EPA-670/2-73-081
September 1973
Environmental Protection Technology Series
Laboratory Study of Self-Sealing
Limestone Plugs For Mine Openings
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and
Monitoring, Environmental Protection Agency, have
been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further
development and application of environmental
technology. Elimination of traditional grouping
was consciously planned to foster technology
transfer and a maximum interface in related
fields. The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY series. This series
describes research performed to develop and
demonstrate instrumentation, equipment and
methodology to repair or prevent environmental
degradation from point and non-point sources of
pollution. This work provides the new or improved
technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality
standards.
-------
EPA-670/2-73-081
September 1973
LABORATORY STUDY OF
SELF-SEALING LIMESTONE PLUGS
FOR MINE OPENINGS
By
RAY G. PENROSE, JR.
IGOR HOLUBEC
Project No. 11*010 HKN
Contract No. 68-01-0135
Program Element
PROJECT OFFICER
JAMES M. SHAKELFORD
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D. C. 201+60
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20102 - Price $2.25
Prepared for
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND MONITORING
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency and approved for publication. Approval does
not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor
does mention of tradenames or commercial products constitute
endorsement or recommendations for use.
ii
-------
ABSTRACT
Laboratory studies of self-sealing limestone plugs for mine
openings were conducted to determine the optimum limestone
material for such a treatment and sealant technique.
Conducting a thorough study of the performance of such plugs
required pilot plant operations utilizing synthetic solu-
tions representative of anticipated acid mine waters, aggre-
gate additives to improve plug performance, and several
basic types of limestone which were varied in terms of size
gradation and placement density. The types of limestone
used were selected from, results of a previous neutralization
study; synthetic mine waters were prepared to EPA formula-
tions for ferric, ferrous, and ferric/ferrous solutions; and
percentage admixture of bentonite, flyash and air-cooled
blast furnace slag additives were used with the aggregate.
Experimental results indicated that permeability, compres-
sibility and strength of a limestone plug are primarily a
function of the particle size distribution and density.
Plug performance was most effective with high limestone
placement density and smaller gradation of stone. Ferric
waters were controlled most effectively. Additive effects
were less significant throughout the tests.
Further tests were conducted on the effects of particle
size distribution variations and placement density and
other additives to cement particles into an effective plug.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Project No.
14010 HKN, Contract No. 68-01-0135 under the sponsorship
of the Environmental Protection Agency.
111
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
CONCLUSIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
INTRODUCTION
APPARATUS
PROCEDURE
DISCUSSION
Lab Cycle I
Lab Cycle II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
PAGE
1
3
5
9
19
21
21
72
87
89
91
v
-------
FIGURES
NO. PAGE
1 Typical Limestone Mine Seal 6
2 Test Water Preparation System 12
3 Metering Pumps 13
4 Manifold Assembly 15
5 Assembled Test Vessel (Effluent End) 17
6 Initial Grain Size Curves - 1/8 x 0 stones 26
7 Initial Grain Size Curves - 1/4 x 0 stones 27
8 Initial Grain Size Curves - 1/2 x 0 stones 28
9 Initial Grain Size Curves - 1/2 x BOM
stones 29
10 Initial Grain Size Curves -1x0 stones 30
11 Initial Grain Size Curves - 1 x 50M
stones 31
12 Initial Grain Size Curves - 1/2 x 0
stone containing additives 32
13 Initial Grain Size Curves -1x0 stones
containing additives 33
14 Lab Cycle I Testing 34
15 Lab Cycle I Limestone Specimens -
Initial Flow vs Fines Content 36
16 Ferric Water - Specimen Flow Histories 41
17 Ferric/Ferrous Water - Specimen Flow
Histories 42
18 Ferrous Water - Specimen Flow Histories 43
VI
-------
FIGURES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
19 Limestone Specimens after Testing 46
20 Limestone Volume Loss 47
21 Particle Structures at Minimum and
Maximum Densities 51
22 Particle Size Distributions Before and
After Mine Water Percolation Stone
No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 size 58
23 Permeability vs Dry Density 59
24 Triaxial Cell 50
25 Constant Diameter Compression Test 61
26 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test 62
27 Stress-strain Curves from Constant
Diameter Compression Tests 64
28 Compressibility vs Density 66
29 Stress-strain Curves from Consolidated
Drained Triaxial Tests 68
30 Typical Triaxial Test Strength Diagram 69
31 Shear Strength vs Density 71
32 Lab Cycle II - Specimen Flow Histories 74
33 Lab Cycle II Specimens - Initial Flow
vs Fines Content 80
34 Lab Cycle II Specimens - Initial Flow
vs Density 81
35 Lab Cycle II Specimens - Compressibility
vs Density 83
36 Lab Cycle II Specimens - Shear Strength
vs Density 85
vii
-------
FIGURES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
Al Process Flow Diagram 191
A2 Test Vessel Detail 192
A3 Test Vessel Details 193
A4 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 194
A5 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 195
A6 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 195
A7 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 197
A8 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 193
A9 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 199
AID Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 200
All Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 201
A12 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 202
A13 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 203
A14 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 204
A15 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 205
A16 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 206
A17 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 207
A18 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 208
A19 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 209
A20 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 210
A21 One Dimensional Compression Test Results 211
A22 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 212
vin
-------
FIGURES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A23 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 213
A24 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 214
A25 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 215
A26 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 216
A27 Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test Results 217
-------
TABLES
NO. PAGE
1 Tank Sizes 10
2 Limestone Grades Used in Lab Cycle I 22
3 Analysis of Limestones Tested in
Lab Cycle I 24
4 Comparison of Independent Limestone
Analyses 25
5 Specimens Discontinued After 20 Days 38
6 Synthetic Acid Mine Waters - Average
Composition 39
7 Stone Volume Losses 48
8 Analyses of Limestones Tested in Lab
Cycle I Before and After Testing 49
9 Minimum and Maximum Dry Densities 53
10 Volume Loss, Dry Density, and Porosity
of Trimmed Specimens (After 50 Days
of Mine Water Percolation, Lab Cycle I) 54
11 Volume Loss, Dry Density, and Porosity
of Trimmed Specimens (After 100 Days
of Mine Water Percolation, Lab Cycle I) 55
12 Increase of Fines Due to Mine Water
Percolation 57
13 Summary of Compression Test Results,
Lab Cycle I 65
14 Strength Parameters and Shear Strength
for a 2.0 TSF Overburden Pressure 70
15 Volume Loss, Dry Density and Porosity
of Trimmed Specimens (After 50 Days
of Ferric/Ferrous Mine Water Percolation,
3/8 x 0 Stone, Lab Cycle II) 76
x
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
16 Minimum and Maximum Dry Densities 77
17 Increase of Fines Due to Mine Water
Percolation 78
18 Summary of Compression Test Results,
Lab Cycle II, Strength Parameters and
Shear Strength for a 2.0 TSF Overburden 82
19 Pressure, 3/8 x 0 Stone, Lab Cycle II 84
Al Specimens Tested on Ferric Water 93
A2 Specimens Tested on Ferric/Ferrous Water 94
A3 Specimens Tested on Ferrous Water 95
A4 Initial Particle Size Distributions
Stone No. 1809
(Percent of Material Smaller by Weight) 96
A5 Initial Particle Size Distributions
Stone No. 1355
(Percent of Material Smaller by Weight) 97
A6 Initial Particle Size Distributions
Stone No. 1337
(Percent of Material Smaller by Weight) 98
A7 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 1
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size Containing
10% Slag) 99
A8 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 2
(Stone No. 1809, 1x0 Size Containing
10% Slag) 100
A9 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 3
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size Containing
5% Bentonite) 101
XI
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A10 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 4
(Stone No. 1809, 1x0 Size Containing
5% Bentonite) 102
All Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 5
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size Containing
10% Flyash) 103
A12 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 6
(Stone No. 1809, 1 x 0 Size Containing
10% Flyash) 104
A13 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 7
(Stone No. 1809, 1/8 x 0 Size) 105
A14 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 8
(Stone No. 1809, 1/4 x 0 Size) 106
A15 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 9
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 50M Size) 107
A16 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 10
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size) 108
A17 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 11
(Stone No. 1809, 1 x 50M Size) 109
A18 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 12
(Stone No. 1809, 1x0 Size) 110
A19 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 13
(Stone No. 1355, 1/8 x 0 Size) 111
xii
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A20 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 14
(Stone No. 1355, 1/4 x 0 Size) 112
A21 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 15
(Stone No. 1355, 1/2 x 50M Size) 113
A22 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 16
(Stone No. 1355, 1/2 x 0 Size) 114
A23 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 17
(Stone No. 1355, 1 x 50M Size) 115
A24 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 18
(Stone No. 1355, 1x0 size) 116
A25 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 19
(Stone No. 1337, 1/8 x 0 Size) 117
A26 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 20
(Stone No. 1337, 1/4 x 0 Size) 118
A27 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 21
(Stone No. 1337, 1/2 x 0 Size) 119
A28 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 22
(Stone No. 1337, 1/2 x 50M Size) 120
A29 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 23
(Stone No. 1337, 1 x 50M Size) 121
A30 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 24
(Stone No. 1337, 1x0 Size) 122
Xlll
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A31 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 25
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size Containing
10% Slag) 123
A32 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 26
(Stone No. 1809, 1 x 0 Size Containing
10% Slag) 124
A33 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 27
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size Containing
5% Bentonite) 125
A34 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 28
(Stone No. 1809, 1x0 Size Containing
5% Bentonite) 126
A35 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 29
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size Containing 127
10% Flyash)
A36 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 30
(Stone No. 1809, 1x0 Size Containing
10% Flyash) 128
A37 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 31
(Stone No. 1809, 1/8 x 0 Size) 129
A38 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 32
(Stone No. 1809, 1/4 x 0 Size) 130
A39 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 33
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 50M Size) 131
xiv
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A40 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 34
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size) 132
A41 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 35
(Stone No. 1809, 1 x 50 Size) 133
A42 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 36
(Stone No. 1809, 1x0 Size) 134
A43 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 37
(Stone No. 1355, 1/8 x 0 Size) 135
A44 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 38
(Stone No. 1355, 1/4 x 0 Size) 137
A45 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 39
(Stone No. 1355, 1/2 x 0 Size) 139
A46 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 40
(Stone No. 1355, 1/2 x 50M Size) 140
A47 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 41
(Stone No. 1355, 1 x 50M Size) 141
A48 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 42
(Stone No. 1355, 1x0 Size) 142
A49 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 43
(Stone No. 1337, 1/8 x 0 Size) 144
A50 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 44
(Stone No. 1337, 1/4 x 0 Size) 145
xv
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A51 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 45
(Stone No. 1337, 1/2 x 50M Size) 146
A52 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 46
(Stone No. 1337, 1/2 x 0 Size) 147
A53 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 47
(Stone No. 1337, 1 x 50M Size) 148
A54 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 48
(Stone No. 1337, 1x0 Size) 149
A55 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 49
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size Containing
10% Slag) 150
A56 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 50
(Stone No. 1809, 1x0 Size Containing
10% Slag) 151
A57 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 51
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size Containing
5% Bentonite) 152
A58 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 52
(Stone No. 1809, 1x0 Size Containing
5% Bentonite) 153
A59 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 53
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size Containing
10% Flyash) 154
xvi
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A60 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 54
(Stone No. 1809/ 1x0 Size Containing
10% Flyash) 155
A61 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 55
(Stone No. 1809, 1/8 x 0 Size) 156
A62 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 56
(Stone No. 1809, 1/4 x 0 Size) 157
A63 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 57
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 50M Size) 158
A64 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 58
(Stone No. 1809, 1/2 x 0 Size) 159
A65 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 59
(Stone No. 1809, 1 x 50M Size) 160
A66 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 60
(Stone No. 1809, 1x0 Size) 161
A67 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 61
(Stone No. 1355, 1/8 x 0 Size) 162
A68 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 62
(Stone No. 1355, 1/4 x 0 Size) 163
A69 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 63
(Stone No. 1355, 1/2 x 50M Size) 164
xvi i
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A70 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 64
(Stone No. 1355, 1/2 x 0 Size) 165
A71 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 65
(Stone No. 1355, 1 x 50M Size) 166
A72 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 66
(Stone No. 1355, 1x0 Size) 167
A73 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 67
(Stone No. 1337, 1/8 x 0 Size) 168
A74 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 68
(Stone No. 1337, 1/4 x 0 Size) 169
A75 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 69
(Stone No. 1337, 1/2 x 50M Size) 170
A76 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 70
(Stone No. 1337, 1/2 x 0 Size) 171
A77 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 71
(Stone No. 1337, 1 x 50M Size) 172
A78 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 72
(Stone No. 1337, 1x0 Size) 173
A79 Comparison of Particle Size Distributions
Before and After 50 Days of Mine Water
Percolation - Material No. 1809 174
A80 Comparison of Particle Size Distributions
Before and After 100 days of Mine Water
Percolation - Material No. 1355 175
xviii
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A81 Specimens Tested in Lab Cycle II 176
A82 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 73
(5% Portland Cement, 30% DR) 177
A83 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 74
(5% Calcium Sulfate Hemihydrate, 30% DR) 173
A84 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 75
(5% Sodium Silicate, 30% DR) 179
s
A85 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 76
(2X Original Fines, 30% DR) 180
A86 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 77
(2X Original Fines, 60% DR) 181
A87 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 78
(3X Original Fines, 30% DR) 182
A88 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 79
(3X Original Fines, 60% DR) 183
A89 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 80
("Zoned" Plug, 30% DR) 184
A90 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 81
(3/8 x 0 Stone, 30% DR) 185
A91 Flow and Effluent Composition D^ta
For Test Vessel No. 82
(3/8 x 0 Stone, 60% DR) 186
xlx
-------
TABLES
(Cont'd)
NO. PAGE
A92 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 83
(3/8 x 0 Stone, 0% DR) 187
A93 Flow and Effluent Composition Data
For Test Vessel No. 84
(3/8 x 0 Stone, 30% DR) 188
A94 Comparison of Particle Size Distributions
Before and After 50 Days of Ferric-Ferrous
Mine Water Percolation, Varying Quantities
of Fines and Densities in Test Vessels
Stone No. 1809 189
A95 Comparison of Particle Size Distributions
Before and After 50 Days of Ferric-Ferrous
Mine Water Percolation - Stone No. 1809
with Additives 190
xx
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
This laboratory investigation of various limestone aggregate
plugs has led to the following conclusions:
1. The results of this study indicate that limestone aggre-
gate plugs are a feasible means of sealing underground
mines which discharge water containing ferric iron.
2. The 3/8" to dust size of limestone No. 1809 placed at
60% relative density was the most satisfactory natural
material tested.
3. High placement densities are essential for satisfactory
plug performance.
4. Significant stone volume losses can occur when limestone
plugs are exposed to acid mine water flow due to set-
tling of the stone upon being wetted, erosion, and chemical
consumption of the stone.
5. Limestone plugs will perform best on ferric mine waters
and poorest on ferrous mine waters.
6. The Type A limestone (found in previous tests to neutralize
acid mine waters better than Types B and C limestones)
had the best overall performance, while the Type C lime-
stone had the poorest performance.
7. The 3/8" to dust grade of stone was the most satisfactory
size tested.
8. Bentonite and flyash additives improve water flow and
treatment properties of permeable plugs.
9. Bentonite and slag additives decrease stone volume losses.
10. Increasing the fines content of commercially available
stone to twice the original amount (as determined by the
fraction of material which passes a No. 200 sieve) results
in improved performance.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
This study has shown that limestone permeable plugs must be
constructed of well-graded limestone and must be placed in a
dense to very dense state. On the basis of this finding,
the following recommendations are made:
1. Further research should be conducted to determine the
minimum acceptable placement density.
2. Investigations are needed to establish placement densities
which can be achieved in the field with presently avail-
able equipment.
3. Future prototype limestone seals should be designed and
constructed using earth and rock dam technology.
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
Recent laboratory investigation and field trials have indi-
cated that crushed limestone can be used to seal mine openings
which are discharging acid mine drainage. 1 This is accom-
plished by filling a section of the mine opening with limestone
aggregate. An example of this design is shown in Figure 1.
Because the aggregate is porous, mine water initially seeps
through. But as the water passes through this permeable plug,
it is neutralized and filtered. Thus mine water is treated
as it passes through the plug. This process gradually seals
the plug and eventually eliminates or greatly reduces mine
water flow.
Many different types of limestone aggregate could conceivably
be used to construct permeable plugs. Research in limestone
neutralization of acid mine drainage has shown that limestones
can be classified into three groups according to their neu-
tralization behavior. ^ These three groups were called
Type A, Type B, and Type C limestones. Beside differing in
stone type, limestone aggregates could also have different
particle size ranges and different particle size distributions
or gradations within a given range. Additives could also be
blended with the aggregate to alter its performance as a mine
seal.
This study was conducted to investigate the behaviors of
various types of limestone aggregate when subjected to mine
water percolation. It was intended to determine which type(s)
would be most suitable for use in permeable plugs. All three
stone types (A, B, and C) were used in the study. Several
size ranges of each stone type were tested. The fines con-
tent of one size range was varied to determine the effect
of particle size distribution. Several additives were also
investigated. Since performance might be dependent on the
type of mine water, three different synthetic mine waters
were used in percolation tests.
All testing was done on a pilot scale in the laboratory.
Aggregate samples were placed in square, horizontal tubes to
simulate full-scale installations. The resulting model plugs
were six inches square and six feet long. Synthetic mine
water was supplied to one end of the test vessels and allowed
-------
CPi
. , ;•••!
p:<4
- - : .:• • •:<-»')
..';•••-.• !.- -•----. Ni-- -..' •-. ~ --.•.-•'.,.••_;» '...;• *'• .. '.-.-'.'•.-.••<•• .,: - ; • -. j. . .... -. -v. *-•--.- ^.'\'^'\1'.
'^i^-:'^'';'''''\^
' U^ ~f^t "r r r I - n'-'n - k, H "» *'i n n •'.' • n f ^' n 'fl "^ '1 ' ^i , • n" — "*"^VL ' M ' ' ' 1\ I ,11 t'^r.Jr
FLOOR
S^c-of * «o • * - .*;tt.gj > '.•-.o-. a/'r •^,J •*•» * ;'•..-;'»•;%.• »t"•-«.« »..= »-o^•a.*.-f-'*•« V-;/'•-.*:»>»• «.%».-,?«•.'
;v».'>ftff"*••"•*i7;,:.'-•'.- -..'--';:.',;• •'•• -.'"."^•'•-•:f^''•.'-.*
• * f." Of
'"'' -'"-A^S
'•- ->.-,y»
(LIMESTONE AGGREGATE)
MINE
OPENING
^=^^2is>.
TYPICAL LIMESTONE MINE SEAL
FIGURE 1
-------
to percolate through the stone. The other end was open and
essentially unobstructed, allowing water to discharge freely.
Water percolation was allowed to continue without interrup-
tion for up to 100 days.
To evaluate the performance of these model plugs, several
physical and chemical parameters were observed. Anlyses were
made to determine the chemical compositon and particle size
distribution of the stone prior to testing. During the test
run, flow data and effluent water composition data were
recorded. After the test run was concluded, selected plugs
were subjected to Chemical analysis, grain size analysis,
and strength analysis.
-------
SECTION IV
APPARATUS
Equipment was developed to study the effects of mine water
percolation on a variety of crushed limestone mine opening
plugs on a pilot scale. The equipment simultaneously pro-
duced three (3) synthetic mine waters differing only in
ferric iron/ferrous iron ratios and supplied each type of
water to a battery of up to 24 test vessels at a maximum rate
of one (1) GPM per vessel. To insure an adequate supply of
test water, the system was sized to continuously produce 25 GPM
of each type of water. With this design, a total of 72
tests could be run at one time. A detailed flow diagram of
the equipment is presented in Figure Al in the Appendix.
Tap water and the following technical grade chemicals were
used to produce the three (3) test waters:
Manganese sulfate
Magnesium sulfate (epsom salts)
Aluminum sulfate (alum)
Calcium hydroxide (hydrated lime)
Ferric sulfate (ferri-floc)
Ferrous sulfate (copperas)
66° Be sulfuric acid
All the chemicals except sulfuric acid were obtained in 50 or
100 pound bags and stored on pallets. Sulfuric acid was pur-
chased in bulk quantities and stored in a 1500 gallon steel
tank.
The dry chemicals were not used directly as received. The
sulfate salts were dissolved in tap water to form concentrated
solutions and the hydrated lime was suspended in tap water
to form a lime slurry.
A tank farm was installed for preparation and storage of these
concentrates. Two (2) polyethylene tanks, a main tank and an
auxiliary tank, were provided for each of the chemicals. Table
1 lists the tank sizes. All the main tanks were equipped
with mixers so that concentrates could be prepared in these
tanks. The auxiliary tanks provided additional storage for
the chemical concentrates.
-------
Concentrate preparation involved mixing measured volumes of
tap water and known weights of dry chemicals in the main
tanks. The following recipes were used:
TABLE 1
TANK SIZES
Reagent , Main Tank Secondary Tank
Manganese Sulfate Solution 55 gal. 55 gal.
Magnesium Sulfate Solution 360 gal. 55 gal.
Aluminum Sulfate Solution 275 gal. 275 gal.
Lime Slurry 500 gal. 55 gal.
Ferrous Sulfate Solution 500 gal. 55 gal.
Ferric Sulfate Solution 500 gal. 55 gal.
10 Ibs. manganese sulfate/37 gal. H2O
1400 Ibs. magnesium sulfate/228 gal. H2O
800 Ibs. aluminum sulfate/189 gal. H2O
400 Ibs. hydrated lime/480 gal. H2O
1200 Ibs. ferric sulfate/396 gal. H20
1200 Ibs. ferrous sulfate/386 gal. H2O
The water volumes were measured to the nearest 0.1 gallon
with a small water meter on the fill line. Since the chemi-
cals were supplied in bags of 50 or 100 pounds, the appro-
priate number of bags were added. Due to the small amount
of manganese sulfate required, it was weighed on a small
scale.
Magnesium sulfate, ferric sulfate, and ferrous sulfate solu-
tions were usually fed from the main tank. However, when
the main tank was being refilled, solution was fed from the
smaller 55 gallon auxiliary tank. The desired tank was
selected with a three-way ball valve. This approach pre-
vented an interruption of synthetic mine water production
while new concentrate was being made. After the main tank
was refilled, normal operation was restored. The auxiliary
tank was then refilled with solution from the main tank by
a portable 25 GPM transfer pump.
Aluminum sulfate and manganese sulfate solutions were fed
from only the auxiliary tank. Because aluminum sulfate
dissolved slowly, its auxiliary tank was required to be as
large as the main tank. The manganese sulfate tanks were
both 55 gallon tanks since this was the smallest practical
size. To simplify piping, these solutions were prepared
in the main tanks and transferred to the auxiliary tanks
for use.
10
-------
A blending system, shown in Figure 2, was used to produce
the three (3) synthetic waters from tap water and the chem-
ical concentrates. Operation was automatic except for re-
filling the concentrate tanks as required. When operating
continuously, the system could produce 25 GPM of each test
water.
Tap water and four concentrates (manganese sulfate, magnesium
sulfate, aluminum sulfate, and lime) were first blended in
a 200 gallon polyethylene mixing tank, forming an iron free
base stock. The concentrates were added in proportion to the
amount of water added. Separate addition of these concen-
trates allowed individual adjustment of manganese, magnesium,
aluminum, and calcium concentrations in the synthetic waters.
The common base stock assured uniformity in all three (3)
test waters.
The rate of reagent addition was placed by a water meter and
signal generator. A model FV Niagara Industrial Meter equipped
with a model CM impulse transmitter was used. This device
generated a short electrical impulse for each two (2) gallons
of water passing through the meter. This signal controlled
four (4) diaphragm metering pumps which injected the concen-
trates.
Model 1261 air-driven BIF Chem-0-Feeder metering pumps, shown
in Figure 3, were used. The electrical signal opened a
three-way solenoid valve, admitting compressed air to the back
of the pump's impulse diaphragm. This caused a discharge
stroke of the pump. The length of the stroke could be manually
adjusted to vary the volume of the discharge. When the
electrical signal terminated, the solenoid valve vented the
air in the pump's impulse chamber, resetting the pump. With
this system, a pre-set volume of concentrate was injected for
every two (2) gallons of tap water.
