Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11681/11033
Title: PSU/WES interlaboratory comparative methodology study of an experimental cementitious repository seal material. Report 1, Short-term results
Authors: Pennsylvania State University. Materials Research Laboratory
United States. Department of Energy
Battelle Memorial Institute. Project Management Division
Battelle Memorial Institute. Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation
Roy, D. M.
Grutzeck, M. W.
Mather, Katharine
Keywords: Cement grouts
Laboratory tests
Radioactive wastes
Radioactive waste disposal
Mortars
Concrete
Sealers
Subsurface waste disposal
Underground structures
Publisher: Structures Laboratory (U.S.)
Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)
Series/Report no.: Miscellaneous paper (U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station) ; SL-81-2 rept.1.
Description: Miscellaneous Paper
Abstract: A study is under way in two separate laboratories to investigate possible use of portland cement grout as repository sealing material for underground isolation of nuclear waste. The labs involved are the Structures Laboratory (SL) of the U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station and the Materials Research Laboratory of The Pennsylvania State University (PSU). It was suggested by the project manager, Mr. Floyd L. Burns of the Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation (ONWI), that these laboratories make a comparative study to determine their ability to obtain accurate and similar results. This report documents this comparative study. The same grout mixture was prepared in each laboratory in September 1980, and tests were started. Testing included characterization of cement and fly ash by chemical, physical, and petrographic procedures. Tests of grout specimens included restrained expansion, compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, density, permeability, X-ray diffraction, and scanning electron microscopy. Each laboratory made many of the same tests and some that were not directly comparable. This document (Report 1) contains largely J- and 7-day results and none beyond 28-day ages. Report 2 will. be published after intermediate and 1-year data become available. The objectives of the study were to: (A.) Develop a plan which would contribute to ensuring reproducibility of diagnostic methods used in research and. development on repository sealing materials. (B.) Compare results of tests performed by similar methods on similar cementitious seal materials, conducted and prepared in each of the two laboratories. (C.) Use also the results of complementary, but not identical, tests performed in the two laboratories to illustrate the confirmative, performance-related information gained. (D.) Generate data on a material which could be a candidate for repository sealing in halite or anhydrite host formations or formations containing both halite and anhydrite. It was concluded that there was generally good agreement between the results of the tests that were performed by both laboratories to date, which provided confidence in the ability to reproduce the results of tests and methodologies. This included replicability or high similarity in the starting materials when received from a common source, but which often in other circumstances have been found not to be identical, within most precise limits. The reproducibility was enhanced by the fact that certain of the materials were received by SL, the lots split and part transshipped to PSU. There was also the added accomplishment that where nonidentical methods were used in the two laboratories, some provided complementary types of information; e.g., which confirmed that the selected proportions for an experimental grout mixture would be satisfactory from a broader range of considerations, both relating to early stage performance, and having implications for longevity in performance.
Rights: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11681/11033
Appears in Collections:Miscellaneous Paper

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
MP-SL-81-2-Report-1.pdf16.15 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open