Search Documents

By Eric Nelson

The paper point out the structural openings and the localization of ore bodies. Structural openings in rocks constitute the primary permeability network for the formation of most hydrothermal ore deposits. The distribution, geometry, density, and orientation of ore bodies in structural openings are controlled by two primary factors: the far and near field stresses and the mechanical properties of rock. When stress controls the orientation and kinematics of faults and fractures in the absence of pre-existing weaknesses, ore shoot orientation is perpendicular to the fault slip vector and can be predicted by kinematic analysis. However, when structural openings form along pre-existing weaknesses, ore shoot orientation cannot always be predicted by kinematic analysis. Because we can classify ore bodies based on the types of geological structures discussed above and the variations that naturally occur from material property heterogeneity, exploration for hydrothermal ore deposits should include analysis of geologic structure and evolution, rheological variations, pre-existing weakness, and fault kinematics to evaluate structuralcontrols on localization of ore bodies.

Apr 22, 2003

It is now widely accepted that horizontal stress is present nearly everywhere underground. Often it is more severe than the vertical stress. It is a major cause of roof control problems in underground mines. The AHSEM computer program contains two modules to improve mine layouts for control of horizontal stress. For development, the user specifies the orientations of the maximum horizontal stress, the entries, and the crosscuts. Angled crosscuts may be used, and the angles may be different for the right- and left-hand crosscuts. AHSEM then shows the user how the stress condition would vary as the entry and crosscut orientations are changed. The second module is for longwall mining. Severe stress concentrations can make headgate conditions hazardous when the entries are improperly oriented. AHSEM shows whether a particular longwall orientation and extraction sequence places the headgate corner in a stress concentration or in stress relief. It also estimates the magnitude of the stress concentration.

Apr 1, 2003

Introduction The Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR) is a roof classification system. It was first introduced to the mining community in 1994.The CMRR filled a longstanding need to quantify geologic description of coal measure rocks into an engineering value that could be used for mine design. It has now been written to a user-friendly visual basic code that can be run on any PC with a Windows operating system. Background Rocks that form the roof of coal mines can vary widely and quickly in composition, extent, and defects. This results in an equally broad range of rock properties that can substantially affect the ability of the rock mass to form a stable mine roof. The CMRR was designed to evaluate the properties of the coal mine roof rock mass that contribute to its weakness and convert them into a relative strength rating from 0 to 100. These properties include the cohesion and frequency of discontinuities like bedding, slips, shears, and joints; uniaxial compressive strength (UCS); and moisture sensitivity. With simple lab and field tests and observation, the CMRR can be calculated by technical and operating personnel with a minimum of training. The CMRR has been widely accepted in both U.S. and international coalfields. As a result, a number of roof control applications have been found for the CMRR. It is currently used as an input component in the Analysis of Longwall Pillar Stability(ALPS) program, which is used to design longwall chain pillars. Incan be used as a criterion for determining the appropriate width of mine entries. It has also been used to indicate the appropriate length of cut in weak ground. The CMRR can be used as a strength parameter to characterize inter burden between mined seams in the numerical modeling of subsidence effects. In any area where an estimation of coal measure rock mass strength is required, the CMRR can be adapted to fill this need. How It Works Originally designed to be used with underground exposures, the CMRR can also be calculated from core. The chisel test for bedding cohesion and the ballpeen hammer test for UCS are inappropriate for core. These tests have been replaced by point load testing both axially and diametrally. Two other measures that are common to standard core logging—Rock Quality Designation (RQD) and fracture spacing—are also used to estimate rock weakness. With these easily obtained parameters, the CMRR can be calculated from core and used in the mine planning and exploration phase. The input screens allow calculation of the CMRR for both underground exposure and core. The CMRR is reported both as a “dry" value and as a groundwater-adjusted value for moisture-sensitive rocks. There is a graphical output report featuring a lithologic column with annotated unit ratings and a roof bolt symbol representing the height of the bolted horizon. Another important feature is an AutoCAD interface. This feature allows the export of located CMRR data directly to an AutoCAD layer in XYZ form. In this way, drill hole data can be inserted directly to a base map.

