P O S I V A O Y

FI -27160 OLKILUOTO, F INLAND

Tel +358-2-8372 31

Fax +358-2-8372 3709

Ursu la S ievänen

Pau la Ra iv io

U l l a Vuor inen

Johanna Hansen , Juhan i Noroka l l i o

Pau l i Sy r j änen

November 2006

Work ing Repor t 2006 -85

Optimisation of Technical Properties ofLow pH Cementitious Injection Grout

Laboratory Tests and Pilot Field Test 3

November 2006

Working Reports contain information on work in progress

or pending completion.

Ursu la S ievänen

Pöyry I n f r a Oy

Pau la Ra iv io

Contes ta Oy

Ul la Vuor inen

VTT P rosesses

Johanna Hansen , Juhan i Noroka l l i o

Pos iva Oy

Pau l i Syr jänen

Gr idpo in t F in l and Oy

Work ing Report 2006 -85

Optimisation of Technical Properties ofLow pH Cementitious Injection Grout

Laboratory Tests and Pilot Field Test 3

ABSTRACT

Posiva, SKB and NUMO co-operated in developing low-pH (pH<11 in the leachate)

grouts for deep repositories 2002 2005. The development of low-pH cementitious

grouts for fractures > 100 μm was done in Finland. The non-cementitious low-pH

grouts for fractures < 100 μm were studied in Sweden. Several cementitious binder

material combinations were studied within the project. The most promising and suitable

system was Portland cement + microsilica. The targets with regard to the main

properties (pH and penetration ability) were reached, but all technical properties were

not satisfying. Superplasticizers were avoided, but it turned out that in order to reach the

acceptable technical properties together with low pH, superplasticizers were necessary

to decrease water/dry material-ratio and fasten the early age strength development.

Posiva continued the optimisation of Portland cement + microsilica + superplasticizer –

mixes within the LPHTEK-project during 2005. The work comprised laboratory studies,

two batch mixing tests in field conditions, the third pilot field test and monitoring of the

test area.

The objective of the laboratory tests was to improve the properties of the mix P3

developed in earlier stage. The superplasticizer was changed to one which is considered

less harmful with respect to the long-term safety. The water/dry material-ratio and the

contents of microsilica and superplasticizer were varied and the behaviour of the mixes

was observed under cooled circumstances (12 ºC) and at room temperature. Several

mixes showed promising results and one mix, P308B (SF/PC=0.69, naphtalene

sulphonate SPL 4%) met the targets, except that set to yield stress. Technical tests

indicated that cement consignment, age of the cement, age of the microsilica, mixer type

and temperature affected on results, but it was not possible to study these in detail. The

improved composition of the mix stabilised the leachate pH-values with time as well as

somewhat lowered them; the observed pH in fresh AL-MR water was < 11 and in saline

OL-SR water < 10. The difference in the pH values were reflected in the released

alkaline elements; only KOH in OL-SR leachates while both KOH and Ca(OH)2 were

present in ALL-MR leachates. High ionic strength and the effect of common ions (Na

and Ca) in OL-SR and in cement pore water restrict the ionic behaviour. Based on leach

test results for mix f63 (base mix in developing mix P308B) the curing temperature

(20ºC or 50ºC) gives different pH values in the beginning of testing and those are

reflected in the amounts of released alkalies especially, as well.

Before the pilot field test 3, a batch mixing test was arranged in field conditions. A few

mixes were made with a full scale grouting mixer and tested for technical properties. All

mixes showed promising behaviour and mix P3080B met the targets. Two mixes

(P308B and P307B) were selected for the test grouting. In the pilot field test 3 arranged

in ONKALO access tunnel, one fan was grouted with test mixes. The sealing efficiency

was about 90% and small moist areas and minor leakages were observed after grouting.

Testing of technical properties showed practical problems due to testing conditions and

device failure. A second batch mixing test was arranged in order to verify the properties.

Marsh fluidity, bleeding and early age shear strengths were satisfying for P308B.

After excavation one borehole was drilled in the pilot field test 3 area through the

grouted zone, and groundwater sampling was carried out. As expected, pH decreases

more efficiently in low pH grout environment than in the case with ordinary cement

Keywords: grouting, grout, low pH (pH <11), penetration ability, Marsh fluidity, early

age shear strength, compressive strength, ONKALO, final disposal of spent nuclear

fuel, control of water inflow, tunnelling

TIIVISTELMÄ

Posiva, SKB ja NUMO kehittivät matalan pH:n (uutteen pH<11) injektointiaineita

ydinjätteen loppusijoitustilojen injektointiin vuosien 2002–2005 aikana. Yli 100 μm

rakojen injektointiin tarkoitettujen sementtipohjaisten massojen kehitystyö suoritettiin

Suomessa. Ruotsissa kehitettiin injektointiaineita alle 100 μm rakoihin.

Sementtipohjaisten injektointimassojen osalta tutkittiin useita sideainekombinaatioita.

Sopivimmaksi ja lupaavimmaksi sideainekombinaatioksi osoittautuivat Portland

sementti + mikrosilika pohjaset massat. Tavoitteet pääominaisuuksien (pH ja

tunkeutumiskyky) suhteen saavutettiin, mutta kaikki tekniset ominaisuudet eivät olleet

tyydyttäviä. Vaikka notkistimia pyrittiin välttämään, todettiin ne toistaiseksi

välttämättömiksi. Massojen vesi/kuiva-ainesuhde tuli saada riittävän pieneksi

halutunlaiseen lujuudenkehitykseen pääsemiseksi.

Posiva Oy jatkoi Portland sementti + mikrosilika + notkistin massojen optimointia

LPHTEK-projektin puitteissa vuonna 2005. Työ sisälsi laboratoriotutkimuksia, kaksi

kenttäolosuhteissa tehtyä sekoituskoetta, kolmannen pilottikenttäkokeen ja koealueen

monitorointia.

Laboratoriotyön tavoitteena oli parantaa aiemmin kehitetyn reseptin P3 ominaisuuksia.

Notkistin vaihdettiin toiseen, joka on nykytietämyksen mukaan pitkäaikais-

turvallisuutensa puolesta turvallisempi. Massan vesi/kuiva-ainesuhdetta, mikrosilikan ja

notkistimen määrää varioitiin ja massan käyttäytymistä tutkittiin jäähdytetyissä

olosuhteissa (12 ºC) ja huoneen lämpötilassa. Useat massat vaikuttivat lupaavilta ja yksi

massa, P308B (SF/PC=0.69, naftaleenisulfonaattinotkistin 4 %) oli tavoitteen mukainen

lukuun ottamatta myötöraja-arvoa. Teknisten testien perusteella vaikutti siltä, että

sementtierällä ja -iällä, mikrosilikan iällä, laboratoriosekoittimella ja lämpötilalla on

vaikutus tuloksiin. Näitä ei kuitenkaan tässä vaiheessa kyetty tarkemmin tutkimaan.

Massojen aiempaa parempi koostumus tasoittaa uutteiden pH-arvojen kehittymisen ajan

myötä ja jossain määrin alentaa pH:ta; makeammassa AL-MR-vedessä pH oli < 11 ja

suolaisemmassa OL-SR-vedessä < 10. Uuttovesien erilaiset pH-arvot heijastuivat myös

vesianalyysien tuloksissa; OL-SR veteen uuttui vain KOH kun taas AL-MR uutteessa

oli läsnä sekä KOH että Ca(OH)2. OL-SR veden korkeampi ionivahvuus ja yhteiset

ionit (Na ja Ca) sementin huokosveden kanssa rajoittavat uuttumista. Aikaisemmin

uuttotestatun massan f63 (josta kehitettiin P308B massa) kahdessa eri lämpötilassa

kovetettujen näytteiden uuttovesien analyysitulokset osoittivat, että kovettumislämpötila

(20 °C tai 50 °C) aiheuttaa uuttotestin alussa erilaisen pH käyttäytymisen, joka heijastuu

myös erityisesti vapautuvien alkalien määrissä.

Ennen pilottikenttäkoetta järjestettiin sekoituskoe, jossa muutama lupaavin resepti

sekoitettiin täyden mittakaavan sekoittimella ja eräät tekniset ominaisuudet testattiin

kenttäolosuhteissa. Tulosten perusteella valittiin kaksi parasta reseptiä pilotti-

kenttäkokeeseen (P308B ja P307B). Kaikkien massojen tulokset olivat lupaavia ja

massa P308B:n tulokset olivat tavoitteiden mukaisia. ONKALOn ajotunnelissa tehdyssä

pilottikenttäkoe 3:ssa yksi injektointiviuhka injektoitiin kahdella lupaavimmalla

laboratoriossa kehitetyllä massalla (P308B ja P307B). Injektointi vaikutti onnistuneelta;

noin 90 % vuodoista saatiin tiivistettyä ja pieniä kosteita alueita ja tippoja jäi

testialueelle. Massojen teknisten ominaisuuksien testaamisessa oli ongelmia

koeolosuhteiden ja laiterikkojen vuoksi. Pilottikenttäkoe 3:n jälkeen järjestettiin

ylimääräinen sekoituskoe, jonka tarkoituksena saada varmentavat tulokset massojen

teknisistä ominaisuuksista. P308B:n Marsh-juoksevuus, veden erottuminen ja

varhaislujuus olivat tavoitteen mukaisia.

Louhinnan jälkeen pilottikenttäkoealueelle kairattiin reikä injektoidun vyöhykkeen läpi,

ja reiästä otettuja pohjavesinäytteitä tutkittiin. pH laski nopeammin matalan pH:n

sementin ympäristössä verrattuna tavanomaisen sementin ympäristöön.

Avainsanat: injektointi, injektointiaine, matala pH (pH <11), tunkeutuvuus, Marsh-

juoksevuus, vedenerottuminen, varhaislujuus, puristuslujuus, ONKALO, käytetyn

ydinpolttoaineen loppusijoitus, vuotovesien hallinta, kalliorakentaminen

PREFACE

Since 2005 the further optimisation of low pH cementitious grout has been coordinated

by the LPHTEK project, which is responsible for developing and implementation of low

pH grouts during the construction of ONKALO access tunnel. This report presents the

work done and results achieved during 2005.

The LPHTEK project group consisted of project manager Tapani Lyytinen (ELY

Management Oy), Margit Snellman (Saanio & Riekkola), Ursula Sievänen (Pöyry Infra

Oy) and project responsible and customer contact Johanna Hansen (Posiva Oy).

The LPHTEK project group planned the laboratory studies together with geologist

Paula Raivio (Contesta Oy), who was responsible for testing the technical properties of

mixes. Batch mixing tests and pilot field test 3 were carried out by the project group,

ONKALO grouting designer and ONKALO contractor Kalliorakennus Oy. Leaching

tests and rheology measurements were done at the Technical Research Centre of

Finland. NES tests were carried out at Cementa’s cement factory in Degerhamn in

Sweden.

The LPHTEK project group took part in evaluating the results and contributing to this

report. The following persons have mainly contributed to this report: Chapters 1, 3,

partly Chapter 7, 8 and partly 9 Ursula Sievänen from Pöyry Infra Oy; Chapter 2, 4 and

5 Paula Raivio from Contesta Oy; Chapter 6 Ulla Vuorinen from VTT PRO; partly

chapter 7 Pauli Syrjänen from Gridpoint Finland Oy; Section 7.4.8 Juhani Norokallio

from Posiva; Chapter 7.7 Margit Snellman from Saanio & Riekkola Oy and partly

Chapter 9 Johanna Hansen from Posiva Oy. Conclusions present the opinion of the

project group. Ursula Sievänen has compiled this report.

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

TIIIVISTELMÄ

PREFACE

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................ 3

1 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................... 5

2 MATERIALS ........................................................................................................... 9

3 OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................... 11

4 METHODS FOR TESTING GROUT PROPERTIES............................................. 13

4.1 General ......................................................................................................... 13

4.2 Fluidity by Marsh funnel ................................................................................ 14

4.3 Fluidity by Flow table .................................................................................... 15

4.4 Bleeding ........................................................................................................ 15

4.5 Early strength development by fall cone ....................................................... 16

4.6 Penetration ability by penetrability meter in laboratory tests......................... 17

4.7 Penetration ability by filter pump in field tests............................................... 18

4.8 Compressive strength ................................................................................... 18

4.9 Rheology....................................................................................................... 19

4.10 NES test........................................................................................................ 19

4.11 Evaluation of the grouting result of the field test ........................................... 20

5 LABORATORY STUDIES..................................................................................... 21

5.1 Tasks ............................................................................................................ 21

5.2 Tested mix compositions .............................................................................. 21

5.3 Mixing and conditions for testing the grouting related properties.................. 24

5.4 Test results and remarks .............................................................................. 25

5.5 Comprehensive laboratory test results ......................................................... 27

5.6 Tests with alternative superplasticizers ........................................................ 29

5.7 NES test........................................................................................................ 30

5.8 Conclusions of laboratory tests..................................................................... 31

6 LEACH TESTING ................................................................................................. 33

6.1 Leach testing of mix p308B........................................................................... 33

6.2 Results on old mixes..................................................................................... 41

2

7 PILOT FIELD TEST 3 ........................................................................................... 45

7.1 General ......................................................................................................... 45

7.2 Grouting equipment ...................................................................................... 45

7.3 Batch mixing test 1 and selection of the mixes for pilot field test 3 ............... 46

7.4 Pilot field test 3 – test grouting...................................................................... 49 7.4.1 Site description.......................................................................................... 49 7.4.2 Water penetration tests and flowlog results in probe holes....................... 49 7.4.3 Plan for test grouting ................................................................................. 51 7.4.4 Results of technical tests of grout mixes................................................... 53 7.4.5 Drilling of the grout holes .......................................................................... 56 7.4.6 Results of the grouting .............................................................................. 56 7.4.7 Quality control ........................................................................................... 58 7.4.8 Geological mapping after excavation ........................................................ 58 7.4.9 Leakage water inflow after excavation ...................................................... 62

7.5 Batch mixing test 2........................................................................................ 64

7.6 Summary and conclusions of pilot field test 3............................................... 66

7.7 Observations from monitoring of the effect of the low-pH cement on groundwater chemistry ............................................................................................. 67

8 SUMMARY OF P308B MATERIAL PROPERTIES MEASURED IN THE LABORATORY AND IN THE FIELD............................................................................. 71

9 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 73

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 75

APPENDIX 1: RHEOLOGY RESULTS BY VTT ........................................................... 77

APPENDIX 2: LABORATORY RESULTS .................................................................... 81

APPENDIX 3: RESULTS OF BATCH MIXING TEST 1................................................ 89

APPENDIX 4: PROBE HOLE DRILLING LOG............................................................. 93

APPENDIX 5: FLOW LOG RESULTS PR0502 ............................................................ 95

APPENDIX 6: RESULTS OF TECHNICAL TESTS OF MIXES IN TEST GROUTING.................................................................................................................................... 101

APPENDIX 7: GROUTING HOLE DRILLING LOG .................................................... 103

APPENDIX 8: GROUTING LOG................................................................................. 107

APPENDIX 9: GROUTING PRESSURES, FLOW AND GROUT TAKE..................... 111

APPENDIX 10: CONTROL HOLE DRILLING LOG.................................................... 133

APPENDIX 11: RESULTS OF BATCH MIXING TEST 2............................................ 135

3

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ALL-MR Leach solution, simulated fresh Allard water

bcrit Critical aperture for a grout to penetrate (all grout penetrates)

bmin Minimum aperture for a grout to penetrate

BMT Batch mixing test (1. or 2.)

DM Dry material (weight)

DOC Dissolved organic content

G Gypsum

GA GroutAid, commercial stabilised microsilica slurry

HAC High alumina cement

KTH Royal University of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

M-SPL Melamine based superplasticizer

LAC Japanese low alkaline cement

LPHTEK Project concerning the optimising of technical properties of

low pH cement grout

NES Apparatus for measuring penetrability properties of a grout

NS-SPL Naphtalene sulphonate based superplasticizer

NUMO Nuclear Waste Management Organisation of Japan

OL-SR Leach solution, simulated saline Olkiluoto water

PC Portland cement

PCB-SPL Polycarboxylate superplasticizer

PFL Posiva’s flowlog device

PFT Pilot field test

POSIVA Nuclear waste management company in Finland

RH Relative humidity

RQD Rock Quality Designation

SF Silica Fume /microsilica / = silica component of commercial

product GroutAid

SKB Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB

SPL Superplasticizer

SSC Supersulphate cement –system

T Temperature

TOC Total organic carbon

UF16 Ultrafin16, microfine sulphate resistant Portland cement

VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland

W/DM Water to dry material ratio

WLM Water loss measurement (Lugeon-test)

wt-% Weight-%

vol-% Volume-%

4

5

1 BACKGROUND

SKB, Posiva and NUMO carried out a project “Low-pH injection grout for deep

repositories” during 2003-2005. The project was established and outlined based on the

outcome of the earlier feasibility study. The development work was divided so that

Posiva was responsible for developing a low pH cementitious grout for fractures with an

aperture over 100 μm and SKB was responsible for the development of a low pH non

cementitious grout for fractures with an aperture less than 100 μm. The project

concentrated on the technical development of properties for the low pH grouts;

long-term safety aspects, environmental acceptance and durability of materials were

preliminarily considered. The whole project “Low pH injection grout for deep

repositories” is reported by Bodén & Sievänen (2005).

The development of the low-pH cementitious grout consisted of several tasks. First the

requirements for the materials were set. The potential systems were selected and the

technical properties of some two hundred recipes were tested. The most promising

recipes were then tested for pH and leaching behaviour. Based on the results, the most

promising recipes were tested in pilot field-tests (PFTs) in Finland.

The development of the technical performance of the grouts was done by Kronlöf

(2005a). The tested binder-material systems were named Portland Cement + Silica

Fume (=microsilica) –system (PC+SF), Blast furnace slag –system, Super sulphate

cement –system, Japanese Low alkali cement –system and Fly ash –system. In this stage

superplasticizers (SPLs) were avoided. The grouting related properties tested in the

laboratory were penetrability, bleeding, early age shear strength viscosity and yield

value. For some mixes Marsh fluidity and uniaxial compressive strength were also

measured. The pH and leaching properties were studied by Vuorinen et al. (2005). The

methods for testing pH and leaching behaviour were the so-called “equilibrium test” and

“diffusion test”. In those tests the groundwater conditions (fresh ALL-MR and saline

OL-SR) were simulated by varying the composition of the leach solutions.

During the project all other systems except PC+SF were ruled out for different reasons.

Fly ash was ruled out in the early stage because there were problems with the

availability of material of uniform quality. LAC was ruled out due to poor penetrability

properties. At the late stage of the work Slag- and SSC-systems were ruled out due to

high leaching of sulphide from materials including slag.

A few PC+SF –mixes showed promising technical and leaching performance, these

mixes were named f63, f64, w1 and w2. Out of these f63 was selected to be tested in

PFT1 (Table 1-1). The properties of this mix, measured in the laboratory, are gathered

in Table 1-2. Mix f63 had good penetration ability.

Laboratory tests showed that the alkali content of the raw materials could not directly be

correlated to the measured pH of the leaching solutions. Minimum value for SF/PC ratio

in mixes based on PC+SF should be above 0.69 in order to yield pH 11 or lower. It was

also shown that the minimum content of SiO2 in mixes should be close to or above

50 wt % of total binder materials and Ca/Si molar ratio should be close to or less than

6

0.80 in order to reach the pH criteria, pH 11. The sum of CaO+MgO is an important

factor affecting the pH. It was also found that increasing W/DM improves penetration

ability of grouts but only up to the W/DM ratio of about 2. The penetration ability of

PC+SF mixes sharply became worse with W/DM below 2 but the penetration ability of

some slag mixes was relatively good down to a value of 1.6. Larger values still decrease

(improve) viscosity. Generally viscosity and yield values were unrelated to penetration

ability. The W/DM ratio controls strength development. Aluminium cement and/or

gypsum notably speeded up the PC+SF system. SF increases the strength in PC+SF

systems.

Mix f63 was tested in the PFT1 in Kamppi-Kruununhaka multipurpose tunnel (Sievänen

et al. 2005). Also two slag based mixes were tested, but later slag was ruled out. PFT1

showed that the PC+SF –system was too slow in field conditions (Table 1-2). There

were also problems in dosing of the components in the actual grouting work, and this

possibly partly affected on poor early age strength development. The sealing result was

not satisfying because regrouting was needed. SPL was regarded necessary in order to

decrease the W/DM-ratio and to speed up the development of strength and keep the

rheological properties satisfying at the same time. Further mix modification was

considered necessary.

Some tens of mix modifications with SPL were tested (Kronlöf 2005b). The mix f63

was further modified by changing the content of water, SPL, aluminium cement and

gypsum. The requirements were slightly modified due to the problems found in PFT1.

Attention was paid to increasing the early age shear strength, which was raised from

0.5 kPa to 2 kPa as a required property, and in the final strength of the mixes. Only

grouting related properties were tested. Leach testing was not done because the ratio of

SF/PC was not altered in the mixes and pH behaviour was assumed to be similar as that

of f63.

Three promising mixes were selected for the so-called batch mixing test (BMT)

(Sievänen et al. 2005). Based on those results mix P3 (Table 1-1) was selected to be

tested in PFT2 in ONKALO. The results of mix P3 obtained in the laboratory tests and

BMTs are gathered in Table 1-2. The mix had good penetration ability, promising

Marsh fluidity, promising strength development and satisfying compressive strength

and its composition was the simplest and among the alternatives it was the most

acceptable from the long-term safety point of view (lowest content of SPL). Only the

Marsh fluidity obtained in the laboratory was not satisfying. Although all properties

were not the best, the overall behaviour of the mix and the composition of it were

regarded best.

In PFT2, half of the grouting fan was grouted with P3 and the other half with the

ordinary grout used in ONKALO (Sievänen et al. 2005). The results of mix P3 were

promising but not satisfying (Table 1-2). The development of strength was promising;

the uniaxial compressive strength at 28 d was good. The results of penetrability and

Marsh-fluidity were poorer in actual grouting tests than in mixing tests. The results may

partly be explained by experiment conditions in the tunnel and malfunctioning of the

measuring equipment. Bleeding was good. It was found that mix P3 seemed to be

poorer than the ordinary grout, but some of the leakages were sealed and the thickness

7

of the grouted zone was estimated to be about 2-3 m. One dropping leakage and

moisture remained on the tunnel ceiling and walls after grouting. After rock bolting

there were a few dropping leakages. The conclusion of PFT2 was that the use of this

kind of low pH cementitious grout could be considered for repository grouting from a

technical performance point of view, but more field experiences were necessary to

verify the behaviour of the grout. Technical performance could be better, so further

optimising was recommended. Also based on a separate literature examination

(Hakanen & Ervanne 2006), the melamine based SPL used in mix P3 was not regarded

as the most suitable for repository grouting. According to them, naphthalene

sulphonate-based superplasticizer (NS-SPL) is the least problematic.

The further optimisation was started within the LPHTEK-project, which is managed by

Posiva Oy, and the laboratory work and field tests decided within this project are

presented in this report. In the future the developed mixes will be tested in a large scale

field test, named LPHTEK-field test and will be reported separately.

8

Tabl

e 1-

1. C

hem

ical

com

posi

tions

of t

he P

C+

SF –

mix

es f6

3 an

d P3

, whi

ch w

ere

the

mos

t pro

mis

ing

low

pH

cem

entit

ious

mix

es a

t the

ea

rlie

r sta

ge.

Mix

S

yste

m

PC

-typ

e

SF

-typ

e

SP

L-t

ype

G/P

C

HA

C/P

C

SF

/PC

S

PL/D

M(w

t-%

)C

a/S

i mola

r ra

tio S

iO2

W/D

M

f63

UF

16+

SF

+E

TT

A

UF

16

Gro

ut

Aid

- 0.0

27

0.0

75

0.6

9

0

0.8

3 C

a/S

i 49.3

%2.4

8

P3

UF

16+

SF

+S

PL

UF

16

Gro

ut

Aid

SP

-40

(mela

min

e-

base

d)

0.0

00

0.0

00

0.6

9

2.0

0.7

9

52.2

%

1.6

1

Tabl

e 1-

2. R

esul

ts o

f tec

hnic

al te

sts

in th

e la

bora

tory

and

in th

e fie

ld o

f the

mix

es f6

3 an

d P3

, whi

ch w

ere

the

mos

t pro

mis

ing

low

pH

cem

entit

ious

mix

es in

ear

lier s

tage

. Lab

ora

tory

re

quirem

ents

(to

the le

ft o

f th

e c

olu

mn)

and r

esu

lts (

to t

he r

igh

t)

Mix

B

lee

din

g

(vol-%

)6h s

he

ar

stre

ngth

(kP

a)

bm

in (μ

m)

bcr

it(μ

m)

Vis

cosi

ty

Bin

gham

(P

a)

Yie

ld s

tress

B

ing

ham

(P

a)

Mars

h f

luid

ity

(s)

Com

pr.

str

ength

(M

Pa)

28d/9

1d

f63

10

0

0.5

3.7

80

44

12

0

65

50

50

5

21

- -

4/-

-

P3

10

0

2

1.3

80

46

12

0

107

ALA

P(1

) -

ALA

P(1

) -

- 136

8/-

14.4

/-

Fie

ld t

est

requ

irem

ents

* (to

the le

ft o

f th

e c

olu

mn)

an

d r

esu

lts (

to t

he r

ight)

(m

ixin

g t

est

/gro

utin

g t

est

**/m

ixin

g t

est

Mix

B

lee

din

g

(vol-%

)6h s

hear

stre

ngth

(k

Pa)

Filt

er

pum

p

(ml) (

100μ

m)

Mars

h flu

idity

(s

)C

om

pr.

str

ength

(M

Pa)

28d/9

1d

f63

(5)1

0

1

0.5

0.1

5

(20

0)-

30

0

290-3

10

**(5

)10

39-4

0

S(2

) /-

1.5

7 /

-

P3

10

0-1

0.5

~

0.2

1/~

0.2

**

(20

0)-

30

0

300-3

20/1

40-2

70**

10

45-4

7/5

1-5

4**

S(2

) /-

10.9

/-*

*

(1) A

LA

P =

as

low

as

po

ssib

le

(2) S

= S

eve

ral

*th

e d

eta

iled

de

term

ina

tion

s a

nd

cla

ssifi

catio

ns

for

the

re

qu

ire

me

nts

ha

ve c

ha

ng

ed

du

rin

g t

he

pro

ject

an

d t

he

y a

re p

rese

nte

d in

wo

rkin

g r

ep

ort

s (K

ron

löf

20

05

a,

20

05

b,

Sie

vän

en

et

al.