A hi-lo level control was used on the 200 gallon primary
tank containing the base stock. When the liquid level
dropped below a pre-determined height, the control system
opened a control valve on the tap water line. Water flowed
into the tank at about 76 GPM, refilling the tank with base
stock. After the tank was refilled to a pre-determined
height, the control system closed the control valve. Thus
the liquid level in the tank was always within pre-set
limits. This type of on-off control was used rather than
porportional control so that the flow rate of tap water
would always be within the range of the water meter.
11
-------
to
MANGANESE
SULFATE
SOLUTION
MAGNESIUM
SULFATE
SOLUTION
ALUMINUM
SULFATE
SOLUTION
LIME
SLURRY
FERROUS
SULFATE
SOLUTION
k
.4
SULFURIC
AGIO
L xfil /n.
FERRIC
SULFATE
SOLUTION
LJ WATER METER 8 SIGNAL GENERATOR
DIAPHRAGM METERING PUMP
LEVEL CONTROLLER
. I
TEST WATER PREPARATION SYSTEM
FIGURE 2
-------
U)
flr
METERING PUMPS
FIGURE 3
-------
The common base stock was then pumped to each of two (2)
100 gallon polyethylene mixing tanks at the rate of about
38 GPM. Sulfuric acid from the 1500 gallons storage tank
was injected into each line. Ferrous sulfate solution was
injected into one (1) to form a ferrous test water, while
ferric sulfate solution was injected into the other to form
a ferric test water. These two (2) waters were identical
except for the iron oxidation state.
As before, combination water meters and signal generators
were used to control metering pumps which injected the
reagents. Due to the smaller flow rates, Model DV Niagara
Industrial Meters equipped with Model CM Impulse Trans-
mitters were used. The transmiters generated an impulse
for every gallon of water passing through the meters.
Again, hi-lo level controls were used.
Equal amounts of ferric and ferrous test waters were blend-
ed in a third 100 gallon polyethylene mixing tank to form
ferric/ferrous test water. Two (2) Model P25-P2-15N Jabsco
positive displacement pumps mounted on a common shaft pump-
ed the ferric and ferrous waters into this third tank at
the identical rates of about 13 GPM. Once again, hi-lo
level control was used for automatic operation.
Each test water was pumped to a manifold assembly, illus-
trated in Figure 4, which supplied a battery of up to 24
test vessels below it. Test water was pumped at the rate
of 25 GPM from its mixing tank into the upper supply mani-
fold. Overflow tees at each end of the manifold maintained
a constant water pressure of about 15" in the manifold.
The overflows were connected to the lower return manifold
which returned excess feed water to the mixing tank by
gravity. Two (2) inch PVC pipe and fittings were used to
minimize head loss. Each 25 foot long assembly was mounted
on a unistrut rack above the test vessesl.
Test water was supplied from this assembly to a 3/4" dia-
meter by six foot high standpipe attached to the inlet end
of each test vessel. A constant one (1) GPM flow was de-
livered to each standpipe through a calibrated length of
polyethylene tubing. An overflow tee at the top of each
standpipe limited the head on the test vessel to a maximum
of six (6) feet. Test water flow in excess of what was
required at a six (6) foot head was diverted by the tee
to the return manifold. Thus a maximum feed rate of one
(1) GPM and a maximum head of six (6) feet were independently
provided.
14
-------
UI
MANIFOLD ASSEMBLY
FIGURE 4
-------
The test vessels containing the crushed limestone were
assembled square plexiglas tubes lined with a PVC film
sleeve. Use of these clear materials allowed the stone
to be observed while testing was in progress. Crushed
limestone filled the tubes to form six (6) inch by six
(6) inch by six (6) feet long model permeable plugs.
PVC screens retained the stone at both ends of the vessel.
The inlet end was closed by a plexiglas end plate, while
the effluent end was essentially unobstructed.
The vessels were assembled using separate pieces to facil-
itate disassembly upon termination of the test run. By
first assembling the bottom, sides, ends, and liner,
limestone could easily be placed in the vessel from the
top. After the limestone was in place, the liner was
sealed and the top was secured, completing vessel assembly.
Figure 5 shows the effluent end of a completely assembled
vessel. Before water flow was initiated through the stone,
the outside of the PVC liner was pressurized with compressed
air at about 5 psig to prevent water channelling along the
top and sides of the stone plug. Detailed drawings of the
vessel design are presented in Figures A2 and A3 in the
Appendix.
Test vessel effluents were discharged into a trench for
disposal to the laboratory sanitary sewer. A weir in the
trench formed a pond of liquid which was neutralized with
lime slurry as required by a variable speed pump. An air
sparger in the pond aerated the water to oxidize any
ferrous iron which might be present. A portable pH meter
was used to periodically monitor this water.
16
-------
ASSEMBLED TEST VESSEL (EFFLUENT END)
FIGURE 5
-------
SECTION V
PROCEDURE
The filled and sealed test vessels were placed on a test rack
beneath the feed water supply manifolds and all piping was
connected. After pressurizing the test vessels with air,
the test water preparation and delivery systems were turned
on to start the test run. Operation was automatic except
for refilling the concentrate tanks when required and per-
forming any necessary maintenance or repair.
Flow data were recorded daily during the test run. A gradua-
ted cylinder and stopwatch were used to collect and measure
the volume of water passing through each vessel over a pre-
determined period of time. Various time intervals were used,
ranging from 15 seconds to five (5) minutes, depending on the
rate of flow. The flow rate was calculated from this infor-
mation and recorded as ml/min. The liquid head at each
vessel inlet was measured to the nearest 1/2 inch with a
manometer.
At the same time, samples of the feed waters and vessel ef-
fluents were collected and analyzed for pH and conductivity.
A Corning Model 7 pH Meter was used to determine the pH.
An Industrial Instruments, Inc., Model RC 16B2 conductivity
meter was used to measure the conductivity. This meter was
standardized with a 0.01 M KC1 solution which has a known
conductivity of 1413 MHO/cm at 25°C. Because the meter
was not equipped with automatic temperance compensation, the
temperature of each sample was measured to the nearest
centigrade degree while the conductivity was being deter-
mined. The conductivity measured at the sample temperature
was corrected to an equivalent value at 25°C.
Weekly feed and effluent samples were collected for ferrous
iron, total iron, calcium, sulfate, and hot phenolphthalein
acidity determinations. Ferrous iron was determined within
one (1) day after sampling using the o-Phenanthroline colori-
metric method for samples with less than 10 mg/1 iron and
the potassium dichromate titrametric method for samples
with ferrous iron concentrations of 10 mg/1 or more. Total
iron was determined by atomic absorption or by one of the
preceeding two methods. Either AA or the EDTA titrametric
method was used to analyze the samples for calcium. Sulfate
19
-------
concentrations were determined gravimetrically. Hot pht.
acidity was determined by titrating with a standard sodium
hydroxide solution and reported in mg/1 as calcium carbonate
One (1) set of samples was also analyzed for manganese using
the ammonium persulfate colorimetric method.
After terminating the test, the vessels were opened by re-
moving the plexiglas top and any volume decrease of each
limestone plug was determined. A wood block was placed
across the vessel perpendicular to the direction of flow.
The distance between the bottom of the block and the stone
surface was measured to the nearest 1/8" with a ruler and
subtracted from 6" (the height of the vessel sides) to give
the stone height. This was done at distances of 0'6", I16",
2'6", 3'6", 4'6", and 5'6" from the inlet end. In addition,
the average width of the stone plug was estimated. This
data was used to calculate the stone volume loss as a per-
centage of the initial 1.5 ft.3 volume.
20
-------
SECTION VI
DISCUSSION
This study was conducted in two sequential laboratory cycles,
Lab Cycle I and Lab Cycle II. In Lab Cycle I, a total of
72 limestone specimens were tested. Six size ranges of each
of three different limestones were tested on ferric, ferrous
and ferric/ferrous synthetic mine waters. In addition, three
additives were investigated. The results of these tests
were used to select promising materials to be tested in Lab
Cycle II.
Lab Cycle I
Selection of the three limestones used in Lab Cycle I was
based on a previous limestone neutralization study 2 which
showed that limestones could be classified into three
groups, called Types A, B, and C limestones. Type A lime-
stones were the most effective in neutralizing acid mine
drainage, while Type C limestones were the least effective.
One limestone from each group was selected for this study.
Limestone No. 1809 (Type A), limestone No. 1355 (Type B)
and limestone No. 1337 (Type C) were used. These stones
were obtained from Winfield Lime and Stone Company, Elkins
Limestone Company, and Mineral Pigments and Metals Company,
respectively.
The following six size fractions of each stone type were
tested on each of the three waters:
1" to dust (called 1x0)
1" to 50 mesh (called 1 x 50M)
1/2" to dust (called 1/2 x 0)
1/2" to 50 mesh (called 1/2 x 50M)
1/4" to dust (called 1/4 x 0)
1/8" to dust (called 1/8 x 0)
All six size fractions were prepared by screening a blend
of equal weights of three commercially available grades of
crushed limestone. A blend was used rather than one stan-
dard grade because no single grade contained the entire
range of one inch particles to dust. The commercial grades
used to produce the blends of each stone type are listed
in Table 2.
21
-------
STONE
TYPE
TABLE 2
LIMESTONE GRADES USED IN LAB CYCLE I
ASSIGNED
NUMBER
SUPPLIER
GRADES USED
B
1809 Winfield Lime and Stone
Company, Inc.
West Winfield, Pa.
1355 Elkins Limestone
Company
Elkins, West Virginia
1337 Mineral Pigments and
Metals
Charles Pfizer
Gibsonburg, Ohio
Pa. No. 1, IB,
2*
AASHO No. 10,
8, 67**
1) Primary
screening
(3/8" to dust)
2) Road stone
(3/4" to 3/8")
3) Rotary kiln
feed (1-1/2"
by 1/2")
* Pa. - Pennsylvania Department of Highways Designation
** AASHO - American Association of State Highway Officials
Designation
22
-------
In addition to these 18 specimens (6 sizes of 3 stone types),
three different additives were investigated. Limestone
mixtures containing 5% bentonite, 10% flyash, and 10% air-
cooled blast furnace slag were tested on all three synthetic
waters. These additives were blended with both 1x0 and
1/2 x 0 size fractions of limestone No. 1809 (Type A stone).
Thus a total of six specimens containing additives were
tested on each water.
Chemical compositions of the 1/4 x 0 sizes of all three
stone types were determined before testing. The results
of these determinations are listed in Table 3. Due to an
oversight, A12O3, Fe2C>3, and S analyses were not performed
on limestones No. 1355 and No. 1337. However, analyses had
been performed on limestone samples from the same two
sources in a previous study. 2 Al^C^ and Fe2O3 values from
that study were included in Table 3 for completeness.
Reported values from these two independent analyses are
compared in Table 4. This comparison shows that the two
analyses were in reasonable agreement. Furthermore, the
agreement is closer for limestones No. 1355 and No. 1337
than for limestone No. 1809. It is expected that A12C>3
and Fe2C»3 values would have followed the same pattern of
agreement.
Complete particle size analyses were performed on represen-
tative samples of all 24 different stone specimens before
testing. These data are given in Tables A4 through A6 in
the Appendix. Grain size distributions are presented in
Figures 6 through 13. These curves show a considerable
particle size variation in the 1/8 x 0 and 1/4 x 0 size
fractions of all three limestones. They also show that
limestone No. 1337 consistently contained considerably
more fines than the other two stone types. Both the 1/2 x
50M and 1 x 50M sizes of the three stone types had similar
particle size distributions.
Three test vessels were loosely filled with each of the 24
different limestone aggregate specimens for a total of 72
test vessels. The three sets of 24 specimens were tested
on ferric, ferric/ferrous, and ferrous synthetic mine waters.
For identification purposes, the test vessels were assigned
test vessel numbers as listed in Tables Al, A2, and A3 in
the Appendix.
23
-------
TABLE 3
ANALYSIS OF LIMESTONES TESTED IN LAB CYCLE I
(REPORTED AS WEIGHT % OF IGNITED SAMPLE)
STONE #1809 STONE #1355 STONE #1337
Loss on ignition
SiO2
A1203
CaO
MgO
Fe2°3
36.93
15.4
3.9
71.9
0.59
2.86
0.29
33.8
23.9
5.75*
62.3
1.65
2.48*
46.00
1.82
0.15*
54.3
39.1
0.25*
* Data taken from previous study
24
-------
TABLE 4
COMPARISON OF INDEPENDENT LIMESTONE ANALYSES
(REPORTED AS WEIGHT % OF IGNITED SAMPLE)
STONE #1809 STONE #1355 STONE #1337
A B A B A B
Loss on ignition 36.93 41.5 33.8 33.3 46.00 47.5
Si02 15.4 5.90 23.9 27.5 1.82 0.78
A1203 3.9 1.99 5.75 0.15
CaO 71.9 88.0 62.3 60.0 54.3 53.0
MgO 0.59 1.34 1.65 1.85 39.1 45.0
Fe203 2.86 1.50 2.48 0.25
NOTE: Analysis "A" performed during this study
Analysis "B" taken from previous study2
25
-------
SIEVE ANALYSIS
h-
X
LU
$
>-
EG
cr
UJ
LU
O
a:
LJ
Cu
U.S STANDARD SIEVE OPENINGS
100
CLEAR SIEVE
OPENINGS
3" I 1/2" 3/4' 3/8" 4 8 16 30 50 100 200
I I < I ! I I I I
COBBLES
GR AVEL
COARSE
FINE
SAND
COARSEJ MEDIUM j 'FINE
INITIAL GRAIN SIZE CURVES
1/8x0 STONES
FIGURE 6
LIMESTONE DESCRIPTION
MATERIAL
1809
1355
1337
STONE SIZE
1/8 XO
1/8X0
1/8 X 0
PERCENT PASSING NO 200 SIEVE.
3 9
85
26
-------
SIEVE ANALYSIS
x
o
LJ
03
LJ
UJ
U
cr
LJ
Q.
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENINGS
CLEAR SIEVE
OPENINGS
3" I 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 8 16 30 50 100 2OO
100
COBBLES
GR AVEL
COARSE
FINE
SAND
COARSE
MEDIUM
FINE
LIMESTONE DESCRIPTION n
MATERIAL
1809
355
377
STONE SIZE
1/4 XO
m
m
XO
X 0
PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE.
3.5
5.6
10. g
INITIAL GRAIN SIZE CURVES
1/8 X 0 STONES
FIGURE 7
27
-------
cc
cr
LJ
LJ
O
LE
UJ
SIEVE ANALYSIS
CLEAR SIEVE U S STANDARD SIEVE OPENINGS
OPENINGS
3" I 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 8 16 3O 50 100 200
100
COBBLES
•GRAVEL
COARSE
FINE
SAND
COARSE! MEDIUM
FINE
LIMESTONE DE S CR! P
MATERIAL
1809
1355
1337
STONE SIZE
1/2 XO
1/2X0
1/2X0
PERCENT PASSING NO
TION
200 SIEVE.
1.9
2.1
88
INITIAL GRAIN SIZE CURVES
1/2 X 0 STONES
FIGURE 8
28
-------
SIEVE ANALYSIS
S'|}/E U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENINGS
0 PE NlNGS
3" I 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 8 16 30 50 100 200
COBBLES
GRAVEL
COARSE
FINE
SAND
COARSE
MEDIUM
FINE
LIMESTONE DESC
MATERIAL
1809
1355
1337
STONE SIZE
1/2 X 50
1/2 X 50
1/2 X 50
PERCENT PASSING
Rl PTION
NO 200 SIEVE.
O.I
_ 0.4
2.6
INITIAL GRAIN SIZE CURVES
1/2 X 50 STONES
FIGURE 9
29
-------
SIEVE ANALYSIS
UJ
CD
cr
Id
Z
LU
U
o:
L_i
CL
U.S STANDARD SIEVE OPENINGS
CLEAR SIEVE
OPENINGS
3" I 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 8 16 30 50 100 2OO
COBBLES
GR AVE L
COARSE
FINE
SAND
COARSE] MEDIUM
FINE
LIMESTONE DESC
MATERIAL
1809
1355
1337
STONE SIZE
1 XO
1 XO
1X0
PERCENT PASSING
Rl PTION
NO 200 SIEVE.
1.2 *
1.9
6.9
INITIAL GRAIN SIZE CURVES
I X 0 STONES
FIGURE 10
30
-------
SIEVE ANALYSIS
CD
Ul
LJ
CJ
cc
UJ
CL
CLEAR SIEVE
OPENINGS
3" I 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" 4
U.S STANDARD SIEVE OPENINGS
100
30 50
100 200
I
COBBLES
GR AVEL
COARSE
FINE
SAND
COARSE
MEDIUM
FINE
LIMESTONE DESCRIPTION
MATERIAL
1809
1355
1337
STONE SIZE
1 X50
1 X50
1 X50
PERCENT PASSING NO 200 SIEVE.
O.I
1.3
1.2
INITIAL GRAIN SIZE CURVES
I X 50 STONES
FIGURE II
31
-------
SIEVE ANALYSIS
x
CJ}
UJ
$
>-
CD
o:
LU
o
or
LJ
Q.
100
CLEAR SIEVE
OPENINGS
3" I 1/2" 3/4" 3/8"
i i I i
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENINGS
16
i
30 50
100 200
COBBLES
GR AVEL
COARSE
FINE
SAND
COARSE) MEDIUM
FINE
LIMESTONE DESCRIPTION
MATERIAL
1809
li
1
09
09
STONE SIZE
/2 XO
/2 X 0
/2 X 0
PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE.
7.4
2.3
4.0
ADDITIVE
10% FLYASH
10%, SLAG
5%BENTONITE
INITIAL GRAIN SIZE CURVES
1/2 X 0 STONES CONTAINING ADDITIVES
FIGURE 12
32
-------
C3
LU
s
co
en
UJ
O
o:
LU
0.
SIEVE ANALYSIS
CLEAR SIEVE
OPENINGS
3" I 1/2" 3/4' 3/8"
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENINGS
100
8
16
t
30 50 100 200
I I
10
COBBLES
GRAVEL
COARSE
FINE
SAND
COARSE
MEDIUM
FINE
LIMESTONE DESCRIPTION
MATERIAL
180$
1809
1809
STONE SlrZE
1x6
!XQ
ixt>
PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE
75 '
1.4
52
ADDITIVE
15% PLVAg^ '
(0% SLAG
5%BEMONITE
INITIAL GRAIN SIZE CURVES
1X0 STONES CONTAINING ADDITIVES
FIGURE 13
33
-------
Start-up for the ferrous, ferric, and ferric/ferrous bat-
teries were staggered over three days. The inlet heads
on all the 1/8 x 0 and 1/4 x 0 sizes quickly rose to the
maximum six feet. Initial heads on the coarser stones
were as low as six inches. Flow data was recorded daily
beginning 24 hours after start-up. The flow rates after
one day of testing, referred to as initial flow rates,
ranged from 15 ml/min to the maximum 1 GPM (3785 ml/min).
A view of testing in progress is presented in Figure 14.
The flow rate of water through a permeable material is
given by the relation:
Q = k(hA/L)
In this equation, Q is the flow rate, k is the permeability
coefficient, h is the head loss through the material, A
is the cross sectional area of flow, and L is the length
of the flow path. The permeability coefficient, k, is a
function of the particle shape, grain size distribution,
and density of the material.
In well-graded materials with no particle sizes missing,
the fraction of the material passing a No. 200 sieve has a
great influence on the permeability. Small increases of
fines greatly decrease the permeability of well-graded
gravels. Granular materials with 10 to 20 percent passing
the No. 200 sieve and placed at a medium density or greater
are relatively impermeable.
Measured initial flows exhibited this effect, as shown in
Figure 15 where initial flow rates were plotted against
fines content for specimens which did not contain additives,
Test vessels which had not attained a 6 foot head were not
plotted, since their flow rates were artifically restricted
to the maximum 1 GPM. Logarithmic coordinates were used
so that a least means squares linear regression could be
performed. These data show a significant decrease in per-
meability with a relatively small increase of fines, indi-
cating that the specimens' gradations were responsible
for initial flow behaviors.
Gas pockets formed in the inlet chambers of several test
vessels during the first 24 hours of testing, possibly due
to air leakage or CO2 generation. Sharp edges of the plexi-
glas vessels could possible have torn the PVC liners,
34
-------
LAB CYCLE I TESTING
FIGURE 14
35
-------
10,000 T
•FLOW LIMITED TO I GPM
? 1000 -
2
^
2
u
H-
cr
5
O
u_
_i
^ 100-
10
0.1
®
I I I I 1111 I I I I I I 111
I 10
MATERIAL PASSING No. 200 SIEVE (%)
100
LAB CYCLE I LIMESTONE SPECIMENS
INITIAL FLOW VS. FINES CONTENT
FIGURE 15
36
-------
allowing the pressurizing air to leak into the vessels.
However, the 9 mil liners were relatively tough and care
was exercised during vessel assembly. A more likely ex-
planation is that C02 was accumulated as limestone, which
is mainly calcium carbonate, neutralized the acid test
water.
During the first 3 weeks of testing, the flow rate of test
water delivered to each vessel standpipe decreased from
the design 1 GPM to about 1/2 GPM. This was due to feed
pump impeller wear. Test vessels which maintained a six
foot head were not affected by this condition, since the
standpipe overflows were diverting excess flow.
After 20 days of testing, the specimens with flows in
excess of 0.5 GPM (1892 ml/min) at a six foot head were
discontinued. Twenty-one specimens fell into this category
and are listed in Table 5. All of these specimens had a
1/2" or 1" upper size limit and most of them had a 50 mesh
lower size limit. The remaining specimens were continued
for an additional 33 days for a total of 53 days of testing
Three of the remaining specimens, the 1/8 x 0, 1/4 x 0, and
1x0 sizes of limestone No. 1355 on ferric/ferrous water
(Vessels No. 37, 38, and 42), were tested for a total of
101 days. Daily monitoring was continued during the last
48 days, but was reduced from seven days per week to five,
Monday through Friday.
Throughout the test run/ the synthetic mine water composi-
tions were checked and adjusted as required to maintain
consistent values. The average compositions are presented
in Table 6.
Flow and effluent composition data for all 72 test vessels
are presented in Tables A7 through A78 in the Appendix.
This data includes the following parameters:
Inlet head (in.)
Flow rate (ml/min)
pH
Specific conductance ( mho)
Ferrous iron (mg/1)
Total iron (mg/1)
Calcium (mg/1)
Sulfate (mg/1)
Hot pht. acidity (mg/1 as
37
-------
TABLE 5
SPECIMENS DISCONTINUED AFTER 20 DAYS
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
FERRIC TEST WATER
9 - Stone #1809, 1/2 x 50 m
11 - Stone #1809, 1 x 50 m
12 - Stone #1809, 1x0
15 - Stone #1355, 1/2 x 50 m
17 - Stone #1355, 1 x 50 m
22 - Stone #1337, 1/2 x 50 m
23 - Stone #1337, 1 x 50 m
FERRIC/FERROUS TEST WATER
Vessel No. 36
Vessel No. 40
Vessel No. 41
Vessel No. 45
Vessel No. 47
Stone #1809, 1x0
Stone #1355, 1/2 x 50 m
Stone #1355, 1 x 50 m
Stone #1337, 1/2 x 50 m
Stone #1337, 1 x 50 m
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
Vessel No.
FERROUS TEST WATER
50 - Stone #1809, 1x0 (10% slag)
52 - Stone #1809, 1x0 (10% bentonite)
57 - Stone #1809, 1/2 x 50 m
60 - Stone #1809, 1x0
65 - Stone #1355, 1 x 50 m
69 - Stone #1337, 1/2 x 50 m
70 - Stone #1337, 1/2 x 0
71 - Stone #1337, 1 x 50 m
72 - Stone #1337, 1x0
38
-------
TABLE 6
SYNTHETIC ACID MINE WATERS
AVERAGE COMPOSITION
FERRIC FERRIC/FERROUS FERROUS
WATER WATER WATER
PH
Sp. conductance
Hot pht acidity
Calcium
Magnesium
Manganese
Aluminum
Total iron
Ferrous iron
Ferric iron
Sulfate
2.5
2700
743
81
28
5.3
16
205
10
195
1055
2.6
2700
894
78
22
5.8
16
209
106
103
1030
2.5
2850
874
75
23
5.0
18
198
197
1
1122
39
-------
The inlet head and flow rate through the stone are directly
proportional according to:
Q = kA h
L
For a material with a given permeability (k), cross-sectional
area (A), and length (L), the ratio of flow rate to head is
a constant (kA/L). This principle can be used to adjust
measured flow rates at measured heads to equivalent flow rates
at a six foot head. When this is done, it can be seen that
most of the specimens reduced the equivalent flow rate of
water over the test period.