Apr 1, 2003

By D. Berkley

The competitive pressure, the increasing energy costs and the environmental regulations impose substantial challenges to the definition of power plants serving industrial facilities. Primary mining and metallurgical facilities have even greater challenges because they are often located remotely, where the fuel supply can be a problem. The absence of a power grid imposes challenges on the reliability and quality of the electrical energy supply. In addition, the facilities usually require thermal energy too, not only electricity. This paper outlines these types of issues that have to be considered when defining a cogeneration plant integrated with a remote located industrial facility. It is addressed to the ?users? of cogeneration facilities rather than to ?generators.? The focus is on analyzing various site-specific design considerations to pre-screen the feasible cogeneration alternatives and minimize the number of options to be analyzed from the economics viewpoint. This approach could substantially reduce the engineering effort and schedule during the feasibility phase of the project. Part 1 of this paper (Berkley, 2003) provides a basic understanding of cogeneration plants of various types to establish a common language. Part 2 outlines and analyzes specific issues that could be of help in the definition of cogeneration installations for remotely located industrial facilities, with a focus on mining and primary metallurgical plants.

Mar 1, 2003

Develop tools that mine personnel can use to comply with 30 CFR,Part 47. Background The new MSHA rule, 30 CFR, Part 47 (also known as the HazCom rule), requires all mines to develop a written program to track hazardous chemicals at their sites. More specifically, the rule requires that mines list all chemicals and determine which are hazardous; develop a written Hazard Communication Program; label all containers used to store hazardous chemicals; obtain or develop Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for all chemicals stored or produced; provide miners with training in working around hazardous chemicals; and make information about hazardous chemicals available to all workers. All mines with six or more employees must have complied with the new rule by September 23, 2002, and mines with five or fewer employees will have to be in compliance by March 21, 2003.

Mar 1, 2003

By Peter Yen

This session consists of five papers. Three involved research on the properties of grout materials, specifically ultrafine cements and polyurethane grouts. Two papers present the development of soil grouting technology and monitoring methods. Of great interest are the papers on ultrafine grout penetrability testing focusing on the pressure filtration effects encountered in permeation grouting applications (Ericksson, Stille and Mittag, Savidis). The comparison testing of hydrophilic and hydrophobic polyurethane grouts submitted by Vrignaud, Ballivy, Perret and Fernagu assessed the long-term performance of these materials for repairing saturated cracks in concrete, subject to thermal expansion and contraction. Two very practical papers present the development of soil grouting, where permeation, fracture, replacement, jetting and other grouting techniques are utilized. The papers by Lees with Chuaqui and Warner present experience with ultrafine and other commonly used grout materials. Methods to measure and monitor the injection process and verify production progress are discussed.

Feb 10, 2003

By John Davie

We used a Remtek survey in Glenrock and had very good luck with it when we first started the initial investigation. We would have loved to have used that more but my understanding is the equipment is hard to find. It also requires a flooded mine workings. If you're in a dry mine the communication between the two holes is not quite as successful.

Feb 10, 2003

By George Burke

Of the three projects, particularly the extensive Nimitz II (downtown) project, a single system, which was part of the operation, was used to control the spoil. Spoil control was continuous with the work since a vacuum truck and crew was used to suck up the spoils as they came out of the borehole. So, the whole job was kept clean both during operations and at the end of the shifts. On the Sand Island project, a double system was used. Larger spoil quantities were contained within the shaft limits during the work and the cleanup or disposal of the spoils was performed during excavation.