20

05

, 2006)

** t

he

re

sult

is o

bta

ine

d in

PF

T3

, th

e o

the

r re

sults

in B

MT

1 a

nd

BM

T2

9

2 MATERIALS

Based on the outcome of the earlier project “Injection grout for deep repositories”

(Bodén & Sievänen 2005, Kronlöf 2005a, 2005b, Vuorinen et al. 2005 and Sievänen et

al. 2005) the further development of low pH cementitious grout and optimisation of the

grout properties is based on the binder material system Portland cement (PC) and

microsilica (SF). Superplasticizer (SPL) is considered necessary in order to get all the

wanted technical properties.

The PC used in further optimisation is commercial Ultrafin 16 (UF16) by Cementa AB.

Ultrafin 16 is a sulphate resistant (chromate reduced) and low alkaline injection

Portland cement, designation in accordance with EN 197-1: CEM I 52.5 R. Its d95

particle size is less than 16 μm. The used microsilica is commercial GroutAid (GA) by

Elkem. The bulk density of the GroutAid used in the laboratory and BMTs was

1390 kg/m3 which is an average bulk density given by the producer. The SPLs used in

the laboratory tests were Mighty 150 (naphtalene sulphonate) by Scancem and SP40

(melamine sulphonate) by Sika. Product information is gathered in Table 2-1.

A few preliminary tests with two polycarboxylate superplasticizers (PCB-SPL) were

also made in the laboratory. The target of these tests was to observe and compare the

properties of mixes with different SPL. The tested PCB-SPLs were Structuro 111X by

Fosroc A/S (agent Semtu Oy in Finland) and Glenium 51 by MAC S.P.A. (agent

Degussa Construction Chemicals Finland Oy).

Two mixes with SuperParmix-superplasticizer (naphthalene formaldehyde) by

Finnsementti were tested preliminarily in one BMT.

The tested mix compositions were defined by Posiva Oy together with the LPHTEK

project.

10

Tabl

e 2-

1. T

he m

ain

prop

ertie

s of t

he g

rout

com

pone

nts u

sed

at th

e la

bora

tory

. Dat

a co

llect

ed fr

om d

ata

shee

ts g

iven

by

the

prod

ucer

.

Pro

du

ct

/Pro

du

cer

Co

mp

osi

tion

M

ax

sto

rag

e

time

(month

s)

Sto

rage

T(

C)

De

nsi

ty

(co

mp

act

)

kg/m

3

So

lids

(wt

%)

Wa

ter

(wt-

%)

BE

Tsp

eci

ficsu

rfa

ce(m

2/k

g)

Ma

x p

art

icle

si

ze (

m)

pH

V

isco

sity

C

he

mic

al

pro

pe

rtie

s (w

t-%

) L

OI=

loss

o

n ig

niti

on

Ultr

afin

16

(U

F16

) ce

me

nt

/Ce

me

nta

Ab

Su

lph

ate

resi

sta

nt,

ch

rom

ate

re

du

ced

an

d

low

alk

alin

e

cem

en

t

6-

3100 -

32

00

--

1600

16 (

95 %

) -

-M

gO

ma

x 5.0

S

O3 m

ax

3.5

Gro

utA

id

/Elk

em

Sili

ca f

um

e

(mic

rosi

lica

) -

ba

sed

ad

diti

ve

- -

1390

(1350-1

410)

50

2

- 15 0

00 (

dry

) 1 (

>90 %

)

45 (

ma

x 1%

)4.5

- 6

.5

Max

100 c

P

SiO

2 m

in.

86

C

arb

on m

ax

2.5

LO

I m

ax

3.0

A

lka

li o

xid

es

max

2.0

Mig

hty

15

0

(SP

L)

/Sik

a

No

rge

AS

Na

fta

len

sulfo

nic

aci

d-

form

ald

eh

yde

con

de

nsa

te,

Na

-sa

lt

-+

5 -

+25

C1200

40

60 -

100

--

Ca.

9

50

mP

as

-

Sik

a-S

P 4

0

(SP

L)

/Sik

a

Su

lph

on

ate

dm

ela

min

efo

rmald

eh

yde

con

de

nsa

tes

-+

0 -

+25

C1260

(+20

C)

30 -

60

60 -

100

- -

10 -

12

(+20

C)

50 -

90

mP

as

(+20

C)

Form

ald

eh

yde

< 0

.2

Super-

Pa

rmix

(SP

L)

/Fin

nse

me

ntt

i

Na

ph

tha

len

efo

rmald

eh

yde

po

lyco

nd

en

sate

Min

. 1

2

(unopene

d)

> +

5C

> +

15

C(m

in.

wo

rkin

g T

)

1200

40

--

-8 -

9

--

Str

uct

uro

111X

(S

PL)

/Fo

sro

c A

/S

(Sem

tu)

Po

lyca

rbo

xyla

te

poly

mer

12

+5 -

+50

C1070

(+20

C)

- -

- -

ca. 6.5

-

Ch

lorid

e C

l-

<0

.05

So

diu

me

q.

Na

2O

<1

.0

Gle

niu

m 5

1

(SP

L)

/MA

C S

.P.A

(D

eguss

a)

Mo

difi

ed

po

lyca

rbo

xylic

eth

er

Min

. 1

2

(sh

elf

life

) >

+5

-

+5

0C

1100

50

35

1

--

-6 -

7

128

30

m

Pa

sC

hlo

rid

e<

0.0

1

11

3 OBJECTIVES

The objective of this work was to develop the grouts that fulfil certain requirements in

order to meet the workability and sealing requirements technically in short- and

long-term and also to meet the basic long-term safety requirement set (pH 11).

The objectives of the laboratory and field work have been set and justified in the project

internal memorandums. Originally the objectives were set within the project “Injection

Grout for Deep Repositories” and they were updated within the project LPHTEK based

on experiences obtained from the earlier project.

Because partly different testing methods are used in the laboratory and in the field, the

objectives are presented separately in Table 3-1 and Table 3-2. The objectives are

divided into required and desired properties. Given values are not absolute acceptance

criteria for any grouts; they are meant to be used as guidelines in this development

work.

Workability time was set to be 30 min, and it is meant to be determined so that certain

measurements are done at 30 min. However, due to testing arrangements in the

laboratory, mixes were tested soon after mixing and some properties were checked at 1

h.

Although several target properties are presented, all measurements are not done with all

mixes. If a mix showed poor Marsh-value, bleeding or shear strength at 6 h further

testing was passed. Only promising mixes were tested for penetration ability (by

penetrability meter). For mixes that fulfil the target for penetration ability the

rheological measurements were done. The leach test was done to one basic mix used

also in pilot field test 3 (PFT3). The mixes that ended up to the PFT3 were tested

thoroughly.

Although two target values for strength development were set (at 6 h and at 8 h),

measurement at 6 h was possible to do in the laboratory. In field it was not possible to

measure these at certain hour and the results at 6 h and 8 h were estimated from the

nearby results.

Target values for filter pump tests and NES tests were originally given, but they were

not systematically tested since penetrability meter is considered more reliable. NES

equipment was not available in field. Density was not separately measured in the

laboratory, since the components were dosed with scale and the risk for wrong dosing is

not as high as in field where density is systematically measured.

12

Table 3-1. Objectives for the laboratory work. All properties were not tested systematically in the laboratory; those that were not usually measured or were not possible to follow in the laboratory are written in light-blue colour.

Order of

importance

Property Requirement Measuring

methodpH 11.0 Leaching tests Density To be determined for

each mix. Acceptable limits 20 kg/m3

Densimeter. Acceptable value shall be obtained before other properties are tested.

Penetrability bmin

Penetrability bcrit

Penetrability

Penetrability

80 μm 120 μm

>300 ml

100 μm

Penetrability meter at 30 min

Filter pump (100 μm and smaller, if this target is reached) at 30 minNES-test at 30 min

Viscosity

Fluidity

50 mPas

45 s

Rheometry at 30 min

Marsh funnel at 30 min

Required properties

Shear strength at 6 h 500 Pa Fall cone at 6 h Workability time 30 min Determined by

penetrability and rheology

Shear strength at 8 h 2 kPa Fall cone at 8 h Bleed 2% Measuring tin at 2 h Yield value 5 Pa Rheometry at 30 min

Desired properties

Compressive strength 4 MPa Uniaxial compressive strength at 28 d

Table 3-2. Objectives for the field testing. Penetrability (light-blue text) was not measured by NES-equipment.

Order of

importance

Property Requirement Measuring

methodPenetrability / filtration stability Penetrability

>300 ml

< 100 μm

Filter pump, 100 μm mesh at 30 min Field NES equipment at 30 min

Density To be determined for each mix. Acceptable limits 50 kg/m3

Mud balance. Acceptable value shall be obtained before other properties are tested.

Fluidity 45 s Marsh funnel at 30 min

Required properties

Shear strength at 6 h 500 Pa Fall cone at 6 h

Bleed 2% Measuring glass at 2 h

Shear strength at 8 h 2 kPa Fall cone at 8 h Workability time 30 min Determined by fluidity

and penetrability

Desired properties

Compressive strength Several MPa Uniaxial compressive strength at 28 d

13

4 METHODS FOR TESTING GROUT PROPERTIES

4.1 General

The following laboratory tests were used to characterize the properties of the grouts:

1. Marsh funnel test; to determine the fluidity, which gives an idea of the

rheological properties of the grout.

2. Flow table test; to get an idea of the rheological properties of the mixes. The

flow table test was done because with some mixes no result was achieved with

the Marsh funnel test.

3. Bleeding test by measuring tin; to measure water separation.

4. Fall cone test; to follow up the early age strength development.

5. Penetrability meter test; to characterize the penetration ability.

6. Vicat-needle; to test the time taken for setting (made only for a few mixes).

7. NES-test; to measure penetration ability (was done only for a couple of mixes).

8. Uniaxial compressive strength; to get an idea of the final strength of the mix.

In order to measure the compressive strength of the hardened grout the samples were

cast in prisms.

Most materials were stored in a cooled cabinet (12 ºC), but some at room temperature.

Testing temperature 12 ºC was chosen because the prevailing temperature at the

repository level is about ~10.5-12 ºC. During mixing the mixer bowl was embedded in

cold, running tap water if cooling was required. The testing was performed at room

temperature, but the mixes were stored in a cooled cabinet the first 24 h, if required. The

mix temperature was recorded during mixing (Figure 4-1).

14

Figure 4-1. Set-up for the grout mixing under cooled conditions at the laboratory.

The following methods were used to characterize the properties of the grouts in the

PFT3 in ONKALO:

1. Filter pump; to determine the filtration stability, which gives a rough idea of the

penetration ability

2. Marsh funnel; to determine the fluidity, which gives an idea of the rheological

properties of the grout

3. Measuring glass; which measures water separation

4. Fall cone test; to follow up the early strength.

In BMTs the samples of the most promising mixes were cast for leach testing.

Temperature in the different field tests varied between 2 ºC and 25 ºC.

More detailed descriptions of the methods are available for example in Kronlöf (2005a).

4.2 Fluidity by Marsh funnel

The Marsh funnel (Figure 4-2) gives an idea of the rheological properties of the grout. It

gives neither viscosity nor yield value, but Marsh fluidity is a sort of combination of

these properties.

The Marsh funnel was filled with 1.5 litres of grout. When filling, the grout is run

through a mesh so that clumps etc. are removed. The time it takes for 1 l of grout to run

through the funnel is measured

15

Outlet d = 4.8 mm

305 mm

Filling height 302.5 mm

50.8 mm

d = 152 mm

Figure 4-2. Marsh funnel. The volume of the specimen run through the cone is 1 l.

4.3 Fluidity by Flow table

The flow of the mixes were measured by filling a brass cone (inner diameter = 39 mm,

height 50 mm) standing on a dry glass plate with grout and lifting the cone evenly so

that the grout spread out on the plate (BY1, 1972). The largest and the smallest

diameters of the flow pattern were measured and the result was the average in mm. The

flow table test was performed because in some cases no result was obtained with the

Marsh funnel (grout was too thick).

4.4 Bleeding

Bleeding (water separation) was measured with a measuring tin and pipette in the

laboratory (dimensions slightly modified from BY1, 1972). The tin was filled with

grout until the grout surface touched the measurement needle put over the top of the tin.

The volume of the mass was then 914 ml. The tin was covered with a lid, and stored

usually in the cold room until tested. The water separated at the surface of the grout was

sucked with a pipette and weighed. The result was given as volume-% of separated

water at about two hours after mixing.

In the field a 1000 ml measuring glass was used and bleeding was measured by volume

as water separated on the surface of the grout (Figure 4-3).

16

Figure 4-3. Illustration of measuring glass test for measuring bleeding (water separation). Water separates (shown by the arrows) on top of the grout.

4.5 Early strength development by fall cone

The fall cone test, according to standard CEN ISO/TS 17892-6, was used for

determining early shear strength of the mixes. The testing was performed at the ages of

6 h and 24 h in the laboratory.

The principle of the test is presented in Figure 4-4. After the cone was dropped into the

mix the depth of the indent was observed and the corresponding shear strength was

determined from a table.

Figure 4-4. Fall cone apparatus for measuring the early age shear strength.

17

4.6 Penetration ability by penetrability meter in laboratory tests

The penetration ability of some selected mixes was determined with the penetrability

meter developed by KTH (Royal University of Technology) (Eriksson & al. 2004). The

method gives the bmin and bcrit values for the mixes.

The mix was poured into the penetrability meter container (Figure 4-5) and then

squeezed out under 0.1 MPa pressure through a set of filters in an ascending series. Six

litres of freshly made mix at the age of about 0.5 h was tested. The filters used in the

tests were 35, 45, 54, 63, 75, 90, 104, 125, 144 and 200 μm. The mix was let to flow

through the filter for 10 seconds at the most or until the filter was blocked by the filter

cake. The filter was changed to one with bigger sieve opening until at least 1000 ml of

grout was collected after which the testing was stopped. With each filter the amount of

mix squeezed out was measured and then the results were plotted on a mesh size vs.

amount of mix –chart. The inversion points give the bmin and bcrit values. bmin represents

an opening that grout starts to penetrate into and bcrit represents an opening that all grout

penetrates into. The smaller the values are the smaller fractures the grout can penetrate

into.

Figure 4-5. Grout being squeezed out of the penetrability meter through a filter under 0.1 MPa pressure.

18

4.7 Penetration ability by filter pump in field tests

The penetration ability was measured with a filter pump according to VU-SC:27 (Figure

4-6). A short manual of the method is presented in the appendices of Kronlöf (2005a).

The pump is hand-operated. Filters with different mesh sizes can be used; typical sizes

are 63, 75 and 100 μm. The idea is to suck grout through the filter and then pump out

back through the filter and measure the outpumped volume. After the grout is sucked

into a cylinder, the contents are to be pressed into a measuring glass in order to measure

the exact volume. The volume of the pump is 310 ml, which is the maximum

penetration ability through the sieve. The exact penetration ability of the mix is obtained

by testing the grout with meshes of different sizes.

4.8 Compressive strength

The compressive strength is measured of prisms sized 40x40x160 mm at the age of 1,

28 and for some mixes at 91 days. Three measurements were performed for one prism

and the result was given as an average. Often no result was achieved with a fall cone

test at the age of 24 h, so 1 day compressive strength gave comparable results of all the

tested mixes.

The prisms were cast at the age of 1 h and stored in a mould covered by a glass plate at

room temperature or in a cooled cabinet (12 C), if required. After 24 hours the prisms

were de-moulded and moved to another cabinet for curing (20 C, 100% RH) and stored

there until testing.

Figure 4-6. Filter pump.

19

4.9 Rheology

The equipment for the rheology tests was brought to the laboratory and the 4 mixes to

be tested were prepared as usual in cooled conditions. The rheology methods are

described e.g. in Kronlöf (2005a). Viscosity determinations were done at spindle

rotation speeds 0-238 rpm with a Brookfield DV-III+ Rheometer by VTT PRO

(Appendix 1).

Each mix was tested twice for viscosity and yield values, first on freshly made mix and

then again 15 - 30 minutes later. The rest of the mix was kept in a cooled cabinet

(12 ºC) under constant mixing during the first test.

4.10 NES test

In the NES test grout material is pumped through an artificial smooth fracture at a

constant pressure. The amount of mass that comes through the fracture and the elapsed

time are recorded. A filter cake may form and stop the flow depending on the mix

composition. The equipment is situated at the Cementa factory at Degerhamn, Sweden.

The experimental set-up is illustrated in Figure 4-7.

Figure 4-7. NES test for penetrability analysis.

20

4.11 Evaluation of the grouting result of the field test

The grouting result was evaluated by comparing the calculated leakage water inflow

before grouting to 1) calculated leakage water inflow after grouting and

2) measured/mapped leakage water inflow after grouting. Evaluation of the sealing

efficiency is rough and qualitative.

Before grouting the rock was characterised with water loss measurements in four probe

holes. Posiva’s Flowlog was used for observing the water conductive fractures. After

grouting four control holes were drilled and studied to evaluate the grouting result. The

leakages on the tunnel walls and ceiling were mapped after excavation and after rock

bolting. In the geological mapping of the tunnel the fractures containing grouting

cement were observed.

21

5 LABORATORY STUDIES

5.1 Tasks

The laboratory tests were done by Contesta Oy during the time period March

2005-December 2005.

The objective of the laboratory testing was to improve the mix P3 which had given

promising results in earlier studies but was still too stiff for grouting (Bodén &

Sievänen 2005, Kronlöf 2005a, 2005b, Vuorinen et al. 2005 and Sievänen et al. 2005).

Mixing and testing low pH cementitious grouts in the laboratory was done at Contesta

Oy according to the instructions given by Posiva Oy. The mix composition was

optimised by 1) replacing the used SPL (SP-40, M-SPL) with one (Mighty 150, NS-

SPL) with expected less harmful effects on the long-term safety of a repository for spent

nuclear fuel (Hakanen & Ervanne 2006), 2) varying the dosing of SPL and SF and 3)

cooling the temperature of the mixes.

5.2 Tested mix compositions

The composition of the mix P3, that was selected to be further optimised, was

59.27 wt % of UF16 cement and 40.73 wt-% microsilica by dry weight (in form of GA)

leading to SF/PC -ratio 0.69, water to dry materials (W/DM as weight units) was 1.59

and SPL SP-40 was 2 wt % of the dry weight of the mix.

The tested mix compositions based on P3 and the recipes delivered by Posiva Oy are

given in Table 5-1. Detailed recipes (weighing in laboratory) of each mix are given in

Appendix 2. The task was to identify the most promising mixes for further testing on

the basis of early age test results and strength development. The mixes were tested at

two different temperatures and with two SPLs. The UF16 cement used was from the

same consignment as in the preliminary tests from December 2004 and was therefore

about 3-4 months old at the time of these second tests.

The mixes were numbered with running numbering (Appendix 2). It was agreed that it

was not necessary to test all mix compositions if some set of mixes did not show

acceptable results during the mixing and early testing. Nor was it necessary to test all

the mixes with decreased microsilica content if mixes with “low pH producing”

microsilica content behaved well. Here “low pH producing” refers to the content, which

is known to lead to pH-values 11 in leachates. The reason for testing mixes with

reduced microsilica content (-5 or -10 wt-% units compared to the “low pH producing”

content 40.73 wt-%) was that the preliminary tests of the mixes in December 2004 with

this amount of microsilica showed rather poor performance in the fresh state at room

temperature. The technical properties were improved at the expense of the low pH as

microsilica content was reduced. The best technical properties were achieved with

higher SPL dosage (3 wt-%). Low pH was prioritised over higher SPL dosage. Some

tests were added to the test series during the work, these are listed as B-mixes in Table

22

5-1. Altogether 28 mixes were tested from Table 5-1. The first tests showed that higher

SPL content lead to better results than higher water content. The test matrix was slightly

modified based on the results and P307B and P308B were added to the matrix.

The project group chose the most promising mixes, which were then tested more

comprehensively in the laboratory at low temperatures (Table 5-2). The mix P307C was

developed during the PFT3 and it was tested afterwards in the laboratory. Two

laboratory batches were made from each mix. One set of batches was used in the same

tests as the mixes in Table 5-1. The other set of batches was tested with a penetrability

meter. Fresh UF16 cement and GA were used in these tests. Seven mixes were tested in

this test series.

The rheological properties were measured for the mixes used in the PFT3.

Complementary laboratory studies were done with a different type of penetration ability

device. This NES-test series was done at the Cementa cement factory, Sweden.

23

Tabl

e 5-

1. M

ix c

ompo

sitio

n pl

an o

f the

test

seri

es. C

hang

es in

the

SPL

dosa

ge in

par

enth

esis

afte

r the

mix

num

ber.

Tem

p.

(C

)12

12

12

20

20

20

12

12

12

20

20

20

20

SP

L

(wt-

%)

SP

40

3

SP

40

2

SP

40

2

SP

40

3

SP

40

2

SP

40

2

Mig

hty

150

3

Mig

hty

150

2

Mig

hty

150

2

Mig

hty

150

3

Mig

hty

150

2

Mig

hty

150

2

Mig

hty

150

2

SF

, lo

w p

H d

osi

ng (

SF

/PC

= 0

.69)

W/D

M

Mix

nro

1.2

P301

1.4

P302

1.6

P303

1.2

P304

1.4

P305

1.6

P306

1.2

P307

P307B

(4%

)

1.4

P308 (

3%

)

P308B

(4%

)

1.6

P309

1.2

P310

1.4

P311

1.6

P312

1.8

P313

SF

-5 w

t-%

units

(S

F/P

C =

0.5

6)

W/D

M

Mix

nro

1.2

P321

1.4

P322

1.6

P323

1.2

P324

1.4

P325

1.6

P326

1.2

P327

1.4

P328

1.6

P329

1.2

P330

1.4

P331

1.6

P332

1.8

P333

SF

-10 w

t-%

units

(S

F/P

C =

0.4

4)

W/D

M

Mix

nro

1.2

P341

1.4

P342

1.6

P343

1.2

P344

1.4

P345

1.6

P346

1.2

P347

1.4

P348

1.6

P349

1.2

P350

1.4

P351

1.6

P352

1.8

P353

24

Table 5-2. Mix compositions chosen for further testing in the laboratory.

Mix P307 P307B P307C P308 P308B P309 P327

T ( C) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

SPL-type

(wt-% of DM weight)

Mighty 150

3

Mighty 150

4

Mighty 150

3.3

Mighty 150

3

Mighty 150

4

Mighty 150

2

Mighty 150

3

W/DM 1.20 1.20 0.88 1.40 1.40 1.60 1.20

SF (in form of GA),

(wt-% of DM weight)

SF/PC

40.73

0.69

40.73

0.69

41.00

0.69

40.73

0.69

40.73

0.69

40.73

0.69

35.73

0.56

5.3 Mixing and conditions for testing the grouting related properties

In the first tests the quantity of each test batch was about 3 litres. For further testing

with the penetrability meter a double batch, about 6 litres, was prepared. Detailed

recipes of each mix are given in Appendix 2.

For testing at 12 ºC the materials were cooled in a cabinet and kept there all the time

except during weighing and testing at room temperature (about 20 ºC). The materials

tested at 20 ºC were kept at room temperature all the time and the tap water used was

lukewarm. Cold tap water (7- 9 ºC) was used in the 12 ºC mixes.

The mixing was done with a Polytron PT3100 high-speed mixer. The target for the

mixing speed was 12 000 rpm, but during all mixes the mixing speed had to be raised

even up to about 20 000 rpm in order to assure efficient mixing.

As the batch volume was rather small the temperature tended to rise during mixing. The

temperature rise was suppressed by cooling the 12 ºC mixes by immersing the whole

mixing device up to the edge of the mixing bowl in a tank filled with running cold tap

water. The mixes tested at room temperature were not cooled during mixing. The

temperature changes during mixing were recorded repeatedly.

The mixing order was the following: cement was added first to a major part of the water

and the mixing proceeded at about 12 000 rpm for 2 minutes after which SPL was

added together with the remaining water. Last some microsilicaslurry (GroutAid) was

slowly added to the mixture. Mixing continued for 3 minutes at elevated speeds. Total

mixing time was mostly about 5 minutes, but due to stiffness of some mixes, the mixing

may have taken a little longer. The mixer was not efficient enough for some mixes, but

it seemed that the mixes became homogenous enough to proceed with the testing. The

age of the mixes was measured from the end of the mixing time.

Directly after mixing the Marsh funnel test was performed as well as testing of fluidity

with a flow table test. The batch was held in a bucket in the cabinet at 12 ºC or at room

temperature until it was mixed again with a boring machine mixer and tested at the age

25

of 1 h with a Marsh funnel. Laboratory mixes were not agitated in the same way as in

the field.

Samples were taken after the first Marsh funnel test for the fall cone tests and for the

bleeding test. For compressive strength testing 3 prisms were cast of each mix of the

portion that was tested at a 1 hour Marsh funnel test. Otherwise there would not have

been enough mass for the prisms. The specimens were stored in the cabinet at 12 ºC or

at room temperature.

The bleeding test was measured at the age of 2 hours. The fall cone tests were

performed at the ages of 6 h and 24 h. As it was expected that no test result would be

achieved with many mixes in the 24 h fall cone test, the compressive strength testing

was performed at 24 h for almost all mixes. After 1 day the rest of the prisms were

stored at a temperature of 20 ºC and a humidity of 100% RH until tested at the age of

28 days (and later 91 days for some mixes).