Flow histories of the limestone specimens with flow rates
of 300 ml/min or less are presented in Figures 16, 17, and
18. Flow rate adjustment was not necessary, since the inlet
heads on these vessels were six feet. These plots shows the
measured flow rates vs time.
Test water type had a significant effect on flow behavior.
Although all flow histories showed a considerable fluctua-
tion, this fluctuation was least severe for specimens on
ferric water and most severe for specimens on ferrous
water. Ferric water specimens generally had the lowest
flow rates, while ferrous water specimens had the highest.
Flow behavior was also shown to be dependent on stone type.
Initial flow rates were highest for stone No. 1809 (Type A)
and lowest for stone No. 1337 (Type C). As previously dis-
cussed, this was due to the initial fines content of the
aggregate. For example, the 1/8 x 0 size of stone No. 1337
contained over four times as much fines as the same size
of limestone No. 1809.
During the test run, however, stone No. 1809 exhibited the
greatest reduction of flow, while stone No. 1337 exhibited
the smallest reduction. As a result, flow rates after 50
days of testing for stone No. 1809 specimens tested on
ferric or ferric/ferrous water were generally lower than
for corresponding stone No. 1337 specimens.
The lowest recorded flows occurred with the 1/8 x 0 and
1/4 x 0 sizes, while the highest recorded flows occurred
with the 1/2 x 50M and 1 x 50M sizes. All the 1/8 x 0
sizes and all but one (Vessel No. 56) of the 1/4 x 0 sizes
maintained flows less than 300 ml/min. Flow histories
for these two sizes were similar, although the 1/8 x 0
40
-------
o
_f
u.
300^
250 -
200
150 -
100 -
50 -
0-
0
300-
? 250-
5
^ 200 -
ui 150 -
t-
K too -
50-
0
300-.
250-
200-
150-
100-
50-
-VESSEL N0.7
(1/8X0)
STONE NO. 1809
VESSEL NO. 10
(1/2X0)
VESSEL NO. 8
(1/4X0)
I
5
10
15
20 25
30
35
40
45
50
-VESSEL NO.I6
(1/2X0)
STONE NO. 1355
VESSEL NO.I4
(1/4X0)
VESSEL NO. 13
(1/8X0)
10
15
20
25
30
40 45
50
VESSEL N0.2I
(1/2X0)
STONE NO. 1337
VESSEL N0.20
(1/4X0)
VESSEL NO.I9
(1/8X0)
05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
TIME (DAYS)
FERRIC WATER-SPECIMEN FLOW HISTORIES
FIGURE 16
50
41
-------
300 -i
250-
200 -
150 -
100 -
50 -
0
0
300 -,
250 -
200 -
150 -
100 -
50 -
0
-VESSEL NO. 31
(1/8X0)
VESSEL NO. 32
(1/4X0)
STONE NO. 1809
10 15
VESSEL NO. 39
(1/2X0)
20 25
30 35
40
I
45
50
STONE NO. 1355
VESSEL NO. 38
(1/4X0)
VESSEL NO. 37
(1/8X0)
•VESSEL NO. 46
(1/2X0)
-VESSEL NO 44
[1/4X0)
VESSEL NO. 48
(1X0)
STONE NO. 1337
VESSEL NO. 43
(1/8X0)
10 15 20 25
TIME (DAYS)
i i i i i
30 35 40 45 50
FERRIC/FERROUS WATER-SPECIMEN FLOW HISTORIES
FIGURE 17
42
-------
300 -
250 -
200 -
150 -
100-
50 -
0
VESSEL N0.58
(1/2X0)
STONE NO. 1809
VESSEL N0.55
(1/8X0)
0
300 -i
? 250-
5
j 200 -
uj 150 -
H
a too -
3 so-
u.
0 -
0
300 -
250 -
200 -
150 -
100 -
50 -
0
0
T
5
i
5
10 15 20 25
-VESSEL NO. 62
(1/4X0)
I T \ I I
30 35 40 45 50
STONE NO. 1355
VESSEL N0.6I
(1/8X0)
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
STONE NO. 1337
VESSEL N0.68
(1/4X0)
VESSEL NO 67
(1/8X0)
10
20 25 30
TIME (DAYS)
i
35
40 45 50
FERROUS WATER-SPECIMEN FLOW HISTORIES
FIGURE 18
43
-------
size generally exhibited lower initial flow rates. Flow
histories for the 1/2 x 0 sizes tested on ferric or ferric/
ferrous water were slightly greater than those for the
1/8 x 0 and 1/4 x 0 sizes. As previously discussed, most
of the 1/2 x 50M and 1 x 50M sizes were discontinued after
20 days of testing due to their high flow rates.
Specimens which had lower flow rates neutralized mine
water through the stone more effectively than those with
high flow rates. Also, the pH of the effluents from the
specimens tended to increase slightly throughout the tests
as the observed flow rates decreased. These results were
expected, since the neutralization reaction is relatively
slow when limestone is used, and slower flow rates provided
increased detention time. The effluents typically had pH
values of 6 or 7 for those specimens having flows less than
300 ml/min.
Chemical compositions of the effluents were also pretty
much as expected. Ferric iron concentrations in the neu-
tralized effluents were typically less than 20 mg/1 (a
90% removal of iron) and were often less than 0.03 mg/1.
Ferrous iron was also removed in many cases, but not as
completely as ferric iron. Calcium concentrations were
significantly higher in this neutralized effluents. Due
to the neutralization reaction and erosion. Sulfate con-
centrations were essentially unchanged.
These results show that iron is precipitated and trapped
within the stone, but that calcium sulfate is not. The
superior flow behaviors which were observed for specimens
tested on ferric water indicate that the precipitated iron
had a significant effect on the permeabilities of the
specimens, since ferric iron was removed more effectively
than ferrous iron.
Flyash and bentonite additives were shown to improve the
performances of 1/2 x 0 and 1x0 stone sizes. Use of
these additives, particularly flyash, provided lower flow
rates and more effective mine water treatment. Performance
of specimens containing these additives were comparable to
performances of the 1/8 x 0 and 1/4 x 0 sizes (without
additives) in tests using ferric and ferric/ferrous waters.
Both the 1/2 x 0 and 1x0 sizes containing flyash were
more successful than smaller sizes without additives in
ferrous water tests.
44
-------
After the test runs were completed, the tops of the test
vessels were removed and the stone specimens were visually
examined. Variable amounts of stone discoloration were ob-
served, as illustrated in Figure 19. All specimens showed
some yellowish-brown or red discoloration and a thin crust
on the top and sides. The discoloration was largest in
the coarser stones and smallest in the stones with large
percentages of fines. Although no specimens were rigidly
cemented, some small blocks of lightly cemented material
within 6" to 12" of the inlet end were observed in the
more heavily discolored specimens.
A decrease in stone heights and widths, shown in Figure 20
was also observed. Height decreases ranged from 1/8" to
1", and width decreased ranged from 0" to 1/2". Since the
inlet ends of the vessels were most severely affected, it
is believed that stone consumption by neutralization
reactions was a major cause of these volume losses. Set-
tling of the stone upon wetting, hydraulic erosion, and
compression by the pressurizing air could also be respon-
sible .
Average volume losses were determined for each specimen
and are listed in Table 7. The reported values are believed
to be accurate to within about 3 percentage points. These
data show the following trends:
1. Volume losses were largest for specimens tested on
ferrous water and smallest for specimens tested on
ferric water.
2. Limestone No. 1337 (Type C) showed the most volume loss,
while limestone No. 1809 (Type A) showed the least.
3. The intermediate sizes, 1/4 x 0 and 1/2 x 0, exhibited
the least severe volume losses.
4. Bentonite and slag effectively inhibited stone volume
loss.
Chemical analyses were performed on samples taken six inches
from the inlet ends of .all nine 1/4 x 0 specimens. The
results of these determinations are presented in Table 8.
Values for the corresponding stones before testing are
also included. These data show that constituent/calcium
ratios generally increased as a result of testing on
synthetic mine waters. Iron/calcium ratios generally ex-
hibited the greatest increase, indicating that iron was
deposited in the first foot of the plug.
45
-------
LIMESTONE SPECIMENS AFTER TESTING
FIGURE 19
46
-------
-• •
^^^^j^BBJWfc^^s
* f
.
-------
TABLE 7
STONE VOLUME LOSSES
EXPRESSED AS % OF INITIAL VOLUME
STONE
SAMPLES ON SAMPLES ON SAMPLES ON
FERRIC FERRIC/FERROUS FERROUS
WATER WATER WATER
1809, 1/8 x 0
1809, 1/4 x 0
1809, 1/2 x 0
1809, 1x0
1809, 1/2 x 50 m
1809, 1 x 50 m
1809, 1/2 x 0, 10% slag
1809, 1x0, 10% slag
1809, 1/2 x 0, 5% bentonite
1809, 1x0, 5% bentonite
1809, 1/2 x 0, 10% flyash
1809, 1x0, 10% flyash
1355, 1/8 x 0
1355, 1/4 x 0
1355, 1/2 x 0
1355, 1x0
1355, 1/2 x 50 m
1355, 1 x 50m
1337, 1/8 x 0
1337, 1/4 x 0
1337, 1/2 x 0
1337, 1x0
1337, 1/2 x 50 m
1337, 1 x 50 m
5
4
9
6*
5*
2*
5
6
3
7
14
14
17
6
8
7
5*
6
30
18
14
9
3*
6*
7
7
11
9*
13
7
6
9
3
7
16
20
24**
13**
15
17**
6*
8*
28
16
18
9
13*
10*
12
10
38
18*
21*
36
6
13
8
14
11
12
20
3
15
20
23
13*
19
11
20*
39*
33*
NOTE: * Specimen discontinued after 20 days of testing
** Specimen discontinued after 101 days of testing
Others discontinued after 53 days of testing
48
-------
TABLE 8
ANALYSIS OF LIMESTONES TESTED IN LAB CYCLE I
BEFORE AND AFTER TESTING
(REPORTED AS WEIGHT % OF IGNITED SAMPLE)
VESSEL
NO.
None
8
32
56
None
14
38
62
None
20
44
68
STONE
NO.
1809
1809
1809
1809
1355
1355
1355
1355
1337
1337
1337
1337
TEST LOSS ON
WATER IGNITION
None
Fe+3
Fe+3/Fe+2
Fe+2
None
Fe+3
Fe+3/Fe+2
Fe+2
None
Fe+3
Fe+3/Fe+2
Fe+2
36.93
35.8
5.7
29.5
33.8
32.2
9.3
32.0
46.0
44.8
44.2
45.1
SiO?
15.4
15.3
11.1
25.0
23.9
23.6
22.7
24.6
1.82
1.78
5.56
1.42
Al?O3
3.9
4.2
2.0
20.0
5.75*
6.05
3.86
5.29
0.15*
1.45
1.61
0.73
CaO
71.9
67.8
45.1
49.1
62.3
59.4
33.6
58.1
54.3
53.6
52.0
55.7
MgO
0.59
1.20
4.03
1.23
1.65
1.77
0.78
0.49
39.1
38.4
40.9
40.6
Fe^Oj
2.86
6.90
11.52
9.33
2.48*
4.43
17.3
4.42
0.25*
4.14
5.12
2.06
S
0.29
0.59
0.27
0.57
0.60
0.86
0.59
0.33
0.34
0.18
* Data taken from previous study'
49
-------
In— place density, particle size distribution, compressibil-
ity, and strength parameters were evaluated for eleven of
the stone plugs. Densities, compressibilities, and shear
strengths were measured on 4" diameter, 6" high cylindrical
specimens trimmed from the inlet ends of the stone plugs
where the effects of mine water percolation were greatest.
A summary of the data is presented in Tables 9 through 14
and Figures 21 through 31 in the text and detailed data
are given in the Appendix.
The density of uncemented granular materials has a great
influence on the compressibility, permeability, and strength
of the stones. The density of granular materials is deter-
mined by the specific gravity of the particles , particle
shapes, particle size distribution and the particle struc-
ture. In a loose state, particle contacts are edge to
plane and edge to edge producing a structure which collapses
on disturbance. In a dense state, the particle contacts are
primarily plane to plane producing a strong and stable
structure since the material must expand to be sheared.
Loose and dense structures are illustrated in Figure 21.
These states are defined by minimum and maximum densities
determined by laboratory tests, and the in-place density of
a granular material is related to these limiting densities
by a relative density parameter. The relative density is
expressed in percent and is obtained from the following
equation :
Ydmax
DR = x 100%
Yd (Ydmax
DR = relative density, %
Yd = dry density
Ydmax = maximum dry density
Ydmin = minimum dry density
The significance of relative density values may be shown as
follows :
50
-------
AT REST
WHEN SHEARED, STRUCTURE
COLLAPSES
VERY LOOSE , Dr =0%
DILATION 1
AT REST
WHEN SHEARED,STRUCTURE
Dl LATES
VERY DENSE, Dr =100%
SHEAR
FORCE
NOTE
Dr = RELATIVE DENSITY
PARTICAL STRUCTURES AT
MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM DENSITIES
FIGURE 21
51
-------
Relative Density Material Type of
(Percent) Description Structure
0-15 Very Loose Collapsing
15 - 35 Loose Collapsing
36-65 Medium Dense Intermediate
65 - 85 Dense Dilating
85 - 100 Very Dense Dilating
The dry densities of the limestones in the test vessels
were evaluated by relative density calculated from minimum
and maximum densities shown in Table 9.
It should be noted that since the density affects the physi-
cal properties of the stones, the minimum and maximum den-
sities provide a criterion for evaluating of stones with
various particle size distributions. The stones with higher
densities should have better properties. Assuming the stones
were placed with the same compaction effort or at the same
relative density, stone No. 1355, 1/8 x 0 size, should have
the best permeability, compressibility and strength properties
The in-place densities of trimmed cylindrical specimens of
the limestones subjected to mine water percolation were
measured. These densities, relative density, and porosity
are presented in Tables 10 and 11. The volume decrease is
also shown for completeness of the density discussion.
The densities were calculated from the measurements taken
on trimmed cylindrical specimens from the test vessels.
In the case of Test Vessel 58, undisturbed samples could
not be obtained because of the large collapse and irregu-
larity of the stone surface in the test vessel. The three
specimens of each material are listed in order of sampling
from the influent end with the center of the first specimen
located about six inches from the influent, and the centers
of the second and third specimens approximately 12 and 18
inches, respectively.
The relative densities of all trimmed specimens show the
limestones at the influent end of the vessels to be loose
to very loose. In six of the eleven vessels, the final
densities are less than the minimum densities obtained by
very loose placement of dry material resulting in negative
relative densities. These negative densities indicate a
large loss of material produced by the erosion of unpro-
tected particle surfaces leaving a particle structure
considerably looser and more fragile than can be obtained
by physical placement. Therefore, these limestones are
very loose, compressible and susceptible to structural
collapse.
52
-------
TABLE 9
MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM
DRY DENSITIES
Material
BCR No.
1809
1809
1809
1355
1355
1355
Stone
Size
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/8
1/4
1/2
x 0
x 0
x 0
x 0
x 0
x 0
Minimum Drya
Density, PCF
91.8
94.8
83.2
97.5
88.4
78.0
Maximum Dryb
Density, PCF
130.0
130.7
134.8
140.0
136.0
130.0
Minimum by ASTM Method, D-2049
bMaximum by Modified Proctor Test, ASTM Method, D-1557
53
-------
TABLE 10
VOLUME LOSS, DRY DENSITY AND POROSITY OF TRIMMED SPECIMENS
(AFTER 50 DAYS OF MINE WATER PERCOLATION, LAB CYCLE I)
Stone No.
& TV No.
Volume
Stone Loss,
Size %
Dry Density
Yd' AV9- Yd'
PCF PCF
DR^
%
Porosity
n, %
Ferrous Mine Water
1809
58
1/2 x 0 38
86.8 86.8
11
47.5
Ferric Mine Water
1809
10
1809
31
1809
32
1809
34
1355
39
1337
46
1809
33
1/2x0 9
Ferric-Ferrous
1/8x0 7
1/4x0 7
1/2 x 0 11
1/2 x 0 15
1/2 x 0 18
1/2 x 50 13
84.0
94.3 91.7
96.8
Mine Water
87.5
99.4 95.1
98.5
94.5
91.6 94.2
96.6
77.2
77.8 79.8
84.3
72.2
81.8 79.5
84.6
92.0
88.4 90.5
91.0
90.0
83.2 84.8
81.2
4
30
37
-17
-25
-23
-1
-13
7
-20
-18
3
-40*
-4
4
25*
15
23
20*
0
-6
49.2
43.0
41.4
47.1
40.0
40.4
42.8
44.5
41.5
53.3
53.0
49.0
56.4
50.6
48.8
44.4
46.5
45.0
45.4
49.8
50.9
54
-------
TABLE 11
VOLUME LOSS, DRY DENSITY AND POROSITY OF TRIMMED SPECIMENS
(AFTER 100 DAYS OF MINE WATER PERCOLATION, LAB CYCLE I)
Volume Dry Density
Stone No. Stone Loss Yd' Av
-------
Finally, the settlement of the stone surfaces without cor-
responding increase of relative density from the loose
placement density to medium density indicates stone erosion
in the vessels.
Particle size analyses of the stones subjected to mine
water percolation all showed an increase of fines. This is
shown in Table 12 where the percentage of fines passing
the No. 200 sieve before and after percolation are given
and in Figure 22 where the effect of type of mine water on
No. 1809, 1/2 x 0, stone is illustrated. The increase of
fines is due to the dissolving of larger limestone particles
and the accumulation of precipitates. This increase of
fines would plug the voids in the stones and decrease cor-
respondingly the flow of water.
The effect of density on permeability is illustrated in
Figure 23 where permeability test results on 3/8 x 0 stone
specimens prepared at different densities are presented.
These data indicate a significant decrease of permeability
with an increase of dry density. Thus, increasing the
placement density considerably reduces the flow of water
through the stone.
Triaxial tests were conducted on trimmed cylindrical speci-
mens of the limestones to determine their compressibility
and strength after mine water percolation. In the triaxial
test a cylindrical specimen is enclosed by a rubber membrane,
confined by a lateral pressure and sheared by an axial
load applied through a piston. The triaxial test apparatus
is illustrated in Figure 24.
Two types of tests were conducted in this apparatus. The
first was a constant-diameter compression test in which the
diameter was kept constant by continually increasing the
lateral confining pressure during axial loading of the
specimen as illustrated schematically in Figure 25. The
need to increase the confining pressure was sensed by a
lateral gage mounted at mid-height of the cylinder. During
the compression test the axial deformation, axial load and
confining pressure were recorded and the axial strain, axial
and confining stress and the ratio between the vertical and
horizontal pressures calculated.
The second type of test was a shear strength test conducted
at a constant confining pressure, illustrated in Figure 26.
This type of test was necessary because the limestones after
being subjected to the mine water percolation were found to
56
-------
TABLE 12
INCREASE OF FINES DUE TO
MINE WATER PERCOLATION
Percent of Material
Test Stone Type of Sample Passing No. 200 Sieve
Vessel Size Water Description Before After
Lab Cycle 1-50 Days Percolation - Stone No. 1809
31 1/8 x 0 F/F 3.9 5.8
32 1/4 x 0 F/F Placed 3.9 4.5
34 1/2 x 0 F/F In 1.9 8.5
10 1/2 x 0 Ferric Loose 1.9 10.7
38 1/2 x 0 Ferrous State 1.9 7.9
Lab Cycle I - 100 Days Percolation - Stone No. 1335
37 1/8 x 0 F/F Placed 8.5 13.7
38 1/4 x 0 F/F In Loose 5.6 7.1
42 1x0 F/F State 1.9 9.4
F/F = Ferric-Ferrous
57
-------
T
O
UJ
*-
.:
Lu
CLEAR SIEVE
OPE MINGS
3" I 1/7" 3/4' 3/S'
i CO
SIEVE ANALYSIS
U S STANDARD SiEVE OPENINGS
4 8 16 30 50 100 200
AFTER MINE
WATER PERCOLATION
TESTS
INITIAL
GRADATION
:TBBLE s
GRAVED
CCARSE
P i M E
S A N D
COARSE) MFDI(JV
F1 NE
LIMESTONE CE-SCR PT,QN
MATERIAL
1809
1809
1809
1809
STONE SIZE
1/2 X 0
1/2X0
1/2 X 0
1/2 X 6
PERCENT PA-SING N;?OOSIE\E
1 9
8 5
7 9
10.7
TYPF OF WATER
NONE
FERRIC/FERROUS
FERROUS
FERRIC
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS BEFORE AND
AFTER MINE WATER PERCOLATION
STONE NO. 1809, 1/2 XO SIZE
FIGURE 22
58
-------
3/8 X 0 STONE
BCR NO. 1809
90 100 110 120
DRY DENSITY ,a/d, PCF
130
PERMEABILITY VS. DRY DENSITY
FIGURE 23
59
-------
CONFINING
PRESSURE
SUPPLIED
BY WATER
LUCITE
CYLINDER
AXIAL
LOAD
PISTON
HORIZONTAL
DEFORMATION CLIP
OPENING TO
SAMPLE
END PLATEN
O-RING
RUBBER MEMBRANE
SAMPLE
(4" DIA , 6" TO 8" LONG)
PRESSURE SUPPLY
TRIAXIAL CELL
FIGURE 24
60
-------
AL
INITIAL
SPECIMEN
AXIAL COMPRESSION ,
COMPRESSED
SPECIMEN
X 100 %
L
CONSTANT DIAMETER STRESS RATIO , Ko= T3 / T,
CONSTANT DIAMETER COMPRESSION TEST
CONSTANT DIAMETER
FIGURE 25
61
-------
1 1 J
SPECIMEN CONSOLIDATED SPECIMEN SHEARED
UNDER ALL-AROUND CONFINING BY INCREASING T,
PRESSURE V. =T^=C AND KEEPING T-? -C
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAX1AL TEST
CONSTANT T3
FIGURE 26
62
-------
be uncemented and, therefore, behaved as granular materials.
Granular materials derive their strength from particle
stresses on the failure plane. The shear strength is de-
rived from cohesion and friction components and may be
expressed as:
S = C + N tan 0
where S = Shear strength
C = Cohesion
N = Normal stress on failure plane
0 = Angle of internal friction
The cohesion and angle of internal friction are the strength
parameters and are normally evaluated in the triaxial shear
test.
A mine seal can develop a normal stress, and hence, shear
strength from two mechanisms: (1) the hydrostatic pressure
on the seal tending to push the seal out of the opening
will tend to expand the seal and increase the confining
pressure; (2) settlement of the roof will transfer part of
the overburden load to the limestone seal.
Compression tests were conducted on trimmed undisturbed
specimens from ten vessels and on remolded specimens from
one vessel. In the latter case, a remolded specimen had
to be used because it was impossible to trim a specimen
from the collapsed material in Vessel 58. Since the com-
pression data showed the limestones to be very compressible,
two additional tests were conducted on remolded and compacted
material prepared at a greater density than measured in
the test vessels to determine the effect of density on the
stiffness of the limestones. Typical axial stress-strain
curves for three different stone sizes are shown in Figure
27 and all compression test data are summarized in Table
13.
The stress-strain compression data show the in-place lime-
stones subjected to mine water percolation to be very com-
pressible. The low stiffness of the limestones is the
result of the loose placement of the stone and subsequent
erosion of the limestone by mine water percolation. The
effect of density variation can be seen from the stress-
strain curves in Figure 27 and from the compression versus
density plot in Figure 28.