Feb 10, 2003

By Dawn Shuttle

In trying to find a grout, or some kind of stabilizer that would work in this application, we established some performance criteria. Of those, what I controlled the most was viscosity, then I had a whole list of other criteria. I needed a long, controllable gel time, durability and the ability to set and stabilize the soil. So I looked through a lot of different stabilizers, some really crazy ones and also the typical chemical grouts that are used. The typical chemical grouts were eliminated because of long-term durability concerns, the need for having extended gel times, and several other concerns. I would be happy to discuss that with you further after the talk if you're interested. But, generally it was based on viscosity, gel time, and the need for extended gel time. In terms of the relative density of the sand many other grouts could have been used. But the main issue was trying to develop this way to do low pressure grouting that would not cause invasive disruption of the site. We couldn't go in and grout it, put centers, so most of the other grouts wouldn't work for various reasons. The forty percent relative density samples were prepared by plubiation. That was both during the cyclic testing stage of the research, which happened a few years back, and also during the box model and the laminar box models at RPI. In terms of what criteria were used to determine the success of the grouting, when I initially started this work what I did was take the grouted samples and I subjected them to cyclic triaxial testing. What I did was take a look at the cyclic deformation resistance of different concentrations of grouted colloidal silica treated sand. I looked first at 20% concentration because I wanted something that I knew worked and then I gradually decreased to 15%, 10%, and 5%. What I was most concerned with was that it did not liquefy and that it was able to hold together it and experience some deformation. But most importantly it needed to not liquefy. So, that was the biggest issue in determining the success of the grouting. In terms of the centrifuge modeling it was done by looking at several components: from looking at the pictures of the bending moments, looking at the acceleration records and how the acceleration records were transferred through the soil, looking at the reduction in the lateral displacement and those kinds of issues. So let me show you the difference.

Feb 10, 2003

By G. Stuart Littlejohn

In spite of recent concerns in certain European countries, I believe that silicate-ester grouts will continue to be employed in practice, unless more cost-effective inorganic grouts are developed for the treatment of fine sands. It is also noteworthy that over the past 40 years, there has been a record of good experience where silicate-ester grouts have been used in ground improvement. Nevertheless, there is now a need via the European Standard EN 12715 (2000) "to assess the environmental impact, particularly the toxicity of the grout and grout components, and their effect on ground and drinking water should be considered before grouting." "When testing the grouting material for environmental impact, the following aspects should be considered: ? Whether during processing, transport or grouting, substance can be generated or released which could be hazardous to the environment or the grouting crew; ? Whether noxious substances can spread upon mixing with ground water; ? Whether reaction products can be produced or released which influence the water quality; ? The type of particles eroded from hardened grout; ? Chemical reactions between hardened grout and the ground water."

Feb 10, 2003

By James Warner

Although use of low mobility grout is just now beginning in some parts of the world, its advantage for many applications has been well established through more than 50 years of positive experience. The single largest area of application continues to be densification of soil by way of compaction grouting. Because it is often the safest and least costly method for soil improvement in general, and virtually always that in connection with soil improvement under, or adjacent to structures or in developed areas, use will undoubtedly increase both geographically and in diversity of application.

Feb 10, 2003

By Masaki Kitazume

Five papers were presented orally to the topics of Jet Grouting and Deep Mixing. The session was started with a brief introduction by the moderators. Following the oral presentation, floor discussions were directed by the moderators. A brief introduction of each of the oral presentations is provided before each discussion.

Feb 10, 2003

By Stephan A. Jefferis

I presume that the questioner is not asking about the reduction of sulfate in groundwater to hydrogen sulfide as a result of biological activity promoted by organics in the grout hardener and that the question relates to sulfate attack on cementitious grout systems. For the project in Spain presented in my paper, we used a very high pulverized fuel ash (PFA) content in the cementitious material. This gives good sulfate resistance and indeed the chemical interaction will actually cause the permeability to drop for about 50 years without any question of sulfate attack and damage to the whole thickness of the grout - of course there will be attack at the exposed face of the grout where it is in contact with the contaminated groundwater. The mix had over 75% PFA, and also a very high overall cementitious content. The mix was the contractor's design and showed excellent behavior in laboratory proving trials. In grouts as distinct from concrete, PFA gives significantly better sulfate resistance than ground granulated blast furnace slag which is often used in Europe as a component of bentonite-cement mixes for slurry trench cut-off walls.