For the penetrability meter two sets of batches were prepared, 6 litres altogether. Before

testing, the two sets of batches were poured into a bucket and mixed with a boring

machine mixer in order to achieve a uniform mix. The age of the mix in the test was

about 15 - 20 minutes counting from the age of the first batch. The mix run through the

penetrability meter was not used in any other test due to possible destruction of the

newly formed cement hydration products that would affect the results in other tests. In

actual grouting the grout batches are moved to the agitator after mixing and then

pumped into the bedrock. A new batch will be mixed with the former one in the agitator

and thus the mix, which is grouted, represents several batches of varying ages. Also the

pressure used at the laboratory penetrability test was only 0.1 MPa. It is remarkably low

compared to the normal grouting pressures (2-10 MPa).

5.4 Test results and remarks

The detailed mix and test results are given in Appendix 2.

The laboratory test results are not directly comparable to those obtained during the

actual grouting work in field conditions. This is due to environmental conditions such as

temperature that prevails in e.g. ONKALO, which has an effect on the behaviour of the

grout. Also when performing actual grouting, the mixing and grouting equipment and

the batch volume differ greatly from those used in the laboratory. Nevertheless,

laboratory test results are useful because many mixes that differ slightly from each other

can be tested quickly and they can be compared with each other. In these tests various

SPLs, their amounts and W/DM were compared. It is believed that the best candidates

for field tests can be chosen on the basis of the laboratory tests.

The laboratory mixer (max 3 litres) was not quite efficient enough to mix evenly some

of the mixes that were gel forming and became somewhat stiff. The stiffness of the

mixes was caused by microsilica added slightly after the superplasticizer when cement

and water had first been mixed for two minutes. When added to the mixes, the

microsilica that came into contact with the cement slurry first probably started to react

26

vigorously, thus delaying the efficient mixing of the rest of the microsilica. Even if

microsilica was added cautiously and the mixing speed was increased, it often occurred

that the mix formed gel and lumps that took some time to mix uniformly and this may

have increased somewhat the total mixing time. There are plans to change the mixer to a

bigger and more efficient one for future laboratory tests.

Another problem with a small volume in the mixer was that the temperature tended to

rise quickly as the cement started to react with water and GA. It was not possible to

maintain the temperature of the mix exactly at the target value even though cooling of

materials during mixing was used. In ONKALO the temperature of the grouting is

easier to manage as the environmental temperature is low and stable and the volume of

the batch is much bigger. Also the full-scale mixer is of different type.

The mixes listed in Table 5-1 were made with the UF16 cement consignment that was

3-4 months old, stored at 12 ºC in plastic bags. The mixes chosen for further laboratory

tests (Table 5-2) were made with fresh cement consignment. As the UF16 cement is a

very finely ground cement, the finest particles probably react easily with the

atmospheric moisture. This has an effect on the cement properties both in the fresh and

hardened state as can be seen from the test results of the same mixes both in Table 5-1

and Table 5-2 (App. 2). The mixes made with fresh cement show higher hydration

temperature during mixing (partly due to higher water temperature), poorer Marsh

funnel and flow table consistency and generally earlier and better strength build-up.

It turned out that P3-type mixes with SF/PC ratio 0.69 met the most important

requirements (Table 5-1 and Appendix 2) and there was no need to further study fluid

mixes with lower SF content (SF/PC=0.56 and 0.44).

The temperature of most mixes was near 12 ºC, which is close to the prevailing

temperature in the rock at repository depth at Olkiluoto. Generally the lower

temperature made the mixes more fluid; although there were some contradictory results

with the more fluid mixes being at room temperature (compare P307 & P310 and P309

& P312). However, of these mixes the room temperature ones with the same SPL and

dosage amounts as in the cooled conditions, showed a clear fall in the 28 days

compressive strength compared to the 12 ºC mixes, the reason of which is not known. It

may be possible that the efficiency of the SPL was stronger in the room temperature

mixes as they were prepared 1 month earlier than the 12 ºC mixes. It is also possible

while comparing to the other tests in Table 5-1, that the two types of SPLs (SP-40 &

Mighty150) have behaved vice versa at different temperatures.

The fluidity of the P3-mixes was improved by varying the W/DM content together with

SPL type and amount. Increasing the W/DM helped the mix to become more fluid, but

at the same time the strength development weakened. The W/DM was kept at a lower

level by increasing the SPL amount.

The dosage of 2 – 3 wt-% SP-40 superplasticizer was not enough to make the P3 mixes

fluid enough at any W/DM levels studied (=1.2 - 1.6). The mix achieved good flowing

properties while 3 – 4 wt-% of Mighty150 was used at W/DM=1.4, or 4 wt-% of

Mighty150 at W/DM=1.2. The NS-SPL Mighty150 is according to the literature study

27

(Hakanen & Ervanne 2006) less harmful with respect to the long-term safety aspects as

compared to the M-SPL based SP40, so the mixes with Mighty150 were preferred in the

testing.

It might be worth a try to change the mixing order in P3-mixes; first mix microsilica

with water for 1 - 2 minutes and after that add superplasticizer and cement and mix for a

few minutes. The idea of this mixing order is to suppress the cement hydration, as the

microsilica and water would form a homogeneous, even mix that would be ready to

react with the quickly hydrating cement as soon as the cement enters the mix. This

would also shorten the mixing time, because no hydration reactions would occur before

the cement is added.

5.5 Comprehensive laboratory test results

The main laboratory test results of the mixes chosen for further testing in the laboratory

are presented in Table 5-3. These mixes were also chosen for the field tests among some

other mixes excluding P327. The P307C recipe was developed during the pilot field test

3 and it was tested later in the laboratory. The P327 mix was the only mix that did have

a risk for not fulfilling the pH criteria (pH 11) as its microsilicaslurry content was

5 wt-%-units lower compared to the others.

Fluidity as determined with the Marsh funnel was at the required level only in the mix

P308B, but the fluidity of the mixes P307B and P308 were promising. The fluidity

became better as W/DM and the dosage of SPL were increased. The Marsh funnel

results were expected to be better in the field as the conditions there are more stable and

affect less the measurements. The fluidity of the mixes P307, P309 and P327 was poor

both in the fresh state and at the age of 1 h.

All the mixes in Table 5-3 fulfilled the requirement for the shear strength at 6 h

( 500 Pa) and for the compressive strength at 28 days ( 4 MPa). The strength

development became better as the W/DM content decreased. Higher dosage of SPL

seemed to have a slight negative effect on the early age strength development but on the

other hand, lead to somewhat better later age strength development (compare P307 &

P307B and P308 & P308B).

All the mixes in Table 5-3 fulfilled the requirement of penetrability bmin ( 80 μm) with

the penetrability meter. The required bcrit value ( 120 μm) was achieved in all mixes

except P307. Rheological properties were determined for four mixes in Table 5-3. The

requirement for viscosity ( 50 mPas) was fulfilled in all mixes except P307C. The

composition of P307C was decided in the field and calculated later for a laboratory mix.

In the rheological measurements P307C was relatively stiff.

Yield stress values were higher than the requirement (yield value 5 Pa) in all four

mixes. The P307C mix (designed as thick closing mix in field), was relatively stiff and

differed clearly from the other three. The P307C mix seemed to make a sort of

differentiated cone around the rotating axle at higher speeds during the test. At lower

28

speeds the mix seemed to be more uniform and to grab more firmly on the axle. The

rheological test results of P307C need to be taken with some caution.

Table 5-3. The main laboratory test results of the mixes chosen for further testing in the laboratory from the Table 5-1 including a field recipe P307C (see also Appendix 2). Temperature 12 ºC. Target values are given in Table 3-1.

Mix P307 P307B P307C P308 P308B P309 P327

SPL

Mighty 150, (wt-%) 3 4 3.3 3 4 2 3

W/DM 1.20 1.20 0.88 1.40 1.40 1.60 1.20

SF/PC 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.56

Marsh, fresh, (s) >100 57 >100 57 44 96 72

Marsh, 1 h, (s) >100 97 - 113 61 >100 >100

Shear strength, 6 h, (kPa)

3.2 2.1 1.3* 1.9 1.1 1.3 2.4

Compressive strength, 1 d, (MPa)

0.9 1.0 1.7* 0.6 0.7 0.4 1.1

Compressive strength, 28 d, (MPa)

19.6 21.3 31.1 15.2 17.0 10.0 18.1

Compressive strength, 91 d, (MPa)

- 31.9 - - 22.4 - -

Penetration-ability, bmin, ( m)

42 43 - 41 40 37 42

Penetration-ability, bcrit, ( m)

247 108 - 90 88 113 94

Viscosity, Bingham, (mPas)

1. measurement

2. measurement 10.7

18.0

**

86.5

133.1

23.5

33.6

10.9

15.3

Yield Stress, Bingham, (Pa)

1. measurement

2. measurement 18.5

18.5

*

113.4

114.9

22.2

22.2

12.1

13.8

* Curing temperature of the mix P307C was 8 C during the first 24 hours, which delayed the strength build-up to some degree.

** Composition of the mix P307C in the rheological measurements differed from the tabulated laboratory mix and was W/DM=0.89, SPL=3.1%, SF/PC=0.80.

29

5.6 Tests with alternative superplasticizers

For possible future needs other SPLs based on polycarboxylate (PCB) compositions

were tested with the P3-type grout. The purpose of these test series was to find a PCB

SPL that would behave acceptably with the P3-type grout during the fresh and

hardening stage. Another target was to be able to reduce the total amount of SPL by

using PCBs and in that way reduce the eventual harmful effects on the long-term safety.

Two PCB SPL were chosen for this test series, Glenium 51 (producer MAC S.P.A.,

Italy) and Structuro 111X (producer Fosroc A/S, Denmark). The amount of PCB SPL

was either 1 or 2 wt-% of the dry weight of the mix. The mixing and testing methods

were the same as earlier. The detailed composition of the tested mixes and the test

results are given in Appendix 2. As it turned out that 2 wt-% of PCB SPL was too much

and 1 wt-% too little, a test series with 1.3 - 1.5 wt-% of PCB SPL were performed

(Appendix 2, main results in Table 5-4).

The rotor speed control unit of the 3-liter mixer Polytron PT3100 broke down before

this test series and it was by-passed. As a result, no speed adjustments could be done

during mixing of the batches. The rotor speed depended on the stiffness of the mixes:

the mixing speed for stiffer mixes was around 18 000-20 000 rpm and for the more fluid

mixes around 22 000-25 000 rpm. Another disadvantage was that with especially stiff

mixes small bubbles formed and remained in some mixes during testing even in the

hardened stage. In order to see the effect of the small bubbles on the results, the

previously developed mix P308B was mixed both with the Polytron mixer and with the

electric blender (1.5 l, Electrolux Assistant Line, 600 W) and tested simultaneously with

the PCB SPL mixes.

The bubble build-up in the mixes during mixing and testing did affect the test results.

By comparing the test results of the mix P308B (Table 5-3 and Table 5-4) it looks like

the bubbles clearly increase the fresh Marsh value and somewhat also the 1 hour Marsh

value. On the other hand, the strength build-up seems to be delayed by the bubbles.

Based on this estimation the test results of the PCB SPL mixes are expected to be better

than those shown in Table 5-4 when the batches are mixed with proper equipment.

However, it is also possible that the PCB SPL itself creates some bubbles.

Compared to the mixes with Mighty 150, P3-type mixes with PCB SPL showed better

rheological properties but poorer early age strength development. The amount of the

PCB SPL needs to be adjusted further. The proper amount probably lies between

1.0-1.5 wt-% for the P3-type mixes with W/DM 1.2 - 1.6. With 1.6 W/DM value 1.3 wt-

% of PCB SPL seems to be too much. The results indicate that out of these two SPLs

the Glenium 51 behaves better than Structuro 111X in these mixes.

30

Table 5-4. The main laboratory test results of the PCB SPL mixes (see also App. 2). Temperature 12 ºC. - = no result (either not made or not achieved). P308B is given for comparison.

Mix

Mixer

P369S

Polytron-mixer

P379G

Polytron-mixer

P380G

Polytron-mixer

P381G

Polytron-mixer

P308B

Polytron-mixer

P308B

Electricblender

P308B

Polytron-mixer

Table 5-3

SPL- type Structuro 111X

Glenium51

Glenium51

Glenium51

Mighty 150

Mighty 150

Mighty 150

SPL (wt-%) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.3 4 4 4

W/DM 1.20 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.40 1.40 1.40

SF/PC 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69

Marsh, fresh, (s) 45 39 36 37 53 46 44

Marsh, 1 h, (s) 55 48 45 43 65 - 61

Shear strength, 6 h, (kPa)

1.27 0.23 - - 0.76 - 1.1

Compressive strength,1 d, (MPa)

1.3 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.6 - 0.7

Compressive strength, 28 days,(MPa)

21.7 23.5 12.1 12.1 12.3 - 17.0

5.7 NES test

Selected low pH-producing mixes were tested with the NES equipment during one day

in Cementa’s cement factory, Degerhamn, Sweden (Table 5-5). Also some ordinary

mixes already used in ONKALO (also called “normal mixes”) were tested with NES for

comparison. Fresh cement from the factory was used in the tests. The fracture width

was 75 μm in the tests. The amount of mass poured into the cylinder was 1000 ml and

the mass was squeezed out through the fracture at 2 MPa pressure.

All the 13 NES tests were acceptable in regard to timing. No filter cakes were formed

except with one normal mix (SF/PC = 0.18) which contained some accelerator and

formed a small filter cake.

According to a representative of Cementa (S. Hjerström) it should be no problem to

inject the rock with corresponding average fracture width if all grout penetrates a

specific NES slot. If only part of the grout penetrates the slot, the penetration and

sealing capacity will correspond to the volume that has penetrated the slot.

31

Table 5-5. NES test results of selected low pH producing mixes. Tests performed at room temperature.

Mix P308B P309 P308 P307B P379G

SPL-type Mighty 150 Mighty 150 Mighty 150 Mighty 150 Glenium 51

SPL (wt-%) 4 2 3 4 1.5

W/DM 1.40 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.20

SF/PC 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69

NES, (s) 20 17 17 21 22

NES, passed amount, (wt-%)

82 68 82 80 85

Marsh, fresh, (s) 37 57 47 40 33

5.8 Conclusions of laboratory tests

The objective of the laboratory tests was to improve the mixes based on the earlier

P3-type mix, which fulfilled the requirement of pH 11.0 in the leachate. The desired

pH was achieved with a high dosage of microsilicaslurry (41 wt-% microsilica by dry

weight). In case these P3-type mixes were to behave unsatisfactorily in the fresh state,

two sets of mixes with a lower amount of microsilica were also planned (36 wt-% and

31-wt% microsilica, by dry weight). It was discovered during the work that the P3-type

mixes behaved acceptably, so the main emphasis was put on them.

The performance of the P3-type mixes in the fresh and hardened state depended on the

water to dry materials ratio, the type of SPL, the amount of SPL and temperature. Most

tests were carried out at about 12 ºC. This was achieved by cooling the materials and the

mixing bowl during mixing. 12 ºC is close to actual temperatures in ONKALO and the

mixes generally also behaved better at this temperature compared to those mixes made

at room temperatures. Higher temperatures probably caused most of the mixes to react

quicker and therefore the mixes became stiffer.

The choice of the NS-SPL (Mighty 150) for further testing was made partly due to its

better performance during the fresh state and partly because it was considered less

harmful with respect to the long-term safety aspects as compared to the M-SPL (SP-40).

The later strength development was better with SP-40, but mixes with Mighty 150

fulfilled the requirements for compressive strength at 6 h and 28 days, too.

The best mix based on the laboratory test results of the mixes chosen for further testing

was P308B judged by the behaviour at fresh state (Table 5-3). P307B was somewhat

poorer in the fresh state, but it showed better strength development than P308B. The

difference in performance was caused by lower W/DM of P307B.

32

Mix P308 was generally somewhat poorer compared to the other two, but its

performance was nearly acceptable. The other mixes in Table 5-3 were clearly poorer in

the fresh state and seemed not to be satisfying mixes for narrow fractures. It should be

remembered, however, that all mixes may actually behave better in the fresh state at

ONKALO due to the more stable and lower temperatures, and the far bigger batches

and more effective mixing compared to those done in the laboratory.

33

6 LEACH TESTING

6.1 Leach testing of mix p308B

Mix P308B was considered the best one based on its performance in the conducted

laboratory tests with laboratory equipment and therefore was also chosen for leach

testing. The mix was cast in plastic tubes at Contesta, and the cast pipes were then

delivered to VTT. The mix was let cure at room temperature until 56 d of age and then

sample disks for the leach tests were sawn. Descriptions of the sample preparations,

handling, dimensions, test methods etc. are found in more detail in Vuorinen et al. 2005.

The testing procedure of Mix P308B was the same as earlier (Vuorinen et al. 2005) with

two leach procedures (equilibrium and diffusion) and with two leach solutions (fresh

ALL-MR and saline OL-SR). In the equilibrium test the leachate was only partly

replaced at each sampling point (corresponding to renewal of 0.74 ml per day) while in

the diffusion test the entire amount of leachate (30 ml) was exchanged.

Table 6-1 gives the composition of mix P308B with mixes f63 and Ref 52 from the

earlier tests (Kronlöf 2005a, 2005b; Vuorinen et al. 2005). Ref 52 represents a

conventionally used grout material (high pH) including some superplasticizer and mix

f63 without superplasticizer is the grout mix that was found in the earlier tests to be the

most promising low-pH mix to be further developed to obtain P308B composition.

The pH values measured earlier for the conventional high-pH grout (Ref 52) did not

virtually show any decrease in either leach test, only slight variations were observed

between the different sampling points. The high pH was around 12.5 in the fresh

leachate (ALL-MR) and little less, about 12.3, in the saline leachate (OL-SR) in both

leach test (Vuorinen et al. 2005).

Table 6-1. Composition of three grout mixes.

Mix Binder PC

-type SF

-type SPL-type

PC/DM

SF/DM

G/PC HAC/PC

SF/PC

SPL/DM(%)

Ca/Simolar ratio SiO2 (wt-%)

W/DM

P308BUF16-SF

+SPLUF16 GA

Mighty 150

0.59 0.41 0.000 0.000 0.69 4 0.7952.8 %

1.4

f63UF16-SF

with ETTA UF16 GA - 0.56 0.38 0.027 0.075 0.69 0.0 0.83

49.3 % 2.48

Ref52UF16-SF

+SPLUF16 GA SPL-40 0.93 0.07 0.000 0 0.075 1

2.331.21

UF16 = commercial cement

ETTA = Ettringite Acceleration

PC = Portland Cement

SF = Silica Fume

GA = commercial slurry of SF

DM = dry matter

DM = dry matter

SPL = Superplasticizer

SPL-40 = sulphonated melamine formaldehyde condensate

Mighty-150 = naphtalenesulfonic acid polymer with formaldehyde

HAC = High Alumina Cement

34

Figure 6-1 shows the pH-values measured in the equilibrium leach test for mix P308B

and those for mix f63 from the earlier test. When comparing the outcome of the tests the

clear decreasing trend in the pH values of mix f63 is not seen for mix P308B as the

pH-values quickly, after about 3 weeks of testing, have reached a constant level; below

pH 11 in ALL-MR and below pH 10 in OL-SR. Already from the beginning of the leach

test the pH-values were lower for mix P308B than for mix f63. In the fresh leachate the

difference is about 0.5 pH units and even more in the saline leachate. Similar behaviour

between the two mixes is also seen in the diffusion test results, Figure 6-2; no

perceivable decreasing trends in the pH-values, as well as lower pH-values in the

leachates of mix P308B. Variation of the length between samplings (shorter or longer)

in the diffusion test is naturally always reflected in the pH-values measured, as can be

seen in the early test values, especially in the fresh leachates, Figure 6-2 a) and b).

When constant sampling intervals were used the pH-values either remained at about the

same level or showed a trend (the later test values).

MIX P308B (EQ): ALL-MR

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Sampling point

pH

6w4w3w2w1w2d 5d 10w 8w 20w15w

MIX P308B (EQ): OL-SR

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Sampling point

pH

6w4w3w2w1w2d 5d 10w 8w 25w20w15w

MIX f63 (EQ): ALL-MR

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Sampling point

pH

6w4w3w2w1w2d 5d 10w8w 20w15w

MIX f63 (EQ): OL-SR

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Sampling point

pH

6w4w3w2w1w2d 5d 10w8w 25w20w15w

a)

c)

b)

d)

Figure 6-1. Comparison of the pH values obtained in the equilibrium leach test for mixes P308B and f63. The upper row sub-figures show the results in the fresh leachate; (ALL-MR) a) for mix P308B and b) for mix f63. The lower row sub-figures give the pH values in the saline leachate (OL-SR); c) for mix P308B and d) for mix f63.

35

MIX P308B (DIFF): ALL-MR

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Sampling point [d]

pH

1h 4h 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 11 15 22 29 36 43 50 57 65 71 78

MIX P308B (DIFF): OL-SR

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Sampling point [d]

pH

1h 4h 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 11 15 22 29 36 43 50 57 65 71 78

MIX f63 (DIFF): ALL-MR

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Sampling point

pH

1h 4h 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 11 15 22 29 36 43 49 51 59 66 73 80

MIX f63 (DIFF): OL-SR

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Sampling point

pH

1h 4h 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 11 15 22 29 36 43 49 51 59 66 73 80

b)a)

c) d)

Figure 6-2. Comparison of the pH values obtained in the diffusion leach test for mixes P308B and f63. The upper row sub-figures show the results in the fresh leachate (ALL-MR); a) for mix P308B and b) for mix f63. The lower row sub-figures give the pH values in the saline leachate (OL-SR); c) for mix P308B and d) for mix f63. Figure 6-3 shows the results on the total alkalinity values obtained by titration (with

HCl) for some leachate samples from both leach tests for mix P308B (a and c) and mix

f63 (b and d). The pH values of the samples analysed are included as well.

In the equilibrium test in the case of mix f63 the total alkalinities gradually decreased in

both leachates with the declining pH values (Figure 6-3 b), whereas in the case of mix

P308B the trends were different (Figure 6-3 a). In the fresh leachate (ALL-MR)

alkalinities initially slightly increased from about 2.5 meq/l up to about 3 meq/l and then

evened out until at the end of testing dropped to around the initial value of 2.5 meq/l,

which corresponds to the value obtained at the end of mix f63 test, as well. In the saline

leachate (OL-SR) mix f63 showed similar trends as in the fresh leachate, while mix

P308B followed a quite different one. The alkalinity values increased, from about

1 meq/l up to about 3 meq/l, in 3 weeks of testing while the pH values remained

virtually at a constant level. After 3 weeks the total alkalinities decreased back to about

1 meq/l at the end of leach testing corresponding to the level obtained in mix f63 tests as

well. The differing behaviour of the alkalinity values measured may be due to organic

matter released from mix P308B as a result of the added SPL. It is known that some

organic ligands may contribute to alkalinity with other non carbonate contributors (e.g.

silicate and hydroxide).

In the diffusion test (Figure 6-3 c) the total alkalinities for mix P308B initially increased

in both leachates, then slightly dropped and showed some increase thereafter. A reason

36

for this varying behaviour might be a result of the role of the SPL in the internal

evolving of the material. Leach testing was stopped in the saline leachate (OL-SR)

earlier at which point (day 8) the alkalinity value measured was around 0.4 meq/l.

Testing in the fresh leachate was continued longer and towards the end of testing a

slight decreasing in total alkalinity was observed. The last alkalinity value measured

was about 1.5 meq/l. The results in the fresh leachate are difficult to compare to those

for mix f63, as only values for sampling points of much longer testing existed for mix

f63. In the case of mix P308B the alkalinity values in both leachates in the diffusion test

were, as expected, lower compared to the values obtained in the equilibrium test.

At this phase analysing total organic carbon (TOC) was only for tryout purposes and

therefore only three samples from ALL-MR leachates (diffusion test) for mix P308B

were analysed and not any for mix f63. The results showed clearly higher TOC value in

the first sample (about 30 mg/l) than in the two samples towards the end of testing

(around 3 mg/l). However, this only indicates that the difference in the trends of

alkalinity between the two mixes could be a result of SPL added to mix P308B.

In the diffusion test the amount of leachate at each sampling point was enough to allow

chemical analyses. Samples from both leachates, fresh ALL-MR and saline OL-SR, for

mix P308B were analysed, but as testing in the saline leachate was stopped sooner there

are results only up to 11 days of testing, while for the fresh leachate the results cover a

time period up to 80 days.

P308B (EQ)

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213 141516171819 202122

sampling points [weeks]

pH

0

1

2

3

4

Alk

TO

T [

me

q/L

]

2d 5d 1 2 3 4 6 8 10 20 2d 5d 1 2 3 4 6 8 10

a) f63 (EQ)

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

sampling points [weeks]

pH

0

1

2

3

4

Alk

TO

T [

me

q/L

]

2d 3 6 10 15 20 2d 3 6 10 15 20

b)

P308B (DIFF)

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

sampling points [days]

pH

0

1

2

3

4

Alk

TO

T [

me

q/L

]

1h 1 4 8 57 73 79 1h 1 4 8

c)f63 (DIFF)

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

sampling points [days]

pH

0

1

2

3

4

Alk

TO

T [m

eq

/L]

85 106 271 316 85 106

d)

Figure 6-3. Total alkalinity results (pink dots and right side axel) and pH values (blue diamonds and left side axel) in equilibrium (a and b) and diffusion (c and d) leach tests for mix P308B (left sub-figures) and mix f63 (right sub-figures). In each sub-figure the solid vertical line in the middle separates the results in the two leachates used; on the left side for the fresh leachate (ALL-MR) and on the right side for the saline leachate (OL-SR).