63
-------
tr
H-
C/)
<
X
<
STONE UNDISTURBED COMPACTED
5 10
AXIAL STRESS , (T ,TSF
STRESS-STRAIN CURVES FROM
CONSTANT DIAMETER COMPRESSION TESTS
FIGURE 27
64
-------
TABLE 13
SUMMARY OF COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS, LAB CYCLE I
Test
Vessel Stone
No. Size
Type of Dry Density /V^, PCF
Specimen Initial Final
Axial
Strain
at 10
TSF Load kn =
H % "Jo;
Ferric Water
10
1/2
X
0
Ferrous
58
1/2
X
0
Remolded
Water
Remolded
94
86
.3
.8
101
92
.7
.0
6
7
.4
.5
.43
.45
Ferric-Ferrous Water
31
31
32
34
34
39
46
33
37
38
42
1/8
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/8
1/4
1 X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
x50
X
X
0
0
0
Undisturbed
Compacted
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Compacted
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
87
113
94
77
118
72
92
90
106
100
72
.5
.0
.5
.2
.8
.2
.0
.0
.8
.0
.7
96
117
105
90
120
92
99
102
117
111
96
.9
.8
.8
.5
.9
.3
.3
.8
.2
.9
.9
9
2
8
14
2
17
6
9
7
8
22
.4
.5
.6
.0
.3
.4
.2
.1
.0
.5
.5
.43
.34
.44
.46
.36
.43
.43
.38
.45
.41
.53
65
-------
TYPE OF SPECIMEN
INDICATES TEST VESSEL
70
80 90 100
INITIAL DRY DENSITY
110
, PCF
*• UNDISTURBED SPECIMENS AT IN-PLACE DENSITIES SUBJECTED
TO 50 AND 100 DAYS MINE WATER PERCOLATION.
COMPRESSIBILITY VS. DENSITY
FIGURE 28
66
-------
The stress-strain curves of the three undisturbed samples
in Figure 27 do not show the expected decrease of com-
pressibility with an increase of particle size. It was
anticipated that the 1/2 x 0 stone would be the least com-
pressible and the compressibility would increase with the
decrease of particle size as represented by the 1/4 x 0
and 1/8 x 0 stone, respectively. The deviation from the
expected behavior is believed to be due to the low and
variable densities, with the variations in density over-
shadowing the gradation effect.
Finally, the specimens trimmed from the limestones subjected
to 100 days mine water percolation specimens. This can be
observed in Figure 28 where compressibility is related to
dry density.
Triaxial tests were conducted on two or three specimens
from each vessel to determine the shear strength parameters
of the limestones following the mine water percolation tests.
The strength parameters were obtained from strength envelopes
based on stress-strain curves from four to six tests at
different confining pressures as illustrated in Figure 29.
For some specimens more than one strength point was obtained
by shearing the specimen at two different confining pressures.
The shear strength parameters were obtained from a strength
envelope established from the maximum shear stresses of the
triaxial test in Figure 30.
The results of all the tests are summarized in Table 14,
where the average dry density, average axial strain at
failure, cohesion, angle of internal friction and shear
strength at a confining pressure of 2.0 TSF are given.
Shear strengths developed by the stones at a given confining
pressure are presented to permit a comparison of the shear
strengths. These shear strengths are plotted against dry
density in Figure 31.
The triaxial shear test data shows the limestones subjected
to mine water percolation behave as granular materials whose
shear strength is a function of the confining pressure and
in-place density. For a typical confining pressure of 2.0
TSF, the shear strengths were mainly a function of the
density, of the stone. Some decrease of strength was ob-
served for the materials subjected to 100 days of percolation,
however, the decrease is small.
67
-------
TEST VESSEL 31
1/8 x 0
SPECIMEN DENSITY
96 9 PCF
994 PCF
985 PCF
INDICATES MAXIMUM
SHEAR STRESS
- CONFINING
PRESSURES
UNLOADING
AXIAL STRAIN,6, ,%
STRESS-STRAIN CURVES FROM
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TESTS
FIGURE 29
68
-------
I Or
O
^x
O
8-
l-
II
a
CO
UJ
(T
(T
<
UJ
X
en
0=0.40
(c=950)PSF
6-
t o
TEST VESSEL 31
!/8 x 0
SIN 0 =TAIM<*
C=-9-
COS 0
STRENGTH
ENVELOPE
(0=35.3°)
SPECIMEN DENSITY
• 96.9 PCF
• 99.4 PCF
A 98.5 PCF
I
10
12
MEAN NORMAL STRESS, P = ( —-= —) , KG/CM
STRAIN RATE =0.06 IN./WIN
CONSOLIDATION TIME =1/2 HOUR
SAMPLE DIMENSIONS
DIAMETER —4 0 IN.
LENGTH~6.0 IN
TYPICAL TRIAXIAL TEST
STRENGTH DIAGRAM
FIGURE 30
69
-------
TABLE 14
STRENGTH PARAMETERS AND SHEAR STRENGTH
FOR A 2.0 TSF OVERPURDEN PRESSURE
-J
o
Test
Vessel
10
58
31
31
32
34
34
39
46
33
37
38
42*
Stone
Size
1/2x0
1/2 x 0
1/8 x 0
1/8 x' 0
1/4 x 0
1/2 x 0
1/2 x 0
1/2 x 0
1/2 x 0
1/2 x 50
1/8 x 0
1/4 x 0
1x0
Type of
Specimen
Undisturbed
Remolded
Undisturbed
Compacted
Undisturbed
Undisturbed,
Compacted
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Undisturbed
Average
Dry
Density
Yd' PCF
9.17
86.8
95.1
113.2
94.2
79.8
118.0
79.5
90.5
84.8
107.7
99.1
74.7
Average
Axial
Strain
at
Failure
en,%
15
12
18
10
19
24
6
22
23
23
18
22
20
Strength
Parameters
Cohesion Friction
C, PCF Angle, $
1,600
640
950
1,100
700
350
2,700
0
0
400
o •
670
0
35.5
36.4
35.3
37.0
35.3
39.5
37.0
42.4
41.5
37.3
43.8
40.5
38.7
Shear3
Strength
Su, PSF
4,300
3,700
3,900
4,400
3,800
3,900
5,400
3,700
3,600
3,900
3,800
4,100
3,200
-------
GOOOi
5000-
"
o: o
CO
INDICATES TEST
VESSEL NUMBER
80
90 100
DRY DENSITY,*d,PCF
110
120
SHEAR STRENGTH VS. DENSITY
FIGURE 31
-------
The investigation of the physical properties of limestones
placed at low densities showed that they are not suitable
for mine sealing. The low density produces a permeable
limestone which is eroded by the mine water. Since the
chemical reaction between the stone and mine water did not
result in any cementation, the erosion left a very collap-
sible stone structure. The limestones subjected to mine
water percolation were very compressible and had small
shear strength.
Lab Cycle II
Lab Cycle I clearly indicated that the physical properties
determining the suitability of a limestone as a mine plug,
permeability, compressibility, and strength are a function
of particle size distribution and density. Hence, Lab
Cycle II was conducted to further investigate the effects
of varying particle size distribution and placement density,
In addition, additives which might aid in cementing the
stone particles were investigated.
A total of twelve (12) specimens were tested in Lab Cycle
II. Ten of these were subjected to ferric/ferrous test
water, and two of these were tested with South Pittsburgh
city water. Commercially available 3/8 to dust (called
3/8 x 0 size) grade of limestone No. 1809 was used to pre-
pare all specimens.
Three additives were investigated. Portland cement, cal-
cium sulfate hemihydrate (plaster of paris), and sodium
silicate were blended with 3/8 x 0 stone in 5% concentra-
tions. These three specimens were placed in test vessels
at about 30% relative density. All three were tested on
ferric/ferrous water.
Four specimens containing increased quantities of limestone
fines were tested on ferric/ferrous water. Minus 50 mesh
fines were obtained by screening 3/8" to dust stone. These
fines were added to 3/8 x 0 stone in sufficient quantity
to increase the fraction of material passing a No. 200
sieve by factors of 2 and 3. Each of these two materials
was placed at both 30% and 60% relative density for a total
of four specimens.
A "zoned" plug was also tested on ferric/ferrous water.
The first foot of stone contained 5% ferric sulfate and
15% sodium silicate. This section was intended to be a
water "pretreatment" area and was not considered to be
72
-------
part of the actual limestone plug. The remaining five feet
of the specimen was 3/8 x 0 stone. The entire six foot
long specimen was placed at about 30% relative density.
Four "blanks", 3/8 x 0 stone as received from the quarry,
were tested. Two of these specimens were placed at about
30% and 60% relative density and tested on ferric/ferrous
water. The other two were placed at about 0% and 30%
relative density and tested on South Pittsburgh city water.
As in Lab Cycle I, the test vessels were assigned vessel
numbers for identification purposes. A list of vessel
numbers and specimen descriptions is presented in Table A81
in the Appendix.
Testing was performed in a manner similar to Lab Cycle I.
Heads and flow rates were measured after 30 minutes, 3 hours,
and 8 hours during the first day of testing. Effluent pH
values were also recorded after 8 hours of testing. Begin-
ning on the second day of testing (1 day after start-up)
head, flow, pH, and specific conductance were recorded for
each specimen on a Monday-Wednesday-Friday schedule. All
specimens were tested for 50 days. Vessel effluent samples
were collected after 1, 24 and 50 days of testing.
Flow and effluent composition data for the 12 specimens
tested in Lab Cycle II are presented in Tables A82 through
A93. These data show that all specimens tested on synthetic
mine water effectively obstructed the flow of water and
treated water which passed thorugh the stone. Flow and
neutralization behaviors were generally more satisfactory
than those observed in Lab Cycle I.
Flow histories for specimens tested on synthetic mine water
are presented in Figure 32. Flow rates for Vessel No. 79
were always less than 0.5 ml/min, so this vessel's flow
history was not included. The flow histories show that
both increasing the placement density and increasing the
fines content of the stone resulted in significantly lower
flow rates. Increasing the fines content proved to be the
most effective means of obstructing water flow.
Flow data for the two specimens tested on tap water also
showed decreasing flow rates over the test period, indicating
that physical effects are at least partly responsible for
observed flow decreases. The flow magnitudes, however,
73
-------
300 -i
250 -
200 -
150 -
100 -
50
0
NATURAL STONE
0
LU
a: 100
VESSEL NO. 81
(3/8XO,DR~30%)
VESSEL NO. 82
(3/8X0. DR~ 60%)
i
10
15 20 25 30 35 40 45
50
-VESSEL NO. 76
(2XFINES.DR =
STONE WITH
INCREASED FINES
VESSEL NO. 77
{2XFINES,DR~60%
VESSEL N0.78
(3XFINES,DR = 30%)
45
50
VESSEL N0.80
("ZONED PLUG", DR=30%)
STONE WITH
ADDITIVES
0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
•VESSEL NO.75
(5%SODIUM SILICATE,DR~30%)
•VESSEL N0.74
(5% CaS04-1/2 H20, DR~30%)
-VESSEL NO.73
(5% PORTLAND CEMENT, DR~30%)
LAB CYCLE H-SPECIMEN FLOW HISTORIES
FIGURE 32
74
-------
were much larger than for specimens tested on synthetic
mine water. These data show a discontinuity at 10 days
after start-up due to an air pressure failure. Although
the two vessels operated without air pressure for only a
few minutes, it is believed that the stones' grain struc-
ture was permanently affected.
Physical examinations, described in Lab Cycle I, were con-
ducted on the ten test vessels from Lab Cycle II which were
tested on ferric/ferrous water. A summary of the data is
presented in Tables 15 to 23 and Figure 33 to 36 in the
text, and details of particle size, compressibility and
shear strength test data are given in the Appendix.
Discoloration of the limestones was observed for the entire
length of the specimens containing additives, and the length
of discoloration of the remaining stones was directly re-
lated to the quantity of fines and degree of compaction.
The natural stone at DR = 30% (Vessel No. 81) showed the
greatest discoloration while the stone with 3 x fines and
placed at DR = 60% was discolored for only the first six
inches from the influent end.
The surface measurement of the test specimens indicated
some volume decrease in all test vessels. This data is
included in Table 15. The following trends were observed:
1. Volume losses were largest for specimens with the
highest fines content and smallest for specimens
with the smallest fines content.
2. Higher placement densities resulted in lower volume
losses.
3. Volume losses for specimens containing additives
were comparable to losses for the corresponding natural
stone.
These data indicate that stones must be placed at higher
densities than DR = 60% to prevent excessive stone settlement,
Furthermore, the degree of compaction must be increased
with the percent of fines in the stone to compensate for
the greater compressibility of fines.
The in-place densities, relative densities and porosities
of trimmed cylindrical specimens from the test vessels are
listed in Table 15. Evaluating the in-place densities
75
-------
TABLE 15
VOLUME LOSS, DRY DENSITY AND POROSITY OF TRIMMED SPECIMENS
(AFTER 50 DAYS OF FERRIC-FERROUS MINE WATER PERCOLATION, 3/8 X 0 STONE,
LAB CYCLE II)
Test
Vessel
81
82
76
77
78
79
73
74
75
80
Material
Description
Natural
DR = 30
Natural
DR = 60
2 x Fines
DR - 30
2 x Fines
DR = 60
3 x Fines
DR -= 30
3 x Fines
DR - 60
5Z Cement
DR - 30
5Z Calcium
Sulfate Hemi-
hydrate
52 Sodium
Silicate
DR * 30
Zoned
DR • 30
Volume
Loss , Z
7
2
16
8
20
8
3
7
6
8
Dry Density
Yd,
pcf
95.2
97.7
92.8
96.2
100.1
106.1
110.8
115.0
115.8
118.0
118.6
117.9
121.2
116.3
112.1
117.6
111.7
116.5
99.0
86.5
97.0
88.2
103.7
106.0
77.8
86.8
92.3
90.4
95.7
100.8
Avg Yd,
pcf
95.2
100.8
113.9
118.2
116.5
115.3
94.2
99.3
85.6
97.7
Dra,
Z
6
13
-2
9
20
37
40
50
52
57
59
57
76
67
58
69
57
62
17
-25
11
-19
30
37
-63
-24
-5
-11
7
22
Porosity
n, Z
42.. 4
41.0
43.9
41.8
39.5
35.8
32.9
30.6
30.0
28.7
28.2
28.7
26.7
29.7
32.2
28.9
32.5
29.5
40.1
47.7
41.4
46.7
37.3
35.8
52.9
47.5
44.3
45.3
42.1
39.1
76
-------
using relative density based on minimum and maximum
densities (given in Table 16), the following observations
can be made:
1. Relative densities smaller than the placement densities
were measured in the natural stones in Vessels No. 81
and 82. A possible explanation for the low density could
be the washing out of fines in the area of sampling.
2. Specimens from Vessel No. 77 and Vessel No. 78, where
the stones were placed at DR = 30%, had average relative
densities of 47 and 67 percent, respectively. This
densification could have been caused by wetting of the
stone combined with the confining pressure. This is
supported by the large volume losses.
3. The negative relative densities in the stone with 5%
sodium silicate indicate adverse chemical reaction
leading to stone erosion.
TABLE 16
MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM DRY DENSITIES
Stone Stone Minimum Drya Maximum Dry
No. Size Description Density, PCF Density, PCF
1809 3/8 x 0 Natural 94.6 139.0
1809 3/8 x 0 2 x Fines 98.6 141.6
1809 3/8 x 0 3 x Fines 90.7 138.0
aMinimum by ASTM Method, D-2049
bMaximum by Modified Proctor Test, ASTM Method, D-1577
Finally, the comparison of the minimum and maximum densities
of the three stones indicates the stone with 2 x fines can
be placed at higher densities than the other two stones,
resulting in better physical properties.
The comparison of the particle size distribution of the
stones before and after percolation testing indicates an
increase of fines in all materials (Table 17). The in-
crease of fines is probably the result of precipitate
77
-------
TABLE 17
INCREASE IN FINES DUE TO
MINE WATER PERCOLATION
Test
Vessel
L
81
82
76
77
78
79
Stone
Size
ab Cycle II
3/8 x 0
3/8 x 0
3/8 x 0
3/8 x 0
3/8 x 0
3/8 x 0
Type of
Water
- 50 Days Pe
F/F
F/F
F/F
F/F
F/F
F/F
Sample
Description
rcolation - Stone
Natural DR = 30
DR « 60
2xFines DR = 30
DR = 60
3xFines DR = 30
DR - 60
Percent of Material
Passing No. 200 Sieve
Before
No. 1809
6.9
6.9
11.6
11.6
21.1
21.1
After
8.7
8.6
14.1
16.5
24.9
25.6
F/F as Ferric - Ferrous
DR = Relative Density in Percent
78
-------
accumulation. It can be concluded that the decrease of
flow experienced in all vessels was at least partially
due to precipitates plugging the stone voids.
The initial flow of the synthetic mine water through the
vessels was found to be related to the percent of fines
and density of the stones. To illustrate this, the initial
flow after three days of percolation has been plotted
against percent of material passing the No. 200 sieve in
Figure 33 and density in Figure 34.
Triaxial tests were conducted on trimmed cylindrical
specimens on all test vessel materials. The compression
test results are shown in Table 18 and Figure 35, and shear
strength in Table 19 and Figure 36.
These results illustrate that the compressibility and shear
strength are independent of the particle size distribution
in the mixes tested and are directly related in the material
density. The good agreement of the behavior of the specimens
from materials with additives with the natural stones indi-
cates that the additives did not increase the stiffness of
the material nor increase its shear strength.
79
-------
300
200 -
u.
_l
<
100 _
0
O NATURAL
0 2 X FINES
A 3X FINES
• WITH ADDITIVES
INDICATES
TEST VESSEL NUMBER
78,79
5 10 15 20
PERCENT OF MATERAL PASSING N0.200 SIEVE
LAB CYCLE IE SPECIMENS
INITIAL FLOW VS. FINES CONTENT
FIGURE 33
25
80
-------
300
200 -
o
O NATURAL
Q 2 X FINES
3 X FINES
WITH ADDITIVES
INDICATES
TEST VESSEL
'NUMBER
100 -
90 100
DRY DENSITY , )$ d ,
LAB CYCLE H SPECIMENS
INITIAL FLOW VS. DENSITY
FIGURE 34
81
-------
TABLE 18
SUMMARY OF COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS, LAB CYCLE II
(3/8 x 0 Stone, Trimmed Undisturbed Specimens)
Test
Vessel
81
82
76
77
78
79
73
74
75
80
Material
Description
Natural
Natural
2 x Fines
2 x Fines
3 x Fines
3 x Fines
5% Cement
5% CaS04
5% NaSi02
Zoned
Dry Density, Yd,pcf
Initial
95.2
96.2
110.8
118.0
121.2
117.6
99.0
103.7
86.8
90.4
Final
106.5
107.7
119.8
124.5
128.7
123.6
108.4
114.6
100.6
102.2
Axial Strain
@ 10 tsf
Load,E^,%
9.0
8.6
6.2
4.3
4.9
4.1
6.5
7.2
11.8
9.6
vv
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.35
0.42
0.42
0.41
0.37
0.45
0.40
82
-------
20
Q
Si
Li-
en
O
QC
h
(n
_i
-------
TABLE 19
STRENGTH PARAMETERS AND SHEAR STRENGTH FOR
A 2.0 TSF OVERBURDEN PRESSURE, 3/8 x 0 STONE, LAB CYCLE II
Test
Vessel
81
82
76
77
78
79
73
74
75
80.
Material
Description
Natural
Natural
2 x Fines
2 x Fines
3 x Fines
3 x Fines
5% Cement
5% Ca
5% NaS02
Zoned
Average
Dry
Density
Yd, Pcf
95.2
100.8
113.9
118.2
116.5
115.3
94.2
99.3
85.6
97.7
Average
Axial
Strain
at
Failure
16
15
12
11
16
8
13
18
15
Strength
Parameters
Cohesion
C, pcf
750
750
1,500
1,000
560
600
900
0
360
650
Friction
Angle,
-------
00
Ul
5000
U.
CO u_
4000
3000
h- ?
cn?
or u.
< z
LLI O
X O
2000 L-
75
WITH ADDITIVES
73
80
O
79
INDICATES TEST VESSEL NUMBER
1
90 100
DRY DENSITY,*d,PCF
10
120
LAB CYCLE IE SPECIMENS
SHEAR STRENGTH VS. DENSITY
FIGURE 36
-------
SECTION VII
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The support of the project by the Office of Research and
Monitoring of the Environmental Protection Agency and the
help provided by Dr. James M. Shackelford, the Project
Officer, and Mr. Ernst P. Hall, Chief of the Pollution
Control Analysis Branch, is acknowledged with sincere
thanks.
Messrs. Martin Wielesky and Ed Wielesky of the Winfield
Lime and Stone Company, Mr. Hutchinson of the Elkins
Limestone Company, and Mr. Garn of the Mineral Pigments
and Metals Company provided valuable technical support
during the investigative portion of this study.
The principal investigators of this study were Mr. R. G.
Penrose, Jr., of the Cyrus Wm. Rice Division - NUS Corpor-
ation and Mr. I. Holubec of E. D'Appolonia Consulting
Engineers, Inc.
87
-------
REFERENCES
1. Halliburton Company, "New Mine Sealing Techniques for
Water Pollution Abatement", FWPCA Publication No.
14010 DM0.
2. Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., "Studies in Limestone
Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage", FWQA Publication No,
14010 EIZ 01/70.
89
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
TABLE Al
SPECIMENS TESTED ON FERRIC WATER
VESSEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
1/2
1 X
1/2
1 X
1/2
1 X
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1 X
1 X
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1 X
1 X
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1 X
1 X
X
0
X
0
X
0
X
X
X
X
50
0
X
X
X
X
50
0
X
X
X
X
50
0
0 size containing
10% slag
size containing 10% slag
0 size containing
size containing 5%
0 size containing
5% bentonite
bentonite
10% flyash
size containing 10% flyash
0 size
0 size
50 m size
0 size
m size
size
0 size
0 size
50 m size
0 size
m size
size
0 size
0 size
0 size
50 m size
m size
size
93
-------
TABLE A2
SPECIMENS TESTED ON FERRIC/FERROUS WATER
VESSEL NO
DESCRIPTION
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
1/2
1 X
1/2
1 X
1/2
1 X
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1 X
1 X
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1 X
1 X
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1 X
1 X
X
0
X
0
X
0
X
X
X
X
50
0
X
X
X
X
0 size containing
10% slag
size containing 10% slag
0 size containing
size containing 5%
0 size containing
5% bentonite
bentonite
10% flyash
size containing 10% flyash
0 size
0 size
50 m size
0 size
m size
size
0 size
0 size
0 size
50 m size
50 m size
0
X
X
X
X
size
0 size
0 size
50 m size
0 size
50 m size
0
size
94
-------
VESSEL NO,
TABLE A3
SPECIMENS TESTED ON FERROUS WATER
DESCRIPTION
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1809,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1355,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
#1337,
1/2
1 X
1/2
1 X
1/2
1 X
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1 X
1 X
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1 X
1 X
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/2
1 X
1 X
X
0
X
0
X
0
X
X
X
X
50
0
X
X
X
X
50
0
X
X
X
X
50
0
0 size containing
10% slag
size containing 10% slag
0 size containing
size containing 5%
0 size containing
5% bentonite
bentonite
10% flyash
size containing 10% flyash
0 size
0 size
50 m size
0 size
m size
size
0 size
0 size
50 m size
0 size
m size
size
0 size
0 size
50 m size
0 size
m size
size
95
-------
TABLE A4
INITIAL PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
MATERIAL NO. 1809
(Percent of Material Smaller by Weight)
Sieve
"Size
1 1/2
3/4
3/8
4
8
16
30
50
100
200-
Stone Size
1x0
100.0
94.0
61.7
33.9
19.6
10.4
5.5
3.1
1.8
1.2
1 x 50
100.0
96.2
67.5
39.2
21.5
9.7
3.5
0.5
0.2
0.1
1/2 x 0
—
100.0
84.0
42.5
24.9
14.2
8.1
4.8
2.9
1.9
1/2 x 50
100.0
79.8
40.1
22.0
10.1
3.6
0.4
0.1
0.1
1/4 x 0
100.0
88.3
58.1
34.2
19.5
10.9
6.1
3.9
1/8 x 0
100.0
65.9
33.3
16.6
9.0
5.5
3.9
Sieve
Size
1 1/2
3/4
3/8
4
8
16
30
50
100
200
Stone Size
Flyash
Added
1x0
100.0
97.1
69.5
44.6
30.3
20.4
14.2
10.8
8.9
7.5
1/2 x 0
100.0
83.3
51.3
33.8
21.8
14.7
10.9
8.9
7.4
Slag
Added
1x0
100.0
95.8
60.8
35.0
21.5
12.5
7.0
3.9
2.3
1.4
1/2 x 0
100.0
78.4
40.3
25.3
15.2
9.1
5.6
3.5
2.3
Bentonite
Added
1x0
100.0
93.0
65.3
40.5
26.3
16.6
11.4
8.7
6.9
5.2
1/2 x 0
100.0
82.6
43.9
25.7
15.0
9.6
6.9
5.2
4.0
96
-------
TABLE A5
INITIAL PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
MATERIAL NO. 1355
(Percent of Material Smaller by Weight)
Sieve
Size
1 1/2
3/4
3/8
4-
8
16
30
50
100
200
Stone Size
1x0
100.0
87.6
65.6
35.5
20.4
11.8
6.6
4.0
2.7
1.9
1 x 50
100.0
88.6
67.3
35.5
18.8
10.0
5.2
2.2
1.6
1.3
1/2 x 0
100.0
90.0
47.8
25.5
13.8
7.5
4.5
3.0
2.1
1/2 x 50
100.0
91.6
43.5
21.5
9.7
4.0
0.9
0.5
0.4
1/4 x 0
100.0
77.6
42.0
23.8
15.4
10.6
7.7
5.6
1/8 x 0
100.0
84.5
51.6
32.6
20.5
13.1
8.5
97
-------
TABLE A6
INITIAL PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
MATERIAL NO. 1377
(Percent of Material Smaller by Weight)
Sieve
Size
1 1/2
3/4
3/8
4
8
16
30
50
100
200
Stone Size
1x0
100.0
87.9
73.2
43.8
27.6
19.9
16.1
13.6
10.7
6.9
t
1 x 50
100.0
82.4
60.7
28.1
13.7
6.9
3.9
2.0
1.5
1.2
1/2 x 0
100.0
91.5
53.1
34.5
25.5
20.9
17.5
13.7
8.8
1/2 x 50
100.0
90.4
42.5
21.0
11.8
7.2
4.1
3.1
2.6
1/4 x 0
100.0
79.8
46.2
32.6
25.7
21.3
16.7
10.8
1/8 x 0
100.0
85.1
58.8
45.6
36.4
26.9
16.1
98
-------
TABLE A7
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 1
(STONE 11809, 1/2 x 0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% SLAG)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
f>
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
1»
19
20
21
22
23
?4
25
26
27
28
29
30
.31
32
33
3*1
35
36
37
3?