Feb 10, 2003

By Raymond Henn

Yes we have also used some however, again because of the nature of the maintenance window where we have that two hour (at best) window every night and due to the numerous other crews that are wanting to get in to do the other types of maintenance activities, we don't know if we are going to be getting into that same area from one night to the next. So even with the dormancy additives that one can add to cementitious grouts (that are good up to 72 hours) we don't know if we are going to get back in to the same locations from one week to the next. That's why I use the term "the forgiving nature of the acrylamide". It allows us to ream out the hole allowing us to use the exact same hole without having to re-drill a new hole. The program started in 1997 and we have a budget between labor/materials and equipment of 4.5 million dollars on a year to year basis. For the next few years that is going to come down drastically because the program is going to be more of an ongoing maintenance program. The program started in 1997 and we have a budget between labor/materials and equipment of 4.5 million dollars on a year to year basis. For the next few years that is going to come down drastically because the program is going to be more of an ongoing maintenance program. Up to the end of 2001 we were just over 1.7 million liters of between AV100 and AV118 grout. Of that, approximately just under 200,000 was AV100 and the remaining balance was AV118.

Feb 10, 2003

By Douglas Heenan

The fracture orientations were inferred based on theory and previous experience. The fracture pattern was not monitored during the project. Grout volume was recorded at each sleeve port and real time movement monitoring of the building foundation was performed.

Feb 10, 2003

By Jim Henry

I would say mainly the cost. I showed only 3 cases. One of them was the one that Allen just described and there were two other cases. In those cases it was fairly easy to develop a solution using limited mobility grout to treat the soft soils suitable for the limited bearing pressures required by the structures. LMG readily provided a fairly reliable system for the foundation support at a reasonable cost.

Feb 10, 2003

By Richard Berry

The spacing of grout injections is typically about 2 to 2 V½ meters if the purpose of the grouting is densification of the in-situ soils. Hole spacing will vary with the in-situ soil properties and the grout injection rate; faster rates requiring closer hole spacing.

Feb 10, 2003

By Stephan Jefferis

It is my understanding that the Scandinavians have done some fundamental work on durability. I have seen a study published whereby the author, Helen Anderson, comments on the durability of polyurethane grouts and there was -if I am not mistaken- a reference made to another Scandinavian testing institute comparing durability of the polyurethane to cement grout under the same type of circumstances. Circumstances are important so we should actually ask the gentleman to shed some light on this particular method because apparently Scandinavia is the place where durability has been taken very seriously and has been well researched.

Feb 10, 2003

By Trent Dreese

For critical velocities in gravel units we use Bush-Luckner, Sichardt, other empirical equations, and equations derived from laboratory experiments too. On the base of these, we compiled critical velocity - permeability coefficient dependencies. Under the lower border of these dependencies sand particles can't be moved, and thus they are stable. For critical velocities in the fissures of flysh and volcanic rocks we use Ronzhin (1974) criteria derived from laboratory experiments in Russia. Maximal filtration velocities measured by tracer methods in gravel soils and in fissured rocks have smaller values then the critical ones.

Feb 10, 2003

By Helen Ahnberg

The scope of the present paper is limited to report the experimental evidence and not for describing the analytical assumptions. However, the idea behind the experimental program is that the deterioration may be caused by the leaching of Ca from the treated soil to surrounding soil or water driven by the difference in the Ca ion concentration. As a consequence of Ca leaching, it may be natural to expect the expansion of micro void space within the treated soil. In a saturated condition, the water inflow into the treated soil may accompany the leaching phenomenon. We measured the water content within the treated soil. But there is not much difference in water content within the soil.

Feb 10, 2003