37

The analysed results in the DIFF-test for mix P308B are presented in Figure 6-4 and

Figure 6-5 in mg/l. The corresponding pH values are included in Figure 6-4. In addition

to the pH values the major differences between the results in ALL-MR and OL-SR are

seen in the leached amounts of Na, Ca (Figure 6-4) and SO42-

(Figure 6-5); in OL-SR

rather than leaching disappearance from the leachate was observed while in ALL-MR

leaching occurred. The high ionic strength of OL-SR and the common ion effect

between the leachate and cement pore solution partly contributes to such a result,

especially in the case of Na and Ca, but also reactions with the cement matrix are

possible, e.g. for SO42-

. The total amount of K leached was higher in OL-SR, but the

increase of K in the leachate compared to the initial leachate amount was higher in

ALL-MR. In both leachates Mg disappeared (Figure 6-5) which could be due to

formation of brucite (Mg(OH)2) or other e.g., reactions with Ca-containing phases in

cement. The higher pH and lower ionic strength of ALL-MR may allow more Si to

leach (Figure 6-5). (Note! Some anomalous analytical results for Si may be related to

formation of a gel like formation observed in some leachate samples).

The analytical results from diffusion tests indicate that different reactions may occur

between the cement matrix and the leachate depending on the composition of the

leachate and especially the salinity.

Figure 6-6 shows comparison of the analytical results (in mmol/l) of the fresh leachate

samples for mix f63 (a) and mix P308B (b) and Mg results for both mixes (c). Table 6-2

gives the initial nominal concentrations in ALL-MR in mmol/l.

In the case of mix P308B the results show more congruent behaviour, especially K, Ca

and SO4, than in the case of mix f63. Additionally for mix P308B the pattern of Na and

Si results follows rather well that of the other results. The amount of leached K was

higher for mix f63 in the beginning, whereas Ca slightly increased towards the end of

testing. Practically no Cl was leached from mix P308B while in the case of mix f63

some leaching was observed in the beginning and towards the end of testing. Some

more Si was leached from mix P308B than from mix f63. As expected in both cases Mg

disappeared from the leachate samples (Figure 6-6c).

The major differences in the composition of mixes f63 and P308B were the lower water

to dry matter ratio (W/DM), addition of SPL and lack of gypsum and high alumina

cement in mix P308B. The modified composition resulted in more stable pH values

which were also somewhat lower than for mix f63.

Table 6-2. Initial nominal composition of fresh leachate, ALL-MR, in mmol/l. Na 2.3 Si 0.028 Ca 0.13 Cl 1.38 K 0.10 SO4 0.10 Mg 0.029 HCO3 1.07

38

Mix P308B (OL-SR)

9.4

9.6

9.8

10.0

10.2

10.4

10.6

10.8

11.0

1 2 3 4 5 6

time [days]

pH

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11

Mix P308B (ALL-MR)

9.4

9.6

9.8

10.0

10.2

10.4

10.6

10.8

11.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

time [days]

pH

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 36 57 73 80 Mix P308B (OL-SR)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

1 2 3 4 5 6

time [days]

Na

[m

g/L

]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11

Na

pH pH

Mix P308B (ALL-MR)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

time [days]

Na

[m

g/L

]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 36 57 73 80

Na

Mix P308B (ALL-MR)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

time [days]

K [

mg

/L]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 36 57 73

Mix P308B (OL-SR)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2 3 4 5 6

time [days]

K [

mg

/L]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11

KK

Mix P308B (ALL-MR)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

time [days]

Ca

[m

g/L

]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 1 1 36 57 73 80

Mix P308B (OL-SR)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

1 2 3 4 5 6

time [days]

Ca

[m

g/L

]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11

Ca Ca

Figure 6-4. Analytical results for mix P308B in diffusion test. The left sub-figures are for the fresh leachate (ALL-MR) and the right sub-figures for the saline leachate (OL-SR). (Note the different length of testing period; ALL-MR leachate 80 days, OL-SR 11 days). The two topmost figures are for pH and the orange line in the figures at pH 11 shows the limit below which the pH values should stay. The blue line across the element figures indicates the initial concentration in the leachate solution used.

39

Mix P308B (ALL-MR)

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

time [days]

Mg

[m

g/L

]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 36 57 73 80

Mix P308B (OL-SR)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

1 2 3 4 5 6

time [days]

Mg

[m

g/L

]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 Mix P308B (OL-SR)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

time [days]

Si [

mg

/L]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11

Mix P308B (ALL-MR)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

time [days]

Si [

mg

/L]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 36 57 73 80

MgMg

SiSi

Mix P308B (ALL-MR)

0

10

20

30

40

50

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

time [days]

Cl [

mg

/L]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 1 1 36 57 73 80

Mix P308B (OL-SR)

0100020003000400050006000700080009000

100001100012000130001400015000

1 2 3 4 5 6

time [days]

Cl [

mg

/L]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11

Mix P308B (OL-SR) SO42- STOT

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

1 2 3 4 5 6

time [days]

[m

mo

l/L]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11

Mix P308B (ALL-MR) SO42- STOT

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

time [days]

[m

mo

l/L]

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 36 57 73 80

Figure 6-5. Analyses results for mix P308B in diffusion test. The left sub-figures are for the fresh leachate (ALL-MR) and the right sub-figures for the saline leachate (OL-SR). (Note the different length of testing period; ALL-MR leachate 80 days, OL-SR 11 days). The blue line across the figures indicates the initial concentration in the leachate solutions. The pink line across the figures indicates the detection limit.

40

f63

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

sampling point [days]

mm

ol/L

Na

Cl

K

Ca

Si

SO4

Mg

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 36 57 71

P308B

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

sampling point [days]

mm

ol/L

Na

Cl

K

Ca

SO4

Si

Mg

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 36 57 73 80

a)

b)

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

sampling point [days]

mm

ol/L

Mg P308B

Mg f63

0.1 0.2 1 4 8 11 36 57 73 80

c)

Figure 6-6. Analytical results together in mmol/L for the diffusion test leachates (ALL MR; the initial contents in Table 6-2); a) for mix f63 and b) for mix P308B. Additionally c) shows the Mg results together for both mixes on a smaller scale also the initial leachate concentration of Mg is shown with the horizontal turquoise line.

41

6.2 Results on old mixes

From the previous leach testing of grout mixes (Vuorinen et al. 2005) some samples

were stored in the glove-box and new measurements were done later.

Two test samples of mix Ref 52 had been stored for 1.5 years in a glove-box in the

initial leachate solutions; one in the fresh leachate and the other in the saline leachate.

These test samples had experienced no leachate renewal during the storage time. By

measuring the pH values in the leachates maximum pH at equilibrium in those

conditions was obtained; in the fresh leachate the pH value was 12.4 and in the saline

leachate 12.1. Slightly lower values were obtained for two corresponding samples that

had in the beginning of testing experienced leachate renewals, totally 104 ml in the

fresh leachate and 16 ml in the saline leachate, while the total volumes of renewed

leachates in a completed test were 750 ml and 600 ml, respectively. Thereafter the

samples had remained stored in the leachates for about a year and 1.5 years,

respectively. The pH values measured gave 12.3 for the fresh leachate and 12.0 for the

saline leachate.

The previous leach testing (Vuorinen et al. 2005) included samples for mix f63 that had

been cured at two different temperatures, 20 ºC and 50 ºC. The measured pH values

behaved differently in the beginning of testing in both leachates and both leach tests. An

example of the trends is shown in Figure 6-7 in the diffusion test in the fresh leachate

(ALL-MR). The pH values differed more in the beginning of testing but gradually

approached the same value as testing proceeded.

The reason for such behaviour was not clear and therefore some leachate samples were

analysed for the chemistry in order to see if the results could provide an answer. Results

on the analysed samples are shown in Figure 6-8 and Figure 6-9 in both leachates; for a

few sampling points from the beginning and a couple from the end of testing. When

comparing the differences between the fresh (ALL-MR) and saline (OL-SR) leachate

MIX f63 (DIFF): ALL-MR

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

12.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Sampling point

pH AL 20

AL 50

Figure 6-7. The trends in pH values with increasing experimental time and leachate renewal for mix f63 samples cured at two different temperatures, 20 ºC and 50 ºC. Results are shown for the fresh leachate, ALL-MR.

42

sample results the main discrepancy is in the leached components; in OL-SR only K and

Si are leached while in ALL-MR also some Ca and SO4 are leached. As stated before

one reason for the different behaviour is due to the different ionic strengths of the

solutions and in the saline leachate the common ion effect (Ca and Na) with the pore

solution can be another reason. Mg disappears from all leachates probably as a result of

formation of brucite (Mg(OH)2) or reactions with Ca containing phases.

Mix f63 (AL-MR)

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

pH

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Mix f63 (OL-SR)

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

pH

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64 Mix f63 (AL-MR)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Na

[m

g/L

]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Mix f63 (OL-SR)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Na

[m

g/L

]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64 Mix f63 (AL-MR)

0

10

20

30

40

50

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

K [

mg

/L]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Mix f63 (OL-SR)

0102030405060708090

100110120

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

K [

mg

/L]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64 Mix f63 (AL-MR )

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Ca

[m

g/L

]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Mix f63 (OL-SR )

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Ca

[m

g/L

]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Figure 6-8. The left sub-figures are for the fresh leachate (ALL-MR) and the right sub-figures for the saline leachate (OL-SR). The blue line across the figures indicates the initial concentration in the leachate solutions and the orange line in the pH figures the target pH in the development of the cement mixes.

43

Mix f63 (AL-MR)

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Mg

[m

g/L

]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Mix f63 (OL-SR)

05

1015202530354045505560

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Mg

[m

g/L

]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64 Mix f63 (AL-MR)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Si [

mg

/L]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Mix f63 (OL-SR)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Si [

mg

/L]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64 Mix f63 (AL-MR)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Cl [

mg

/L]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Mix f63 (OL-SR)

0100020003000400050006000700080009000

10000110001200013000140001500016000

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

Cl [

mg

/L]

20 oC

50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64 Mix f63 (AL-MR)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

[m

mo

l/L]

SO4 20 oC

SO4 50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Mix f63 (OL-SR)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

1 2 3 4 5

time [days]

[m

mo

l/L]

SO4 20 oC

SO4 50 oC

0.1 1 4 36 64

Figure 6-9. The left sub-figures are for the fresh leachate (ALL-MR) and the right sub-figures for the saline leachate (OL-SR). The blue line across the figures indicates the initial concentration in the leachate solutions.

44

Comparison of the analytical results for the two different curing temperatures, 20 ºC or

50 ºC, reveals that in the fresh leachate (ALL-MR), in addition to the differing pH

values, the leached components show dissimilar behaviour,

- the sample cured at 20 ºC showed higher release of K in the early stage of

testing and overall higher release of Si while

- the sample cured at 50 ºC released more Ca and SO4 in the beginning of testing

and more K at the end of testing.

For both curing temperatures the amount of Si increased at the end of testing.

In the case of both curing temperatures the only components leached in the saline

leachate (OL-SR) were K and Si, and similarly to the fresh leachate results more K was

released in the beginning of testing from the sample cured at 20 ºC. Slightly increased

values of Si were observed towards the end of testing in the leachate of the sample

cured at 50 ºC, whereas a decrease was observed in the case of the sample cured at

20 ºC. Disappearance from the leachate samples were observed in Na, Ca and SO4

contents. Sulphate behaviour in both leachates (Figure 6-9) shows a very similar

pattern, which may imply that in the sample cured at 50 ºC the pore water contains more

SO4 as more is released to the fresh leachate but less is disappearing from the saline.

45

7 PILOT FIELD TEST 3

7.1 General

The field testing included three stages:

1. the first batch mixing test (BMT1) to select the most promising mixes for test

grouting

2. pilot field test (PFT) (test grouting)

3. the second batch mixing test (BMT2) to verify the mix properties

In the BMT1 several promising mixes were mixed in a full-scale mixer in field

conditions and the properties were verified and the most promising ones were selected

for actual test grouting (PFT3).

The test grouting was performed in the ONKALO access tunnel together with the

ONKALO contractor Kalliorakennus Oy. The procedure of the actual test grouting is

presented in Figure 7-1. In the beginning the suitable test area had to be found and the

grouting was planned based on the information obtained from four probe holes. The

intention was to avoid major fracture zones and tight rock. Before test grouting the

tunnel face was characterized with water loss measurements (Lugeon tests) done in four

probe holes and with the flowlog method in leaking probe holes. If needed,

modifications to the plan could be made.

The test grout was mixed and the grouting was performed like in normal grouting.

Samples for testing the technical properties were taken from the agitator.

After test grouting the grouting result was checked from quality control holes. After

excavation the remaining leakages were observed.

Because of difficulties in testing the mix properties during the PFT3, the BMT2 was

arranged in order to verify the mix properties.

7.2 Grouting equipment

The contractor co-operating in the PFT3 was Kalliorakennus Oy. The used grouting

equipment consisted of:

- mixer: Atlas Copco Cemix 201 E

- agitator: Atlas Copco Cemag 401 E

- pump: Atlas Copco Craelius ZBE-100

A Logac-system (by Atlas Copco) recorded the grouted volume and pressure.

Microsilicaslurry and SPL were dosed by hand.

46

Selection of the test site

Planning thetest grouting

Characterisation of the testarea (probe or grouting holes)

Possible modificationsto the grouting plan

Mixing of the test grout

Test grouting

Testing the propertiesof the grout

Controlling the result fromquality control holes

Observation of theremaining leakages

Selection of the test site

Planning thetest grouting

Characterisation of the testarea (probe or grouting holes)

Possible modificationsto the grouting plan

Mixing of the test grout

Test grouting

Testing the propertiesof the grout

Controlling the result fromquality control holes

Observation of theremaining leakages

Figure 7-1. The testing procedure in the test grouting stage of PFT3.

7.3 Batch mixing test 1 and selection of the mixes for pilot field test 3

The aim of the batch mixing test (BMT) was to:

- verify that the required technical properties of the most promising mix(es) can

be achieved when mixing the grouts with ordinary grouting equipment

- verify that the workability (e.g. pumpability) properties can be regarded

satisfying

- verify that the required technical properties of the most promising mix(es) can

be achieved also in field conditions (at different temperatures)

- select one or two mix(es) to be tested in PFT3 in the ONKALO access tunnel

The mixes tested in the first BMT were P307, P307B, P308, P308B, which were

promising in laboratory tests. Mixes P308C, P3B and P3C were tested in order to see

the effect of one alternative SPL, SuperParmix. Mix P309 was planned to be tested, but

the dosing was calculated wrong and afterwards the mix name was changed to P309X.

47

The mixes tested in the BMT are presented in Table 7-1 as corresponding laboratory

weights. In the field the recipes were given in field mixer scale and liquous components

were given as volumes. Mixing order and mixing times were: water, cement, 2 min

mixing, microsilicaslurry, SPL, 3 min mixing and finally mix to the agitator, from

which the samples for testing were taken.

The mixes were tested for density by mud balance, fluidity by Marsh funnel,

penetrability by filter pump (100/75 μm mesh sizes), and early age strength

development by fall cone and bleeding by measuring glass. Before testing the water

flow meter was checked and the recipes were corrected so that the real dosing would be

correct. The density was checked for each mix before tests were made. The temperature

during testing varied between 5-10 ºC. All results are presented in Appendix 3.

Mix P307 (W/DM 1.2 and SPL 3 wt-% of DM) was penetrable (300 ml/100 μm mesh),

but it was quite stiff (Marsh value 53-56 s during 1 h). Bleeding was good (0 vol-%)

and the strength development acceptable, 0.5 kPa was obtained at ~6 h and 2 kPa at

7-8 h.

Mix P307B (W/DM 1.2 and SPL 4 wt-%) was penetrable (300 ml/100 μm mesh and

280 ml/75 μm mesh). The Marsh value was 45-47 s during 1 h (Figure 7-2), which can

be regarded promising. The strength development was also acceptable – about 0.5 kPa

was obtained at ~6 h and 2 kPa at 7-8 h (Figure 7-3). There was no problem with

bleeding (0 vol-%).

Mix P308 (W/DM 1.4 and SPL 3 wt-% of DM) showed promising Marsh values

(43-46 s during 0.5 h). Penetrability was good (300 ml/75 μm mesh). Shear strength of

0.5 kPa was obtained at 6-7 h. Shear strength at 8 h is not possible to evaluate. Shear

strength 8.7 kPa was reached at 10 h. Bleeding was good (0 vol-%).

Mix P308B (W/DM 1.4 and SPL 4 wt-% of DM) was the best with regard to the Marsh

fluidity (39-41 s during 0.5 h, Figure 7-2). Also penetrability was good (300 ml/75 μm).

Bleeding was 0 vol-% and the shear strength of about 0.5 kPa was obtained at 6-7 h, and

2 kPa at 8 h (Figure 7-3)

Table 7-1. Mixes in BMT1.

P307 P307B P308 P308B P308C P3B P3C P309X

Binder UF16+SF UF16+SF UF16+SF UF16+SF UF16+SF UF16+SF UF16+SF UF16+SF

W/DM 1.2 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6

SF-type GA GA GA GA GA GA GA GA

SF/PC 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.60

SPLMighty

150Mighty

150Mighty

150Mighty

150SuperParmix

Mighty 150

SuperParmix

Mighty 150

SPL/DM(wt-%)

3 4 3 4 3 2 2 2

48

Mix P309X (W/DM 1.4 and SPL 2 wt-% of DM; wrong GA dosage) did not show good

penetration ability (200 ml/100 μm mesh). Marsh values were promising (46-47 s

during 0.5 h). Shear strength of 0.5 kPa was obtained at 5-6 h and 2 kPa at ~7 h.

Bleeding was 0 vol-%.

Mix P308C (W/DM 1.4 and SPL SuperParmix 3 wt-% of DM) was penetrable

(300 ml/100 μm mesh) but quite stiff (Marsh value 47-52 s during 20 min). Shear

strength values 0.5 was obtained at 4-5 h and 2 kPa at ~6 h. Bleeding was good

(0 vol %).

Mix P3B (W/DM 1.6 and SPL 2 wt-% of DM) was penetrable (300 ml/75 μm mesh).

The Marsh value showed descending values during 40 min (from 47 to 38 s), which was

not expected. The shear strength value of 0.5 kPa was obtained at 6 h and 2 kPa at

7-8 h. Bleeding was 0 vol-%.

Mix P3C (W/DM 1.6 and SPL SuperParmix 2 wt-% of DM) showed good fluidity

(40-41 s during 0.5 h) and good penetrability (>300 ml/75 μm mesh). The shear strength

values 0.5 and 2 kPa were obtained at ~7 h and ~8 h. Bleeding was 0 vol-%.

Regarding all results, the mix P308B was chosen to be the most promising mix for

starting the grouting. Mix P307B with lower W/DM was chosen to be a good choice for

continuing grouting in case the grout take would be high.

P307B

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

0:00 0:10 0:20 0:30 0:40 0:50 1:00

Age of the sample (h:mm)

Ma

rsh

flu

idity

(s)

P308B

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

0:00 0:10 0:20 0:30 0:40 0:50 1:00

Age of the sample (h:mm)

Ma

rsh

flu

idity

(s)

Figure 7-2. Marsh fluidity of P307B and P308B in BMT1. Target value is < 45 s.

P307B

0123456789

101112

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00

Age of the sample (h:mm)

Sh

ea

r st

ren

gth

(kP

a)

P308B

0123456789

101112

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00

Age of the sample (h:mm)

Sh

ea

r st

ren

gth

(kP

a)

Figure 7-3. Strength development of P307B and P308B in BMT1. Target values are 0.5 kPa at 6 h (required) and 2 kPa at 8 h (desired).

49

7.4 Pilot field test 3 – test grouting

7.4.1 Site description

Pilot field test 3 (PFT3) was performed in the ONKALO access tunnel at the tunnel

chainage 502 to 528 (Figure 7-4) at the depth level of about -50 m.

Figure 7-4. Location of the PFT3 in ONKALO access tunnel.

7.4.2 Water penetration tests and flowlog results in probe holes

Four 29 m long probe holes were drilled before grouting. Figure 7-5 shows the location

of the probe holes (PR-holes). Probe holes are being drilled in order to investigate the

rock properties prior to excavation of the tunnel. Hydraulic conductivity measurements

are carried out in the holes; first flowlog measurement (PFL) is done and then water loss

measurement (WLM). The results are used, in addition to overall characterization, for

grouting design. The results of WLM and PFL are shown in Table 7-2, which also gives

the corresponding naming of the probe holes. The water loss measurements were done

with pressure series 0.8-1.2-1.6-1.2-0.8 MPa, each pressure was kept for 5 min. Only

the hole PR0502D could be measured with the flowlog because the other holes were

dry. The probe hole drilling log and flow log measurement records are presented in

Appendices 4 and 5. The probe holes were also grouted during grouting.

50

Figure 7-5. Location of the probe holes.

Table 7-2. Results of water loss measurements (WLM) and flowlog measurements (PFL) in the probe holes. The location of each probe hole in this table refers to their location in Figure 7-5.

PR0502B PR0502C

Outflowing water: dry

PFL: -

WLM: > 4.22 l/(m*min*MPa), the aimed pressures were not obtained; fracture(s) opened during WLM

Outflowing water: dry

PFL: -

WLM: 0.14-0.07-0.07-0.05-0.06 l/(m*min*MPa)

PR0502A PR0502D

Outflowing water: dry

PFL: -

WLM: 0.53-0.45-0.33-0.21-0.21 l/(m*min*MPa)

PFL: 1 water conductive fracture, see Appendix 5

Outflowing water: 2.15 l/min

WLM: 0.79-0.66-0.88-0.52-0.56 l/(m*min*MPa)

51

The need for grouting was clear (WLM > 0.1 Lug). Probe hole B was originally dry, but

water loss measurements showed such high water intake that Lugeon value could not be

calculated and it seemed that fracture(s) had opened. Probe hole D showed significant

water loss and the flowlog indicated the existence of one hydraulically conductive

fracture/zone at the end of the probe hole, at a depth of about 22.3 m (Appendix 5).

There were some problems in measurements, which are explained in Appendix 5. It was

concluded that there was one leaking fracture and its calculated hydraulic aperture was

about 120 μm.

Later it turned out that during the WLM a connection to one drill hole opened under the

pressure and that explains why the hole PR502B was first dry and then showed high

water losses.

If assuming that originally there was one leaking fracture having a T-value 9.6E 7 m2/s

as observed in PFL-measurement made in probe hole D, the inflow into the tunnel

without grouting would have been according to equation (1) below:

min/2.5/56.8

3502ln

/76.9502

ln

2 32

0

lsmEm

msmEm

RR

hTQ

t

(1)

The parameters and assumptions were as follows: Q = water inflow, h = groundwater

pressure expressed as the height of the water column, T = measured transmissivity,

R0= influence radius of the flow which is set as 2h and Rt=tunnel radius (~ 3 m).

However, as described above, WLM-test probably opened fracture(s) in probe hole B

and the inflow would have been higher than based on probe hole D.

7.4.3 Plan for test grouting

The grouting fan included 23 grouting holes, each of them 26 m long (packer depth

1 m). The maximum distance between grouting holes was 2.5 m (Figure 7-6). The

grouting started from the middle of the floor and continued clockwise.

Based on the BMT1, mix P308B was chosen to be the most promising mix to start

grouting with. Mix P307B with lower W/DM was chosen for continuing the grouting in

case the grout take was high. Mix compositions are given e.g. in Table 5-1 and Table

5-2. In the first grouting holes the grout takes turned out to be so high that one mix with

even lower W/DM-ratio was needed and an extra mix P307C was designed in the field.

The mix properties were tested in the laboratory afterwards. This stiff mix was used

only in a couple of grouting holes. Later it turned out that the grout penetrated into a

nearby (~10 m) drill hole.

The left side of the grouting fan was grouted with maximum grouting pressure of 3 MPa

and the right side with maximum 5 MPa pressure.

52

The grouting instruction (grout mixes, mixing orders, grouting pressures and stop

criteria) given to the contractor is shown in Table 7-3.

Figure 7-6. Grouting fan in PFT3.

53

Table 7-3. Grouting pressures, stop criteria and grout mixes in PFT3. LOW PH CEMENT – PFT3

Stip criteria in grouting holes 1 12: Grouting pressure 2.4-3 MPa, grout flow < 2 l/min during 5 min

Stop Criteria 2 in grouting holes 13-23: Grouting pressure 4…5 MPa, grout flow < 2 l/min during 5 min

Note: the water dosing in grout recipes is the real dosing, possible measuring errors are not taken in recipes.

TEST RECIPE 1: P308B, SPL 4 WT-%

Water 67 l

Ultrafin16 40 kg

Mixing 2 min

GroutAid 40 l

Superplasticizer Mighty 150 2.25 l

Mixing 3 min and then mix to agitator

W/DM 1.4

Density 1349 kg/m3 ( 50 kg/m3)

If grout take > 750 l/hole, then to test recipe 2:

TEST RECIPE 2: P307B, SPL 4 WT-%

Water 53.6

Ultrafin16 40 kg

Mixing 2 min

GroutAid 39.6 l

Superplasticizer Mighty 150 2.25 l

Mixing 3 min and then mix to agitator

W/DM 1.2

Density 1396 kg/m3 ( 50 kg/m3)

If grout take > 500 l/hole, then to test recipe 3:

TEST RECIPE 3: P307C, SPL 3.1 WT-% (Designed during grouting due to high grout take)

Water 32 l

Ultrafin16 40 kg

Mixing 2 min

GroutAid 40 l

Superplasticizer Mighty 150 2.25 l

Mixing 3 min and then mix to agitator

W/DM* 0.9

Density* 1490 kg/m3

Grouting stopped if grout take > 500 l/hole

* Calculated afterwards because the recipe was done in the field

7.4.4 Results of technical tests of grout mixes

Water flow meter was checked before grouting and the values to the recipes were

corrected so that the real dosing was correct.

Mix P308B was the starting mix and thus several batches were possible to be tested.

One batch of mix P307B was tested. The technical tests of the extra mix P307C were

not done, because the mix was established in the field due to high grout take in a couple

54

of grouting holes and it was not meant for substantial use. The results of the technical

tests are collected in Appendix 6.

Temperature in the tunnel was 12 ºC and the groundwater temperature was 7 ºC. Fall

cone tests were done in the work site laboratory where the temperature during testing

was 15-20 ºC.

