Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.

Author Topic: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.  (Read 9954 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Brett LaVigne

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
  • Total likes: 21
  • Karma: 1371
  • Gender: Male
  • This aggression will not stand, man.
Hey all.

I have a tunnel that runs underground for about 100'. It is highly contaminated with things like Pu-239,
Am-241, Sr-90 etc. etc. I want to fill it with grout, but that presents a weight problem for shipping. I am interested in any info on other materials that would do the same thing without the weight. Has anyone used a light weight foam product for a large area that will eventually be segmented with a diamond wire? Any ideas are appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Brett

Oh by the way, tunnel is about 3 1/2' squared.
« Last Edit: Nov 10, 2010, 11:35 by Brett LaVigne »
I Heart Hippie Chicks!!!

Offline UncaBuffalo

  • Mostly Retired
  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1702
  • Total likes: 15
  • Karma: 4594
  • Not All Who Wander Are Lost
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #1 on: Nov 11, 2010, 01:02 »
Hey all.

I have a tunnel that runs underground for about 100'. It is highly contaminated with things like Pu-239,
Am-241, Sr-90 etc. etc. I want to fill it with grout, but that presents a weight problem for shipping. I am interested in any info on other materials that would do the same thing without the weight. Has anyone used a light weight foam product for a large area that will eventually be segmented with a diamond wire? Any ideas are appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Brett

Oh by the way, tunnel is about 3 1/2' squared.

Is 25 pounds per cubic foot too much weight?  We had good luck with low density grout that only added that much weight...in your case, about 300 pounds per linear foot of tunnel, so...?

I gave you this info, but here it is for anyone else that is exploring similar options:
http://www.pigcoinc.com/application-large-component-removal.html
« Last Edit: Nov 11, 2010, 01:04 by UncaBuffalo »
The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations, I have really good days. -Ray Wylie Hubbard

Sun Dog

  • Guest
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #2 on: Nov 11, 2010, 01:58 »
There is some potentially useful information contained in this White paper titled "Characterizing the Behavior of Polyurethane Grout."


http://cigmat.cive.uh.edu/content/conf_exhib/00_poster/7.htm

Offline Rennhack

Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #3 on: Nov 11, 2010, 02:06 »
Has anyone used a light weight foam product for a large area that will eventually be segmented with a diamond wire? Any ideas are appreciated.

The two-component polyurethane foams work well for this application, as does low-density cellular concrete (LDCC).  They were used at rocky flats, Fernald, and they have been used to fill the duct work at K-25 (enriched uranium), prior to removal.  I've also used it to fill void space in very large 'over pack' shipping containers.

One of the techniques is to stick a long tube into the tunnel from one end, reaching the back end (sealed).  As the tunnel fills up with the foam, pull the tube back towards you.

http://www.em.doe.gov/EM20Pages/pdfs/pubs/itsrs/itsr1816.pdf
http://www.efcog.org/bp/p/doc/BP51-Rigid%20Poly%20Foam.pdf
http://www.p2pays.org/ref/14/0_initiatives/init/apr97/spot.htm

Quote
The first void-filling technology demonstrated at Plant 1[Fernald] will be a low-density cellular concrete system by Pacific International Grout Company of Bellingham, Washington. LDCC is made by mixing portland cement with water, adding a foaming agent, and combining with a high-shear mixer. The resulting rigid, low-density cellular concrete is then injected into the process components.

polyurethane foam

The second technology demonstration will test the use of an expanded polyurethane foam as a void filler. In the formation of the polyurethane foam, two chemicals are mixed: a foaming agent and a catalyst. The two chemicals are kept separate until they reach the mixing gun, from which the mixture is immediately injected into the process components. Urethane Foam Specialists of Columbus, Ohio will apply this technology at Plant 1.

The benefits of these void-filling technologies are that (1) they will reduce the need to physically segment process components, thereby decreasing costs and increasing personnel safety, and (2) due to the low density of these materials, they will eliminate the need for significantly larger material-handling equipment when transferring the filled components to the disposal site.
Quote
Two-component polyurethane foams (or froth foam units) come in separate containers, one for each component, and tanks operate conveniently from an upright position. Two-Component Standard Foams are ideal for Insulating and Sealing jobs that require a product designed for spray application over large surface areas or for filling large voids and gaps. Two-Component Foam is a chemically cured foam system. Each Foam pack includes both an “A” & “B” component. Dispensed through the included dispensing tool, the foam “A” and its curing agent “B” are mixed at the nozzle and cure much more quickly than One-Component Foams.

Fast chemical curing results in a higher expansion ratio for two-component polyurethane foams. This makes them suitable for spray-on applications and for filing holes and cavities. They have an R-value (aged) of approximately 6.0 per inch.
« Last Edit: Nov 11, 2010, 02:11 by Rennhack »

Offline Rennhack

Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #4 on: Nov 11, 2010, 04:38 »
I thought you had pictures of these jobs posted in the galleries?!?

The pictures of ME foam filling shipping containers is here:

http://www.nukeworker.com/pictures/thumbnails-65.html

The pictures I THINK you are remembering were removed.

The pdf below has some good pictures in it.
http://www.efcog.org/bp/p/doc/BP51-Rigid%20Poly%20Foam.pdf

« Last Edit: Nov 11, 2010, 04:43 by Rennhack »

Offline Brett LaVigne

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
  • Total likes: 21
  • Karma: 1371
  • Gender: Male
  • This aggression will not stand, man.
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #5 on: Nov 11, 2010, 09:36 »
Thanks for the responses and PM's, much appreciated!!

