temperature analysis of mass grout pours for single shell ......the temperature rise in the grout...

Temperature Analysis of Mass Grout

Pours for Single Shell Tank Closure Raul Dominguez (DOE Fellow, Florida International University),

Colin Henderson, M.S., P.E. (Mentor, Columbia Energy & Environmental Services, Inc.),

Brian Rumburg, Ph.D. (Columbia Energy & Environmental Services, Inc.)

Special Acknowledgement to: Leonel L. Lagos, Ph.D., PMP ®

INTRODUCTION: Operations at the Hanford site have left 55 million

gallons of mixed waste stored in 177 underground

tanks, 149 of them being single shell tanks (SST).

These SSTs were built between 1943 and 1964

(Roelant, 2007). Due to mechanical weathering

and extended use, some tanks have leaked. Plans

for tank closure are underway, involving the

removal and treatment of waste followed by

stabilization of the tank structures.

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Tem

pera

ture

(°F

)

Time (1/2 hrs)

6ft dia. Cylinder Experimental Results vs. ConcreteWorks Theoretical 6x6x6 ft Footing

Exp. 2ftExp. 4ftCross Section 2ftCross Section 4ft

References: 1) Roelant, D., McDaniel, D., Awwad, A., Varona, J., 2007. “Remote Automated Monitoring Systems for High Level Radioactive Waste”. Applied Research Center; 2) Gajda, J., Alsamsam, E., 2006. “Engineering Mass Concrete Structures”. Professional Development Series. Portland Cement

Association.; 3) Gajda, J., Vangeem, M., 2002. “Controlling Temperatures in Mass Concrete”, Concrete International.59-62; 4) Riding, K.A., Poole, J.L., Schindler, A.K., Juenger, M.C.G., Folliard, K.J. 2006.”Evaluation of Temperature Prediction Methods for Mass Concrete Members” ACI Materials Journal 357-365; 5)

Henderson, C., “Closure Demonstration Grout Test report” 2009. Columbia Energy & Environmental Services, Inc. RPP-RPT-41550, Rev. B; 6) Riding, K.A., Poole, J.L., Schindler, A.K., Juenger, M.C.G., Folliard, K.J. 2006.”Evaluation of Temperature Prediction Methods for Mass Concrete Members” ACI Materials

Journal 357-365; 7) Incropera, F.P., and D.P. DeWitt. Introduction to Heat Transfer. 3rd ed. United States of America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1996. Print. Kyle A. Riding Evaluation of Temperature Prediction Methods for Mass Concrete Members

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this investigation

is to determine if the maximum

temperature expected during tank

closure using the bulk fill grout

formulation will be below levels of

concern, thereby reducing or

eliminating operational constraints associated with

the temperature rise in the grout pour.

Lift

Height(ft)

Max Temp

Recorded

(°F)

Max Temp

Difference

(°F)

15 123 44

20 125 47

50 126 49

SELECTION OF METHOD: A diligent search was conducted

for an efficient method or tool

that can be used to predict grout

curing temperatures.

ConcreteWorks V2 proved to be

the best accessible tool. Its

versatile mixture proportions and easy-to-use

graphical user interface allowed us to input our

specific recipes. ConcreteWorks also allows us to

input weather data and duration of analysis.

Results:

RESEARCH DESCRIPTION: Elevated temperatures during curing can cause

an increase in porosity and a decrease in

compressive strength (Gajda, 2006). There are

standard maximum temperatures for concrete

but none for grout. A software package called

ConcreteWorks V2 was used to predict

temperature values over a 14 day period.

CONCLUSION: Based on evaluation, the rectangular footing best represented

the tank closure situation, and the maximum temperatures

predicted were less than 130 °F. Due to the small amount of

cement contained in the grout formulation designed for use

during bulk filling of the tanks, elevated temperatures will

typically not exceed levels of concern. Maximum temperature

values plateauing, prove that grout lift height will not be a

concern or limitation.

Data above demonstrates deviations between

theoretical cross sections and experimental values.

•Three models were

processed to determine

grout lift heights 50ft,

20ft and 15ft.

•Maximum temperatures

did not exceed 130 °F.

•Only the 15ft model

demonstrated a

maximum temperature.

•The other two models

kept same temperature

for days.