Mix P308B showed Marsh values of 43-49 s, which were not totally satisfying and

poorer than those obtained in the BMT1. The filter pump was malfunctioning and only

two measurements were considered to be more or less reliable. The results were not

good, 240 ml with a 100 μm mesh (uncertain if the pump leaked). Bleeding was

0-1 vol-%, which is good (0-1 vol-% refers to an observation that a thin water layer was

observed, but it could not be measured).

Grouting took place at such a time of day that continuous follow up of the early age

strength development was not possible. Samples were taken from the agitator at

different times so that the gap between measurements done in the evening and in the

morning would be as short as possible. Unfortunately, the gap was during the most

interesting time range and target values are evaluated from Figure 7-7. The shear

strength of 0.5 kPa was possibly obtained at 4-5 h and 2 kPa was obtained at 5 h if

assuming a linear behaviour between 4-10 h.

Compared to the results received from the BMT and the laboratory, Marsh fluidity of

P308B was poorer now. Penetrability was not that good either. Bleeding was the same.

The differences may be explained by 1) more difficult testing conditions than in the

BMT, 2) different temperature, 3) quality differences in cement, 4) malfunctioning of

the test equipment, and/or that 5) the given instructions were not followed accurately

enough. There was also inaccuracy related to the testing methods and the number of

tested batches was limited. Early age strength development seemed to be a little faster

than in the BMT1, but one important reason for that was the higher temperature during

the latter test. The age of the cement is not known.

Mix P307B showed satisfying Marsh fluidity (43 s) and the filter pump test showed

penetrability of 170-300 ml with a 100 μm mesh, the lower value cannot be regarded as

good. Also some uncertainties were associated with these results because of

malfunctioning of the filter pump. Bleeding was 0 vol-%. The shear strength of 0.5 kPa

was obtained at 4:30-5 h and based on Figure 7-8 the value 2 kPa was obtained at ~7 h.

Marsh fluidity of mix P307B was a little better in this test than in the BMT1.

Penetrability was a little worse. There is no difference in the bleeding results and the

development of strength does not differ significantly. The explanations for the

differences in values between the BMT1 and the PFT3 are the same as those described

for mix P308B.

55

P308B - two samples taken at different time

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00

Age of sample (hh:mm)

Sh

ea

r st

ren

gth

(kP

a)

Figure 7-7. Shear strength of mix P308B measured in PFT3. The target is 0.5 kPa at 6 h (required) and 2 kPa at 8 h (desired).

P307B

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00

Age of sample (hh:mm)

Sh

ea

r st

ren

gth

(kP

a)

Figure 7-8. Shear strength of mix P307B measured in PFT3. The target is 0.5 kPa at 6 h (required) and 2 kPa at 8 h (desired).

56

7.4.5 Drilling of grouting holes

During drilling of the grouting holes observations of rock quality, fracturing and water

leakage were made (Appendix 7).

Soft rock quality was observed in hole 8 at the depth of 9-14 m. Joints were observed in

almost all grouting holes and they were located at every depth along the holes, but

mainly concentrated behind the hole depth of about 20 m. Crushed rock was observed in

holes 2, 5, 6, 17 and 22. Most of the holes were dry, but many of them leaked

1-10 l/min. Observations during drilling of the grouting holes refer to that more water

conductive fractures could be present.

7.4.6 Results of the grouting

The total grout take in the fan was about 15 m3 (21 l/borehole-m; Table 7-4), which is

within the typical range of the ONKALO access tunnel (10-20 m3 per grouting fan).

Also the grout take in different holes did not vary remarkably from that elsewhere in the

ONKALO access tunnel. Grouting logs are presented in Appendix 8.

In grouting holes 1 and 2 the grout flowed to nearby borehole (distance about 10 m)

OL-KR34 (Volume 460 l). This was noticed as the grout extruded to the ground surface

via a borehole. The volume of this “extra grout” was estimated to be about 450-1 000 l,

which is 3 7% of the total grout take. The total amount of cement was 5319 kg and the

total amount of microsilica slurry was 7429 kg and superplasticizer Mighty 150 was

consumed 377.7 kg.

The grouting was begun with mix P308B in every hole. If the grout take was more than

750 l/hole, grouting was continued with mix P307B. In the case of very high grout take

in a couple of holes the rest of the grouting was done with mix P307C. The total intake

of mix P308B was about 10 600 l, of mix P307B about 4 000 l and of mix P307C about

500 l.

The average grout take in the holes grouted with lower pressure (2.4-3 MPa, measured

average 2.6 MPa) was 22 l/borehole-m, about the same as in the holes grouted with

higher pressure (4-5 MPa, measured average 3.5 MPa). The different sides cannot be

compared because one side was grouted first which naturally had an effect on the other

side.

The grout take, grouting pressure and time are gathered in Table 7-4. Detailed grouting

information from each hole is gathered in Appendix 9.

57

Table 7-4. Grout takes, grout mixes and grouting pressures. Grout takes includes the amount of grout in grouting hole (about 57 l in each hole).

Hole Mix* Closing pressure

(MPa)

Average pressure

(MPa)

Max. meas. pressure

(MPa)

Grouting time

(hh:mm:ss)

Grout take (l)

Vol./bore-hole-m (l/m)

Cement

/borehole-m (kg/m)

1 1+2+3 3 2.7 3.4 2:07:08 1344.8** 53.8 18.4

2 1+2 3 2.6 4.4 1:55:23 1566.9** 62.7 20.4

3 1 3 2.9 4.0 0:57:23 184.2 7.4 2.3

4 1 3 3.5 8.2 0:54:51 335.3 13.4 4.2

5 1 3 3.2 3.7 0:18:50 36.6 1.5 0.5

6 1 3 2.5 3.6 0:27:40 88.5 3.5 1.1

7 1+2 3 2.1 3.5 2:11:52 966.3 38.7 12.5

8 1 3 2.4 3.3 0:19:51 110.5 4.4 1.4

9 1 3 2.4 3.5 1:44:11 331.9 13.3 4.2

10 1+2 3 2.4 2.8 2:24:51 771.9 30.9 9.8

11 1 3 2.4 3.0 0:30:00 146.4 5.9 1.8

12 1 3 1.4 3.0 0:07:10 56.8 2.3 0.7

13 1+2 3 3.9 4.5 2:35:41 1147.8 45.9 15.0

14 1 5 4.1 4.6 0:04:01 4.2 0.2 0.04

15 1 5 4.3 4.5 0:07:50 14.6 0.6 0.2

16 1+2 5 3.4 4.3 1:39:53 931.6 37.3 12.0

17 1+2 5 3.8 4.7 2:29:43 1179.0 47.2 15.5

18 1 5 3.1 4.9 0:05:50 59.5 2.4 0.8

19 1+2+3 5 2.6 4.7 4:59:16 1792.4 71.7 26.2

20 1+2+3 5 2.9 5.0 3:57:14 1585.9 63.4 22.5

21 1 5 4.3 8.4 0:11:20 6.3 0.3 0.1

22 1 5 3.2 5.3 0:09:40 55.4 2.2 0.7

23 1 5 3.9 4.8 1:46:23 622.2 24.9 11.0

PR0502A 1 5 4.5 4.7 0:05:30 1.1 0.0 0.0

PR0502B 1+2+3 5 1.8 3.1 3:56:12 1559.7 55.7 21.0

PR0502C 1 5 3.6 5.0 0:15:11 38.2 1.4 0.5

PR0502D 1 5 4.3 4.7 0:29:50 111.9 4.0 1.4

Average 1:21:57 557.4 21.9 7.6

Total 15049.9

**

*Mix 1 = P308B, Mix 2 = P307B and Mix 3 = P307C; which was designed during the test.

**Grout extruded to the ground surface via borehole KR34. The amount of this “extra grout” is estimated to be about 450-1 000 l.

A summary of the drilling observations and grout takes in different grouting holes is

presented in Table 7-5. In six holes the grouting hole did not leak although the grout

take was considerable. If a grouting hole leaked, the grout take varied a lot. There was

only one hole where crushed rock was observed and it leaked and at the same time the

grout take was considerable. The observations cannot be directly coupled to grout take,

but it should be noted that grouting order has an effect on grout take.

58

Table 7-5. Comparison between drilling observations and grout take in grouting holes.

Rock conditions in grouting holes/

Grout take/hole Dry, jointed rock Dry, crushed rock

Leaking, jointed rock

Leaking, crushed rock

0-100 l 12, 15, 22 5 14, 18, 21

100-1000 l 3, 4, 7, 11, 23 8, 9, 10, 16

>1000 l 13, 20 2* 1*, 19 17

7.4.7 Quality control

Four 21 m long control holes were drilled after grouting. All holes were dry

(Appendix 10). Three control holes showed 0 Lug = 0 l/ (min·m·MPa) in water loss

measurements and one located in the lower right corner showed 0.02 l/ (min·m·MPa) ~

K = 3E-9 m/s ~ T = 5E-8 m2/s.

If assuming the relation (2) (not skin-factor):

min/1.1/59.1

33502ln

/76.9

/85

333ln

/85502

lnln

2

3

2

2

2

0

lsmE

mm

smEsmE

mm

smEm

tRR

TT

RtR

hTQ

t

i

t

t

i

(2)

Based on the calculation above the remaining inflow is 1.1 l/min/test section. The

parameters and assumptions were as follows: Q = water inflow, h = groundwater

pressure expressed as the height, T = transmissivity before grouting, Ti = transmissivity

after grouting, R0= influence radius of the flow which is set as 2h, Rt = tunnel radius

(~3 m) and t = thickness of the grouted zone which is set 3 m. The skin effect is not

taken account as it is calculated later (Section 7.4.9).

According to calculation (2) (no skin factor) the sealing efficiency was about

1-1.1/5.2 = 79%.

7.4.8 Geological mapping after excavation

The main rock type in the area is diktyonite (vein gneiss), in which can be seen

pegmatite granite veins as well as some inclusions of mica and quartz gneiss (Figure

7-9). Along the tunnel section 500-511 some kaolinitic rocks can be seen. Kaolinite is

present as filling pre-eminently in fractures along the cleavage plane and in long

horizontal fractures. This can be seen especially well in the tunnel ceiling. Kaolinite

filled fractures are less frequent on the tunnel walls. Fairly wide kaolinite, calcite and

pyrite filled fractures can occasionally be observed in the pegmatite granite. Along the

tunnel chainage 510-530 there are calcite and pyrite filled flat-dipping fractures. In the

59

ceiling the thickness of fracture filling is centimetres, on the walls no equivalent filling

thickness has been observed. The gneiss inclusions and stripes (mica gneiss, quartz

gneiss) are homogenous, fine-grained inclusions inside the diktyonite. Cleavage in the

inclusions is systematic and two to three fracture directions can often be recognised.

Figure 7-10 presents the fault intersections.

No observations of channelling of flow paths were reported in combination with

mapping. Neither was any clear leakage of water observed. Naturally there is a large

variation in fracture length, the longest fracture being 20 m and the shortest about

10 cm, mean length is slightly over 2 m. Fracture filling thickness also varies, with the

mean value being about 1.8 mm.

There are two main fracture directions in the area. Furthermore there is an abundance of

random fractures. Of the main fracture directions the stronger is almost horizontal and

dipping to the southwest (Set1). The second (Set2) main fracture direction falls to the

southeast, in the direction of the rock schistosity. From the random fracturing one

direction stands out fairly well, it is almost vertical in the north-south direction (Set3)

(Table 7-6 and Figure 7-11).

Along the tunnel sections 516.10-517.20 m and 521.50-523.00 m (latter observed also

with the Flowlog) there are two clear, almost vertical fracture zones, which both have

slickenside surfaces. In the first zone the main fracture direction is 233 and the dip is

79. In the second zone the direction is 284 and the dip 89. Fracture filling thickness

varies between about 1-30 mm. Filling minerals are mainly chlorite, calcite, pyrite and

kaolinite.

Figure 7-9. Geological conditions in the test area. Lithology along the tunnel section 500-530 m. VGN means diktyonite, MGN is mica gneiss or quartz gneiss and PGR is pegmatite granite. The lightly shaded area on the left is clearly more altered than the surrounding rock, largely kaolinitic diktyonite.

60

Figure 7-10. Geological conditions in the test area. Brittle fault intersections (grey) and single shear fractures (line) along the test area (PL= Tunnel Chainage (m)).

Table 7-6. The main fracture directions along tunnel section 500-530.

Tunnel chainage (TC)(m)

Set 1 Set 2 Set 3

500-530, all fractures 209/14 155/43 258/86

Figure 7-11. Main fracture directions along tunnel section 500-530. All fractures have been taken into account in the interpretation.

From the fracture surfaces roughness and alteration factors were mapped in order to

determine the Q-classification. The main parts of the fractures are wavy and rough.

Along the tunnel interval 500-530 fracturing is fair. The RQD value varies between 70

and 95 (Table 7-7).

61

Along the chainage section 500-530 reports of fractures filled with grouting cement are

few. Grout has been reported only from tunnel sections 510-515 and 520-530 (see

Figure 7-12 and Table 7-8), in total 14 fractures. Both sections have 7 fractures with

pre-grouting cement as fracture filling. The thickness of the cement has not been

separately measured as the filling thickness coincides with the total fracture width.

Table 7-7. Rock quality of the ONKALO tunnel along the tunnel chainage (TC) 500 530.

TC (m) RQD Jn Jr Ja Jw SRF Q Quality

500-505 70 3 2 3 1 1 15.56 Good

505-510 90 6 2 3 1 1 10 Fair

510-515 95 6 2 3 1 1 10.56 Good

515-520 90 6 2 4 1 1 7.5 Fair

520-530 85 6 2 4 1 1 7.08 Fair

Fracture fillings in tunnel section chainage 500-530

0 %

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

PL500-505 PL505-510 PL510-515 PL515-520 PL520-525_vasen seinä PL520-530

BT CC EP GR HE IM IL KA KL KM KV MK MS MU SK SR SV None

Figure 7-12. Distribution of fracture minerals. Biotite (BT), calcite (CC), epidote (EP), graphite (GR), hematite (HE), pre-grouting cement (IM), illite (IL), kaolinite (KA), chlorite (KL), K-feldspar (KM), quartz (KV), pyrrhotite (MK), feldspar (MS), muscovite (MU), pyrite (SK), sericite (SR), clay mineral (SV) and none (no observable mineral).

62

Table 7-8. Fractures with pre-grouting cement filling along the tunnel section 500-530. VGN means diktyonite and PGR is pegmatite granite. Biotite (BT), calcite (CC), grouting cement (IM), kaolinite (KA), chlorite (KL) and pyrite (SK).

Tunnel chainage (m)

Fracture length (m)

Fracture type

Dip. Dir. Filling thickness

(mm)Fracture minerals

Rocktype

510-515 1.5 USM 11 013 0.3 IM,CC,KA PGR

510-515 1.5 USM 11 013 0.3 IM,CC,KA PGR

510-515 8 USM 10 121 20 CC,SK,IM PGR

510-515 2.5 USL 69 236 2 CC,IM,KL PGR

510-515 2.5 USL 69 236 2 CC,IM,KL PGR

510-515 8 USM 22 343 20 CC,IM,KL,SK VGN

510-515 1.7 USM 17 339 2 CC,IM,KL,SK VGN

520-530 2.48 URO 44 142 4 IM,CC VGN

520-530 0.9 USM 30 259 1 CC,KL,IM VGN

520-530 1.1 PSM 29 334 1 CC,IM,KL VGN

520-530 3.6 USM 39 004 1,5 KA,IM,KL VGN

520-530 1.3 URO 03 202 2 CC,IM,KA,SK VGN

520-530 1.3 URO 03 202 2 CC,IM,KA,SK VGN

520-530 10 USM 15 177 20 CC,KL,BT, SK,IM

VGN

7.4.9 Leakage water inflow after excavation

The leakage water inflow has been mapped three times (Figure 7-13 and Figure 7-14).

After excavation the PFT3 tunnel section was mainly dry but a few small damp areas

were observed. There were no dropping or leaking points. After rock bolting more damp

areas were observed. However, the tunnel part grouted with test grout is at least as dry

as other parts in the tunnel.

The measured inflow into ONKALO between tunnel chainage 0-580 (1. measuring

weir) is 1.7 l/min/100 m, which is ~0.4 l/min/25 m (= the length of the tested tunnel

section) if assuming similar remaining inflow overall in the tunnel. This means that the

observed leakage water inflow was according to the target inflow for ONKALO

(1-2 l/min/100 m) is less than calculated (Section 7.4.7).

The water inflow into the tested tunnel section without grouting was estimated to be

~ 5.2 l/min (or even more). This means that the sealing efficiency has been

approximately 1-0.4/5.2 ~ 92% (or more).

The calculated leakage water inflow (Section 7.4.7) becomes the same as observed

leakage water inflow if using skin effect value ~1.5 in the denominator.

Most water conductive fracturing was observed at the end of the grouted section (tunnel

chainage about 525). This part seems to be the driest.

63

Figure 7-13. Mapped leakage water inflow in the PFT3 area, marked with a red dashed circle, and in ONKALO.

64

Figure 7-14. Mapped leakage water inflow in the PFT3 area, marked with red dashed circle, and in ONKALO.

7.5 Batch mixing test 2

The second batch mixing test (BMT2) was arranged after the PFT3, because there were

problems with functioning of the test equipment and the testing conditions down in the

tunnel during grouting are usually difficult. The other interest was to see the effect of

temperature on the results. In the BMT2, the test grouts were mixed with a full scale

grouting mixer in field conditions and technical properties were measured. The tested

properties were fluidity by Marsh funnel, bleeding by measuring glass and early age

shear strength by fall cone. Unfortunately the filter pump broke again and no results

were obtained. Outside temperature during testing was 18-21 ºC.

Mixes P307, P307B, P308 and P308B were tested and all results are presented in

Appendix 11.

P307 and P307B (W/DM 1.2, SPL 3 and 4 wt-%) showed good Marsh values. The

Marsh value immediately after mixing was 37 s and at the age of 30 min again 37 s.

Bleeding was 0 vol-% for both mixes. Early age shear strength results are presented in

Figure 7-15.

P308 (W/DM 1.4, SPL 3 wt-%) showed Marsh values 36 s immediately after mixing

and at the age of 30 min. P308B (W/DM 1.4, SPL 4 wt-%) showed Marsh values of 35 s

65

immediately after mixing and at the age of 30 min. Bleeding was 0 vol-% for both

mixes. Early age shear strength results are presented in Figure 7-15.

For measuring the early age shear strength the samples were stored in a refrigerator

where the temperature varied between 7-14 ºC. Mix P307 achieved the required shear

strength (0.5 kPa) at the age of about 4:30 h and 2 kPa at the age of about 8 h. P307B

achieved 0.5 kPa at the age of about 5 h and 2 kPa at the age of about 7 h. P308

achieved 0.5 kPa at the age of 5:30 h and 2 kPa at the age of about 7 h. P308B achieved

0.5 kPa at the age of about 5:30 and 2 kPa at the age of about 7:30 h.

The BMT2 showed good Marsh values for all tested mixes. All Marsh values were

better than in the BMT1 and in PFT3. Early age shear strength and bleeding were also

satisfying. Unfortunately the penetrabilities could not be measured.

The tests indicated that the higher the water to dry material ratio was the better fluidity

the mix had. Also it was seen that the higher the SPL content was, the better the fluidity

was. However, the differences were quite small.

The smaller the W/DM was the quicker the strength development. The SPL seems to

delay the early age strength development a little.

P307: Shear strength (kPa)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00

Age of the sample (h:mm)

Shea

r st

reng

th (

kPa)

P307B: Shear strength (kPa)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00

Age of the sample (h:mm)

Shear

str

eng

th (

kP

a)

P308: Shear strength (kPa)

0

1

23

4

5

6

78

9

10

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00

Age of the sample (h:mm)

Shear

str

engt

h (

kP

a)

P308B: Shear strength (kPa)

0

1

2

3

4

56

7

8

9

10

0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00

Age of the sample (h:mm)

Shea

r st

reng

th (

kPa)

Figure 7-15. Early age shear strength of the mixes tested in BMT2. Required target was 0.5 kPa at 6 h and desired target was 2 kPa at 8 h.

66

7.6 Summary and conclusions of pilot field test 3

Several mixes were tested for technical performance in the BMT1. Out of tested mixes

P307 (W/DM=1.2 and SPL 3 wt-%), P307B (W/DM=1.2 and SPL 4 wt %), P308

(W/DM=1.4 and SPL 3 wt-%), and P308B (W/DM=1.4 and SPL 4 wt-%), stood out to

be the most promising. P307 and P307B were penetrable with 100μm mesh and P308

and P308B with 75μm mesh. Marsh values of P307 and P307B were not within desired

limits, but for P308 and P308B they were good. Bleeding was good for all of the mixes.

P307 and P307B were a bit faster and the early age strength development was within

targets. For P308 and P308B the aimed early age strength development was nearly

reached. The temperature was about 5-10 °C. Regarding all results mix P308B and mix

P307B were chosen to be used in test grouting in the ONKALO tunnel.

One grouting fan was grouted with the test mixes. The mixes were tested for technical

properties. P308B was the starting mix, and if grout take was high, then the grouting

would be continued with mix P307B.

Mix P308B showed poorer Marsh values than in the BMT1, but not unacceptable. Filter

pump results were not reliable. Early age shear strength was good. Mix P307B showed

better Marsh fluidity than P308B and better than in the BMT1. Uncertainties were again

related to the penetrability results. Early age shear strength was satisfying. Bleeding was

good for both mixes. A third extra mix was developed during the grouting due to very

high grout take in two grouting holes, but it was not tested.

The total grout take in the fan of 23 grouting holes was 15 m3. Out of this about

450-1000 l penetrated into the nearby investigation hole 10 m away. Based on the

results obtained from probe holes and the grouting holes the water inflow into the tested

tunnel section would have been several to tens of litres per minute. Quality control holes

showed that the excavation could be continued. After excavation, small moist or damp

areas were observed but it seemed that most of the leakages were sealed and the

grouting could be regarded successful. After rock bolting more damp areas were found,

but still the grouting result is at least as good as elsewhere in the ONKALO tunnel.

The BMT2 was arranged to verify the results of the technical tests because uncertainties

were related to the testing conditions and functioning of the equipment. Marsh values

were good for all mixes. All Marsh values were better than in the BMT1 and in PFT3.

The early age shear strength and bleeding were also satisfying. Unfortunately, the

penetrabilities could not be measured, because the filter pump was broken.

The fluidity was tested for the most promising mixes (P308B and P307B) three times in

the field. The results varied so much that more tests in the field are recommended in

order to get a good picture of the mixes. Marsh fluidity values were often in target

ranges but not always. Penetrability results were often problematic to get in the field,

and more field tests are needed. Bleeding was always good and early age strength

development seems to be satisfying for the most promising test mixes.

67

7.7 Observations from monitoring of the effect of the low-pH cement on groundwater chemistry

In order to monitor the effect of cement on the groundwater chemistry four boreholes

(ONK-KR1…ONK-KR4) were drilled in August 2005 in ONKALO (Rautio, 2005).

The monitoring boreholes represent grouted areas of different ages, different grout-take

and different cement mixes (Table 7-9). The borehole ONK-KR3 was drilled in the

PFT3-area and it represents groundwater in low pH cementitious environment. The

proper location and direction of the holes, where fractures and grout are expected to

occur in fractures, was decided based on the WLM from the probeholes, drilling of the

grouting holes and grout take. Also observations from the rock surface in the tunnel

were used.

The first groundwater station ONK-PVA1 (length 26.30 m) in “native ungrouted rock”

at TC (m) 200 was also drilled in August, and is included in the same monitoring and

sampling programme as the cement monitoring boreholes.

Drill cores samples of the boreholes were mainly unweathered or from unweathered to

slightly weathered. Fractures in drillcores were mostly filled. Grout observations as

fracture infill in drill cores are limited to boreholes ONK-KR3 and -KR4. Kaolinite,

calcite and sulphides are the most common fracture infilling minerals in all of these

boreholes also in ONK-PVA1, though in ONK–KR2 calcite is observed only once.

Chlorite observations are also rather common (Rautio, 2005).

Table 7-9. Boreholes for monitoring of cement (Ahokas et al. 2005). Tunnel chainage

(m)

Date of grouting*/Cement and SPL used in grout mix

Cement-take (kg)**/grouting hole-m

Cement take (tons) **/ fan

Monitoring borehole length (m)

ONK-KR1 11023.11.04/ UF16+SetControl II

9.7 6.7 12.4

ONK-KR2 375 11. -18.4.05/

UF16+SP40 19.7 or 16.2 13.1 or 9.2 15.5

ONK-KR3 515

6. -7.6.05/

Low-pH cement

UF16+GroutAid+ Mighty 150

7.7 5.3 10.7

ONK-KR4 540 13. -21.6.05/

UF16+GroutAid+ SP40

10.1 or 2.3 6.4 or 2.3 11.7

*If a date is given as a range of about one week, the effects of grouting can possibly originate from two different grouting fans and it is not possible to determine which one.

** If the grout can originate from two alternative grouting fans, both grout takes are presented.

68

The daily monitoring of the boreholes for water inflow rate, pH, temperature and

electrical conductivity (EC) started within a few days after drilling. Based on the flow-

log observations and fracture mapping the boreholes were packed off in September-

October and dummies installed in the sections to reduce volume and to get the most

representative water volume. Complete chemical analyses of the waters were done at

four occasions during August-December, 2005. The flow rate in the boreholes has

varied along the monitoring periods, and boreholes have been occasionally dry. The

reason for the fluctuations in the flow is not known; these might be due to different

operations performed in ONKALO during the construction work or due to some

operations in the nearby boreholes.

Observations

The effect of cement was seen as elevated pH values in ONK-KR3 and ONK-KR4, very

soon after starting the monitoring (Figure 7-16). The low-pH cement monitoring

borehole ONK-KR3, shows more significant decrease with time than the later with

normal cement grouting. The decrease in pH cannot be explained by variable flow

conditions; hence it should be caused by the availability of hydroxide sources (Ca(OH)2,

etc.). Cement was observed in the drill cores of these most recently grouted boreholes.

These boreholes also represent the lowest flow rate of the monitoring boreholes.