I have been looking at a two part pourable foam, we have used it here on site but the set up time might be an issue. I am also looking at a marine two part foam that sets up slower.  I am convinced that a light weight grout will be our best option, but with the push back on cost due to weight, I was looking for foaming ideas.

We are not going to tackle this until at least next summer due to weather, but I will post up results how ever we decide to get rid of the tunnel of death. Thanks again.

Brett
I Heart Hippie Chicks!!!

Offline Brett LaVigne

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
  • Total likes: 21
  • Karma: 1371
  • Gender: Male
  • This aggression will not stand, man.
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #6 on: Nov 11, 2010, 09:41 »
Is 25 pounds per cubic foot too much weight?  We had good luck with low density grout that only added that much weight...in your case, about 300 pounds per linear foot of tunnel, so...?

I gave you this info, but here it is for anyone else that is exploring similar options:
http://www.pigcoinc.com/application-large-component-removal.html

In the grand scheme of things...no, 25 lbs per sq ft is not a big deal. It will add something like 10 tons. Considering the fact that most of the site and ground below it will be thrown away as rad waste, how can 10 tons make that much difference? I do appreciate the info. you gave me today! I am still going to argue for grout but seek other alternatives.
I Heart Hippie Chicks!!!

Offline UncaBuffalo

  • Mostly Retired
  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1702
  • Total likes: 15
  • Karma: 4594
  • Not All Who Wander Are Lost
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #7 on: Nov 13, 2010, 01:39 »
A mutual friend asked me to caution you to check with the disposal site to make sure what you are trying to do will meet their Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC).

Some burial sites have specific grout and density requirements...make sure you confirm what those requirements are.

"It would be an ugly thing to grout it & then not be able to dispose of it..."  ;)
The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations, I have really good days. -Ray Wylie Hubbard

Jr8black3

  • Guest
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #8 on: Nov 13, 2010, 07:01 »
Marssim probably knows more about this then all of us put together..

My only question is why would you grout something your going to ship as Rad Waste. Its just a question.

Offline Brett LaVigne

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
  • Total likes: 21
  • Karma: 1371
  • Gender: Male
  • This aggression will not stand, man.
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #9 on: Nov 13, 2010, 12:56 »
Marssim probably knows more about this then all of us put together..

My only question is why would you grout something your going to ship as Rad Waste. Its just a question.

The tunnel runs underground, outside of any buildings. It has several hundred feet of pipe that runs through it. The tunnel and the pipes are highly contaminated with bone-seeking fission products. We need to encapsulate and stabilize so we can diamond wire cut it into manageable sections. Grouting (or foaming) will allow us to remove the tunnel without having the risk of sending people into it.
I Heart Hippie Chicks!!!

Jr8black3

  • Guest
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #10 on: Nov 13, 2010, 05:12 »
I would go with grouting, it will work, monitor the ass end of those pipes though, and once you start you cant stop, get some good Fernco couplings  and fit them for your concrete truck

LOL Marssim knows more about this then I do

Jr8black3

  • Guest
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #11 on: Nov 13, 2010, 07:26 »
You with what has been proving, yes you will ship more weight,,, Brett how hot are these things and what is your decommission plan call for? and how deep are they

Offline wasteman

Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #12 on: Nov 13, 2010, 10:17 »
low density grout weighs more than 25 per....  anyway, grout em, cut them into smaller chunks.  but gee brett, isn't your waste group led by the all time guru of gurus in waste?

Jr8black3

  • Guest
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #13 on: Nov 14, 2010, 07:30 »
Brett I'm still leaning towards you getting alot of advice from Marssim,, he is very smart, I have alot of respect for the man..

Offline UncaBuffalo

  • Mostly Retired
  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1702
  • Total likes: 15
  • Karma: 4594
  • Not All Who Wander Are Lost
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #14 on: Nov 14, 2010, 11:42 »
low density grout weighs more than 25 per....  anyway, grout em, cut them into smaller chunks.  but gee brett, isn't your waste group led by the all time guru of gurus in waste?

25 to 130 pounds per cubic foot was quoted in the link from the company that did our grouting.
« Last Edit: Nov 14, 2010, 11:48 by UncaBuffalo »
The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations, I have really good days. -Ray Wylie Hubbard

Offline thenukeman

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1939
  • Total likes: 1
  • Karma: 1964
  • Elements Rule Battle , Elementis Regamus Proleium
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #15 on: Nov 14, 2010, 12:28 »
Yes it is a good idea to know the waste acceptance criteria. (WAC) Get the estimated picocuries of each radionuclide in the tube  and divide by the weight of material used to get picocuries per gram weight for WAC.  In this case more weight may be better for a Plutonium WAC.

Offline Brett LaVigne

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
  • Total likes: 21
  • Karma: 1371
  • Gender: Male
  • This aggression will not stand, man.
Re: Grouting alternatives? High contamination control.
« Reply #16 on: Nov 14, 2010, 02:14 »
low density grout weighs more than 25 per....  anyway, grout em, cut them into smaller chunks.  but gee brett, isn't your waste group led by the all time guru of gurus in waste?

We have a very capable Rad team here, best I've worked with ever. Many of us believe this to be the best solution, there are a couple that do not. I won't get into any of that here, every project has challenges and differences of opinion. I have received some great info. here and through PM's to help sell my plan. I actually have some literature about a low density grout that weighs 25 per/Ft3...Thanks UncaBuffalo for that !! Thanks to all that responded.
I Heart Hippie Chicks!!!

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2021 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?