a comprehensive statistical analysis of the reported ground-fall incidents from 2010 through 2019 including both coal and metal/non-metal mines. Since most of the ground-fall injuries and fatalities occurred in underground coal mines and were attributed to falls of roof and rib, an additional analysis was directed to evaluate roof- and rib-fall incident trends in underground coal mines associated with the mining method, coal-seam thickness, mine size, and the seasonal effects.

By Jonathan Baggett, Nino Ripepi, Amin Abbasi, Richard Bishop, Juan Monsalve, John Hole

This work focuses on the operational and safety issues associated with karst voids in large opening underground mines. Issues include water inrush, structural instability, and engineering uncertainty in these environments. Coupled with the fracturing prevalent in folded sedimentary rocks, karst voids are complex and challenging ground-control risks. Traditional methods of predicting karst void locations, such as probe drilling, are impeded by the inconsistent spatial distribution and variable sizes of the features as reported by Li et al. (J Rock Mechan Geotech Eng:232–242, 2010) and Hassan et al. (Procedia Chem 19:737–742, 2016). Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) is a geophysical technique that transmits radio waves into a medium and subsequently detects reflected waves via a receiver. The travel time and energy of received signals are then processed and interpreted. The difference in conductivity and dielectric permittivity between limestone and open karst cavities causes strong reflections. GPR is frequently used as a geophysical surveying technique in several industries; however, there is a lack of published research on underground mining GPR applications as reported by Zhao et al. (2015a; Geophys J Int:62–71, 2015b) and Eskelinen and Pellinen (Constr Build Mater:888–898, 2018). The purpose of this work is to demonstrate the use of GPR in an underground stone mine and to discuss the importance of karst void detection ahead of mining.

By Jonathan Baggett, Nino Ripepi, Amin Abbasi, Richard Bishop, Juan Monsalve, John Hole

This work focuses on the operational and safety issues associated with karst voids in large opening underground mines. Issues include water inrush, structural instability, and engineering uncertainty in these environments. Coupled with the fracturing prevalent in folded sedimentary rocks, karst voids are complex and challenging ground-control risks. Traditional methods of predicting karst void locations, such as probe drilling, are impeded by the inconsistent spatial distribution and variable sizes of the features as reported by Li et al. (J Rock Mechan Geotech Eng:232–242, 2010) and Hassan et al. (Procedia Chem 19:737–742, 2016). Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) is a geophysical technique that transmits radio waves into a medium and subsequently detects reflected waves via a receiver. The travel time and energy of received signals are then processed and interpreted. The difference in conductivity and dielectric permittivity between limestone and open karst cavities causes strong reflections. GPR is frequently used as a geophysical surveying technique in several industries; however, there is a lack of published research on underground mining GPR applications as reported by Zhao et al. (2015a; Geophys J Int:62–71, 2015b) and Eskelinen and Pellinen (Constr Build Mater:888–898, 2018). The purpose of this work is to demonstrate the use of GPR in an underground stone mine and to discuss the importance of karst void detection ahead of mining.

By Moritz Schleeh, Christian Moormann

Temporary working platforms are generally required in order to ensure that heavy construction machinery such as drilling and trench wall units, pile drivers, vehicle and crawler cranes can be set up safely at the site of operation. Considering all possible operating and loading conditions, especially on ground of low shear strength and stiffness, the design and construction of temporary mobile working platforms needs to be considered more as a serious engineering task than as a second order structure of minor relevance. Working platforms reinforced with one or several geosynthetic layers have proven to be especially effective with regard to stability, serviceability and durability but their design requests even more sophisticated approaches. Existing design models are often based on simplified assumptions and do not consider the complex interaction between construction machinery, working platform and subgrade. Non-monotonic loading as well as elastoplastic and time-variant deformation of cohesive subsoil can adversely affect the base layer system and the serviceability and stability of the construction machinery operating on it. In this context, there is a need for improvement of design approaches and their optimisation considering that there are no generally accepted design approaches or technical codes of practice available for the design of temporary working platforms. The present paper deals with the multifaceted and non-trivial interaction effects of working platforms investigated by model tests, field measurements and numerical simulations to develop a design approach that ensures a safe installation and operation of heavy plants on unstable ground.