Boreholes ONK-KR1 and ONK-PVA1 show values without cement influence typical to

“native” groundwaters in shallow bedrock at Olkiluoto (Pitkänen et al. 2004). EC values

seem to change with pH for the boreholes. The decrease of EC in the boreholes ONK

KR3 and –KR4 may partly result from decreasing pH. At the end of monitoring the EC

values increase with the depth of the monitored boreholes except in ONK-KR3, which

may also reflect direct connection to the surface.

As compared to the native groundwater the high pH samples from ONK-KR3 and

ONK-KR4 show a lower Mg, DIC and silica content in general and higher K, NH4 and

Ca, particularly in the case of ordinary cement (ONK-KR4). These may be explained by

precipitation reactions, e.g., Ca, Mg and DIC or dissolution and ion exchange, e.g. K,

NH4. Silica may be precipitated in cement grout. Dissolved organic content (DOC)

does not deviate from the usually found DOC in the shallow bedrock at Olkiluoto. Thus,

the influence of the eventual contamination due to organics introduced during

construction, such as any cement additives cannot be estimated based on the results

available so far.

The first observations based on ONK-KR3 and –KR4 suggest that, as would be

expected, pH decreases more efficiently in low pH grout environment than in the case

with ordinary cement. However a number of uncertainties influence the overall

interpretation (Ahokas et al. 2006), such as divergent chemical evolutionary paths for

the monitored sections, partly influence of cement and partly normal hydrogeochemical

evolution due to variable flow paths (passing or in contact with cement) and the time

frame for cement-water interaction. Also, buffering processes, e.g., alteration of silicates

or the neutralising of carbonic acid in groundwater need to be encountered.

69

Figure 7-16. Temporal variation of a) flow rate, b) pH and c) EC since the start of grouting in monitored boreholes at ONKALO. Days refer time after grouting of each borehole. Groundwater samples with complete chemical analyses have been taken at four occasions in Augus-December 2005 (Ahokas et al. 2006).

70

71

8 SUMMARY OF P308B MATERIAL PROPERTIES MEASURED IN THE LABORATORY AND IN THE FIELD

The results of mix P308B, which is the most promising low pH cement mixture for the

moment, are gathered in Table 8-1. Mix P308B has SF/PC 0.69, W/DM 1.4 and

naphtalene sulphonate SPL 4 wt-%. From long-term safety point of view this SPL is

considered the less harmful than the other types of SPLs.

The pH, which is the most important property together with penetration ability, of the

mix is as targeted (pH <11 in the leachate). Penetration ability, measured by

penetrability meter, is significantly better than the set target. Penetration ability was

characterised also in field by filter pump (only once the results can be regarded reliable,

because the pump got broken two times) and the result was better than the target.

Viscosity was measured by rheometer and obtained values were better than the target.

Marsh fluidity was as targeted when measured right after mixing. Instead, twice (out of

four determinations) it has been poorer than targeted at 30 or 60 min. Marsh values

obtained in field have been better than those obtained in the laboratory.

Early age strength development has been as targeted, but a couple of times very

narrowly above the set target value. Shear strength at 6 h was better in the laboratory

than in field tests. Bleeding has been as targeted every time. Also measured

compressive strength (28d) was as targeted.

The only property that is not as targeted is the yield stress values of the mix P308B.

This property has also an influence on Marsh values (not always as targeted).

The overall behaviour of mix P308B has been satisfying and the used SPL is less

harmful than the other ones. Mix P308B is recommended for further testing in field.

However, the laboratory tests have indicated that cement age, cement consignment,

mixer type etc. seems to have an effect on technical properties. Further testing is

recommended in order to verify the target properties can be obtained repeatedly.

72

Table 8-1. Target values for different grout properties and results of mix P308B obtained in the laboratory, BMTs and PFT3. Target properties are not in an order of importance.

Property Target value Laboratory BMT1 PFT3 BMT2

pH 11.0 ALL-MR < 11

OL-SR < 10 -

< 11 after 3 months

-

penetration ability

bmin/bcrit (μm) 80 / 120 40/88 - - -

penetration ability

filterpump (ml)

300

(100 μm) -

300

(75 μm) ? ?

Viscosity (mPas) 50 10.9-15.3 - - -

Marsh-fluidity (s) 45 44/61* 39/41** 43/49** 35/35**

Shear strength at

6 h (Pa) 500 1100 ~ 500 ? > 500

Shear strength at

8 h (Pa) 2000 - ~ 2000 ? > 2000

Bleeding (vol-%) 2 < 1 0 < 1 0

Yield value (Pa) 5 12.1–13.8 - - -

Compressive strength 28d (MPa)

4 17

* at 60 min**at 30 min ? results uncertain- not measured

73

9 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the outcome from the SKB-Posiva-NUMO joint project “Injection grouts for

deep repositories” Posiva continued the optimisation of Portland cement + microsilica +

superplasticizer –mixes in the LPHTEK-project during 2005. The work comprised of

laboratory studies, two batch mixing tests in field conditions, the third pilot field test

and monitoring of the test area.

The objective of the laboratory tests was to improve the properties of the mix P3

developed earlier. The superplasticizer was changed to one, which is considered less

harmful with respect to long-term safety. The water/dry material-ratio and the contents

of microsilica and superplasticizer were varied and the behaviour of the mixes was

observed in the laboratory. Basic properties (Marsh fluidity, early age shear strength,

bleeding) were systematically tested. The poor mixes were abandoned and promising

mixes were tested more comprehensively (penetration ability by penetrability meter

etc).

Several mixes showed promising results and one mix, P308B (SF/PC=0.69, W/DM 1.4,

naphtalene sulphonate SPL 4%) met the targets, except that set for yield stress. pH,

penetration ability and viscosity were very good. Early age shear strength was

satisfying. Cement consignment, age of the cement, age of the microsilica, mixer type

and temperature possibly have an effect on results, but these were not possible to study

in this project in detail. The improved composition of the mix stabilises the leachates

pH-values as well as somewhat lowers them. The pH value, which is the most important

property together with the penetration ability, of mix P308B is reflected in the leachate

pH values which were just below the target value of 11 in the fresh leachate (ALL-MR)

and clearly below in the saline leachate (OL-SR), <10. The pH values of leachate

samples also quickly reached a stable level and the release of several substances

appeared rather congruent compared with the corresponding results for mix f63 in

earlier tests. The results on alkalinity gave reason to suspect that some SPL was released

especially at the beginning of testing and was supported by the results of a few trial

analyses of TOC. In the laboratory tests mix P308B turned out to be most promising

mix to be tested in the field. Also a few other mixes were proposed for field tests.

Before the actual pilot field test 3, a batch mixing test was arranged in field conditions

(T = 5-10 ºC). A few mixes were made with a full-scale grouting mixer and tested for

technical properties. All mixes showed promising behaviour and mix P3080B was in

accordance with targets. Two mixes (P308B and P307B) were selected for test grouting.

In the pilot field test 3 arranged in ONKALO access tunnel (T = 7-11 ºC/15-20 ºC), one

fan was grouted with test mixes. The sealing efficiency was >90% and small moist areas

and minor leakages were observed after grouting. Grouting cement was observed in

several fractures. Testing of technical properties showed practical problems due to

testing conditions and device failure. A second batch mixing test (T= 20 ºC) was

arranged in order to verify the mix properties. Marsh fluidity, bleeding and early age

shear strength was satisfying for P308B. Penetrability was not obtained.

74

After excavation one borehole was drilled in the pilot field-test 3 area through the

grouted zone, and groundwater sampling has been carried out. As expected, pH

decreases more efficiently in low pH grout environment than in the case with ordinary

cement.

Mix P308B has shown behaviour as targeted, except yield stress, and the mix is

recommended for further studies in the laboratory and in the field to get a more

comprehensive idea of variations in its behaviour. The question, if the target properties

can be reached repeatedly in varying circumstances remains open and it is

recommended to study it in future. There should be a good understanding of typical

variation of all mix properties.

The target values were set in order to reach groutable material. However, some practical

problems in e.g., testing schedule and comparison of the results at different testing times

and conditions arose. It is recommended that all target properties be revised so that they

can be measured in a similar way and at similar sample age in the laboratory and in the

field. This enables better comparison between the results and the targets, as well as

comparison between the results obtained in the laboratory and in the field. Further, the

targets were set assuming a need for one basic mix. In reality mixes having different

properties are possibly needed in varying rock conditions. Thus it is recommended to

check if the requirements could be different for a couple of grout types to be used in

different rock scenarios (open fractures, small fractures). Also several low pH recipes

can be developed for varying purposes.

75

REFERENCES

Ahokas, H., Ahokas, T., Hansen, J., Hellä, P., Koskinen, L., Koskinen, K., Lehtinen, A.,

Löfman, J., Marcos, N., Meszàros, F., Partamies, S., Pitkänen, P., Sievänen, U.,

Snellman, M. & Vieno, T. 2006.Control of Water Inflow and Use of Cement in

ONKALO after Penetration of Fracture Zone R19. Posiva Report 2006 XX. To be

published.

Bodén, A. & Sievänen, U. 2005. Low-pH injection grout for deep repositories.

Summary report from a co-operation project between NUMO (Japan), Posiva (Finland)

and SKB (Sweden). Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB, Stockholm, Sweden. Report

R 05-40.

BY1, 1972. Technical code. The Concrete Association of Finland (In Finnish).

Eriksson, M., Friedrich, M. & Vorschulze, C. 2004. Variations in the rheology and

penetrability of cement-based grouts - an experimental study. Cement and Concrete

Research 34, 1111-1119.

Hakanen, M. & Ervanne, H. 2006. The influence of Organic Additives on Radionuclide

Mobility. A literature Survey. Posiva Oy, Olkiluoto, Finland. Working Report 2006-06.

Kronlöf, Anna. 2005a. Injection Grout for Deep Repositories - Low-pH Cementitious

Grout for Larger Fractures: Testing technical performance of materials. VTT Building

and Transport 2005. Working report 2004-45.

Kronlöf, A. 2005b. Injection Grout for Deep Repositories – Low pH Cementitious

Grout for Larger Fractures: Testing Effect of Superplasticizer on Technical

Performance. Posiva Oy, Olkiluoto, Finland. Working report 2005-08.

Rautio, T. 2005, Core Dilling of Boreholes ONK-KR1, ONK-KR2, ONK-KR3,

ONK-KR4 and ONK-PVA1 in ONKALO at Olkiluoto 2005, Posiva Working Report

2005-66.

Sievänen, U. Syrjänen, P. & Ranta-Aho, S. 2005. Injection Grout for Deep Repositories.

Low pH Cementitious Grout for Larger Fractures. Subproject 3: Field Testing in

Finland, Pilot Tests. Posiva Oy, Olkiluoto, Finland. Working Report 2004 47.

Vuorinen U., Lehikoinen, J., Imoto, H., Yamamoto, T. & Cruz Alonso, M. 2005.

Injection Grout for Deep Repositories, Subproject 1: Low pH Cementitious Grout for

Larger Fractures, Leach Testing of Grout Mixes and Evaluation of the Long Term

Safety. Posiva Oy, Olkiluoto, Finland. Working Report 2004-46.

76

77

APPENDIX 1: RHEOLOGY RESULTS BY VTT

78

79

80

81

AP

PE

ND

IX 2

: L

AB

OR

AT

OR

Y R

ES

UL

TS

Inje

ctio

n g

routs

of

Posi

va 2

005,

labora

tory

test

ing

Te

stin

g a

t C

on

test

a O

y, R

aja

torp

an

tie 8

C,

PL

23

, F

IN-0

16

01

Va

nta

a,

tel.

+3

58

9 2

52

5 2

44

1,

gsm

+3

58

50

38

7 2

44

1,

fax

+3

58

9 2

52

5 2

42

6,

ww

w.c

on

test

a.f

i

Mix

co

mposi

tions

W/D

Mper

We

igh

tto

tal

Wa

ter

Dry

mat

Of

dry

ma

teria

ls

Of

dry

m

ate

ria

lsC

em

en

tC

em

en

tG

A d

ryG

A

slu

rry

Wa

ter

Su

pe

rpla

st.

Su

pe

rpl.

Su

pe

rpl.

Ba

tch

Date

Mix

W/D

Mto

tal

ma

ssg

tota

l g

tota

l g

cem

%

GA

%

sil/c

em

type

am

ou

nt

ga

mo

un

tg

am

ou

nt

ga

mo

un

tg

type

am

ou

nt

%a

mo

un

tg

volu

me

l

23

.12

.20

04

P3

1.5

90.6

145

3716

2283

1433

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

849

583

1167

1700

SP

40

229

2.8

1

Mix

co

mp

os

itio

ns b

as

ed

on

P3-r

ecip

e:

21

.4.2

00

5P

30

11

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

SP

40

355

2.8

52

1.4

.20

05

P3

02

1.4

00.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

SP

40

233

2.9

42

1.4

.20

05

P3

03

1.6

00.6

154

3800

2338

1462

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

866

595

1191

1743

SP

40

229

2.8

71

3.4

.20

05

P3

06

1.6

00.6

154

3800

2338

1462

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

866

595

1191

1743

SP

40

229

2.8

71

3.4

.20

05

P3

07

1.2

00.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Mig

hty

15

03

55

2.8

51

3.4

.20

05

P3

07

B1

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Mig

hty

15

04

73

2.8

51

3.4

.20

05

P3

08

1.4

00.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Mig

hty

15

03

50

2.9

41

3.4

.20

05

P3

08

B1

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Mig

hty

15

04

67

2.9

41

3.4

.20

05

P3

09

1.6

00.6

154

3800

2338

1462

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

866

595

1191

1743

Mig

hty

15

02

29

2.8

78

.3.2

00

5P

31

01

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Mig

hty

15

03

55

2.8

58

.3.2

00

5P

31

11

.40

0.5

833

3800

2217

1583

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

938

645

1290

1572

Mig

hty

15

02

32

2.8

08

.3.2

00

5P

31

21

.60

0.6

154

3800

2338

1462

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

866

595

1191

1743

Mig

hty

15

02

29

2.8

78

.3.2

00

5P

31

31

.80

0.6

429

3800

2443

1357

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

804

553

1106

1890

Mig

hty

15

02

27

2.9

42

1.4

.20

05

P3

21

1.2

00.5

455

4000

2182

1818

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

1169

650

1299

1532

SP

40

355

2.8

48

.3.2

00

5P

32

21

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

1071

596

1191

1738

SP

40

233

2.9

32

1.4

.20

05

P3

23

1.6

00.6

154

3800

2338

1462

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

939

522

1044

1816

SP

40

229

2.8

71

3.4

.20

05

P3

27

1.2

00.5

455

4000

2182

1818

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

1169

650

1299

1532

Mig

hty

15

03

55

2.8

48

.3.2

00

5P

32

81

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

1071

596

1191

1738

Mig

hty

15

02

33

2.9

31

3.4

.20

05

P3

29

1.6

00.6

154

3800

2338

1462

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

939

522

1044

1816

Mig

hty

15

02

29

2.8

71

5.3

.20

05

P3

30

1.2

00.5

455

4000

2182

1818

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

1169

650

1299

1532

Mig

hty

15

03

55

2.8

41

5.3

.20

05

P3

31

1.4

00.5

833

4000

2333

1667

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

1071

596

1191

1738

Mig

hty

15

02

33

2.9

31

5.3

.20

05

P3

32

1.6

00.6

154

3800

2338

1462

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

939

522

1044

1816

Mig

hty

15

02

29

2.8

71

5.3

.20

05

P3

33

1.8

00.6

429

3800

2443

1357

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

872

485

970

1958

Mig

hty

15

02

27

2.9

38

.3.2

00

5P

34

11

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

69.2

7

30.7

3

0.4

4U

F16

1259

559

1117

1623

SP

40

355

2.8

38

.3.2

00

5P

34

21

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

69.2

7

30.7

3

0.4

4U

F16

1155

512

1024

1821

SP

40

233

2.9

2

82

21

.4.2

00

5P

34

31

.60

0.6

154

3800

2338

1462

69.2

7

30.7

3

0.4

4U

F16

1012

449

898

1889

SP

40

229

2.8

68

.3.2

00

5P

34

71

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

69.2

7

30.7

3

0.4

4U

F16

1259

559

1117

1623

Mig

hty

15

03

55

2.8

38

.3.2

00

5P

34

81

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

69.2

7

30.7

3

0.4

4U

F16

1155

512

1024

1821

Mig

hty

15

02

33

2.9

2

P

en

etr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r m

as

ses, te

sti

ng

fre

sh

an

d h

ard

en

ing

pro

pert

ies, à 1

batc

h:

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

71

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Mig

hty

15

03

55

2.8

51

0.5

.20

05

P3

07

B1

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Mig

hty

15

04

73

2.8

51

0.5

.20

05

P3

08

1.4

00.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Mig

hty

15

03

50

2.9

41

0.5

.20

05

P3

08

B1

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Mig

hty

15

04

67

2.9

41

0.5

.20

05

P3

09

1.6

00.6

154

3800

2338

1462

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

866

595

1191

1743

Mig

hty

15

02

29

2.8

71

0.5

.20

05

P3

27

1.2

00.5

455

4000

2182

1818

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

1169

650

1299

1532

Mig

hty

15

03

55

2.8

4P

en

etr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r m

as

ses, à 2

batc

hes f

or

just

pe

netr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r:

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

71

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Mig

hty

15

03

55

2.8

51

0.5

.20

05

P3

07

B1

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Mig

hty

15

04

73

2.8

51

0.5

.20

05

P3

08

1.4

00.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Mig

hty

15

03

50

2.9

41

6.5

.20

05

P3

08

B1

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Mig

hty

15

04

67

2.9

41

6.5

.20

05

P3

09

1.6

00.6

154

3800

2338

1462

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

866

595

1191

1743

Mig

hty

15

02

29

2.8

71

6.5

.20

05

P3

27

1.2

00.5

455

4000

2182

1818

64.2

7

35.7

3

0.5

6U

F16

1169

650

1299

1532

Mig

hty

15

03

55

2.8

4

Fie

ld t

est

rec

ipe

, la

bo

rato

ry s

cale

: 3

.11

.20

05

P3

07

C0.8

8200

0.4

687

4400

2062

2338

59.0

0

41.0

0

0.6

9U

F16

1379

959

1917

1104

Mig

hty

15

03

.31

978

2.9

2

Rh

eo

log

y m

ass

es:

24

.8.2

00

5P

30

7B

1.2

00.5

455

3000

1636

1364

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

808

555

1111

1081

Mig

hty

15

04

55

2.1

52

4.8

.20

05

P3

07

C0.8

8889

0.4

706

3200

1506

1694

55.5

56

44.4

44

0.8

0U

F16

941

753

1506

753

Mig

hty

15

03

.13

53

2.1

52

4.8

.20

05

P3

08

1.4

00.5

833

3000

1750

1250

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

741

509

1018

1241

Mig

hty

15

03

38

2.2

22

4.8

.20

05

P3

08

B1

.40

0.5

833

3000

1750

1250

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

741

509

1018

1241

Mig

hty

15

04

50

2.2

1

Alt

ern

ati

ve s

up

erp

lasti

ciz

er

ma

sses:

5.1

0.2

00

5P

36

2S

1.2

00.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Str

uct

uro

236

2.8

55

.10

.20

05

P3

63

S1

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Str

uct

uro

118

2.8

55

.10

.20

05

P3

65

S1

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Str

uct

uro

233

2.9

45

.10

.20

05

P3

66

S1

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Str

uct

uro

117

2.9

45

.10

.20

05

P3

68

S1

.60

0.6

154

3900

2400

1500

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

889

611

1222

1789

Str

uct

uro

115

2.9

55

.10

.20

05

P3

72

G1

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Gle

niu

m 5

12

36

2.8

55

.10

.20

05

P3

73

G1

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Gle

niu

m 5

11

18

2.8

55

.10

.20

05

P3

75

G1

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Gle

niu

m 5

12

33

2.9

45

.10

.20

05

P3

76

G1

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Gle

niu

m 5

11

17

2.9

45

.10

.20

05

P3

78

G1

.60

0.6

154

3900

2400

1500

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

889

611

1222

1789

Gle

niu

m 5

11

15

2.9

56

.10

.20

05

P3

69

S1

.20

0.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Str

uct

uro

1.5

27

2.8

5

83

6.1

0.2

00

5P

37

9G

1.2

00.5

455

4000

2182

1818

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

1078

741

1481

1441

Gle

niu

m 5

11

.527

2.8

56

.10

.20

05

P3

80

G1

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Gle

niu

m 5

11

.525

2.9

46

.10

.20

05

P3

81

G1

.60

0.6

154

3900

2400

1500

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

889

611

1222

1789

Gle

niu

m 5

11

.320

2.9

56

.10

.20

05

P3

08

B1

.40

0.5

833

4000

2333

1667

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

988

679

1358

1655

Mig

hty

15

04

67

2.9

46

.10

.20

05

P3

08

B1

.40

0.5

833

2040

1190

850

59.2

7

40.7

3

0.6

9U

F16

504

346

692

844

Mig

hty

15

04

34

1.5

0

Test

pro

pert

ies

(measu

red)

C

uri

ng

of

com

p.s

tre

ng

th p

rism

s:

F

irst

24

h a

fte

r m

ixin

g in

ta

rge

t te

mpera

ture

12

°C o

r ro

om

tem

p.

After

1 d

ay

curin

g a

t 20°C

, 100%

RH

until

th

e t

est

ing

ag

e

M

ixin

g a

t ro

om

tem

p.

* C

oo

ling

d

urin

gm

ixin

g

W/D

M(s

up

erp

l.in

clu

de

d)

Mars

hfr

esh

Mars

hfr

esh

Mars

h 1

hM

ars

h 1

h

Flo

w

tab

le t

est

fresh

Ble

ed

ing

2h

Fall c

on

e

6h

Fall c

on

e

24h

Co

mp

. str

en

gth

1 d

ay

Co

mp

. str

en

gth

7 d

ay

Co

mp

. str

en

gth

28 d

ay

Co

mp

. str

en

gth

91 d

ay

Tem

p. °C

T

em

p. °C

T

em

p. °C

1

00

0 m

ls

Am

ou

nt

ml

10

00

ml

sA

mo

un

t

m

l P

rism

40m

mx4

0m

mx1

60

mm

Pri

sm40m

mx4

0m

mx1

60

mm

Pri

sm40m

mx4

0m

mx1

60

mm

Pri

sm40m

mx4

0m

mx1

60

mm

Date

Mix

targ

et

be

g.

of

mix

ing

en

d o

f m

ixin

gW

/DM

or

ma

x tim

ein

me

as.

tim

eo

r m

ax

time

in m

ea

s.

time

mm

vol-%

kP

akP

aM

Pa

MP

aM

Pa

MP

a

23

.12

.20

04

P3

12

13.5

21.1

1

.59

180

700

80

340

92

0.1

(3h)

1.1

1

8.6

(10h

)0,9

cylin

de

r d

ia1

05

mm

x h

eig

ht

10

0m

m

5,0

cylin

de

r d

iam

ete

r1

05

mm

x

he

igh

t1

00

mm

Mix

co

mp

os

itio

ns b

as

ed

on

P3-r

ecip

e:

21

.4.2

00

5P

30

11

2

8.5

1

2.9

* 1

.20

74

100

50

113

0.1

2.3

3

1.3

20.2

21

.4.2

00

5P

30

21

2

8.2

1

4.0

* 1

.40

100

100

87

0.0

2.6

9

2

1.4

.20

05

P3

03

12

7

.9

13

.4*

1.6

0117

100

30

98

0.1

1.4

9

157

0.5

12.1

13

.4.2

00

5P

30

620

20.0

25.7

1

.60

100

300

95

1

3.4

.20

05

P3

07

12

8

.5

12

.9*

1.2

0100

900

102

0.0

2.3

9

1.0

22.9

13

.4.2

00

5P

30

7B

12

8

.6

12

.2*

1.2

043

51

150

0.1

1.3

5

0.8

19.1

13

.4.2

00

5P

30

81

2

8.6

1

2.6

* 1

.40

45

86

136

0.1

1.3

5

196

0.6

16.8

13

.4.2

00

5P

30

8B

12

8

.9

12

.6*

1.4

037

43

177

0.1

0.6

8

157

0.5

16.5

13

.4.2

00

5P

30

91

2

8.4

1

3.3

* 1

.60

71

100

390

99

0.1

1.0

1

130

0.4

12.0

8.3

.20

05

P3

10

20

17.9

25.2

1

.20

52

118

128

0.0

11.7

0

1.8

13.5

84

8.3

.20

05

P3

11

20

21.4

26.6

1

.40

82

100

150

116

0.0

8.7

3

1.2

11.9

8.3

.20

05

P3

12

20

22.3

27.2

1

.60

50

93

129

0.1

6.4

7

240

0.7

7.7

8.3

.20

05

P3

13

20

19.1

23.5

1

.80

44

60

135

0.2

4.4

3

157

0.4

4.5

21

.4.2

00

5P

32

11

2

8.3

1

4.0

* 1

.20

68

100

50

105

0.1

2.1

4

1.5

24.1

8.3

.20

05

P3

22

12

7

.1

12

.8 *

1

.40

100

850

100

25

100

0.0

1.0

1

0.7

14.8

21

.4.2

00

5P

32

31

2

8.2

1

3.5

* 1

.60

63

100

160

108

0.2

1.3

5

130

0.5

12.7

13

.4.2

00

5P

32

71

2

8.6

1

3.0

* 1

.20

42

140

900

120

0.0

2.0

2

1.1

20.8

8.3

.20

05

P3

28

12

7

.3

13

.9 *

1

.40

95

100

125

120

0.1

1.5

7

240

0.7

14.7

13

.4.2

00

5P

32

91

2

7.5

1

3.5

* 1

.60

52

92

142

0.2

1.2

2

122

0.5

18.6

15

.3.2

00

5P

33

020

20.7

24.5

1

.20

54

100

950

119

0.1

9.8

0

1.9

20.6

15

.3.2

00

5P

33

120

20.5

25.6

1

.40

75

100

440

116

0.1

8.8

3

1.2

16.5

15

.3.2

00

5P

33

220

19.8

24.3

1

.60

50

80

132

0.2

4.8

8

0.7

11.2

15

.3.2

00

5P

33

320

20.2

25.9

1

.80

41

48

144

0.3

3.8

9

196

0.5

9.9

8.3

.20

05

P3

41

12

7

.0

14

.7 *

1

.20

47

101

150

0.1

1.0

7

1.4

17.7

8.3

.20

05

P3

42

12

6

.9

13

.0 *

1

.40

59

100

400

123

0.1

1.0

5

0.8

12.4

21

.4.2

00

5P

34

31

2

10

.0

14

.4*

1.6

048

91

126

0.4

0.9

0

157

0.4

11.4

8.3

.20

05

P3

47

12

6

.6

13

.1 *

1

.20

43

68

153

0.1

1.0

0

1.2

17.1

8.3

.20

05

P3

48

12

6

.8

12

.4 *

1

.40

46

103

144

0.2

0.9

4

0.8

10.8

P

en

etr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r m

as

ses, te

sti

ng

fre

sh

an

d h

ard

en

ing

pro

pert

ies, à 1

batc

h:

