Search Documents

By David E. Siskind

U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation 8507 was published in 1980. In a comprehensive analysis of all known blast damage studies plus new definitive data, the USBM authors adopted new safe level criteria of 0.5 & 0.75 in/sec for the frequency range corresponding to structure resonances. These were 3 to 4 times lower than the existing limit of 2 in/sec and are the most restrictive scientifically-based blasting criteria for the prevention of threshold hairline cracks in homes. The Bureau's own tests involved 76 homes in six states. In USBM RI 8507, those tests were combined with data from nine other studies from the US, Canada, Czechoslovakia and Sweden in an overall conservative summary analysis intended to preclude blasting damage.

Jan 1, 1998

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 E. M. De Souza, P. Lausch, D. O. DeGagné, J. F. Archibald

"The potential use of industrial and municipal waste glass as a partial pozzolanic replacement for Normal Portland cement in mine backfill has been investigated. Considerable quantities of glass are currently discarded into landfill sites at high cost to municipal and industrial users with no foreseeable environmental benefits being gained by such disposal. This research study was undertaken to assess the viability of using ground waste glass materials as partial binder replacement of Portland cement fractionswithin consolidated mine backfill materials. The program was implemented to review various factors that could influence successful incorporation of glass waste replacement of cement, these factors being the feasibility of glass waste procurement, determination of process economics and the physical and chemical suitability of ground waste glass materials to generate adequate backfill strength when replacing Normal Portland cement fractions. A series of laboratory assessment trials were established to evaluate backfill component characteristics and mixture strength properties for both standard Portland cement-consolidated and blended Portland cement/ground waste glass-consolidated backfill materials. Side-by-side review of the strength behaviour of various component backfill/cement mixtures was designed to permit comparative evaluation of the capabilities of ground waste glass and Portland cement products as backfill consolidating agents"

Jan 1, 1995

By Russell G. Slayback

Feasibility investigations for prospective gold mines too often neglect to consider ground water. Simple observations and tests during drilling exploration can provide useful data on probable water conditions. As the prospect becomes more serious, more detailed investigation of ground water and dewatering needs may be warranted. Ignoring ground-water conditions can lead to costly mistakes.

Jan 1, 1987

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 R. C. Mahon

THE importance of ground water control in glacial drift overlying mines is widely recognized. Adequate handling of the problem results in consider- able saving in overall pumping costs, as the cost of pumping the larger quantity of water under low heads from surface wells is more than offset by the decrease in the quantity of water to be pumped from the mine under high heads. Eliminating or partly reducing seepage of water through the ledge reduces moisture content of the ore, a factor especially important in iron ore mines, where a reduction of 1 pct in moisture effects a very material saving. An important though indeterminate saving is also brought about by the elimination of water in the working places underground. The Homer and Wauseca mines of Hanna Coal & Iron Co. at Iron River, Mich., cover 480 acres. When these mines were started it was possible to operate on only one 40-acre tract, as the depth of water over the remainder of the property was too great to permit operation. Although the average depth of the ground water over the area being mined at that time was less than 50 ft it was necessary to pump 1200 gpm from the mine, the greater part from a depth of 750 ft. The slate footwall and graywacke hanging wall are almost impervious, and it was apparent that seepage into the mine was mainly through the iron formation in which the orebodies were located. Analysis of the water in the iron formation showed it to be of the same character as that in the glacial drift, while the water in both walls was heavily mineralized, also indicating that the water passed much more freely through the iron formation.

Jan 6, 1954

By J. W. Harshbarger, E. L. Montgomery

The region of metallic ore deposits in northern Chile, southern Peru, western Bolivia, and northwestern Argentina occurs in arid zones at altitudes as high as 6 km (19,700 ft). Because surface water supplies are meager, new mines require unexploited sources of water. Prolific ground water aquifers occur in salar basins in this region of the Andean Highlands. Exploration water wells have been constructed and aquifer characteristics have been tested in eight salar basins. Results indicate ground water quality is good. Aquifer transmissivity and storage computed from results of pumping tests indicate maximum capacities of more than 170 L/sec (2700 gpm) for individual production water wells. Results of investigations conducted by the authors demonstrate that ground water reservoirs in the Andean Highlands comprise a source of large quantities of water for the mineral industry.