.19
40
41
42
m
44
4S
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72. n
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.'"1
72.0
72.i
72.?
72.0
72.0
72.0
12.1
72.0
7 2. '"i
72.?
72.:
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72. ^
72.0
72. n
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min )
875.
63C.
610.
f.OO.
57C.
500.
315.
240.
220.
214.
200.
200.
230.
2CO.
1dO.
176.
177.
130.
19C.
1NO.
130.
110.
190.
180.
155.
186.
176.
ISO.
175.
172.
164.
164.
144.
132.
112.
150.
114.
100.
100.
00.
92.
R4.
38.
90.
00.
34.
80.
84.
76.
RO.
60.
70.
54.
pH
3.2
3.5
3.2
3.1
3.0
3.4
3.2
3.2
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.1
2.9
3.1
3.0
3.0
2.8
3.0
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.0
3.2
2.7
3.1
3.1
3.0
2.7
2.6
3.3
2.9
2.9
3.0
2. a
3.0
3.C
2.9
3.1
3. 1
3.0
3. 1
3.4
3.5
2.9
2.9
2.8
2.5
2.U
2.6
2.7
3.2
SP. FERROUS
COND. IRON
(ftmho) (rag/1)
1R'~0 7.6
175C
1900
175C
ir,~o
]!\r r>
1700 5.6-
1650
1800
1650
1350
175C
1350
1900 9.0
1b50
1800
1750
1550
1950
2250
1900 6.8
1900
2 0 •"> 0
2000
1850
2150
1850
135C 8.5
165C
2350
2600
1750
1750
200 C
2100 11.0
2150
210C
205C
2000
2100
2050
2100 7.0
2050
180C
1950
2100
1900
195C
2150 9.C
2100
2300
225C
2400
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mq/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
126. 265. 1002. 234.
74.1* 230. 978. 60r>.
125. 205. 1057. 400.
146. 213. 112fl. 485.
1"6. 183. 1062. 479.
139. 270. 1220. 495.
118. 265. 123U. 460.
122. 223. 1236. 541.
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
99
-------
TABLE A3
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 2
(STONE 11809, 1x0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% SLAG)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
n
5
6
7
p
9
T"
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
1P
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
76
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
15
36
37
38
3"
Uf1
41
42
"3
44
45
46
47
43
4
-------
TABLE A9
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 3
(STONE #1809, 1/2 X 0 SIZE CONTAINING 5% BENTONITE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
rj
6
7
8
q
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1f,
19
20
21
22
?.T
24
?5
."if.
27
1°:
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
39
3"
40
41
42
4J
!|(|
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72."
72.0
72."
72.0
72.1
72.- 1
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
7>2.0
72. •»
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
77.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.n
72.1
72."
72.^
72."
72.0
72. "
72.,"
72. A
72. n
72.0
72."
72. )
72. r.
72.0
72.0
72."
72."
72."
72.0
72.0
72. D
72.1
72.0
^ 2. •"!
72. i
72.0
72.0
72.1
FLOW
(ml/min)
25.
25.
13.
10.
20.
25.
20.
20.
1ft.
12.
25.
10.
25.
. 25.
9.
5.
7.
10.
12.
12.
12,
15.
1C.
1C.
15,
10.
1C.
1C.
3.
1C.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
8.
12.
10.
5.
8.
R.
7.
6.
7.
a.
4.
3.
3.
16.
6.
7.
4.
PH
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.5
5.2
5.2
5.3
5.7
5.8
5.5
6.4
6.2
b..3
5.9
6.7
6.7
6.3
6.2
6.2
6.9
6.7
6.4
6.5
6.5
6.3
b.7
o.7
7.0
6.7
6.3
6.3
5.7
6.2
6 .4
G.r
6.6
b. 1
6.6
6.6
6.0
6.5
7.3
6.4
6.1
6.5
6.6
5.9
6.4
7.2
0.9
6.1
6.3
6.6
SP . FERROUS
COND . IRON
Oimho) (mg/1)
2000 < 1.0
1800
2100
2000
18CC
1750
185^ < 1.0
1950
H5C
1650
1900
2^00
T»50
2050 < 1.C
20r C
210C
V)50
1900
2 IOC
22"C
20rc < l.C
21"0
2"5C
2 "50
20 5 C
2150
2J50
2?"" < 1.0
2050
2150
2VC
2030
1P5T
1 150
21"" < 1 . 0
220^
?2">C
21"°
2100
220C
2200
16"C < 1.0
22f C
2200
?1 ""0
7150
2050
2)50
215C < 1 .0
2150
2100
215C
2150
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
33.9 335. 1C78. 10.8
34.9 346. 990. . 18.0
C.34 426. 1075. 69.0
1.2 4bJ. 1070. 83.0
0.84 MU6. 964. <4.0
O.'JV 495. 1167. <4.0
0.23 5°8. 1197. <«.0
0.14 466. 1155. 23.0
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
101
-------
TABLE AID
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 4
(STONE #1809, 1 x 0 SIZE CONTAINING 5% BENTONITE)
DAYS
AFTER HEAD FLOW
START-UP* (in) (ml/min)
1
2
3
4
5
<3
7
A
1 -
1".
1 1
12
13
14
1S
16
17
13
11
O."\
'i 1
22
23
24
25
25
27
?3
29
30
11
32
3?
HI
35
If.
37
38
39
40
14 1
'42
U3
44
45
46
47
18
49
5"
51
52
53
72. 5
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
T2.0
72.0
72.. 1
72.0
72.0
72."
72.0
72.°
72.0
72.0
72. C
•»?.o
72.C
72. j
72.0
72.0
72.^
-I2.~i
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.-"1
72. •>
72.-:
7 2 . 0
72.1
72.^
72.-"
72.0
72.0
72. n
72. )
72.".
72. 1
72."
7 2 . P.
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
•72.7
72.0
72. ?
72. ?
72.0
72.-
72.0
150.
75.
46.
15.
10.
14.
13.
15.
10.
13.
20.
7.
20.
20.
3.
o5.
3.
20.
1<*.
6.
in.
20.
1C.
20.
20.
1U.
12.
1C.
1C.
10.
10.
10.
16.
16.
12.
1C.
7.
1 " .
1 3.
8.
12.
12.
12.
1 1.
.10.
8.
U.
3.
3.
R.
5.
tt.
4.
SP. FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
pH COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(^mhb) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
3.3
3.6
3.7
6.1
5.7
5.8
5.8
D.2
6.2
5.9
5.1
5.2
3.7
5.0
6.6
6.6
6.4
6 .7
b.6
6.6
7. 1
7.0
o.U
6.8
6.7
0.2
6.2
6.6
5.7
U.U
3.9
6.6
6.2
D.5
5.7
5.9
6.0
u.9
5.fl
5.8
6.4
6.3
6. 3
b.6
7.0
3.3
3.1
3.0
2.7
2.7
3.C-
3.0
3.7
175C 7.2 93.3 245. 1028.
170C
175C
2" •"'00
1900
2100
170P 1.3 25. U 300. 1020.
17rO
1850
1650
1700
i'jon
175C
1^50 3.C 5U.4 298. 1117.
1750
iesc
1750
1750
1900
2150
1°00 <1.0 25.5 400. 1100.
1950
1R50
1850
1 "">0
1850
1fl50
175C 2.0 48.4 354. 1033.
175C
1850
i«nr
175C
155C
1750
190C 2.0 , 47.4 420. 1231.
1950
1900
iaon
1750
iar-o
19-^0
19rc 1.7 47.9 400. 1168.
1QT
1-JOO
1800
2 c r c
20' C
2100
215C 1.0 91.4 293. 1309.
2-VC
20^0
205C
215C
10.8
7.2
65.0
22.0
<4.0
31. <*
P.6.0
300.
•Start-up date was 3/16/72.
102 .
-------
TABLE All
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 5
(STONE #1809, 1/2 x 0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% FLYASH)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
2n
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
23
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
3f>
37
38
39
uf>
U1
1.2
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72."*
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ?
72.?
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ">
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. "
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72. n
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
125.
75.
69.
50.
50.
65.
88.
5C.
56.
40.
50.
28.
4C.
45.
31.
28.
29.
35.
30.
28.
30.
30.
30.
30.
25.
24.
28.
20.
17.
2C.
2C.
20.
20.
20.
16.
50.
14.
28.
28.
15.
20.
20.
24.
21 .
22.
24.
17.
16.
16.
20.
45.
14.
14.
pH
6.5
6 .8
5.8
6.3
5.4
6.3
6.0
6.2
6.3
6.6
6.8
6.2
6.5
6.2
6.8
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.8
6.8
7.C
7.0
6.9
6.9
6.7
6.8
7. 1
7.2
7.1
6.4
6.6
7.1
6.7
7.0
6 .6
6.7
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.2
6.3
7.0
6.8
6.7
6.8
6.5
5.6
6.2
6.1
6.4
5.9
6.2
6.5
SP. FERROUS
COND. IRON
(fimho) (mg/1)
1800 10.0
1850
2000
195C
1850
215C
1800 < 1.0
1900
1850
1900
195C
2150
1950
2050 < 1.0
2050
200C
2000
18CC
2150
23r>0
2050 < 1.0
.2100
21CO
2050
2 ICC
2100
2000
2nO < 1.0
2050
2200
2200
2150
1f5C
2000
22«0 < 1.0
2200
2200
2150
210C
215C
2100
2150 < 1.0
2150
2050
2100
215C
2C5C
2100
21CO < 1.0
2150
2300
215C
2250
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
0.16 492. 982. <4.0
l.t 415. 919. 104.
0.06 U80. 1055. 69.0
0.16 505. 1101. 85.0
<0.03 476. 10U2. 19.2
<0.03 538. 1186. 217.
0.05 612. 1133. <4.0
0.03 506. 1155. 15.4
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
103
-------
TABLE A12
* FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 6
(STONE #1809, 1x0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% FLYASH)
, DAYS
.•• AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Q
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2R
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
. «2
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
5"
"=1
52
53
HEAD
(in) (i
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
il/min)
75.
60.
35.
25.
30.
47.
162.
95.
60.
56.
60.
42.
50.
50.
27.
26.
30.
30.
24.
20.
24.
25.
30.
20.
45.
28.
24.
18.
13.
16.
15.
16.
18.
20.
14.
15.
12.
18.
18.
12.
14.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
12.
12.
10.
16.
13.
15.
10.
SP.
pH COND .
6.8
6.5
6.3
6.5
6.3
6.5
6.3
6.6
6.7
6.7
6.8
6.7
6.7
6.4
6.7
6.6
6.9
7.0
7.2
7.1
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.3
6.9
7.1
7.1
7. 2
6.8
6.9
7.1
7.3
7.1
7.2
6.9
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
6.7
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.1
7.3
6.7
6.0
6.6
6.U
6.5
6.7
6.6
6.8
(>tmho)
2050
1900
2000
1900
1850
2050
1650
1750
18CO
1800
1800
2000
1900
2100
2000
2C5C
1900
175C
2200
1850
2100
2100
2100
2050
2100
2050
2000
21CO
2100
2250
2300
2250
1950
2000
2150
2200
2250
2150
2150
2250
2150
2150
220C
2100
210C
2200
2150
2100
2100
2150
2250
2200
2200
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.U
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.C
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
<0.03
19.0
480.
395.
1072.
918.
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
< 4.0
7.2
0.75
467.
1100.
16.0
<0.03
500.
1147.
36.0
0.05
532.
1069.
27.0
<0.03
538.
1166,
81.4
0.05
606.
1174.
< 4.0
<0.03
499.
1162.
76.8
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
104
-------
TABLE A13
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 7
(STONE #1809, 1/8 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
fl
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
23
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
35
37
33
39
40
4 1
42
43
4 '4
45
46
47
48
49
50
5 1
C2
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
175.
125.
98.
100.
100.
79.
70,
40.
42.
25.
25.
26.
25.
35.
21 .
19.
18.
30.
22.
20.
26.
25.
25.
25.
25.
20.
22.
13.
19.
22.
24.
18.
24.
8.
Q
14.
9.
10.
28.
1 1.
12.
12.
12.
10.
1 1.
10.
6.
6.
6.
12.
10.
12.
6.
SP . FERROUS TOTAL
pH COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM
6.2
6 .4
6.5
6.5
6.7
6.6
6.4
6.6
6.8
7.0
7.0
6.9
6.9
6.7
6.6
6.3
7.0
7.1
7.3
7.2
7.4
7.3
7.9
7.3
7.0
7. 1
7.2
7.0
7.2
6.8
7.0
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.2
6.9
6.9
6.6
6 .9
6.2
6.9
7. 1
7.3
6.7
6. 1
6.5
6 .2
6.4
6.9
6.8
6.8
(/imho) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
1700 < 1.0 0.03 U79.
190C
2000
1850
1800
2250
1750 < 1.0 0.03 1J12.
1850
185C
1850
1950
2000
1950
2100 < 1 .0 0.03 471.
2000
205C
1900
1800
2150
165C
2250 <- 1.0 <0.03 510.
220C
2150
2100
2100
2150
2100
2100 < 1 .0 0.87 516.
2100
2300
2300
2150
1900
1900
2C5C < 1.0 0.23 478.
215C
2250
2100
2100
2150
2100
2C50 < 1.0 20.0 - 581.
215C
2050
2050
2100
2COC
2100
2000 < 1.0 23.0 456.
2100
2150
2100
2150
HOT PHT.
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1)
1013. <«.0
939.
-------
TABLE A14
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 8
(STONE #1809, 1/4 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
3U
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
U2
43
44
45
46
47
4B
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
•*2.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
275.
250.
210.
200.
175.
222.
132.
130.
120.
100.
90.
86.
90.
80.
90.
59.
61.
60.
50.
52.
UU.
40.
60.
45.
40.
36.
46.
22.
29.
28.
32.
28.
24.
28.
14.
14.
12.
16.
16.
13.
16.
12.
12.
12.
10.
12.
6.
10.
8.
14.
10.
8.
6.
SP . FERROUS TOTAL
pH COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM
5.7
5.3
6.6
6.5
6.0
6.7
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.6
6.6
6.9
6.7
6.7
5.7
5.7
6.5
6.9
7.0
7.0
6.4
7.3
7.8
7.0
7.3
6.7
6.3
6.7
6.7
6.5
6.3
6.9
6.8
7.0
7.0
7.3
7.2
7.1
7.1
6.7
7.2
6.9
7.1
7.2
7.4
7.1
6.3
6.9
6.7
6.9
6.9
7.1
7.0
C/tmho) (mg/1) (mg/D (mg/1)
1750 < 1.0 37.0 390.
160C
1700
1600
1500
1900
1600 1.3 31. 0 346.
175C
175C
1700
175C
1900
1650
2000 1.0 22.0 417.
1750
185C
1800
175C
205C
170C
2050 < 1.0 24.5 478.
2100
205C
1850
200C
1950
1900
1850 < 1.0 41.4 427.
1900
2000
2COC
1850
1800
1R50
215C < 1.0 11.5 538.
2300
2350
2250
2200
2300
2250
220C < 1.0 0.17 628.
2250
2250
215C
2250
2200
2150
2200 < 1.0 0.34 519.
220C
2250
2250
2100
HOT PHT.
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1)
977. 202.
960. <«l.O
1064. 59.1
1170. 79.0
1076. 15.4
1197. <4.0
1216. < 4 . 0
11R4. 19.2
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
106
-------
TABLE A15
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 9
(STONE #1809, 1/2 x BOM SIZE)
DAVS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
-------
TABLE A16
PLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 10
(STONE #1809, 1/2 X 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2?
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
«9
5C
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.U
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
7.1.0
72.0
r'LOW
(ml/ntin)
*-0.
17s!
140.
120.
110.
170.
130.
90.
90.
84.
120.
74.
90.
75.
70.
68.
62.
61.
58.
60.
48.
45.
50.
44.
50.
46.
48.
52.
36.
40.
40.
44.
44.
40.
44.
40.
35.
50.
4-4.
35.
44.
144.
36.
33.
36.
36.
30.
30.
28.
40.
31.
30.
26.
pH
7.1
5.2
5.3
5.5
6,6
5.7
5.5
5.8
5.6
6.3
6.3
6.0
6.2
6.0
6.2
6.1
6.2
5.9
6.5
6.2
6.8
7.3
7.3
7.1
7.0
6.8
7.0
7.0
6.6
6.6
6.8
7.0
7.0
6.9
6.9
6.8
7.0
6.9
6.9
5.B
6.9
6.1
6.9
7.1
7.3
6.9
6.3
6.6
6.5
6.6
6.7
7.2
7.0
SP.
COND.
(/i mho)
1BOO
1650
1750
1700
IftOO
1950
1700
1800
18DO
1800
1850
1950
19f>C
1S5C
1750
190C
1900
1850
210C
1400
220C
210C
2100
190C
205C
21^0
2000
2100
2050
2300
230C
2100
1P50
2050
2250
2150
2200
215C
2100
2200
2200
210C
225C
2100
215C
2200
210C
2200
220C
2100
2200
2100
2250
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
Cmg/1)
-------
TABLE A17
AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 11
(STONE 11809, 1 x 50 M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER HEAD FLOW pH
START-UP* (in) (ml'/min)
1
2
1
14
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2J.5
26.0
26.0
27.0
27.0
2n. 1
25.0
25.0
25.^
25.5
27.0
2R.1
29.0
29.5
30.0
30.5
29.5
30. n
32.0
31.0
3480.
3785.
3«t6C.
3330.
3230.
2 P U ? .
2770.
2750.
21*60.
2400.
2420.
2340.
232C.
2330.
2270.
2220.
2170.
2200.
216C.
2120.
SP . FERROUS
COND. IRON
(pmho) (mg/1)
2.8
3.C
2.7
3.0
2.8
3.1
2.9
3.0
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.4
2.8
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.6
2.6
3.0
2.7
1SOO
165C
-210C
165C
1800
1500
1600
1650
1800
160C
190C
2050
2000
205C
1850
2C5C
195C
1700
2400
130C
9
6
9
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
9.0 154.
6.3 160.
141. 978. 637.
95. 967. 590.
9.0 189.
90. 1071. 685.
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
109
-------
TABLE A18
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 12
(STONE #1809, 1x0 SIZE)
HEAD
•* (in)
21. A
3 ,-> -)
32. '
?2.5
.'. a . *
2 1 . r>
3 1.ri
•T.5
12.ri
n.5
iu..1
16.5
38. S
.1 8 . 5
'4 n . "•
J 1 . f»
U2.r)
n :. a
U^."
143.0
FLOW
(ral/min)
38^0.
37S5.
3820.
363C.
^30.
3 ^ C r,> .
3110.
2P50.
i7<»0.
27 or.
1720.
^^20.
2650.
2530.
2^0.
2KOC.
2U''S.
2«2C.
Itttif.
235C.
PH
2.S
3.1
2.7
2.9
2.6
3.0
2.8
2.9
2.8
?.8
.7
.!.5
2.7
2.7
2.6
2.8
2.5
2.6
2.9
2.6
SP.
COND.
fyimho)
1750
165C
2200
170C
20^C
150C
U.5C
17CC
1800
175^
165C
220C
210C
220C
2COO
21">C
21°C
17SO
2S5C
27SC
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
8.8 160. 125. 1025. 652.
•»
9.9 163. 90. 973. 648.
10.0 193. 90. 1160. 846.
ate was 3/16/72.
110
-------
TABLE A19
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 13
(STONE #1355, 1/8 X 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
IK
15
16
17
18
19
2C
2 1
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
10
-1
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
"72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72,0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
•72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
50.
30.
30.
20.
40.
23.
39.
35.
26.
20.
50.
16.
30.
30.
14.
14.
18.
20.
16.
14.
16.
15.
20.
12.
15.
14.
14.
16.
9.
14.
. 12.
10.
12.
16.
16.
16.
12.
16.
16.
15.
12.
10.
16.
10.
1 1.
10.
8.
fl.
10.
16.
15.
11.
10.
SP. FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
pH COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(
6.3
6.3
5.5
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.8
5.9
fe.5
6.3
5.9
6.5
6. 1
b.4
6.7
6.4
6.3
6.3
6.2
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.4
7.4
7.3
7.3
7.1
7.3
7.1
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.2
7,2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
6.5
7.2
6.6
7.2
7.3
7.5
7.1
6.5
6.8
6.6
6.8
7.0
6.2
7.1
.fLmtio) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
1900 1.0 13.0 417. 999. 299.
1700
175C
175C
165C
170C
18^0 < 1.0 2.3 452. 928. 205.
IflCO
1P5C
135^
165C
1«5C
1950
2050 < 1.0 0.^4 "32. 1081. 104.
190C
2C5C
1900
1700
2200
210C
2250 < 1.0 <0.03 525. 1170. 126.
2150
215C
2100
2KC
2150
215C
2050 < 1.0 0.03 499. 8fl2. 407.
2 1 o C
2150
2300
220C
1900
195C
215C < 1.0 <0.03 550. 1145. 15.4
215C
2250
210C
2100
225C
215C
215C < 1.0 0.35 519. 1171. <4.0
225C
2150
2C5C
2200
2100
215C , „
215C < 1.0 0.03 518. 1142. 23.0
215C
2300
220C
2300
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
Ill
-------
TABLE A20
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 14
(STONE #1355, 1/4 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
HO
41
42
43
44
1*5
46
47
as
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72,0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
125.
75.
71.
75.
60.
76.
84.
55.
56.
to.
75.
38.
35.
35.
19.
21.
17.
20.
22.
16.
18.
20.
30.
20.
15.
14.
16.
16.
14.
14.