May 1, 2022

By Keros Cartwright

Sanitary landfilling has become one of the most widely used methods of disposing of solid refuse. A principal concern of regulatory agencies and the public itself is that landfill operations do not degrade the physical environment, including water resources, and the ground-water reservoir in particular. Ground-water and engineering geology can guide landfill operations into suitable terranes or develop measures to compensate for any natural limitations at a particular site Experience and research in Illinois suggest four activities relating to landfill disposal that warrant attention by geologists and engineers: (1) Regional delineation of favorable and unfavorable hydrogeologic conditions to facilitate planning and preliminary screening of potential landfill sites. (2) Site evaluations, with considerations of geologic materials, topography, water levels, flow systems, and local occurrence and use of water resources. (3) Re- search on aspects of the hydrogeologic environment that control effects of, or are modified by, landfills. (4) Formulation of practices in the siting, construction, and operation of landfills that prevent, mitigate, or isolate deleterious effects. The first two activities are basically in the domain of earth science, requiring the application of fundamental concepts of geology and hydrology and conventional site-exploration methods. The third activity, research, requires contributions from geology as well as other disciplines, including soil physics, sanitary engineering, and chemistry. The fourth calls for policy decisions by regulatory agencies and elected officials, using the contributions of scientists and engineers.

Jan 1, 1970

By F. B. Sherman, Keros Cartwright

Sanitary land filling has become one of the most widely used methods of disposing of solid refuse. A principal concern of regulatory agencies and the public itself is that landfill operations do not degrade the physical environment, including water resources, and the ground-water reservoir in particular. Knowledge of ground-water and engineering geology can guide landfill operations into suitable terranes or develop measures to compensate for natural limitations at a particular site. Experience and research in Illinois suggest four activities relating to landfill disposal that warrant attention by geologists and engineers: (1) regional delineation of favorable and unfavorable hydrogeologic conditions to facilitate planning and preliminary screening of potential landfill sites; (2) site evaluations, with considerations of geologic materials, topography, water levels, flow systems, and local occurrence and use of water resources; (3) research on aspects of the hydrogeologic environment that control effects of, or are modified by, landfills; and (4) formulation of practices in the siting, construction, and operation of landfills that prevent, mitigate, or isolate deleterious effects. The first two activities are basically in the domain of earth science, requiring the application of fundamental concepts of geology and hydrology and conventional site-exploration methods. The third activity, research, requires contributions from geology as well as other disciplines, including soil physics, sanitary engineering, and chemistry. The fourth calls for policy decisions by regulatory agencies and elected officials, using the contributions of scientists and engineers. Throughout history, man has disposed of unwanted materials by dumping. As urbanization has increased, haphazard dumping practices have given way to disposal under more controlled conditions because of increasing congestion of population and production of waste and greater concern for public health and environmental amenities. Many states and communities have already outlawed open dumping and open burning of refuse. The only practical methods of disposal of large volumes of refuse, therefore, are contained, high-temperature incineration, or burial in a sanitary landfill. In Illinois, regulation of solid waste disposal has been delegated to the Environmental Protection Agency. Each session of the legislature since 1965 has passed increasingly strict laws regulating waste diposal. As a result, the work of evaluating sanitary landfill sites has increased significantly for both the Department of Public Health, now the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Illinois State Geological Survey, which advises the Agency on matters of ground-water geology and pollution. In fact, our ground-water staff spends as much time on studies relating to waste disposal, primarily sanitary landfills, as on ground-water resource studies. Many other geological agencies are experiencing similar demands for increased assistance in solving waste-disposal problems. This paper summarizes some of the salient features of the sanitary landfill concept, describes activities of the Illinois Geological Survey in ground-water and engineering geology relating to landfills, and suggests policies that need consideration. A sanitary landfill is located and operated in such a way that vermin and pests, nuisances, and degradation of air and water are kept at acceptable levels. Some of the physical requirements of a sanitary landfill are all-weather roads for year-round access, fences to retain blowing paper, a daily cover of at least six inches of suitable earth material, and a final cover of at least 2 ft of earth material. Dumping into or adjacent to standing water generally is not allowed. Two common operating techniques are used. In the first, trenches are dug, the refuse is placed in them, and the earth removed from the trenches is used to cover the waste. In the second method, area fill, refuse is placed in low ground and covered with earth from adjacent high areas. The hydrology of the site is a prime consideration in locating sanitary landfills. Putrescible refuse, if saturated above field capacity, produces a leachate that usually has a high concentration of dissolved solids.2 As the leachate also acts as an agent for transporting bacterial pollutants, it constitutes a potential pollution hazard. To reduce the production of leachates, the topography of the landfill area should be such that surface water will not flow into or through the fill. Operations that will result in refuse disposal below or near the highest known water-table elevation may be required to take corrective or preventive measures to protect the ground water. In practice, under humid conditions such as prevail in Illinois, locations where disposal can take place above the water table are relatively few because surficial materials are commonly fine-grained, which permits slow gravity drainage and results in high degrees of saturation (100% moisture content) near the surface. At some sites, although disposal has taken place above the water table, ground-water mounds have developed, resulting in permanent saturation of the refuse. Permeability barriers usually are required to protect the ground-water reservoir from degradation by leachates. The convention in Illinois is to have a minimum of