Jan 1, 1986

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

Underground and strip mining (6,7) produce different hydrologic environments. Many underground mines are below the zone that is completely saturated with water and the mine openings may cause new and continuous contact between sulfurous material and water which flows from the saturated zone to the workings. Strip mines are usually above the zone of continuous saturation and contact between sulfurous material and water is generally restricted to periods of precipitation. A full appreciation of the problem of water pollution caused by drainage from deep mines requires a basic understanding of occurrences and movement of water in the ground and the modes of ground water entrance into mining areas.

Jan 1, 1970

By J. F. Poland

Annual pumpage of ground water from the alluvial valleys of California now is about 10 million acre-feet. This heavy pumpage has created problems of over-draft and ocean-water encroachment in many valleys. Steps are being taken to protect and increase the available supply but much additional basic study is needed.

Jan 2, 1950

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 Burt A. Waite

The new OSM regulations for ground water monitoring of underground coal mines have 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 still exists within the industry as to what is really required. Based on submission and/or approval of more than 30 monitoring plans for existing mines in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio, three basic sections are necessary. They are: 1. background data on the hydrogeologic setting of the mine, 2. the monitoring plan itself, and 3. mining procedures to minimize adverse effects on ground water. Like all of the OSM requirements, ground water monitoring will be a new burden the coal industry must bear, but with proper planning and communication with the regulatory authorities it need not be as bad as originally feared.

Jan 1, 1983

By William R. Taylor

The information I have concerning the early in situ uranium mining activities in Texas is "sketchy." Apparently, the first test was conducted between 1967 and 1971 in Gonzales County, north of Yorktown, at the Dueterstat Site, by, City Service. Other tests were run in Webb County at the Bruni Site, and in Live Oak County at the Burns and Clay-West Sites in the early 1970's. During this period the Texas Water Quality Board maintained a general surveillance of these tests. In mid-1974, Mr. Glen Davis walked into our Austin offices and requested a permit for Atlantic Richfield's first in situ uranium mine. This permit, issued in January, 1975, was for 3 acres of production, and was the first such permit issued in the United States. It formalized the regulation of in-situ uranium mining in Texas. The 4 years since then have been characterized by growth and change. Today there are 20 permits approved for approximately 2,000 production acres. These permits are issued to 8 companies at 13 sites in 6 counties. There are 7 additional permits being processed, or on the verge of being applied for. These will involve possibly another 2,000 production acres, 3 more companies in one more county.

Jan 1, 1979

By Daryl R. Tweeton, Jerry R. Riding, Grant Buma, Frank J. Rosswog

In situ solution mining of uranium has environmental advantages over conventional mining. The leaching of uranium, however, alters the ground-water quality in the aquifer where the mining occurs. Currently, regulations require that the ground water be restored to approximately its original condition. This paper, a summary of a study funded by the Bureau of Mines, reviews the state of the art in restoring ground-water quality after in situ uranium leaching. Current restoration practices discussed include disposal of liquid wastes in deep disposal wells and evaporation ponds, producing from all wells during restoration, and recirculating water purified in surface plants. Methods for predicting the effectiveness and cost of current techniques are presented. Possible alternative techniques are also described. Two restoration operations are discussed.

Jan 1, 1979

By J. E. Garlanger, R. K. Shrestha

During mining, the surficial aquifer and, in some cases, the top of the uppermost confining unit within the mined areas are excavated. Portions are removed from the area for resource recovery. Until the mined areas are reclaimed, the surrounding unmined area continues to dewater. The impact of mining and subsequent restoration of the surficial aquifer on the ground and surface water resources of the watershed affected by the mining will be described. This will be done in terms of ground water recharge, ground water levels, and base flow and runoff to surface streams. Data from actual mining situations will be used in analyses and discussion. Recommendations will be made for further research.

Jan 1, 1992

By Michael Jatczak, Joseph A. Sopko

Ground Freezing was used for excavation support and groundwater control of a 12.8m (42-foot) diameter, 61m (200-foot) deep drop shaft for the South Bay Ocean Outfall Tunnel in San Diego, California. Approximately half way through the excavation, excessive groundwater inflows from the base of the shaft resulted in suspension of excavation and evaluation of the frozen earth wall. This paper discusses the forensic methods used to identify the zone where groundwater intrusion occurred and the methods associated with evaluating zones of high groundwater velocity. The use of remedial grouting and localized liquid nitrogen injection are discussed and evaluated. Concepts of frozen shaft design are discussed, including a new method for permitting the launch of the Tunnel Boring Machine through the frozen earth wall and associated freeze pipes.

Jan 1, 1999