14.
14.
11.
16.
16.
16.
12.
14.
16.
1 3.
14.
12.
24.
13.
12.
12.
8.
9.
12.
20.
14.
10.
10.
PH
6. 1
5.8
6. 1
5.8
5.8
6.0
5.9
6.2
6.4
6.7
6.7
6.6
6.8
6.4
6.6
5.7
6.7
6.7
6.8
6.9
7.3
7.6
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.3
7.3
6.7
7.C
7.0
7.2
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.0
7.0
7.1
7.1
7.2
6.3
7.3
6.8
7.1
7.4
7.5
7.0
6.5
6.8
6.7
6.6
6.9
7.0
7.1
SP . FERROUS
COND. IRON
J£unho) (mg/1)
180C < 1.0
180C
1900
1850
1800
2C5C
1750 < 1.0
1850
1850
1750
175C
19.SP
2000
2050 < 1.0
1900
1950
1850
165C
2100
2C5C
2250 < 1.0
2100
2100
2000
2100
2150
21CO
200P < 1.0
2150
2250
230C
2300
1950
1950
2200 < 1.0
225C
2250
2150
210C
2250
215C
2150 < 1.0
2250
210C
205C
2200
215C
2150
2200 < 1.0
2100
24CC
2450
235C
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
0.89 447. 974. <4.0
3.3 418. 937. 10.8
0.69 47,1 1063. 126.
<0.03 520. 1199. 50.5
0.03 519. 1015. 38.4
<0.03 550. 116«. 19.2
0.06 511. 1172. <
-------
TABLE A21
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 15
(STONE 11355, 1/2 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
HEAD
(in)
58.0
59.5
72.0
57.0
56.0
51.5
53.0
52.0
52.0
51.5
51.5
52.0
50.5
50.0
48.5
50.0
48.0
48.0
49.0
43.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3450.
3420.
3420.
3300.
3160.
2820.
2720.
2530.
2430.
2380.
2360.
2340.
2310.
2370.
2200.
2200.
2130.
2180.
2100.
2000.
pH
2.9
3.2
3.2
3.0
2.8
3.2
2.9
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.6
2.7
2.9
3.1
SP.
COND.
(/i mho)
1800
1550
170C
1650
1750
1500
160C
1600
1700
1650
1800
2050
2050
1950
1850
2100
1950
1550
2350
2200
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
3.3
10.0
10.0
HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
161.
150.
160.
98.
1036.
989.
511.
533.
193.
90.
1111.
654.
•Start-up date was 3/16/72.
113
-------
TABLE A22
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 16
(STONE 11355, 1/2 X 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
23
21
22
23
24
25
25
27
20
29
3C
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
.39
40
41
U2
43
114
45
46
147
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ral/min)
275.
250.
220.
250.
240.
300.
196.
200.
176.
166.
180.
152.
160.
165.
150.
142.
138.
150.
140.
140.
136.
135.
150.
140.
130.
140.
146.
132.
130.
132.
128.
104.
88.
68.
72.
64.
62.
66.
70.
55.
60.
6G.
56.
70.
60.
56.
50.
50.
48.
58.
60.
54.
52.
SP.
pH COND.
6.1
5.0
4.0
3.8
3.6
5.2
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.2
3.1
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.8
2.9
3.3
3.1
3.0
3.3
3.4
3.2
3.2
2.9
3.3
3.1
2. a
3.2
3.1
3.4
3.7
3.5
3.1
3.0
2.9
3.0
3.0
2.6
3.2
2.9
3.0
3.2
3.4
2.9
3. 1
2.8
2.5
2.5
2.6
2.9
3.0
(Mmho)
1500
1550
165C
1550
155C
1650
1550
1600
160C
160C
1700
1fiOC
1900
195C
175C
1800
180C
1550
2100
1950
200C
1950
1900
185C
1E5C
2050
1750
200C
1950
215C
255C
1750
160C
1850
2C5C
2 IOC
2000
200C
1950
19"C
2000
2100
220C
1900
200C
2050
190C
2100
2100
2C5C
245 C
215C
2400
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
4.5
4.0
3.8
7.2
8.5
10.2
10.0
8.0
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM
(mg/1) (mg/D
HOT PHT.
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1)
50.9
71.4
340.
267.
985.
973.
7.2
126.
118.
225.
1060.
356.
140.
210.
1160.
388.
135.
186.
1069.
626.
131.
285.
1205,
457.
119.
242.
1215.
502.
125.
211.
1211.
522.
•Start-up date was 3/16/72.
114
-------
TABLE A23
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR' TEST VESSEL NO. 17
(STONE #1355, 1 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
U
5
h
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
1«
15
16
17
13
19
20
HEAD
(in)
58.0
59.5
72.0
59.3
53.5
52.5
50.5
17.5
«. 9.0
47.5
47.0
U7.5
Hh.5
U6.5
KU.5
45.5
«lt. "*
H3.0
uu.r
i*1.5
FLOW
(rol/min)
3t50.
3600.
3U90.
3420.
326C.
292">.
27oC.
2GCC.
2520.
2420.
2U2.
2UDO.
1370.
2330.
2280.
2180.
225C.
2220.
214C.
2100.
pH
2.9
3.U
3.Q
2.8
2.7
3. 1
2.8
3.0
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.5
2.6
2.9
2.5
SP.
COND.
Qimho)
175C
16^'C
1800
17CO
180C
150C
1550
17K
165C
IflOC
1810
210C
21?C
205C
1P50
2000
20?0
1500
2tOC
22C-C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
8.5 150. 160. 999. 526.
1C.C 1U1. 99. 982. 515.
10.0 190. 94. 1110. 711.
•-
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
115
-------
TABLE A24
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 18
(STONE 11355, 1x0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
HEAD
FLOW
START-UP* (in) (ml/min)
1
2
3
it
5
6
7
fl
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
39
3<*
40
4 1
42
U3
4 '4
45
46
47
4fl
149
SO
51
52
53
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72,?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72, "
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
19CO.
1660.
1520,
1480.
1400,
1100.
1010.
820.
760.
720.
720.
63C.
33C.
65C.
620.
600.
60C.
600.
620.
620.
600.
555.
560.
5<*Q.
550.
54C.
528.
500.
SOP.
€> J u *
492.
i* It.
368.
348.
332.
36C.
325.
340.
110.
310.
3C8.
316.
3C8.
330.
310.
304,
296.
312.
300.
320.
310.
210.
300.
SP. FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
pH COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
Utnho) (fflg/1) (mg/1) (rog/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
2.9
J.5
3. 1
2.8
2.9
3.2
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.9
2.7
2.9
2.9
2.8
2.9
2.7
2.7
3. 1
2.9
2.8
3.0
3.1
2.9
3.2
2.6
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.7
2.8
3.2
3.2
3.1
2.7
2.5
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.8
2.9
2.8
2.6
2.8
2.9
2.6
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.7
1650 8.0 123. 200. 1006. 389.
170C
1750
1750
165C
155C
17CC 8.8 140. 143. 972. 421.
170C
170C
160C
165C
190C
1850
20^0 3.5 168. 135. 1086. 601.
175C
1850
1900
140C
2200
2250
2100 10.0 138. 125. 1126. 711.
205C
2C5C
2150
180C
225C
1750
1800 11.5 138. 140. 1051. 584.
2COC
2400
29"C
175C
1650
2000
2450 11.0 166. 175. 1221. 797.
230C
2250
2400
220C
210C
2100
215C 11.0 176. 147. 1211. 373.
265C
2250
235C
250C
220C
2550
2700 10.0 161. 112. 1221. 787.
?UOC
290C
275C
300C
•Start-up date was 3/16/72.
116
-------
TABLE A25
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 19
(STONE #1337, 1/8 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
tl
7
8
9
1"
11
12
13
1*4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3C
31
32
13
34
35
36
37
38
39
4"
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
UQ
50
T;1
52
53
HEAD FLOW
(in) (ml/min)
72.0
72.0
72. ^
72.0
T2.'1
72.?
72.:
72.1^
•73.0
72."
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. i
72.")
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. n
72.0
72. 1
72."
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72."
72.0
72.0
7 2. a
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72."
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.n
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
25.
1C.
9.
10.
H.
22.
12.
20.
16.
14.
25.
13.
25.
2C.
11.
11.
1 1.
15.
16.
140.
16.
20.
30.
20.
20.
1U.
14.
16.
9.
14.
14.
10.
20.
20.
14.
14.
8.
16.
16.
1 1.
16.
12.
24.
14.
13.
12.
12.
8.
10.
18.
12.
15.
14.
SP. FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
pH COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITV
(Minho) (mq/1) (mq/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
6.9
6.C
5.7
6.1
5.7
5.9
5.6
5.8
6.0
6.5
6.3
6.3
6.5
6.4
6.7
6.8
6.7
6.7
6.8
6.2
7.3
6.9
7.1
6.9
6.5
6.4
6.8
7. 1
7.2
6.4
6.4
6.8
6.4
6.3
6.4
6.7
6.5
7.0
7.3
6.1
6.4
7.2
6.7
6.3
6.4
7.1
6.0
6.4
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.5
6.3
2000 < 1.0 0.29 161. 972. 25.2
1<)5C
1R5C
1950
1(350
18SO
100C < 1.0 0.04 291. 942. 14.4
19CC
1950
190C
1900
2C5C
1950
215C < 1.0 0.31 311. 1025. 62.4
1300
2100
2050
1950
2250
2150
2250 < 1.0
-------
TABLE A26
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 20
(STONE #1337, 1/4 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
u
5
6
7
R
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
2?
21
22
?3
24
25
26
27
28
29
3^
31
32
33
34
35
36
17
38
39
HO
11
12
43
« a
45
46
47
!|«
49
5?
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.0
72. "i
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
•»2.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
7?.l
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. "
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. r
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72. C
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
75.
60.
59.
45.
45.
62.
120.
120.
90.
8C.
75.
52.
65.
55.
50.
35.
35.
35.
84.
U2.
38.
40.
50.
ttO.
4C.
32.
32.
32.
25.
20.
21.
2U.
20.
20.
2C.
22.
16.
22.
24.
15.
20.
16.
2C.
18.
18.
20.
12.
9.
12.
18.
12.
25.
12.
SP.- FERROUS
pH COND. IRON
6.(«
6. 1
6.U
6.3
b. 1
6.3
7. 1
6.2
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.6
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.2
6.4
6.8
6.8
6.7
7.1
7.2
6.8
7.2
7.2
6.5
6.8
6.3
6.7
6.3
6.5
6.9
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.4
6.8
6.8
6.6
6.9
6.7
7.C
6.8
6.8
6.7
7.0
6.0
6.5
6.6
6.6
5.6
6.9
6.6
Oimho) (mg/1)
210C < 1.C
19"0
1950
195C
1800
2COC
165C 1.5
1700
160C
1650
175C
1R50
1750
19"C < 1.0
1350
1R5C
1flCC
16"C
2050
2100
205C < 1.0
1950
2010
1950
155C
1950
19">0
1900 < 1.0
190C
2000
2C5C
2100
180C
1900
21"0 < 1.0
215C
2150
2100
2COC
2150
2100
210C < 1.0 .
2150
2050
2C50
210C
2"5C
205C
2C5C < 1.0
195C
220C
205C
2100
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
0.03 330. 1058. 144.
8.2 227. 917. <4.0
14.0 244. 1035. 1fl.O
13.0 275. 1130. 43.2
18.3 240. 999. 19.2
0.06 310. 1205. 11.5
0.08 279. 1172. 7.8
<0.03 293. 1168. 123.
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
118
-------
TABLE A27
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 21
(STONE #1337, 1/2 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
1A
11
12
1.1
H
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
214
25
26
27
23
29
31
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
13
3^
40
41
U2
'43
tu
•'1 5
46
47
ua
140
sr
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72. ?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. 1
->2."'
72. i
72.i
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.1
T2.0
72.0
72. 1
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72. 1
72. "1
72.T
72.0
72.0
72.1
72. D
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.. 1
7?. 1
72.-0
T T ;i
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ?
•72.0
FLOW
(ral/min)
125.
15.
31.
65C.
3,on_
.3 (4 1 .
232.
JO A
^ ^ .
24.
20.
24.
30.
3C.
14.
25,
24.
26.
24.
1B.
20.
20.
24.
28.
26.
20.
24.
22.
24.
24.
10.
28.
24.
28.
24.
22.
24.
28.
26.
20.
24.
23.
24.
22.
pH
5.7
5.4
6.7
3.4
3.2
4.2
3.4
3.2
3.2
3. 1
6.4
6.6
6.4
6.6
6.7
6.0
6.6
6.7
7.C
6.8
7. 1
7.1
7. 1
7. 1
7.0
6.3
6.8
3.3
6.7
6.7
7.0
7.1
6.9
7.0
6.8
6.6
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.8
7.0
6.8
7.C
6.9
7.0
6.2
6.5
6. 2
6.6
6.C
6.8
6.8
SP.
COND.
(/i mho)
175C
165C
-1750
160C
16,10
155C
1*nr
170C
1700
160C
1750
1900
170C
195C
180C
1900
190C
1350
2100
19K
21*0
2fA0
2COC
1900
T>50
1950
1850
185C
1QCO
20ir
2200
21-">C
175C
1^0
2C5C
2050
20TI
2000
2COC
2C5C
2f"0
205C
2100
1 q^n
1900
205^
ISiO
20^C
2C50
I9ir
22m
200C
2 1 0 C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
2.0 6.5 255. 1038. 18.0
7.5 108. 135. 944. 245.
< 1.0 5.5 255. 1127. 1«.5
< 1.0 <0.03 273. 1204. 32.4
< 1.0 <0."3 253. 1016. 11.5
< 1 .0 J.O'/ 285. 1151. 10.8
< 1 .0 0.-J3 260. 11 19. <4.0
< 1 .0 <0.03 29 1. 1 175. 100.
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
119
-------
TABLE A28
AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 22
(STONE #1337, 1/2 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1U
15
16
17
1fl
19
20
HEAD
(in)
37.5
39.0
39.0
39.0
38.0
30.5
37.5
37.5
39.5
4 1.1
42. 0
4fi.5
43.0
47.5
47.0
49.0
48. T
48.0
5C.O
52.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3680.
3785.
3720.
3710.
348C.
3200.
3COO.
2810.
269C.
266C.
1630.
2600.
1530.
252C.
2U30.
23UO.
2360.
2350.
22SC.
2280.
pH
2.8
3.3
3.0
2.8
2.8
3.0
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.7
2.7
3.0
2.8
SP.
COND.
fynnho)
175C
1500
165C
165C
175C
1550
15"f
170C
170C
175C
185C
205C
2050
200C
190C
2100
175C
165C
235C
2300
FERROUS TOTAL
IRON IRON
(mg/1) (mg/1)
8.5 155.
3.8 164.
14.0 187.
HOT PHT.
CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
108. 1081. 5U7.
85. 975. 529.
82. 1086. 701.
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
120
-------
TABLE A29
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 23
(STONE #1337, 1 X 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
q
10
11
12
13
U
15
16
17
18
19
20
HEAD
(in)
J-4. ..'
36.0
36.0
36.5
36. S
30. ••>
33.0
33.5
35.0
36.0
37.0
141.5
45.0
15.5
45.0
U7.0
46.5
47. r»
49.0
5C."!
FLOW
jml/min )
3790.
3785.
3720.
3630.
3540.
2160.
2300.
2670.
2680.
2580.
1540.
2540.
1450.
2U60.
2370.
2300.
2280.
2290.
2280.
2160.
pH
2.7
3.2
2.9
2.8
2.7
3.0
3.0
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.7
2.7
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.9
2.6
SP.
COND.
(firohp)
1850
160C
U7^f-
170C
185C
155C
1600
175C
170C
1E5C
19CC
22CC
2150
2050
2000
2050
1R30
175C
2450
255C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
6.0 160. 110. 992. 583.
10.0 167. 7«. 983. 580.
10.0 190. 81. 1093. 701.
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
121
-------
TABLE A30
F1OW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 24
(STONE *1337, 1x0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2"
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
5n
5 1
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72,0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. 3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
"72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.?
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ral/roin)
2420.
2250.
2020.
1580.
1700.
1180.
1450.
136C.
1280.
1180.
1120.
1000.
1020.
890.
880.
860.
740.
740.
760.
740.
620.
605.
640.
61C.
500.
480.
170.
128.
110.
44.
48.
48.
24.
22.
20.
20.
16.
22.
22.
20.
2P.
24.
28.
22.
30.
24.
18.
20.
20.
32.
20.
21.
20.
PH
2.8
3.5
2.9
2.9
2.fl
3.2
3.1
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.fl
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.7
2.2
2.7
2.7
3.1
2.8
2.9
3.1
3.2
2.9
3.2
2.8
3.3
3.3
3.0
3.2
3.8
5.6
6.9
6.9
6.8
6.9
7.0
7.0
6.9
7.1
6.9
7.2
6.9
7.1
7.0
7.0
6.3
6.6
6.4
6.6
6.4
7.0
6.9
SP.
COND.
fcimho)
160C
1650
180C
1700
165C
155C
1550
165C
1750
165C
1750
200C
U5C
200C
165C
1850
175C
1650
2200
2400
1950
2COC
2050
190C
1850
2100
175C
1800
1900
2050
2150
200C
2450
2500
2650
2650
2500
2350
210C
2300
215C
185C
2150
2C5C
2000
200C
200C
20 r*C
1900
1650
205C
1<30C
210C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
8.5 135. 127. 987. 464.
8.5 144. 95. 966. 414.
10.0 181. 96, 1091. 657.
9.6 180. 95, 1111, 641,
9.5 85.0 155. 1015. 365.
< 1 .0 0.37 405. 923. < 4.0
< 1.0 . 0,18 276. 1260. <4.0
< 1.0 O.C7 253. 1131. 23,0
*Start-up date was 3/16/72.
122
-------
TABLE A31
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 25
(STONE 11809, 1/2 X 0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% SLAG)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
H
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
1 3
' m
15
16
17
13
19
20
?1
22
23
24
25
26
27
23
20
3n
11
32
33
3«
35
36
37
33
39
140
11
fc2
43
'4 a
145
46
'47
48
49
r>0
r:1
52
53
SP. FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
HEAD FLOW
(in) (ml/min)
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.C
72.0
72.0
72. 0.
72.0
72. 0
72.^
72. 0
72.0
72.0
72. n
72.0
72. n
72. n
72. )
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.:
72.. 0
72. D
72.0
72.0
72. :
72.^
72.0
72,0
72.0
72.0
72.'"*
72.0
72.0
72.-0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
150.
104.
1CO.
7U.
116.
60.
85.
68.
46.
50.
33.
35.
40.
23.
25.
22.
24.
214.
28.
2<4.
25.
3?.
20.
25.
24.
22.
56.
21.
28.
28.
28.
28.
28.
28.
23.
22.
26.
26.
21.
25.
24.
24.
21.
2C.
2 '4.
18.
18.
18.
28.
21.
23.
22.
24.
pH COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(amho) (ma/1) (mq/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
5.8
5.6
5.7
6.2
5. 2
5.3
5.2
5.8
6 .U
6.2
5.8
6. 1
5.9
6.3
5.2
6.2
5.9
6.U
6.5
7.0
6.6
6.5
6.7
6.2
6.U
6.3
6 .8
7.0
6.4
6.7
6.8
6.5
7.3
7.3
7.1
7.U
7.2
7.3
6.1
7.1
7.3
6.5
7.2
7.2
7.2
6. 1
6. 1
6.C
7.0
6.6
7.0
6.9
7.C
1900 12.0 14.0 <*17. 1012.
1900
185C
185C
2C5C
175C
175C 3.D 7.6 406. 1024.
1SOC
1750
18r>C
1<550
1900
1950
1650 <1.0 0.12 420. 1089.
190C
1800
181C
2C5C
2C50
2C5C
1950 30.0 0.08 455. 1155.
200C
2000
1 Q-OC
1fi5C
1F5C
1800
190C < 1.0 <0.03 433. 1C02.
190C
180C
175C
160C
175C
195C
1950 < 1.0 <0.03 445. 1075.
2 1 0 C
1S5C
1950
155C
1850
190C
2C5C < 1.0 0.10 435. 1126.
190C
185C
135C
185C
185C
190C
1800 < 1 .0 0.05 442. 1085.
205C
200 C
2050
2100
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
10.8
-------
TABLE A32
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 26
(STONE 11809, 1x0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% SLAG)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
<;
6
7
8
o
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2n
K-
21
.12
33
34
35
3r
37
)«
39
4n
m
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
c 1
52
53
HEAD
(in)
4T J
52.°
49.5
51.5
43.5
46.0
51.0
51.0
C2. ^
52. J
54.5
52.;
51.5
r>2.5
f> " . "
59.0
57.-^
59.0
72.0
72. ">
72.. ^
72. *
72.0
72.0
72.0
^2. 0
72.^
72.rt
72.0
72. 1
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72."
72,0
7 ? . 0
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.^
7?. r
72.0
72.^
7?. 0
Ti.l
~!2.n
72.0
72. ^
7?. }
72. "••
72. ^
7?. >
72. i
FLOW
(ml/roin)
34HO.
3330.
34TO.
3300.
3 3 "> 0 .
3180.
31"C.
292C.
2720.
2650.
2 4 <* 0 .
229C.
2C3C.
1900.
1P30.
1760.
16«0.
1500.
1640.
1720.
U1C.
161C.
15t>0.
1470.
1320.
1120.
i c a o .
ICoC.
1040.
840.
378.
72.
48.
43.
60.
42.
54.
50.
40.
32.
32.
32.
29.
•4C.
32.
24.
2o.
2-3.
3o.
32.
4C.
40.
44.
SP , FERROUS TOTAL
pH COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM
3.2
2.8
2.8
2.7
2.0
2.3
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.4
2.6
2.8
2.7
2.4
2.5
2.7
3.1
3.C
2.9
2.8
2.fi
3.3
3.3
3.1
3.0
3.C
2.6
2.7
3.2
3.5
b.3
6.8
7.1
6.9
7.2
7.3
7.0
6.7
7.2
7.2
6.3
7.3
7.2
7. 1
6.2
6.4
6.2
0.6
6.5
6.8
6.8
6 .9
(ftmho) (ing/1) (mg/1) (ing/1)
ia:r 32.5 172. 167.
2C5C
1900
2C.OC
1fi5C
1750
190C 90.0 1£>4. 108.
1P5C
1800
2nOC
2450
235C
215C
1S5C ICG. 177. 107.
2200
205C
190C
240 c
2 1 0 C
210C
235C 12C. .184. 111.
225C
17. .1C
160C
18 ^0
T95r
2CJC
21"C 15". 175. 113.
23T
185C
145C
17T
2/00
225T
215C I*.' 5.2 515.
2150
20T
i«;5c
19TC
19?C
2 ' o r
2050 < 1.0. 3.8 4o5.
1f5C
1 9")0
1900
19 ^C
1-100
205 C
IflSC 1.8 13. f 455.
2150
205^
200C
225C
SULFATE
(mg/1)
1094.
1064.
109S.
1138.
1009.
1248.
1172.
1103.
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
446.
594.
640.
632.
16.9
<4.n
115.
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
124
-------
TABLE A33
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 27
(STONE #1809, 1/2 x 0 SIZE CONTAINING 5% BENTONITE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
75.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
57.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ">
72.0
72.0
7Z.O
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
1540.
1410.
1270.
1180.
1240.
-------
TABLE A34
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 28
(STONE 11809, 1x0 SIZE CONTAINING 5% BENTONITE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
u
'X
6
7
S
T
I,"1
11
12
13
14
15
10
17
14
19
2^
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
3?
31
14
35
15
37
3t>
3°
'1C
m
42
4 3
44
45
46
47
un
4°
50
51
52
53
READ
(in)
44.5
43.0
ti't.^
45.0
<*3.5
42.0
49.5
49.5
50.0
5^.5
51.;
49.^
49.5
*2. "i
62. ">
72.^
55.0
13."
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
7/. 0
7?. ">
72.3
72. n
7?.0
72. ^
72.^
72. "*
72. -
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.~
7 2 . •"'
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ^
••2.0
72.:
72. "»
72. '"i
73. '
7?.0
72. ••
??..•*
7 ^ . ..>
7v,"
72. •">
7/. 0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3560.