Jan 1, 1972

By A. D. Davis

The Bear Butte Creek watershed, in the northern Black Hills of South Dakota, shows the effects of past mining activities in the form of dissolved metals and arsenic in stream water. Bear Butte Creek, during normal flow periods, loses all of its discharge to sinkholes that recharge the Madison Limestone aquifer. This work focused on the geochemical transport and fate of arsenic and on understanding ground-water flow conditions in the Madison aquifer through development of a three-dimensional ground-water flow model that was coupled to a geographic information system (GIS). Stream sampling and discharge measurements helped determine sinkhole losses and loading rates. Column laboratory tests provided data on arsenic adsorption and the mixing of stream water with aquifer water, which also was simulated with the geochemical models, pHREEQE and NETPATH. The models and GIS can be updated with new information and will be useful in managing the water quality of the Madison aquifer.

Jan 1, 1997

By Charles S. Robinson

The Henderson ore body is east of the Continental Divide in the Front Range of the Colorado Rocky Mountains about 50 miles west of Denver. The ore body is being developed for mining by workings that extend more than 3500 feet below the topographic surface. During construction of the mine workings, ground water in fractures in crystalline rocks has been encountered. From 1969 to 1973, Charles S. Robinson & Associates, Inc., in cooperation with the engineering and geologic staffs of the Climax Molybdenum Company, a division of Amax Inc., studied the ground water geology of the Henderson mine development area. Detailed geologic records of the Henderson mine were available as a result of the exploration, evaluation and development of the mine. Records of the flow, chemical composition and temperature of the ground water at and near the surface, from the entire mine, from portions of the mine, and from exploration holes drilled in the mine, were kept as the mine was developed. Where possible, ground water pressures in drill holes and changes in pressure with time, were recorded. The geologic, hydrologic and chemical data were correlated. The following conclusions were drawn from the correlations: The ground water in the Henderson mine occurs in fractures in Precambrian igneous and metasedimentary rocks and in a series of Tertiary intrusive rocks. Two zones of ground water were recognized; an active zone, in which the fracture systems are recharged and discharged annually into the surface water system, and a passive zone, in which the fractures were filled with water in the geologic past. Discharge from the passive zone is through mine workings that intersect the fracture systems. Discharge from a fracture or fracture system is initially high but decreased with tire!. The rate of decrease in flow (or pressure) is exponential. By measuring the change in flow with time, it is possible to calculate the amount of flow at some given period of time in the future. Based on changes in rate of flow and pressure, and the geology, and assuming rates of mining of the ore, it will be possible to predict the volumes of water that will have to be handled during the life of the mine and the area around the mine that will be drained by the mining operation.

Jan 1, 1976