1

0.5

.20

05

P3

07

12

9

.1

14

.2*

1.2

01

00

6

00

1

00

<

5

97

3.1

8

0

.9

1

9.6

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

7B

12

9

.2

14

.8*

1.2

057

97

138

2.1

4

1.0

21.3

31.9

1

0.5

.20

05

P3

08

12

8

.9

15

.0*

1.4

057

113

119

1.9

4

157

0.6

15.2

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

8B

12

9

.4

14

.7*

1.4

044

61

152

1.0

7

157

0.7

17.0

22.4

1

0.5

.20

05

P3

09

12

9

.7

16

.2*

1.6

096

100

600

112

1.3

0

103

0.4

10.0

10

.5.2

00

5P

32

71

2

8.2

1

5.7

* 1

.20

72

100

450

118

2.3

9

1.1

18.1

Pen

etr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r m

as

ses, à 2

batc

hes f

or

just

pe

netr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r:

1

0.5

.20

05

P3

07

12

8

.8

15

.6*

1.2

0

1

0.5

.20

05

P3

07

B1

2

8.5

1

6.1

* 1

.20

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

81

2

7.5

1

5.6

* 1

.40

16

.5.2

00

5P

30

8B

12

8

.9

16

.1*

1.4

0

1

6.5

.20

05

P3

09

12

8

.9

15

.2

1.6

0

1

6.5

.20

05

P3

27

12

9

.9

17

.2*

1.2

0

F

ield

test

rec

ipe

, la

bo

rato

ry s

cale

:

3

.11

.20

05

P3

07

C1

2

7.8

1

3.4

0

.89

100

300

118

0.0

1.3

4

1.7

31.1

Rh

eo

log

y m

ass

es:

Te

stin

g a

t 3

0m

in

24

.8.2

00

5P

30

7B

12

1

4.0

1

9.7

* 1

.20

49

57

Te

stin

g a

t 3

0m

in

24

.8.2

00

5P

30

7C

12

1

4.2

1

8.2

* 0

.90

66

2

4.8

.20

05

P3

08

12

1

4.1

1

9.2

* 1

.40

63

83

85

24

.8.2

00

5P

30

8B

12

1

4.2

1

9.0

* 1

.40

43

46

A

ltern

ati

ve s

up

erp

lasti

ciz

er

ma

sses:

5.1

0.2

00

5P

36

2S

12

13.7

19.8

1

.20

37

43

0.3

9

1.3

18.9

5.1

0.2

00

5P

36

3S

12

13.7

18.2

1

.20

136

750

120

0.0

2.7

7

1.1

18.7

5.1

0.2

00

5P

36

5S

12

13.9

17.8

1

.40

45

41

0

.19

the

ma

ss r

un

ou

t o

f th

e m

ou

lds

5.1

0.2

00

5P

36

6S

12

13.8

18.3

1

.40

96

120

123

0.0

1.7

1

0.8

7.9

5.1

0.2

00

5P

36

8S

12

13.7

20.9

1

.60

57

88

133

0.0

1.1

7

0.4

10.3

5.1

0.2

00

5P

372G

12

13.9

17.9

1

.20

40

43

0.9

20.8

5.1

0.2

00

5P

373G

12

13.5

22.1

1

.20

49

110

142

0.0

1.4

0

1.1

7.7

5.1

0.2

00

5P

375G

12

13.7

20.8

1

.40

36

39

0.6

13.8

5.1

0.2

00

5P

376G

12

13.8

20.9

1

.40

45

57

0

.0

0.9

8

0.6

10

.6

5

.10

.20

05

P378G

12

13.5

16.0

1

.60

44

48

0

.0

0.2

6

0.3

8.5

6.1

0.2

00

5P

36

9S

12

13.7

21.4

1

.20

45

55

1.2

7

1.3

21.7

6.1

0.2

00

5P

379G

12

13.8

20.7

1

.20

39

48

0.2

3

1.1

23.5

6.1

0.2

00

5P

380G

12

14.2

20.9

1

.40

36

45

0.7

12.1

6.1

0.2

00

5P

381G

12

14.1

21

1.6

037

43

0.5

12.1

6.1

0.2

00

5P

30

8B

12

13.9

17.1

1

.40

53

65

0.7

6

0.6

12.3

6.1

0.2

00

5P

30

8B

12

1

4.0

2

6.7

* 1

.40

46

0.0

Vic

at

beg

.(s

ett

ing

sta

rts)

Vic

at

en

d(s

ett

ing

ends)

Rem

ark

s!

Pe

ne

tra

bil

ity

me

ter

tes

t, p

res

su

re 0

.1 M

Pa

P

en

etr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r te

st,

re

su

lts

Tim

e

Tim

e

Filt

er

size

m

(n

om

ina

l siz

es)

, m

l ma

ss p

en

etr

ate

d t

hro

ug

h a

filt

er,

te

st e

nd

ed

whe

n 1

00

0 m

l ach

ieve

d

bm

inB

crit

Date

Mix

h:m

inh

:min

35

45

54

63

75

90

104

125

144

200

mm

23

.12

.20

04

P3

Mix

co

mp

os

itio

ns b

as

ed

on

P3-r

ecip

e:

2

1.4

.20

05

P3

01

2

1.4

.20

05

P3

02

no

co

mp

ress

ive

str

en

gth

pri

sms

ma

de

21

.4.2

00

5P

30

3

13

.4.2

00

5P

30

6

m

ass

re

ject

ed

13

.4.2

00

5P

30

7

13

.4.2

00

5P

30

7B

14

:30

?

Vic

at

inst

rum

en

t fa

ilure

1

3.4

.20

05

P3

08

1

3.4

.20

05

P3

08

B

13

.4.2

00

5P

30

9

1

6:3

0?

V

ica

t in

stru

me

nt

failu

re

86

8.3

.20

05

P3

10

8

.3.2

00

5P

31

1

8.3

.20

05

P3

12

8

.3.2

00

5P

31

3

21

.4.2

00

5P

32

1

8.3

.20

05

P3

22

2

1.4

.20

05

P3

23

1

3.4

.20

05

P3

27

8

.3.2

00

5P

32

8

13

.4.2

00

5P

32

9

15

.3.2

00

5P

33

0

15

.3.2

00

5P

33

1

15

.3.2

00

5P

33

2

15

.3.2

00

5P

33

3

8.3

.20

05

P3

41

8

.3.2

00

5P

34

2

21

.4.2

00

5P

34

3

8.3

.20

05

P3

47

8

.3.2

00

5P

34

8

P

en

etr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r m

as

ses, te

sti

ng

fre

sh

an

d h

ard

en

ing

pro

pert

ies, à 1

batc

h:

1

0.5

.20

05

P3

07

1

0.5

.20

05

P3

07

B

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

8

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

8B

1

0.5

.20

05

P3

09

1

0.5

.20

05

P3

27

P

en

etr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r m

as

ses, à 2

batc

hes f

or

just

pe

netr

ab

ilit

y m

ete

r:

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

7

10

20

65

125

200

225

290

320

570

950

42

247

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

7B

15

35

125

225

475

750

1150

43

108

10

.5.2

00

5P

30

8

15

40

165

400

800

1300

41

90

16

.5.2

00

5P

30

8B

20

53

235

440

865

1050

40

88

16

.5.2

00

5P

30

9

20

50

200

305

625

860

960

1120

37

113

16

.5.2

00

5P

32

7

15

40

180

315

635

1080

42

94

F

ield

test

rec

ipe

, la

bo

rato

ry s

cale

:

3.1

1.2

00

5P

30

7C

Cu

rin

g a

t a

bo

ut

8°C

first

24

h

Rh

eo

log

y m

ass

es:

24

.8.2

00

5P

30

7B

2

4.8

.20

05

P3

07

C

2

4.8

.20

05

P3

08

87

24

.8.2

00

5P

30

8B

Alt

ern

ati

ve s

up

erp

lasti

ciz

er

ma

sses:

5

.10

.20

05

P3

62

S

5.1

0.2

00

5P

36

3S

ple

nty

of

sma

ll b

ub

ble

s in

ha

rde

ne

d g

rou

t

5.1

0.2

00

5P

36

5S

5

.10

.20

05

P3

66

S

p

len

ty o

f sm

all

bu

bb

les

in h

ard

en

ed

gro

ut

5

.10

.20

05

P3

68

S

p

len

ty o

f sm

all

bu

bb

les

in h

ard

en

ed

gro

ut

5

.10

.20

05

P372G

5

.10

.20

05

P373G

sma

ll b

ub

ble

s e

ven

ly in

1h

old

ma

ss

5

.10

.20

05

P375G

5

.10

.20

05

P376G

5

.10

.20

05

P378G

6

.10

.20

05

P3

69

S

a

fe

w s

ma

ll b

ub

ble

s in

ha

rde

ne

d g

rou

t

6.1

0.2

00

5P

379G

a c

ou

ple

of

sma

ll b

ub

ble

s in

ha

rde

ne

d g

rou

t

6

.10

.20

05

P380G

som

e s

ma

ll b

ub

ble

s in

ha

rde

ne

d g

rou

t

6.1

0.2

00

5P

381G

ple

nty

of

sma

ll b

ub

ble

s in

ha

rde

ne

d g

rou

t

6.1

0.2

00

5P

30

8B

6

.10

.20

05

P3

08

B

e

lect

ron

ic b

len

de

r m

ixe

r in

a c

old

ca

bin

et

at

12

°C

88

89

APPENDIX 3: RESULTS OF BATCH MIXING TEST 1 RESULTS OF THE PILOT TEST 3, BATCH MIXING TEST 17.5.2005 AT OLKILUOTOOutside temperature 6-7 C Temperature 19:00 ~10 C Marsh value for water 30,6 s.Temperature 21:00 7,5 C re during 12-22 hours ~5 CMIX P307 Teor. density 1397 50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 9:45 Meas. density 1400 kg/m3Mix temperature at 9:45 9,5 C Weight 1450 kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Filter pump 75 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

9:46 0:01 53 Small pieces (< 1 mm) in 9:50 0:05 300 the mesh of the Marsh 10:13 0:28 56 cone - probably from the 10:45 1:00 55 mixer11:38 1:53 011:40 1:55 2014:30 4:45 12 0.1715:33 5:48 6.8 0.5316:45 7:00 4.2 1.3517:50 8:05 6,4 (60g) 419:00 9:15 4,8 (60,g) 6.25

21.00 11:15 2 (60g)7:40 23:00 1 (100g)

MIX P307B Teor. density 1396±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 9:55 Meas. density 1400 kg/m3Mix temperature at 9:55 10.2 C Weight 1365 kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Filter pump 75 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

9:55 0:00 45 Small pieces (< 1 mm) in 9:58 0:03 280 the mesh of the Marsh 10:03 0:08 300 cone - probably from the 10:24 0:29 46 mixer10:49 0:54 4711:38 1:43 011:40 1:45 2014:30 4:35 1815:40 5:45 7 0.516:45 6:50 6.4 0.618:00 8:05 6,4 (60g) 419:05 9:10 5,5 (60g) 5.0221:00 11:05 2,2 (60g)7:40 23:00 0,5 (100g)

MIX P308 Teor. density 1350±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 10:58 Meas. density 1360 kg/m3Mix temperature at 10:58 9.2 C Weight kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Filter pump 75 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

11:01 0:03 4311:04 0:06 30011:26 0:28 4612:52 1:54 014:30 3:32 15.515:40 4:42 12 0.1716:45 5:47 7.6 0.4218:00 7:02 4.8 1.0421:00 10:02 4 (60g) 8.737:47 20:49 0(100g)

Samples casted for leaching tests at 11:30

90

MIX P308B Teor. density 1349±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 11:07 Meas. density 1350 kg/m3Mix temperature at 11:07 8.0 C Weight kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Filter pump 75 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

11:10 0:03 3911:13 0:06 300 Filter cake formation11:35 0:28 4112:51 1:44 015:45 4:38 13.8 0.1216:45 5:38 9 0.318:00 6:53 4 1.5719:05 7:58 9 (60g) 2.0621:00 9:53 3 (60g) 117:40 20:33 1 (100g)

Samples casted for leaching tests at 11:38

MIX P309 Teor. density 1343±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 11:48 Meas. density 1340 kg/m3Mix temperature at 11:48 9.2 C Weight kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Filter pump 75 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

11:50 0:02 4711:54 0:06 < 20011:54 0:06 20012:18 0:30 4614:30 2:42 015:50 4:02 12.8 0.1516:50 5:02 10 0.2518:05 6:17 5.4 0.8419:05 7:17 2.5 321:00 9:12 5 (60g) 5.837:52 20:04 3 (100g)

MIX P308C Teor. density 1350±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 12:00 Meas. density 1360 kg/m3Mix temperature at 12:00 10.0 C Weight kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Filter pump 75 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

12:02 0:02 4712:07 0:07 30012:20 0:20 5214:30 2:30 015:55 3:55 11.8 0.1819:10 7:10 2.5 321:00 9:00 5 (60g) 5.837:54 19:54 ~0,5-1,0 (100g)

91

MIX P3B Teor. density 1320±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 12:20 Meas. density 1310 kg/m3Mix temperature at 12:20 8.9 C Weight kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Filter pump 75 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

12:27 0:07 4712:30 0:10 30012:57 0:37 38 filter cake formation14:30 2:10 015:55 3:35 1516:55 4:35 9.8 0.2518:10 5:50 7 0.519:10 6:50 4 1.5721:00 8:40 5 (60g) 5.837:56 19:36 2(100g)

MIX P3C Teor. density 1320±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 12:28 Meas. density 1290 kg/m3Mix temperature at 12:28 8 C Weight kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Filter pump 75 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

12:36 0:08 40

The density was within the limits, but still deviating from the other batches.

12:40 0:12 320 This influence on marsh 13:00 0:32 41 values and setting time. 14:30 2:02 016:00 3:32 1817:00 4:32 14 0.118:10 5:42 9.8 0.2519:10 6:42 8 0.3821:00 8:32 8,8(60g) 2.147:58 19:30 5 (100 g) 34.8

92

93

AP

PE

ND

IX 4

: P

RO

BE

HO

LE

DR

ILL

ING

LO

G

SIT

E:

502

9m

DR

ILLM

AN

:A

T-4

5m

FO

RE

MA

N:

AT

1m

Hole

Drilli

ng

H

ole

K-v

alu

eN

ote

sle

ng

thdia

m.

soft

norm

al

hard

join

tscr

ush

ed

ope

nd

rym

inor

no

rma

lm

ajo

rD

isp.

me

asu

ring

tim

e5

min

nr

[m]

[mm

][m

-m]

[m-m

][m

-m]

[m-m

][m

-m]

[m-m

][l/

min

][l/

min

][l/

min

][l/

min

]Lug

81

21

612

8[b

ar]

A2

9.0

64

X17-2

9X

0.3

519

42

48

19.6

7.5

l

0.1

40

.53

0.4

50.3

30.2

10

.21

Lug

B2

9.0

64

X13-1

420

X0.8

4300

l

25

1.8

90

.00

0.0

04.2

20.0

00

.00

Lug

C2

9.0

64

16-2

15,8

X0.0

85

6.2

11

52

l

24-2

823,2

40.0

30

.14

0.0

70.0

70.0

50

.06

Lug

D2

9.0

64

X20-2

28,1

42

.15

0.6

929

61

131

48

20.4

l

17

0.1

50

.79

0.6

60.8

80.5

20

.56

Lug

Tota

l

41

16

pcs

m

Aim

ed p

ress

ure

was

not

gre

y

3.6

.200

5

3.6

.200

5

of

wate

r

Mee

ri P

öllä

ne

n

Wate

rloss

measu

rem

ent

WA

TE

RLO

SS

ME

AS

.:

MIN

UT

ES

-KE

EP

ER

:

Wate

r le

aka

ges

Colo

ur

reach

ed

Kalli

ora

ken

nu

s O

y Ilk

ka P

uro

200

4

Dri

llin

g lo

g v

ers

ion

4.0

gre

y

Rock

qualit

yF

ract

uring

DR

ILLIN

G L

OG

NR

PR

OB

E H

OL

E D

RIL

LIN

GK

AT

126

-0351

-10

BD

RIL

LIN

G:

ON

KA

LO

W

OR

K 1

03

DR

AW

ING

:A

CC

ES

S T

UN

NE

L

M. K

an

tane

nS

TA

RT

ING

TIM

E:

M.J

un

ttila

EN

DIN

G T

IME

:

33

4 pcs

gre

y

gre

y

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R H

EA

D:

AV

ER

AG

E Z

:

PA

CK

ER

DE

PT

H:

ST

AT

ION

:

8.3

0 p

m

11

.20

pm

94

95

APPENDIX 5: FLOW LOG RESULTS PR0502 03. - 04.06.2005 (MR)

Measurements are done with a simple flow log measuring device. Flow parallel to the hole is measured

Distance between measuring points is 1.25m.

Preparation of measurements from 16:00 to 17:00 o’clock.

The equipment brought into ONKALO at about 23:10

Monitoring of flushing of the holes 23:15 – 00:00

Water is coming out of hole PR0502D.

Preparation of measurements / logging of hole PR0502D started at about 00:30.

Logging of hole PR0502D (Repetition, REP 1):

1 Output before measurement 2.15 l / min. 2 The first point was left unmeasured because of equipment malfunction (flap leakage) 3 At no point was the unwanted leakage totally stopped, there was water flow from the mouth of the hole

(as well as from the hose). 4 No flow at a depth of 23.75 m (uncorrected depth). 5 The situation was confirmed, and the second repetition prepared. 6 Table of results and pictures of measuring points of hole PR0502D on page 2-3 (REP 1) Due to the strange (valve) leak it was decided to do a repetition 2.

Logging of hole PR0502D (REP 2):

7 Output before measurement 2.15 L / min. 8 The first point was left unmeasured because of flap leakage 9 The leaking could not be stopped this time either. There was flow from the mouth of the hole (as well as

from the hose) 10 No flow at a depth of 23.75 m (uncorrected depth) 11 The situation was confirmed and measurements stopped 12 Table of results and pictures of measuring points of hole PR0502D on page 4-5 (REP 2) Due to the leakage, the flowing fracture must lie between the mouth of the hole and the first measuring point(0-1.25 m). It is not visible in pictures because the first point (0 m) was never measured because of theassumed valve leak.

Logging of hole PR0502D ended at about 03:30.

The equipment moved out of ONKALO about 04:00.

CONCLUSIONS

The measured output (64 800 ml/h) of fracture 23.45 m does not correspond to the total output of the hole.But it is most likely that the whole output of the hole (129 000 ml/h) comes from the afore mentioned depth.The fracture table is on page 2.

96

Measurement table hole D, Rep 1 Operator initials: MR

Area: ONKALO

Description of columns:

Depth(m) = Depth from reference depth to upper end of the section

CorrDepth(m) = Corrected depth to the measuring section

Date = Day.Month.Year

Time = (hours:minutes:seconds)

Flowpos(ml/min) = Flow from the bedrock into the borehole

Flowpos(ml/h) = Flow from the bedrock into the borehole

FlowCalc = Calculated flow rate

Depth(m) CorrDepth(m) CorrDepthSection Section Length Date Time

Flowpos(ml/min)

Flowpos(ml/h) FlowCalc CalcDepth

0.00 0.32 0.95 1.25 - - - - - - *

1.25 1.57 2.20 1.25 4.6.2005 0:45:00 1160 69600 10 2.195 **

2.50 2.82 3.45 1.25 4.6.2005 0:50:00 1200 72000 10 3.445 **

3.75 4.07 4.70 1.25 4.6.2005 0:54:00 1200 72000 10 4.695 **

5.00 5.32 5.95 1.25 4.6.2005 0:59:00 1320 79200 2400 5.945

6.25 6.57 7.20 1.25 4.6.2005 1:02:00 1280 76800 10800 7.195

7.50 7.82 8.45 1.25 4.6.2005 1:10:00 1100 66000 10 8.445 **

8.75 9.07 9.70 1.25 4.6.2005 1:15:00 1440 86400 14400 9.695

10.00 10.32 10.95 1.25 4.6.2005 1:20:00 1200 72000 6000 10.945

11.25 11.57 12.20 1.25 4.6.2005 1:25:00 1100 66000 10 12.195 **

12.50 12.82 13.45 1.25 4.6.2005 1:30:00 1120 67200 10 13.445 **

13.75 14.07 14.70 1.25 4.6.2005 1:35:00 1480 88800 7200 14.695

15.00 15.32 15.95 1.25 4.6.2005 1:37:00 1360 81600 45600 15.945

16.25 16.57 17.20 1.25 4.6.2005 1:40:00 600 36000 10 17.195 **

17.50 17.82 18.45 1.25 4.6.2005 1:44:00 980 58800 10 18.445 **

18.75 19.07 19.70 1.25 4.6.2005 1:48:00 1260 75600 10 19.695 **

20.00 20.32 20.95 1.25 4.6.2005 1:52:00 1480 88800 10 20.945 **

21.25 21.57 22.20 1.25 4.6.2005 1:55:00 1520 91200 26400 22.195

22.50 22.82 23.45 1.25 4.6.2005 2:00:00 1080 64800 64800 23.445

23.75 24.07 24.70 1.25 4.6.2005 2:02:00 10 10 10 24.695 **

* Unable to measure flow rate. Moving the tool to next measuring point.

** In the FlowCalc column negative- and zero- flow values are marked as "zero flow”. The 10 ml value is visible due to technical

reasons Negative values arise from, among other things, measuring accuracy.

Fracture table Hole: PR0502D Elevation of the top of the hole (m.a.s.l.): -42.9 Inclination: -8.1

Depth of fracture along the borehole (m)

Flow (ml/h)

Fracture elevation

(masl)

Drawdown (m)

T (m2/s) Hydraulic

aperture of fracture (mm)

22.28 171000 -46.0 48.9 9.61E-07 0.118

97

10 1001000

10000100000

Flow rate (mL/h)

30

29

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

De

pth

(m

)

Calculated difference flow (Section = 1.25 m, Flow direction = into the hole)2005-06-04

Measured flow along the borehole using manual flow logging device, 2005-06-04

Olkiluoto, Borehole OLPR0502DMeasure T1Measured flow rate of the borehole before flow logging = 129 000 ml / h

98

Measurement Table hole D, Rep 2

Operator initials: MR

Area: ONKALO

Description of columns:

Depth(m) = Depth from reference depth to upper end of the section

CorrDepth(m) = Corrected depth to the measuring section

Date = Day.Month.Year

Time = (hours:minutes:seconds)

Flowpos(ml/min) = Flow from the bedrock into the borehole

Flowpos(ml/h) = Flow from the bedrock into the borehole

FlowCalc = Calculated flow rate

Depth(m) CorrDepth(m) CorrDepthSectionSection Length Date Time

Flowpos(ml/min)

Flowpos (ml/h) FlowCalc CalcDepth

0.00 0.32 0.95 1.25 - - - - - - *

1.25 1.57 2.20 1.25 4.6.2005 2:10:00 1180 70800 10 2.195 **

2.50 2.82 3.45 1.25 4.6.2005 2:15:00 1240 74400 10 3.445 **

3.75 4.07 4.70 1.25 4.6.2005 2:22:00 1240 74400 10 4.695 **

5.00 5.32 5.95 1.25 4.6.2005 2:27:00 1350 81000 4200 5.945

6.25 6.57 7.20 1.25 4.6.2005 2:37:00 1280 76800 10800 7.195 **

7.50 7.82 8.45 1.25 4.6.2005 2:45:00 1100 66000 10 8.445 **

8.75 9.07 9.70 1.25 4.6.2005 2:48:00 1440 86400 12000 9.695

10.00 10.32 10.95 1.25 4.6.2005 2:53:00 1240 74400 8400 10.945

11.25 11.57 12.20 1.25 4.6.2005 2:59:00 1100 66000 10 12.195 **

12.50 12.82 13.45 1.25 4.6.2005 3:05:00 1120 67200 10 13.445 **

13.75 14.07 14.70 1.25 4.6.2005 3:10:00 1480 88800 4800 14.695

15.00 15.32 15.95 1.25 4.6.2005 3:13:00 1400 84000 50400 15.945

16.25 16.57 17.20 1.25 4.6.2005 3:16:00 560 33600 10 17.195 **

17.50 17.82 18.45 1.25 4.6.2005 3:20:00 1000 60000 10 18.445 **

18.75 19.07 19.70 1.25 4.6.2005 3:23:00 1260 75600 10 19.695 **

20.00 20.32 20.95 1.25 4.6.2005 3:26:00 1480 88800 10 20.945 **

21.25 21.57 22.20 1.25 4.6.2005 3:28:00 1520 91200 26400 22.195

22.50 22.82 23.45 1.25 4.6.2005 3:30:00 1080 64800 64800 23.445

23.75 24.07 24.70 1.25 4.6.2005 3:30:00 10 10 10 24.695 **

* Unable to measure flow rate. Moving the tool to next measuring point.

** In FlowCalc column the negative and zero values are presented as zero. 10 ml is presented due to graphical reasons..

Negative values are due to measuring accuracy.