3600.
3 5 R 0 .
?4:"*0.
3460.
3270.
3220.
3 C 4 0 .
2R20.
2710.
2520.
22'4~.
21 JC.
1920.
1650.
1720.
1580.
1510.
1320.
1320.
12U5.
1 ? 4 0 .
1240.
1090.
Q60.
430.
4 '4 0 .
430.
4 •'* f ,
3QO.
192.
56.
2C.
20.
16.
14.
22.
1fi.
14.
16.
0.
11.
13.
13.
10.
6.
(-.
.3.
1-1.
7.
10.
11.
10.
pH
2.9
2.6
2.7
2.5
2.6
2.6
2.7
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.8
2.8
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.9
2.8
2.7
2,7
2.7
3.1
3.1
3,0
2.9
3.0
2.5
2.6
3.1
3.3
4.0
6.9
7.0
7.C
7.2
6.6
6.8
6.9
7.3
7.0
7.2
7. 2
7.5
7.4
6 .6
7 .r
6.3
7.1
7.0
7.4
7.3
7.2
SP. FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(Minho) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
2KC 37.5 180. 127. 1016. 713.
240C
'22^ C
235C
205C
1900
210C 1C). 190. 87. 1037. 702.
2 ior
215C
2i:r
285C
21T
230C
21CC IOC, 181. 90. 1082. 658.
235"
2200
205C
26 5 ('
2500
23T
2550 110. 168. 95. 1144. 7i5.
25<~'C
17CC
150C
1H5C
205C
1950
2T>0 U'O. 177. 111. 1028. 611.
2U"r
1950
\f."C
1 '•* 5 r
220C
2250
215C < 1.0 1.P 490. 1084. <0.0
21<'C
1°5C
1 9 •" 0
2or c
2 1 " r
2050
21^0 < 1.0 0.5(> 475. 1160. <4.0
2 ;" .T
2COC
2 0 •? C
2000
2C-'1C
205C
l"^'"1 0.19 450. 1108. 46.1
2KC
200 0
2C5C
195C
*Start-up date was 3/1J/72.
126
-------
TABLE A35
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 29
(STONE #1809, 1/2 x 0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% FLYASH)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
y
4
5
6
7
P
0
10
11
12
13
11
15
ie
17
IB
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
23
2°
3?
31
32
.13
n
3S
v,
37
3fl
39
40
U1
'42
£-3
44
a^
1*6
47
«p
49
SO
SI
52
53
HEAD
(in)
•72.1
72.0
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.il
72.0
72.1
72.1
72.1
72. ?
7 2 . -i
72. ""
7 2 . 0
72. 1
72.0
72,0
•7i.i
72."
7 2 . T)
12.1
72.1
72. fi
72.0
72.0
72."
72.1
72."
72.0
72.0
72."
72.1
72.0
72.0
72.3
72. 1
72.0
72. n
72.0
72.">
72.:
72.0
72.1
72.5
72. 1
72.0
72.0
72.1
•72.1
72. t
72.1
72.1
72.1
FLOW
(ml/min)
150.
15".
140.
122.
162.
164.
120.
1C 8.
96.
100.
84.
90.
-------
TABLE A3 6
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 30
(STONE #1809, 1x0 SIZK CONTAINING 10% FLYASH)
DAYS
AFTER HEAD FLOW
START-UP* (in) (ml/min)
1
2
.1
u
5
6
7
£
')
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Ifi
19
20
21
~> 1
i, t-
23
24
25
26
27
2R
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
33
3"
4^
41
42
43
cu
'45
4f>
47
4P
49
50
51
":2
53
72. :/
77.?
72.0
72.^
72,0
72. A
72.0
72.0
72.7
72.0
72..-1
72. A
72."
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72. ">
72.0
72. ?
72.0
7.?.T
72.^
72.0
72. •->
72. ">
72.1
72. 7
72. •>
72. *
72.0
72.^
72.^
72.^
72. ">
72.^
72.3
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.1
72."
72.?
72.?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72..*'
72.3
•72. n
72.-1
7?.0
72.0
1 If..
77.
7S.
68.
7?.
230.
1«C.
150.
128.
150.
120.
120.
IOC.
100.
30.
73.
70.
72.
76.
70.
70.
00.
70.
65.
54.
5C.
52.
U9.
52.
«8.
UC.
44.
UO.
36.
36.
34.
t2.
44.
36.
32.
36.
36.
J3.
«P.
32.
28.
28.
2P.
32.
31.
31.
64.
32.
PH
6. 1
6.0
6.0
5.8
5.8
6.R
5.7
6.1
6.4
6.4
6.7
6.4
6.2
6.2
5.8
6.4
6.4
0.7
6.7
6.8
6.8
6. a
6.9
6.6
6.6
6 .3
6.P
6.6
6.5
6.6
6.6
6.7
7.0
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.7
6.7
7.0
6.8
6.8
7.C
7.1
6.9
6.3
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.6
6.8
7.0
7.1
SP , FERROUS TOTAL
COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(M"iho) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
2C-f 15.0 13,0 U52. 1C77.
2000
.2 COG
190C
21r)0
1 ft ••» r
IB^C a. R 17. C U17. 986.
1700
1750
1P5G
2G5C
1SSC
2 1 1 C
200C B.C. 14.0 442. 10fi«.
200 C
1350
1POO
2nr
20 on
2150
25?C 'jn.r 42." 4h3. 1104.
1950
1000
195C
I<35C
2 ° "* 0
1^50
1650 30.^ 33.0 475. 1031.
200 C
1<»OC
1900
1750
2010
2150
2100 12.0 2'J.C 510. 1124.
2150
2050
2000
10
1850
2C3C
205C
1950 1S.O 2G.O 448. 1086.
2100
2^50
2050
2250
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
2 1 . h
<4.0
18.0
21.6
< 4.0
25h.
< 4.0
154.
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
128
-------
TABLE A37
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 31
(STONE 11809, 1/8 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
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
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. T
72.0
72.0
72. D
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ">
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. "I
72.0
7 2. .1
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/rain)
320.
280.
200.
184.
150.
200.
140.
130.
120.
120.
100.
125.
90.
80.
66.
59.
60.
46.
48.
44.
50.
40.
50.
40.
28.
22.
20.
16.
20.
12.
8.
10.
9.
8.
8.
6.
16.
10.
16.
7.
7.
7.
6.
6.
7.
3.
2.
2.
8.
5.
8.
3.
3.
pH
5.6
6.3
6.3
6.1
6.1
6.9
6.C
6.3
6.7
6.5
6.9
6.5
6.4
6.5
5.i'
6.5
6.5
6.8
6.9
6.9
7.0
7.0
7.1
6.8
6.8
6.9
6.8
6.6
6.7
7.1
6.9
7. 1
7.3
7.2
7.3
7.2
7.0
7.3
5.8
7.2
7.1
7.2
7.3
6.6
7.3
a. 9
7.0
6.8
6.8
7.4
7.3
7.3
SP.
COND.
(/xmho)
2COO
2000
205C
190C
225C
1900
19PP
165C
1850
1950
225C
200C
215C
2100
2050
1850
1900
220C
22-10
225C
205C
2C5C
225C
2C50
200C
2000
2100
2050
210C
2150
2150
2150
200 C
2000
210C
220C
22CO
215C
220 C
220C
215C
2100
2100
225C
2100
21CO
210C
215C
2050
220C
220C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
11.3 13.0 457. 1043. <^4.0
7.6 12.0 46U. 1013. <4.0
6.0 9.0 482. 1064. 36.0
2.4 21.0 510. 1144, 32.4
2.5 14.7 525. 1084. <4.0
1.2 O.la 495. 1107. 28.8
2.3 0.16 487. 1184. <4.0
0.05 523. 1176. 76.8
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
129
-------
TABLE A38
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 32
(STONE #1809, 1/4 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2U
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
31
35
36
37
38
39
40
4 1
42
U3
un
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72."
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
300.
260.
19C.
153.
176.
110.
120.
1C8.
96.
110.
76.
80.
7C.
7C.
56.
56.
54.
52.
52.
50.
50.
fiO.
£(3.
4C.
3C.
26.
68.
21.
2U.
14.
12.
12.
12.
10.
10.
a.
12.
10.
6.
8.
8.
7.
6.
8.
5.
3.
3.
3.
8.
6.
6.
10.
6.
SP . FERROUS TOTAL
pH COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
6.5
6.5
6.U
6.3
5. a
6.9
6.2
6.5
6.7
6.6
6.9
6.6
6.5
6.6
5.2
6.6
5.9
7.0
7.0
7.1
7.2
7.2
7.1
6.9
7.C
7.1
6.6
7.1
7.0
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.5
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.4
6.6
7.4
6.8
7.3
7.6
6.3
7.4
6.6
7.1
6.9
7.2
7.0
6.5
7.4
7.3
(Aimho) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
2100 2C.O 23.0 437. 980.
2C50
195C
200C
2200
185C
19.1C 2.5 4.0 453. 1019.
1900
1850
1950
225C
2000
210C
225C 1.4 2.0 475. 1073.
1950
iesn
1750
220C
2200
2250
260C 2.0 7.5 505. 1143.
2050
205C
210C
2C5C
2000
2050
215C < 1.0 0.12 550. 1084.
215C
2100
215C
1950
1900
2000
215C < 1.0 <0.03 525. 1217.
220C
2200
210C
220C
2200
2000
2050 <1.0 0.05 500. 1131.
2150
2150
2150
i10C
2050
2100
200C <1.0 <0.03 «94. 1157.
215C
200C
2200
225C
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
14.4
< 4.0
145.
25.2
691.
<4.0
< 4.0
169.
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
130
-------
TABLE A39
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 33
(STONE #1809, 1/2 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
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
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49 '
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72,0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72,0
72.'"*
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3C70.
2890.
2500.
2044.
1340.
1C60.
670.
600.
560.
520.
580.
530.
490.
310.
300.
320.
310.
230.
204.
164.
190.
190.
200.
180.
168.
152.
148.
150.
168.
144.
92.
76.
60.
56.
60.
46.
60.
60.
4B.
44.
52.
48.
50.
46.
48.
40.
36.
36.
44.
39.
35.
48.
70.
pH
3.5
3.0
3.1
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.0
3.0
2.9
3.1
3.1
2.7
3.0
3.0
3,5
3.7
3.3
3.5
3.5
3.8
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.7
6.3
6.8
7.0
6.8
6.7
6.9
6.7
6.5
6.7
7.5
6.2
6.7
7.0
6.6
6.9
6.2
6.6
6.4
6.5
6.5
6.8
7.0
6.8
SP.
COND.
(fimho)
175C
200C
1900
1900
1650
160C
1750
175C
1600
1700
205C
2050
1900
1950
185C
175C
165C
2C50
185C
2050
245C
165C
1700
160C
1600
165C
1800
185C
190C
173C
145C
150C
1800
2000
2000
2000
21PO
190C
165C
2150
1900
2050
2000
205P
1900
1900
2000
2050
1950
2200
20CC
195C
1950
FERROUS J-OTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
50.0 166. 176. 1016. 526.
90.0 144. 184. 1033. 457,
80.0 153. 170. 1104. 455.
90.0 117. 263. 1137. 209.
80.0 122. 233. 997. 350.
16.0 31. C 455. 1062. <4.0
21.0 29.0 470. 1124. 12.0
3.1 29. C 466. 1098. 19.2
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
131
-------
TABLE A40
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 34
(STONE 11809, 1/2 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
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
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
HU
45
U6
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
39.0
39.1
39.0
42. 5
37.0
51.^
58.5
57. C
57.0
53.0
55.0
55.0
53.?
63. C
63.0
57.0
56.0
57.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.?
72.0
72.">
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ?
72.0
72.?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72..")
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3500.
35£C.
3420.
330C.
3360.
314C.
3100.
294C.
2780.
2650.
2520.
1170.
2C3C.
1680.
1730.
161C.
1580.
1460.
1720.
1600. '
1580.
1540.
1480.
1 46 0 .
12*0.
1160.
1120.'
1037.
1120.
920.
480.
236.
140.
148.
160.
160.
176.
172.
16C.
116.
128.
140.
150.
150.
132.
120.
124.
136.
142.
155.
170.
180.
192.
pH
3.2
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.8
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.9
2.7
2.5
2.6
2.9
3.0
2.9
2.8
2.7
3.0
3.3
3.0
3.1
3.0
3.0
2.7
2.8
3.3
3.5
3.8
3.4
3.1
2.9
3.0
3.0
3.1
3.6
7.2
3.0
3.0
3.2
3.2
3.6
2.6
2.8
2.6
2.6
2.2
2.6
3.0
3.9
SP.
COND.
Qmihp)_
1G5C
2 IOC
1-9 5 C
205C
180C
171 C
185C
1900
175C
195C
240C
2350
2C5C
175C
2150
2000
1650
230C
2100
220C
225C
2200
160C
2C50
175C
165C
2000
210C
235C
190C
145C
140C
191C
2050
215C
20 5C
1850
1950
165C
165C
2000
2C5C
2CCC
2200
1550
195C
2000
205C
19"C
2500
2350
245C
215C
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
25.0
ICO.
90. C
110.
120.
80.0
80.0
40,0
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM
(mg/1) (mg/1)
169.
180.
167.
120.
SULFATE
(rog/1)
1068.
1062.
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
605.
612.
174.
120.
1086.
700.
179.
125.
1161.
691.
174.
128.
1019.
603.
149.
220.
1142.
458.
135.
237.
1194.
476.
141.
164.
1058.
518.
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
132
-------
TABLE A41
'FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 35
(STONE §1809, 1 x 50 SIZB)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
o
10
11
12
13
in
15
16
17
18
IS
20
21
22
23
2<*
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
30
40
41
1*2
U3
i*4
U5
1*6
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
33.0
35.0
36.0
1*1.0
J3.5
38.5
40.5
1*2.0
-------
TABLE A42
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 36
'(STONE 11809, 1x0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
U
5
6
7
R
<3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IP
19
2H
HEAD
(in)
31.7
31.0
31.5
32.^
21. !
2c.D
27.0
21.5
29.5
3 1.0
34.5
37.5
3(1.*
46.0
15.5
43.*
43.0
43.0
72.0
72.^
FLOW
(ml/min)
3251.
320C.
3120.
3C20.
3520.
2 930.
if.60.
2630.
2=80.
2149T.
23UC.
2000.
1R70.
1730.
1600.
158P.
1510.
1300.
192C.
1S60.
pH
3.0
2.7
2.0
2.6
2.8
2.7
2.9
2.R
2.8
2.8
2.6
2.6
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.5
2.7
3.0
2.9
2.8
SP. FERROUS
COND. IRON
friniho) (ng/1)
1900 U1.5
220C
2050
220C
1fi-3C
1BOC
1950 100.
1950
1POO
19SC
265C
2 !»00
2150
190C 90.0
21SO
195C
ieoc
2350
215C
2200
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
168. 161. 1035. 605.
188. 108. 1C27. 684.
177. 115. 1104. 624.
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
134
-------
TABLE A43
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 37
(STONE §1355, 1/8 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-OP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
JO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72. D
72.0
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. P
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
75.
68.
50.
52.
54.
82.
100.
106.
140.
190.
180.
205,
175.
140.
122.
113.
110.
88.
72.
68.
65.
60.
60.
50.
36.
30.
28.
21.
24.
16.
12.
12.
10.
10.
10.
8.
14.
10.
10.
8.
8.
7.
7.
4.
5.
4.
3.
3.
8.
6.
6.
7.
12.
PH
5.7
5.4
5.6
5.4
5.4
5.6
5.5
5.8
6.4
6.2
5.8
6.2
5.7
6.1
5.8
6.1
6.3
6.4
6.3
6.4
6.3
6.4
6.2
6. 1
6.4
6.4
6.9
6.7
6.3
6.3
6.6
6.7
6.4
6.4
7.1
6.7
6.8
6.9
5.9
3. 1
7.2
7.3
6.1
7.2
6.4
6.2
6.5
5.9
6.8
5.5
6.0
6.3
6.1
SP.
COND ,
Uirohc
2100
2C50
1950
2000
2050
1900
190C
1900
1750
1900
2250
1950
2100
1900
2050
1850
170C
2300
240C
2150
210C
2050
2C50
2100
200C
2000
2100
2100
2150
2000
1900
200C
190C
1950
2150
2150
2200
215C
2200
2COO
2100
220C
210C
2150
2100
2050
205C
2C50
2000
215C
2100
2100
2200
FERROUS TOTAL
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
_(mg/l) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
<1.0 0.97 500. 1034.
5.2 fl.6 475. 1010.
7.2 12.0 475. 1092.
3.6 32.0 495. 1123.
3.2 15.4 553. 1119,
< 1.0
1.4
3.0 513. 1113.
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
32.4
25.2
18.0
21.6
< 4.0
14.2
3.1 512. 1155.
< 4.0
< 1.0 23.0 462, 1174,
<4.0
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
135
-------
TABLE A43 (CONT'D.)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
6 3
66
67
08
69
73
74
75
76
77
80
61
82
83
en
67
P8
39
an
91
94
95
96
97
98
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72,0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. 3
FLOW
(ml/min)
50.
76.
46.
4U.
33.
J2.
38.
68.
60.
44.
34.
40.
40.
32.
26.
22.
15.
20.
16.
1 1.
13.
17.
19.
10.
2.
1.
1.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
3.
2.
pH
6.2
6.3
6.8
6.8
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.0
7.5
6.6
6. 1
6.0
6.0
6.4
6.1
6.3
6.3
7.0
6.6
6.4
6.3
6.6
6.5
6.7
6.6
6.5
6.3
6.8
6.1
6.0
6.0
6.3
6.0
6.3
£>P.
COND.
(/t>nho)_
2100
2000
2COO
2100
2300
2300
2200
2050
230C
2350
2350
2200
2150
2150
2C5C
2100
200C
195C
205C
2000
190C
20CO
200C
2200
215C
2100
2100
2250
2200
2200
2250
1800
2100
180C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT,
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
11.0 47.0 475. 1130. 227.
2.0 42.0 537. 1206. 76.8
19.0 47.0 U8S. 1166. <4.0
<1.0 35.0 450. 1114. 8.0
12.0 35.6 570. 1235. 4.0
< 1.0 11.7 620. 2065. 11.7
< 1.0 10.2 550. 1355. <4.0
101
72.0
6.0 210C
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
136
-------
TABLE A44
.FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO, 38
(STONE #1355, 1/4 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
ia
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
no
11
42
43
44
1*5
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72*0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. T
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
240.
200.
170.
165.
132.
120.
130.
110.
98.
125.
80.
75.
70.
60.
58.
47.
55.
46.
48.
52.
40.
50.
45.
35.
34.
34.
40.
33.
30.
26.
24.
28.
24.
24.
22.
18.
24.
22.
2C.
20.
24.
20.
20.
17.
20.
14.
14.
14.
20.
16.
18.
20.
16.
PH
6.0
6. 1
6.0
5.9
5.9
5.9
6.0
6.5
6.8
6.7
6.4
6.7
6. 1
7.0
5.7
6.6
6.9
7.C
6.9
7. 1
7.0
7.3
7.1
7.2
6.8
6.9
7.0
7.2
6.8
6 .9
7.0
7.1
6.9
6.8
7.3
7.1
7.1
7.1
6.8
6.3
7.2
6.2
7.2
7.4
6.9
6.7
6.7
6.4
7.4
6.4
6.6
6.7
6.6
SP.
COND.
Qimho)
1950
205C
1950
1950
2250
180C
1050
180C
180C
195C
2C50
195C
205C
2250
2C50
1750
1800
225C
2100
2100
205T
2COO
195C
1950
1Q"?
1850
1900
195C
2000
185C
175C
1650
165C
1900
20 00
2C50
195C
1950
lane
215C
190C
2000
195C
2COC
1P50
1finO
190C
200 C
1950
2100
205C
2150
220C
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
19.0
< 1.0
< 1 . V
2.0
< 1.C
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
jmg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
25.0
2.9
«45.
446.
1031.
1C 11.
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
18.0
< 4.0
0.95
453.
1090.
0.1
470.
11B7.
0.17
445.
1065.
<0.03
460.
1079.
29.0
18.0
<4.0
<4.0
0.06
472.
1146.
<4.0
<0.03
390.
1131
69.1
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
137
-------
TABLE A44 (CONT'D.;
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
r>5
56
57
58
5°
60
61
62
c, 3
'« 6
f>7
6P
69
7 r
73
7y
75
76
7 7
&"•
<* 1
>*2
fi3
Q'J
i-1
«o
QQ
or
31
94
n5
7('-
97
OR
HEAD
(in)
M. 0
'2.1
72."
72.T
7?. )
72. n
72.0
72. ">
72.T
"7 ~ ^
72. "*
72. •*
72.^
72. -I
72."
72. '">
72. •">
72.)
72. ">
72. ">
72.0
72.:
7 2 . •">
72.^
72.0
72.0
72. ^
72.0
72.0
7?.0
72.7
72.0
72.0
7?.?
FLOW
(ml/min)
27.
52.
35.
42.
36.
40.
64.
2P .
32.
2tl.
22.
24.
24.
32.
2R.
20.
17.
39.
26.
18.
26.
42.
108.
10.
7.
7.
5.
3.
a.
7.
7.
6.
7.
6.
PH
6.6
6.7
7.2
7.0
6.9
6.7
6.6
6.2
7.C
7.1
6.3
6.5
6.3
5.9
b.3
6.4
6.6
7.0
6.8
6.8
6.4
6.2
6.7
c.5
6.9
7.C
7.0
7.4
6 .6
6.5
6.8
b.7
6.5
6.8
SP.
COND.
(^mho)
2 1 "> C
210C
2 1 jC
2100
22^0
215C
2C5C
1950
215-T
2 3 - C
2250
23^
1«OC
2C5C
210?
225C
Ift^C
22*0
1P5r
210C
1ft^0
225C
2150
24*C
210G
2K-0
2250
22">C
2200
210C
21H
165C
185G
U5C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1)
-------
TABLE A45
BLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 39
(STONE #1355, 1/2 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
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
28
29
3C
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
»7
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
56.5
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72,0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
4UO.
280.
240.
191.
260.
178.
135.
114.
104.
110.
100.
100.
85.
80.
78.
73.
75.
72.
60.
50.
55.
60.
45.
45.
42.
44.
44.
50.
42.
44.
36.
44.
36.
36.
36.
34.
50.
40.
52.
28.
32.
32.
28.
28.
28.
22.
24.
24.
36.
20.
32.
36.
40.
pH
6.3
6.4
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.0
6.2
5.8
6.5
6.4
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.1
5.0
6.0
6.5
6.5
7.6
7.1
7.0
7.1
6.9
6.6
6.8
6.8
6.5
6.7
6.7
6.8
6.9
7.0
6.3
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.6
b.6
6.6
6.9
6.8
6.4
6.8
7.0
6.7
6.2
7. 1
6.1
6,5
6.2
6.5
6.7
6.6
SP.
COND.
(/imho)
1850
190C
185C
1850
200C
1750
185C
180C
1ftOO
1800
1900
1750
1950
1650
180C
170C
1500
1950
2150
205C
2050
2000
205C
1900
195C
1950
190C
200C
2100
1850
1750
16CC
185C
1S5C
2050
205C
195C
1900
185C •
1800
195C
2050
1900
2050
1850
185C
1900
205C
1900
2100
2050
2100
2150
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
30.0 52.4 360. 985. 28.8
8.0 21.0 449. 1040. 86.4
30.0 52.9 362. 1072. 18.0
2.8 25.0 473. 1123. 324.
6.C 24.5 470. 1046. < 4.0
6.C 33.0 470. 1069. 77.6
17.0 38.0 465. 1115. < 4.0
15.0 35.0 398. 1090. 65.3
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
139
-------
TABLE A46
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 40
(STONE 11355, 1/2 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
9
1?
11
12
13
1ft
15
16
17
18
10
20
HEAD
(in)
56.0
72.0
56.5
35.5
149. ^
50.5
US. 5
149. r>
147.0
U5.5
U6.5
U4.5
«2.0
UU.O
U3.5
.19.0
38.0
37.5
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3150.
3220.
3200.
3060.
3100.
2920.
292C.
27UO.
256C.
2<460.