99

10 1001000

10000100000

Flow rate (mL/h)

30

29

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

De

pth

(m

)

Calculated difference flow (Section = 1.25 m, Flow direction = into the hole)2005-06-04

Measured flow along the borehole using manual flow logging device, 2005-06-04

Olkiluoto, Borehole OLPR0502DMeasure T2Measured flow rate of the borehole before flow logging = 129 000 ml / h

100

101

APPENDIX 6: RESULTS OF TECHNICAL TESTS OF MIXES IN TEST GROUTINGRESULTS OF THE PILOT TEST 3, GROUTING TEST 6-7.6.2005 AT OLKILUOTOTunnel temperature 12 CGroundwater temperature 6.8 CTemperature in fall cone tests 15-20 C

Flow meter to dose the water was checked: the value 8.75 l corresponded to 10 l in reality

MIX P308B Batch 1 Teor. density 1349 50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 13:40 Meas. density 1400 kg/m3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

13:52 0:12 49 Small pieces (< 1 mm) in the meshof the Marsh cone

14:00 0:20 50 Filter pump did not work

MIX P308B Batch 2 Teor. density 1349±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 15:17 Meas. density 1380 kg/m3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

15:27 0:10 4315:30 0:13 24015:31 0:14 240

MIX P308B Batch 3 Teor. density 1349±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 18:20 Meas. density 1350 kg/m3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

18:22 0:02 44.518:25 0:05 30 Filter pump did not work18:26 0:06 30 Filter pump did not work18:35 0:15 300 Uncertain result21:00 2:40 >20 < 0.1 0-122:18 3:58 14 0.137:00 12:40 2.5 (60g) > 118:40 14:20 1.2 (60g) > 11

Samples casted for fall cone test at 18:50Shear strength values are approximates

MIX P308B Batch 4 kg/m3Sample taken at 21:20 kg/m3

kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

7:00 9:40 2 (60g) > 118:40 11:20 1 (60g) > 11

Sample only for fall cone test - taken at 21:20Shear strength values are approximates

102

MIX P307B Teor. density 1396±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 15:50 Meas. density 1440 kg/m3

Weight kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Fall cone (mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

16:00 0:10 4316:03 0:13 17016:04 0:14 300 Uncertain result19:03 3:13 14.1 0.13 020:07 4:17 8.8 0.3120:58 5:08 5 0.9822:15 6:25 1.2 > 1.67:00 14:40 0 (60g) > 11

Sample casted for fall cone test at 16:20Shear strength values are approximates, except the values got at 20:07 and 20:58

10

3

AP

PE

ND

IX 7

: G

RO

UT

ING

HO

LE

DR

ILL

ING

LO

G

SIT

E:

AC

CE

SS

TU

NN

EL, F

AN

28

502

9m

DR

ILLM

AN

:A

T-4

5m

FO

RE

MA

N:

AT

1m

Hole

Dri

lling

H

ole

K-v

alu

eN

ote

sle

ng

thd

iam

.so

ftnorm

al

hard

join

tscr

ush

ed

open

dry

min

or

norm

al

majo

rD

isp.

me

asu

rin

g t

ime

5m

in

nr

[m]

[mm

][m

-m]

[m-m

][m

-m]

[m-m

][m

-m]

[m-m

][l/

min

][l/

min

][l/

min

][l/

min

]L

ug

812

16

12

8[b

ar]

12

6.0

54

X20

-24

0.7

5l

0.0

00.0

00

.00

0.0

00

.00

0.0

0Lu

g

22

6.0

54

X11

-15

20,2

2X

l

0.0

00.0

00

.00

0.0

00

.00

0.0

0Lu

g

32

6.0

54

X20

-26

Xl

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

42

6.0

54

X6

-9X

l

20

-24

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

52

6.0

54

X20

-26

12

Xl

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

62

6.0

54

X9

-12

15

Xl

0.0

00.0

00

.00

0.0

00

.00

0.0

0Lu

g

gre

y

M.J

un

ttila

30

gre

y

gre

y

T.K

uru

/R.P

ääkk

öS

TA

RT

ING

TIM

E:

A.R

aja

salo

/E

ND

ING

TIM

E:

ON

KA

LO

W

OR

K 1

03

DR

AW

ING

:

DR

ILLIN

G L

OG

NR

GR

OU

TIN

G H

OL

E D

RIL

LIN

GK

AT

126

-03

51

-22

DR

ILLIN

G:

5.6

.20

05

6.6

.20

05

Rock

qua

lity

Fra

cturi

ng

gre

y

Wa

ter

lea

kag

es

Colo

ur

gre

y

of

wate

r

Me

eri

Pö

lläne

n

-

Wate

rloss

me

asu

rem

ent

WA

TE

RL

OS

S M

EA

S.:

MIN

UT

ES

-KE

EP

ER

:

gre

y

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R H

EA

D:

ST

AT

ION

:

AV

ER

AG

E Z

:

PA

CK

ER

DE

PT

H:

10

.00

pm

10

.00

am

10

4

72

6.0

54

X15

-18

Xl

20

-24

0.0

00.0

00

.00

0.0

00

.00

0.0

0Lu

g

82

6.0

54

9-1

4X

12

-14

10.4

l

20

-25

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

92

6.0

54

X12

7.4

l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

10

26

.05

4X

22,2

44

.1l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

11

26

.05

4X

9X

l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

12

26

.05

4X

18,2

0X

l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

13

26

.05

4X

20

-23

Xl

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

14

26

.05

4X

0.3

l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

15

26

.05

4X

16,2

0X

l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

16

26

.05

4X

20

-23

1.5

l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

17

26

.05

4X

20

-22

16

0.5

5l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

18

26

.05

4X

12

-15

1.4

5l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

10

5

19

26

.05

4X

14

-19

0.7

l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

20

26

.05

4X

20

-22

Xl

25

-26

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

21

26

.05

4X

15

2.4

l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

22

26

.05

4X

10,1

1X

l

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

g

23

26

.05

4X

22

-24

Xl

0.0

00

.00.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Lu

gT

ota

l 23

59

8pcs

m

gre

y

gre

y

gre

y

0 pcs

Ka

llio

rake

nnu

s O

y Ilk

ka P

uro

2004

Dri

llin

g lo

g v

ers

ion

4.0

gre

y

gre

y

10

6

10

7

AP

PE

ND

IX 8

: G

RO

UT

ING

LO

G

ON

KA

LO

WO

RK

103

SIT

E:

DE

SIG

N C

OD

E:

GR

OU

TIN

G C

EM

EN

T:

TY

PE

:P

RE

-GR

OU

TIN

G,

PIL

OT

TE

ST

3S

TA

RT

ING

TIM

E:

AT

10

.30

am

AD

MIX

TU

RE

1:

ST

AT

ION

:E

ND

ING

TIM

E7.6

.2005

AT

6.3

0 p

mD

EN

SIT

Y(k

g/d

m³)

:1

.4

DR

. L

OG

:30

ST

AR

TIN

G A

ND

EN

DIN

G:

1P

CS

TIM

E (

h):

31

AD

MIX

TU

RE

2:

FO

RE

MA

N:

MIN

UT

ES

-KE

EP

ER

:D

EN

SIT

Y(k

g/d

m³)

:1

.2

Ho

leT

ime

Gro

ut

Ce

me

nt

Ad

mix

. 1

Ad

mix

. 2

Ad

mix

. 3

Clo

sin

gP

ress

ure

fro

mto

take

12

3

nr

[m]

[m]

[min

]ce

ment

12

3[l]

[kg]

[kg]

[kg]

[kg]

[m]

[bar]

11

.02

6.0

43

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

66

5.9

21

83

05

.81

5.5

0.0

0.0

29

.4

"1

.02

6.0

21

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

05

1.6

17

23

.71

.20

.00

.00

.0

"1

.02

6.0

48

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

48

3.2

17

82

47

.61

2.7

0.0

0.0

21

.7

"1

.02

6.0

31

1.7

36

.62

.08

0.0

00

.00

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

26

.7

"1

.02

6.0

20

14

.64

6.0

2.5

90

.00

14

4.1

66

92

.84

.70

.00

.00

.0

21

.02

6.0

19

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

40

2.1

13

21

84

.69

.40

.00

.02

0.6

"1

.02

6.0

41

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

74

6.3

24

53

42

.71

7.4

0.0

0.0

26

.9

"1

.02

6.0

54

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

41

8.4

15

42

14

.41

1.0

0.0

0.0

0.6

"1

.02

6.0

31

1.7

36

.62

.08

0.0

00

.10

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

27

.6

31

.02

6.0

57

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

18

3.2

60

84

.14

.30

.00

.03

6.7

"1

.02

6.0

21

1.7

36

.62

.08

0.0

00

.20

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

44

.9

41

.02

6.0

55

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

33

5.3

11

01

54

.07

.80

.00

.08

0.4

"1

.02

6.0

11

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

00

.00

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

46

.2

51

.02

6.0

19

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

36

.61

21

6.8

0.9

0.0

0.0

28

.2

"1

.02

6.0

11

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

00

.40

0.2

0.0

0.0

0.0

45

.9

Mig

hty

15

0

Gro

ut w

en

t to

drillh

ole

contin

ue

d la

ter

No

tes:

Gro

utin

g in

terr

upte

d a

nd

MIN

UT

ES

OF

GR

OU

TIN

GN

R

Gro

utA

id S

G

Ce

me

nta

Ultr

afin

16

MA

TP

HK

-2

6.6

.20

05

37

AC

CE

SS

TU

NN

EL,

FA

N 2

8

M.

Jun

ttila

/ A

. R

aja

salo

Gro

utin

g le

ng

th

50

2

Me

eri

Pö

llän

en

Gro

ut

com

po

ne

nts

vo

lum

e-%

10

8

61

.02

6.0

28

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

88

.42

94

0.6

2.1

0.0

0.0

28

.7

"1

.02

6.0

11

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

00

.10

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

44

.7

71

.02

6.0

87

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

74

9.0

24

63

43

.91

7.5

0.0

0.0

22

.8

"1

.02

6.0

45

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

21

7.3

80

11

1.3

5.7

0.0

0.0

29

.9

81

.02

6.0

20

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

11

0.5

36

50

.72

.60

.00

.02

8.1

91

.02

6.0

10

41

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

03

31

.91

09

15

2.4

7.7

0.0

0.0

26

.3

10

1.0

26

.01

29

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

74

9.2

24

63

44

.01

7.5

0.0

0.0

25

.5

"1

.02

6.0

16

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

22

.78

11

.60

.60

.00

.02

5.8

11

1.0

26

.03

01

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

01

46

.44

86

7.2

3.4

0.0

0.0

26

.8

12

1.0

26

.07

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

56

.81

92

6.1

1.3

0.0

0.0

31

.5

13

1.0

26

.08

21

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

07

69

.02

52

35

3.1

17

.90

.00

.03

9.4

"1

.02

6.0

74

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

37

8.8

14

01

94

.19

.90

.00

.04

2.6

14

1.0

26

.04

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

4.2

11

.90

.10

.00

.04

5.6

15

1.0

26

.08

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

14

.65

6.7

0.3

0.0

0.0

40

.9

16

1.0

26

.07

31

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

07

53

.42

47

34

6.0

17

.60

.00

.03

5.5

"1

.02

6.0

27

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

17

8.2

66

91

.34

.70

.00

.04

2.5

17

1.0

26

.07

71

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

07

67

.42

52

35

2.4

17

.90

.00

.03

8.4

"1

.02

6.0

73

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

41

1.6

15

22

10

.91

0.8

0.0

0.0

41

.0

18

1.0

26

.06

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

59

.52

02

7.3

1.4

0.0

0.0

46

.1

19

1.0

26

.08

81

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

07

48

.52

46

34

3.7

17

.40

.00

.02

2.6

"1

.02

6.0

71

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

49

6.7

18

32

54

.51

3.0

0.0

0.0

28

.5

"1

.02

6.0

12

51

4.6

46

.02

.59

0.0

05

46

.52

52

35

1.9

17

.80

.00

.04

2.4

"1

.02

6.0

15

14

.64

6.0

2.5

90

.00

0.7

00

.50

.00

.00

.01

.1

20

1.0

26

.01

00

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

74

9.7

24

63

44

.31

7.5

0.0

0.0

34

.5

"1

.02

6.0

93

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

49

8.3

18

42

55

.31

3.1

0.0

0.0

32

.7

"1

.02

6.0

44

14

.64

6.0

2.5

90

.00

33

7.9

15

62

17

.61

1.0

0.0

0.0

41

.9

10

9

21

1.0

26

.01

11

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

06

.32

2.9

0.1

0.0

0.0

39

.4

22

1.0

26

.01

01

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

05

5.4

18

25

.41

.30

.00

.04

1.0

23

1.0

26

.01

06

14

.64

6.0

2.5

90

.00

62

2.2

28

74

00

.72

0.3

0.0

0.0

40

.4

24

1.0

29

.06

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

1.1

00

.50

.00

.00

.04

1.0

25

1.0

29

.08

91

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

07

69

.72

53

35

3.4

17

.90

.00

.02

0.7

"1

.02

9.0

51

10

.43

2.8

1.8

50

.00

17

5.3

58

80

.54

.10

.00

.00

.0

"1

.02

9.0

64

11

.73

6.6

2.0

80

.00

49

9.5

18

42

55

.91

3.1

0.0

0.0

23

.0

"1

.02

9.0

33

14

.64

6.0

2.5

90

.00

11

5.2

53

74

.23

.80

.00

.02

5.8

26

1.0

29

.01

51

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

03

8.2

13

17

.50

.90

.00

.04

8.0

27

1.0

29

.03

01

0.4

32

.81

.85

0.0

01

11

.93

75

1.4

2.6

0.0

0.0

44

.9T

ota

l 27

22

10

15

05

05

31

97429

.0377.7

0.0

0m

inl

kgkg

kgkg

kg

Pro

be h

ole

Pro

be h

ole

pum

pe

d o

nly

re

cipe

3

m71

4

Pro

be h

ole

Pro

be h

ole

Pro

be h

ole

Pro

be h

ole

Pro

be h

ole

Gro

utin

g m

inu

tes

vers

ion

2.6

Ka

llio

rake

nn

us

Oy

Ilkka

Pu

ro 2

00

4

11

0

111

APPENDIX 9: GROUTING PRESSURES, FLOW AND GROUT TAKE

Grouting hole 1Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 1345 l.

Highest measured pressure 33,9 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00 1:15:00 1:30:00 1:45:00 2:00:00 2:15:00 2:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Recipe 2

Recipe 3

Grouting hole 1Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 1345 l.

Highest measured pressure 33,9 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00 0:35:00 0:40:00 0:45:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

75

150

225

300

375

450

525

600

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

112

Grouting hole 2Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 1567 l.

Highest measured pressure 43,5 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00 1:15:00 1:30:00 1:45:00 2:00:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

VolumeRecipe 2

Grouting hole 2Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 1566 l.

Highest measured pressure 43,5 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00 0:35:00 0:40:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

113

Grouting hole 3Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 183 l.

Highest measured pressure 39,5 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Grouting hole 3Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 183 l.

Highest measured pressure 39,5 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

114

Grouting hole 4Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 335 l.

Highest measured pressure 82,1 bar.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Grouting hole 4Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 335 l.

Highest measured pressure 82,1 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

240

270

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

115

Grouting hole 5Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 36,6 l.

Highest measured pressure 38,3 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Grouting hole 6Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 89 l.

Highest measured pressure 36,0 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

116

Grouting hole 7Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 966 l.

Highest measured pressure 34,7 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00 1:15:00 1:30:00 1:45:00 2:00:00 2:15:00 2:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

VolumeRecipe 2

Grouting hole 7Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 966,3 l.

Highest measured pressure 34,7 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

117

Grouting hole 8Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 111 l.

Highest measured pressure 32,9 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

118

Grouting hole 9Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 332 l.

Highest measured pressure 34,7 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00 1:15:00 1:30:00 1:45:00 2:00:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Grouting hole 9Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 331 l.

Highest measured pressure 34,7 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

119

Grouting hole 10Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 771 l.

Highest measured pressure 27,7 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00 1:15:00 1:30:00 1:45:00 2:00:00 2:15:00 2:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Recipe 2

Grouting hole 10Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 771 l.

Highest measured pressure 27,7 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

120

Grouting hole 11Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 146 l.

Highest measured pressure 30,4 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Grouting hole 12Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 56,8 l.

Highest measured pressure 34,0 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:01:00 0:02:00 0:03:00 0:04:00 0:05:00 0:06:00 0:07:00 0:08:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

121

Grouting hole 13Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 1148 l.

Highest measured pressure 45,3 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:20:00 0:40:00 1:00:00 1:20:00 1:40:00 2:00:00 2:20:00 2:40:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Recipe 2

Grouting hole 13Closing pressure 30 bar. Total grout take 1148 l.

Highest measured pressure 45,3 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

240

270

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

122

Grouting hole 14Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 4,2 l.

Highest measured pressure 46,0 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:01:00 0:02:00 0:03:00 0:04:00 0:05:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

6.5

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Grouting hole 15Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 14,6 l.

Highest measured pressure 45,0 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:01:00 0:02:00 0:03:00 0:04:00 0:05:00 0:06:00 0:07:00 0:08:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

123

Grouting hole 16Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 932 l.

Highest measured pressure 43,4 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00 1:15:00 1:30:00 1:45:00 2:00:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Recipe 2

Grouting hole 16Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 932 l.

Highest measured pressure 43,4 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

124

Grouting hole 17Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 1179 l.

Highest measured pressure 47,1 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00 1:15:00 1:30:00 1:45:00 2:00:00 2:15:00 2:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Recipe 2

Grouting hole 17Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 1179 l.

Highest measured pressure 47,1 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

25

50

75

100

125

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

125

Grouting hole 18Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 60 l.

Highest measured pressure 48,8 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:01:00 0:02:00 0:03:00 0:04:00 0:05:00 0:06:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

126

Grouting hole 19Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 1792 l.

Highest measured pressure 47,4 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:30:00 1:00:00 1:30:00 2:00:00 2:30:00 3:00:00 3:30:00 4:00:00 4:30:00 5:00:00 5:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Recipe 2

Recipe 3

Recipe 4

Grouting hole 19Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 1792 l.

Highest measured pressure 47,4 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

Vo

lum

e (

l)Pressure

Flow

Volume

127

Grouting hole 20Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 1586 l.

Highest measured pressure 50,3 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:30:00 1:00:00 1:30:00 2:00:00 2:30:00 3:00:00 3:30:00 4:00:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Recipe 2

Recipe 3

Grouting hole 20Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 1586 l.

Highest measured pressure 50,3 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

280

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

128

Grouting hole 21Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 6,3 l.

Highest measured pressure 84,0 bar.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0:00:00 0:01:00 0:02:00 0:03:00 0:04:00 0:05:00 0:06:00 0:07:00 0:08:00 0:09:00 0:10:00 0:11:00 0:12:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Grouting hole 22Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 55,4 l.

Highest measured pressure 52,7 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:01:00 0:02:00 0:03:00 0:04:00 0:05:00 0:06:00 0:07:00 0:08:00 0:09:00 0:10:00 0:11:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

129

Grouting hole 23Closing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 622 l.

Highest measured pressure 47,5 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:15:00 0:30:00 0:45:00 1:00:00 1:15:00 1:30:00 1:45:00 2:00:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Probe hole 0502AClosing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 1,1 l.

Highest measured pressure 46,9 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:01:00 0:02:00 0:03:00 0:04:00 0:05:00 0:06:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

130

Probe hole 0502BClosing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 1560 l.

Highest measured pressure 31,1 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 1:20:00 2:40:00 4:00:00 5:20:00 6:40:00 8:00:00 9:20:00 10:40:00 12:00:00 13:20:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Recipe 2

Recipe 3

Probe hole 0502BClosing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 1560 l.

Highest measured pressure 31,1 bar.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/m

in)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

240

270

300

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

131

Probe hole PR0502CClosing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 38,2 l.

Highest measured pressure 49,6 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:02:00 0:04:00 0:06:00 0:08:00 0:10:00 0:12:00 0:14:00 0:16:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

Probe hole 0502DClosing pressure 50 bar. Total grout take 112 l.

Highest measured pressure 47,3 bar.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

0:00:00 0:05:00 0:10:00 0:15:00 0:20:00 0:25:00 0:30:00

Time (hh:mm:ss)

Pre

ss

ure

(b

ar)

, F

low

(l/

min

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Vo

lum

e (

l)

Pressure

Flow

Volume

132

13

3

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

0:

CO

NT

RO

L H

OL

E D

RIL

LIN

G L

OG

SIT

E:

502

9m

DR

ILL

MA

N:

AT

18

.50 p

m-4

5m

FO

RE

MA

N:

AT

19

.50 p

m1

m

Hole

Dri

llin

gH

ole

K-v

alu

eN

ote

sle

ng

thd

iam

.so

ftnorm

al

hard

join

tscr

ush

ed

open

dry

min

or

norm

al

majo

rD

isp.

measu

ring

tim

e5

min

nr

[m]

[mm

][m

-m]

[m-m

][m

-m]

[m-m

][m

-m]

[m-m

][l/

min

][l/

min

][l/

min

][l/

min

]L

ug

812

16

12

8[b

ar]

A2

1.0

54

XX

0.0

00

l/min

0.0

00.0

00.0

00.0

00.0

00.0

0Lu

g

B2

1.0

54

XX

0.0

00.9

l/min

0.0

10.0

00.0

10.0

00.0

00.0

0Lu

g

C2

1.0

54

XX

0.0

00

l/min

0.0

00.0

00.0

00.0

00.0

00.0

0Lu

g

D2

1.0

54

XX

0.0

01.2

l/min

0.0

10.0

00.0

20.0

00.0

00.0

0Lu

g

Tota

l

41

16

pcs

m

gre

y

Mee

ri P

öllä

ne

n

1-p

ress

ure

: 1

2 b

ar

WA

TE

LO

SS

ME

AS

.:

MIN

UT

ES

-KE

EP

ER

:

Ka

llio

rake

nn

us

Oy

Ilkka

Pu

ro 2

00

4

Dri

llin

g lo

g v

ers

ion

4.0

gre

y

Rock

qua

lity

Fra

cturi

ng

DR

ILLIN

G L

OG

NR

QU

AL

ITY

CO

NT

RO

L H

OL

ES

KA

T-1

26

-03

51

-23

KD

RIL

LIN

G:

ON

KA

LO

W

OR

K 1

03

DR

AW

ING

:A

CC

ES

S T

UN

NE

L

T.

Ku

ruS

TA

RT

ING

TIM

E:

A.

Ra

jasa

loE

ND

ING

TIM

E:

15

4 pcs

gre

y

gre

y

Wate

rlo

ss m

easu

rem

en

t

ST

AT

ION

:

Co

lour

of

wate

r

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R H

EA

D:

AV

ER

AG

E Z

:

PA

CK

ER

DE

PT

H:

Wate

r le

aka

ge

s

7.6

.20

05

7.6

.20

05

13

4

135

APPENDIX 11: RESULTS OF BATCH MIXING TEST 2

RESULTS OF THE PILOT TEST 3, BATCH MIXING TEST 18.8.2005 AT OLKILUOTO

Outside temperature 18.1-20.6 C (shadow) Marsh value for water 27.8 sWater temperature 18.3-19.2 CTemperature in fall cone test 7.4-14.2 C (in fridgerator, T lowering) Weighter shower wrong valuesMIX P307 W/DM 1.2, SPL 3% Teor. density 1397 50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 10:31 Meas. density 1310? kg/m3Mix temperature at Weight 1300 kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Cone size (g)Fall cone

(mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

10:33 0:02 37.0 It was observered that the 10:35 0:04 no result mixes were better mixes if 11:02 0:31 36.6 the batch was bigger than 10:40 0:09 started the minimum batch size12:28 1:57 013:29 2:58 013:35 2:30 10 16.9 0.15 Possibly some air bubbles14:48 3:43 10 12.5 0.16 were observed during 15:44 4:39 10 7.0 0.5 Marsh test16:42 5:37 10 7.0 0.517:45 6:40 10 4.8 1.04 Filter pump leaked18:49 7:44 60 9.0 2.068:10 20:05 100 1-2 46.9Samples casted for leaching tests at -Samples casted for fall cone test at 11:05

MIX P307B W/DM 1.2, SPL 4% Teor. density 1396±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 10:45 Meas. density 1370 kg/m3Mix temperature at Weight 1340 kg/cm3

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Cone size (g)Fall cone

(mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

10:46 0:01 37.3 Filter pump leaked10:49 0:04 -11:15 0:30 37.4 Possibly some air bubbles11:17 0:32 started were observed during 12:28 1:43 0 Marsh test 13:29 2:44 013:35 2:35 10 16.6 0.1513:45 2:45 10 15.2 0.1514:49 3:49 10 10.5 0.2315:45 4:45 10 7 0.516:45 5:45 10 5.2 0.917:45 6:45 10 4 1.5718:51 7:51 60 6.5 3.898:10 21:10 100 1-2 46.9Samples casted for leaching tests at 11:00Samples casted for fall cone test at 10:50

MIX P308 W/DM 1.4, SPL 3% Teor. density 1350±50 kg/m3Mixing ready at 11:28 Meas. density 1360 kg/m3Mix temperature at 11:35 22.4 C Weight kg/cm3Mix temperature at 11:51 23.7 C

TimeTime from

mixing (h:mm)

Marsh cone value (s)

Filter pump 100 μm (ml)

Cone size (g)Fall cone

(mm)

Shear strength

(kPa)Bleeding (%) Notes

11:30 0:02 35.811:31 0:03 started11:59 0:31 36.012:00 0:32 no result filter pump leaked12:28 1:00 013:29 2:01 013:39 2:04 10 18-20 0.1514:46 3:11 10 18-20 0.1515:47 4:12 10 12.0 0.1716:47 5:12 10 7.8 0.417:45 6:10 10 5.4 0.8418:45 7:10 60 9.0 2.068:10 20:35 100 1-2 46.9Samples casted for leaching tests at 11:52Samples casted for fall cone test at 11:35 Temperature in fridgerator 7.4-14.2