2320.
2CC5.
1S30.
1830.
1640.
160C.
1510.
ia60.
2680.
2720.
pH
3.5
3.0
2.9
2.8
3.C
2.9
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.5
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.6
2.6
2.9
3.0
6.9
2.8
SP.
COND.
(/xroho)
175C
2000
190P
1900
1800
1700
1850
165C
1650
185C
235C
235C
205C
200C
220C
1700
1700
225C
225C
2050
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PI
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACID3
(rng/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1
45. C 157. 185. 996. 522.
80.0 183. 117. 1037. 612.
90.0 178. 115. 1088. 593.
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
140
-------
TABLE A47
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 41
(STONE #1355, 1 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
n
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
HEAD
(in)
35.5
36.0
31*. 5
72.0
28.0
29.5
28.0
28.0
28'. 0
28.5
29.5
28.0
26.5
25.0
25.5
72.0
23.0
21.5
72.0
U7.0
FLOW
(ml/rain)
2760.
3600.
2700.
2620.
2580.
2500.
2460.
2380.
2160.
2190.
1980.
1720.
1630.
1500.
13UO.
1260.
1150.
11<»0.
2720.
2680.
pH
3.2
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.4
2.6
2.6
2.8
2.7
2.5
2.6
3.0
2.9
2.7
SP.
COND.
(/xmho)
1800
2100
1900
2000
1850
175C
1900
190C
1800
190C
260C
2UOO
2150
2050
2200
195C
1800
230C
2150
2200
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
«5.0 116. 17U. 1015. 508.
90.0 188. 115. 10U7. 659.
90.0 180. 110. 1055. 720.
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
141
-------
TABLE A48
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 42
(STONE #1355, 1x0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1tt
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
HO
41
42
43
at*
U5
-------
TABLE A48 (CONT'D.)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
66
67
68
69
70
73
74
75
76
77
8T
81
82
83
84
87
88
89
90
94
95
96
97
98
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ittl/min)
63.
60.
46.
40.
40.
40.
60.
48.
52.
56.
48.
140.
68.
14.
10.
9.
8.
10.
11.
16.
20.
16.
152.
18.
9.
10.
8.
16.
15.
8.
9.
14.
14.
8.
PH
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.4
6.8
6.6
6.6
6.2
6.9
6.8
6.2
4.3
6.3
7.1
6.7
6.8
6.8
7.2
7.0
7.3
6.3
6.6
6.8
6.5
7.3
7.6
7.2
7.6
6.7
6.5
7.0
6.9
7.0
7.0
SP.
COND.
(ftmho)
2000
1900
185C
215C
2100
1950
1850
1S5C
2050
2250
2250
180C
2COP
225C
2150
2200
2250
2000
2000
1900
1850
1900
1950
24"C
2C5C
2150
2100
2200
2200
2050
2100
1600
195C
1750
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
25.0
22.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
65.0
44.0
417.
1078.
42.2
512.
0.19 600.
1209.
1433.
53.8
<4.0
0.18" 455. 1262. <4.0
0.21 700. 1423. 26.0
0.10 540. 812. 11.7
0.06 438. 1165. <4.0
101
72.0
6.8
175C
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
143
-------
TABLE A49
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 43
(STONE #1337, 1/8 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
ft
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
33
39
(,r>
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.?
72.0
72. 3
72.3
72.1
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.?
72.0
72.f
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
15.
12.
15.
12.
11.
26.
70.
16.
22.
25.
94.
25.
20.
19.
13.
17.
20.
16.
24.
18.
20.
20.
20.
25.
20.
18.
2C.
17.
28.
18.
18.
28.
20.
20.
14.
12.
18.
17.
11.
16.
24.
16.
12.
9.
10.
8.
8.
8.
20.
18.
11.
22.
28.
PH
5.8
6.0
6.2
5.7
5.7
5.6
5.5
6.3
7.0
6.7
6.4
6.7
6.5
7.1
6.5
6.3
6.7
6.8
6.3
7.0
6.1
6.7
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.7
7.1
6.8
6.5
6.6
6.9
7.5
7.1
7.0
7.2
7.1
7.0
7.3
7.0
7.3
6.6
7.0
7.2
7.3
7.1
6.8
7.1
6.8
6.9
6.5
6.6
6.8
6.7
SP . FERROUS
COND. IRON
(pmho) Cmg/1)
200C 1.0
2000
-2 1 0 C
1950
1950
2050
2000 < 1.0
2COC.
1950
2C30
2100
2150
2100
2150 < 1.0
2100
190C
185C
220C
20CO
225C
1900 < 1.0
2150
2100
215C
1900
1900
1950
2000 < 1.0
200C
1850
1800
1600
170C
2000
2100 < 1.0
2C5C
2050
2000
2050
180C
1950
210C < 1.0
210C
2050
2COO
1800
195C
2050
200C < 1.0
215C
1850
210C
2C50
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
0.04 143. 1091. 10.8
8.0 355. 1044. 108.
6.2 315. 1058. 431.
0.80 333. IIUI. 6«.8
7.1 298. 1017. <«.0
0.12 305. 1056. 154.
0.11 322. 1106. < 4.0
2.3 254. 1100. 73.0
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
144
-------
TABLE A50
FLOW AND ErFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 44
(STONE 11337, 1/4 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UF'*
1
2
3
U
5
6
7
fl
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1fl
19
20
21
22
23
2H
25
26
27
28
2C/
3C(
31
32
33
3! 4
•35
36
37
38
39
HO
41
42
43
(14
i»5
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72,0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
,'2.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
100.
79.
90.
76.
140.
220.
260.
220.
166.
150.
122.
140.
90.
130.
96.
104.
100.
9C.
100.
96.
100.
90.
90.
80.
70.
64.
68.
65.
60.
52.
32.
4C.
32.
28.
28.
24.
32.
28.
16.
32.
16.
19.
11.
11.
18.
10.
10.
10.
13.
39.
49.
54.
68.
PH
6.2
6.3
6.3
5.9
6.0
6.C
6.0
6.3
6.2
6.3
6.5
6.4
6.7
6.2
5.4
6.3
6.2
6.7
6.7
6.8
7.3
7.0
7.0
6.7
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.4
6.4
6.7
7.0
7.3
7.1
6.8
6.8
6.9
6.7
6.6
7.1
7.2
6.7
6.8
7.1
7.3
7.0
6.5
6.9
6.5
6.7
6.6
6.7
6.7
6.7
SP , FERROUS
COND. IRON
i/xmho) (mg/1)
200C 5.5
2000
1S50
1900
1950
170C
1700 22.0
1650
165C
1750
1950
1800
2000
190C 5.0
1800
170C
165C
2050
2200
2000
2150 40.0
1800
1900
1850
1800
1900
1850
165C 40.0
195C
1750
1700
1650
1850
2000
205C 8.0
200C
1950
1950
1850
1850
1950
2100 7.0
2C50
2050
1950
1850
1950
2C50
1950 1.0
2050
1800
1900
210C
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
11.0 294. 999. 14.4
2.7 224. 1035. 36.0
5.4 252. 1105. 46.8
34.0 235. 1114. 10.8
24.0 255. 1021. 26.9
10.0 275. 1151. 8.1
11.0 297. 1178. < 4.0
6.3 226. 1149. 57.6
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
145
-------
TABLE A51
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 45
(STONE #1337, 1/2 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
HEAD
(in)
36.0
35.0
35.0
36.0
21.ri
29.0
31.0
31.0
31.5
32.0
33.5
34.0
33.5
34. n
35.0
33. S
35.0
35.5
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3320.
3300.
3300.
3180.
320C.
3C8C.
340.
2800.
2690.
2560.
2420.
2100.
194C.
1710.
176C.
1590.
1530.
1K60.
2S6C.
2S6C.
PH
3.2
2.9
3.0
2.8
2.9
2.8
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.5
2.7
2.9
2.8
2.9
2.6
2.7
3.1
3.0
2.9
SP.
COND.
(/<.mho)
175C
20CC
-185C
1900
175C
1750
1850
1E5C
1650
165C
2400
235C
2050
1900
215C
1B50
16"C
220C
190C
2050
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
35.0 174. 115. 1053. 504.
100. 190. 97. 1067. 695.
80.0 180. 92. 1066. 1.12.
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
146
-------
TABLE A52
FiOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 46
(STONE #1337, 1/2- x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER HEAD
START-UP* (in)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
IK
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
m
142
143
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
72.9
41.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
72.0
7 2 . C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. •>
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
260.
97.
70.
60.
74.
124.
75.
53.
64.
70.
54.
50.
4C.
60.
49.
45.
60.
34.
40.
72.
40.
50.
45.
40.
44.
44.
48.
31.
36.
36.
36.
52.
40.
44.
46.
36.
24.
28.
25.
2P.
32.
32.
24.
2R.
32.
26.
28.
34.
38.
29.
35.
28.
36.
pH
5.0
5.3
5.4
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.6
6.2
6.1
6.7
6.0
5.7
6. 1
5.8
5.8
5.6
6.3
6.2
6.2
7.4
7.0
6.9
6.9
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
7.4
7.2
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.7
7.C
5.6
6.3
6.7
6.8
7.8
7.2
6.9
6.3
6.6
6.1
6.4
6.9
6.6
6.7
6.7
SP. FERROUS TOTAL
COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(Mtnho) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
1700 25.0 73.0 215. 1028.
1fi5C
1800
1800
1900
165C
175C 6.0 8.5 236. 1054.
1700
165C
1700
1700
1850
1900
1850 < 1.0 0.29 252. 1103.
1850
170C
160C
200C
2100
1950
195C < 1 .0 1.9 240. 1076.
1P5C
1850
1E5C
1800
J80C
1800
1900 < 1.0 0.04 263. 1101 .
190C
1700
1550
145C
190C
1950
1950 < 1.0 7.0 260. 1072.
200C
1850
195C
17?C
190C
1900
2000 < 1.0 0.05 287. 1138.
180C
2COO
iaoc
180C
19CC
1900
1SrO 4.0 13.0 198. 1C75.
215C
185C
2C5C
2100
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
86.4
21.6
32.2
10.8
8.5
11.5
< 4.0
< 4.0
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
147
-------
TABLE A53
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 47
(STONE 11337, 1 X 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
It
15
16
17
18
19
20
HEAD
(in)
2C.O
21.0
21.5
72.0
12.0
16.5
16.5
18.0
18.1
19.0
19.5
19.5
19.5
13.0
19.0
17.0
19.0
17.0
29.5
35.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
33CC.
3280.
31UC.
3000.
3060.
29UO.
2860.
2720.
2580.
2UOO.
2200.
1920.
1800.
moo.
1600.
1<430.
1«00.
1320.
32HO.
3120.
PH
2.9
2.7
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.7
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.8
2. U
2.6
2.8
2.8
2.9
2.5
2.6
3.0
2.9
2.8
SP.
COND.
(/i mho)
1650
,2200
2000
2100
19PO
165C
195C
1950
1750
1950
260C
2550
2150
215C
2000
200C
170C
235C
2050
220C
FERROUS TOT
IRON If
(mg/1) (mq
37.0 178
90.0 194
90. C 181
HOT PHT.
CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mq/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
110. 1039. 37U.
87. 999. 727.
82. 11U1. 708.
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
148
-------
TABLE A54
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 48
(STONE #1337, 1x0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IB
19
20
21
22
23
•-2H
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
«0
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. 0
75.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. n
FLOW
(ml/roin)
210.
150.
110.
72.
100. .
84.
70.
84.
86.
190.
80.
80.
80.
90.
72.
66.
8C.
72.
92.
72.
75.
80.
75.
65.
56.
64.
68.
7C.
68.
72.
72.
88.
84.
88.
84.
E6.
100.
88.
80.
68.
76.
72.
70.
90.
72.
64.
64.
64.
76.
175.
74.
76.
79.
PH
4.8
4.7
5.1
5.3
5.2
5.1
5.0
5.5
5.8
6.0
5.7
5.8
5.4
6.0
5.9
5.6
5.8
6.0
5.8
6.0
7.0
6.9
6.8
6.7
6.6
6.6
6.5
6.2
6.4
6.7
6.7
7.0
6.8
6.4
6.4
6.5
6.4
6.4
6.1
6.3
6.4
6.6
6.7
7.0
6.7
6.0
6.2
5.9
6.2
6.3
6.5
6.6
6.6
SP.
COND.
(>imho)
17CO
175C
1700
1700
185C
1650
1750
1650
1650
1650
180C
175C
1650
1*50
185C
1650
160C
2C50
1900
19CC
1850
1800
1800
1850
1800
1E5C
1750
1850
1900
1600
1450
1450
1750
1850
1900
1900
175C
18CC
1650
175C
165C
195C
1850
1850
1650
1850
165C
1900
175C
205C
18CC
1900
20^C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
35.0 84.0 206. 103f.'. 144.
21.2 27.0 231. 1095. <4.0
13.0 21.0 240. 1101. 28.9
40.0 42.0 228. 11 19. < 4.0
30.0 29.0 238. 1016. 15.7
26.0 28.0 238. 1075. 12.7
28.0 32.0 255. 1123. <4.0
25.0 27.0 176. 1062. 50.0
*Start-up date was 3/17/72.
149
-------
TABLE A55
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 49
(STONE 11809, 1/2 x 0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% SLAG)
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM
(mg/1) (mg/1)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
a
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
lit
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2U
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
3 a
35
36
37
33
39
UO
m
k2
41
44
U5
Mfc
47
ue
49
50
51
52
=>3
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ^
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72."
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.1
72.0
7 ? . 0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. r
72,0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
iml/min)
600.
400.
J/!b.
265.
2H'.
1H.fc.
172.
168.
IflO.
169.
174.
200.
166.
17C.
17C.
160.
150.
141.
160.
14«.
146.
152.
150.
140.
130.
110.
110.
96.
84.
80.
76.
72.
64.
64.
72.
68.
7C.
68.
100.
76.
55.
64.
60.
64.
56.
60.
60.
56.
56.
59.
72.
80.
59.
pH
5.4
6.5
5.6
5.3
5.3
5.5
5.6
5.5
5.7
5.7
5.8
6.0
5.9
5.9
2.8
6.0
5.2
5.8
5.5
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.5
6.5
6.6
6.6
6.4
6.4
6.5
6.2
6.4
6.7
6.7
6.8
0.6
5.9
6.4
5.9
6.4
6.4
6.2
o.7
6.4
6.5
6.5
6.6
6.6
6.2
6.4
6.1
6.2
6.2
6.5
SP.
COND.
(/mnho)
20,00
1 90 0 .
185C
1350
185C
165C
1P5C
1750
2200
1650
1650
1700
1850
175C
210C
180C
175C
165C
16SC
1950
165C
185C
1800
165C
160C
17*0
150C
1700
me
1700
1750
140C
1350
1350
165C
1750
1900
165C
175C
1750
140C
1650
inoc
2C50
1900
1700
1400
1E5G
1800
1800
171C
2000
165C
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
190.
160.
160.
140.
13C.
80.0
9C.O
90.0
HOT PHT.
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1)
170.
156.
350.
338.
1268.
1150.
320.
324.
149.
280.
1121.
216.
146.
270.
1096.
212.
12R.
272.
947.
161.
114.
315.
900.
18.8
117.
297.
923.
55.0
123.
338.
1039.
23.0
•Start-up date was 3/15/72.
150
-------
TABLE A56
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 50
(STONE 11809, 1x0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% SLAG)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
in
11
12
13
1U
15
16
17
18
19
20
HEAD
(in)
40.0
35.0
35.5
33.0
3H.5
31'. 5
34.0
33.0
28.5
23.0
30.0
29.5
27.5
2fi.O
29.0
28.5
28.0
24.0
28.0
25.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3735.
3800.
3785.
3840.
2900.
3720.
3660.
3560.
3130.
3000.
2900.
2760.
2600.
2520.
2570.
2310.
2280.
2190.
2130.
1920.
PH
2.9
3.0
3.2
2.9
2.6
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.9
2.9
3.1
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.8
2.8
2.5
2.6
2.8
3.1
SP.
COND.
(ftmho)
2150
210C
2050
2150
2500
2450
2100
2C50
2050
1900
1800
1900
2900
2950
210C
2250
2300
2050
1700
2350
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
200.
200.
210.
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
194.
202.
233.
171.
1196.
1220.
562.
763.
195.
100.
1099.
702.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
151
-------
TABLE A57
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 51
(STONE #1809, 1/2 x 0 SIZE CONTAINING 5% BENTONITE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3C
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72, 0
72.?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
'2.0
',2.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
65.
4C.
25.
18.
20.
13.
12.
26.
30.
22.
26.
25.
10.
30.
15.
9.
8.
85.
20.
12.
12.
14.
15.
20.
10.
15.
14.
14.
13.
10.
14.
4C.
52.
48.
22.
16.
18.
14.
12.
18.
9.
12.
8.
8.
7.
5.
8.
6.
5.
6.
10.
6.
6.
pH
5.4
5.5
5.7
5.4
5.4
5.4
5.6
5. 1
5.5
5.6
6.3
6.0
6.8
6.3
5.5
6.C
5.6
6.1
6.0
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.8
6.8
6.6
6.6
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.5
6.3
6.5
6.3
6.6
6.7
6.5
7.3
6.6
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.8
6.4
6.6
6.3
6.4
6.4
6.7
SP.
COND.
(funho)
20nc
2-C5C
2050
215C
2150
215C
2100
1800
165C
1800
175C
190C
2C5C
1900
2C50
2C50
1950
185C
130C
215C
2000
2100
2000
2000
190^
1900
1750
1800
1800
1800
1800
1250
1200
1200
1650
1800
195C
1900
1650
1850
1600
1600
1300
1900
1800
1800
165C
1700
1850
1950
1750
190C
1700
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
150.
40. C
40.0
30.0
5.0
40.0
4.0
10,0
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
141.
154.
327.
305.
1264.
1150.
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
216.
32U.
49.9
390.
1075.
< 4.0
32.0
415.
1140.
< 4.0
42.9
343.
911.
269.
64.4
310.
942.
23.0
10.0
350.
13f..4.
<4.0
26.0
388.
1002.
4.0
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
152
-------
TABLE AS8
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 52
(STONE #1809, 1x0 SIZE CONTAINING 5% BENTONITE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
u
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
HEAD
(in).
35.0
25.5
24,5
25.0
26.5
28.0
26.5
28.5
27.5
27.5
28.0
28.0
29.5
28.0
28.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
30. 0
31.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3785.
3700.
3630.
3700.
3590.
3560.
3440.
3300.
3060.
2920.
2820.
2650.
2600.
2450.
2390.
2350.
2100.
2130.
2140.
1780.
PH
2.5
2.6
3.2
2.1
2.5
2.5
2.6
2.5
2.8
2.8
2.9
2.8
2.2
2.4
2.7
2.6
2.6
2.5
2.7
3.0
SP.
COND.
Qimho)
2750
2350
1950
2550
2750
2900
2300
230C
2300
2050
1800
190C
3300
3050
2200
2300
235C
2150
165C
2450
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
190. 198. 169. 1178. 735.
190. 201. 147. 1230. 756.
200. 201. 77. 1111. 850.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
153
-------
TABLE AS9
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 53
(STONE *1809, 1/2 x 0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% FLYASH)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ID
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
3?
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72."
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72. D
72.0
72.0
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
•72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
T2.-0
FLOW
(ml/min)
290.
125.
100.
120.
11C.
111.
66.
104.
P.5.
74.
72.
75.
60.
75.
80.
9C.
84.
76.
130.
18C.
146.
6fi.
55.
60.
55.
40.
32.
30.
36.
27.
26.
32.
28.
24.
24.
24.
22.
20.
32.
24.
25.
16.
2C.
18.
16.
18.
36.
14.
14.
14.
19.
18.
-19.
PH
6.3
6.1
5.5
5.4
5.6
5.4
5.6
5.3
5.8
5.7
6.4
6.2
5.9
6.3
5.6
6.6
5.7
5.8
5.6
6.2
6.5
6.8
7.1
7.2
7.2
7.0
7.0
7.C
6.8
7.1
7.0
7.1
7.2
7.2
7.4
6.8
7.1
6.8
7.0
6.8
6.9
7.1
6.9
7.0
7.2
7.1
7.0
6.7
6.9
6.5
7.0
6.6
7.0
SP.
COND.
(/i mho)
215C
200C
2000
195C
1900
195C
1950
18CC
185C
1750
175C
1850
1950
1800
2000
1850
1850
170C
155C
2000
180C
2000
2^00
180C
190C
1900
1750
1750
1700
1800
175C
1450
140C
1450
1600
185C
1900
190C
1800
165C
1550
1600
175C
1950
1900
1850
160C
1600
1800
1900
1800
2000
1800
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1).
80. C
50.0
60.0
50.0
< 1.0
6.5
< 1.0
< 1.0
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(rcg/1) (rag/1) (mg/1)
86.9
24.5
180.
466.
1292.
1180.
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
5.5
14.4
18.5
402.
993.
< 4.0
100.
348.
1087.
<4.0
<0.03
378.
948,
<4.0
<0.03
343.
837.
7.7
0.10
332.
812.
<4.0
<0.03
384.
937.
<4.0
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
154
-------
TABLE A60
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 54
(STONE #1809, 1x0 SIZE CONTAINING 10% FLYASH)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1°
2^
21
22
23
21
25
26
27
23
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
12
43
t|ti
45
46
17
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
"72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. "j
72.0
72. j
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72*0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. A
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
435.
280.
270.
230.
30C.
340.
680.
152.
13C.
98.
52.
70.
40.
60.
40.
8.
10.
69.
70.
60.
60.
124.
85.
90.
BO.
30.
68.
54.
72.
51.
64.
72.
56.
9.
10.
20.
14.
8.
18.
14.
21.
8.
9.
8.
8.
9.
12.
8.
8.
12.
20.
15.
17.
PH
5.7
b.4
6.0
5.8
5.8
5.6
4.6
5.6
6.0
6.0
6.5
6.5
6.3
6.4
6.0
6.7
6 .6
6.1
6. 1
6.3
6.6
5.6
6.5
6.7
6 .8
6.7
6.5
6.5
6.4
6.2
6.3
6.6
6.6
7.5
7.6
7. 1
7.3
7.0
7.2
7.0
7.0
7.5
7.1
7.2
7.0
7.3
7.3
6.9
7.1
6.8
7. 1
6.9
7.1
SP. FERROUS TOTAL
COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(^raho) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
2100 130. 127. 412." 1268.
165C
19~0
190C
185C
IrtOC
1710 190. 148. 325. 11PO.
17PC
175C
1700
175C
190C
2C5C
130C 3C.O 33.0 389. 1051.
2100
175C
2050
160C
155C
195C
1650 90. C 94.4 328. 1115.
175C
183C
1650
160C
170C
160C
165C 80.0 102. 277. 904.
16?C
1600
165C
125C
1250
170C
165C 8.5 0.05 358. 914.
1flOC
1850
1R5C
190C
185C
165C
1550 < 1 .0 0.13 342. 861.
1650
130C
185C
19 DC
1800
160C
170C < 1.0 0.03 382. 989.
1800
1750
1900
1800
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
79.0
205.
10.8
36.6
134.
< 4.0
< 4.0
< 4.0
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
155
-------
TABLE A61
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 55
(STONE #1809, 1/8 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
P
q
1r
1 1
12
13
14
15
1C
17
1 f>
19
2C
21
22
23
24
25
26
2~>
28
29
3C
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Ifi
19
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
5C
SI
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
oS.O
72.-T
72. ">
72. ^
72.0
72.0
72. •"
7?. •>
72. C
72. •>
72.1
72.:
72.0
72.0
72.0
72."
72.^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.^
72. J
72.0
72.:
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
~>2.n
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.r
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.C
FLOW
(ml/min)
8-45.
t-JO.
57 C.
53C.
46 0.
4^ C .
4oO.
424.
3SC.
3oO.
264.
23C.
20C.
210.
17C.
IOC.
152.
122.
no.
120.
90.
90.
9C.
dO.
30.
40.
58.
54.
46.
25.
47.
64.
44.
36.
44.
52.
56.
54.
7C.
76.
43.
6C.
72.
76.
67.
7C.
72.
62.
100.
112.
120.
100.
100.
PH
6.2
5.7
6.1
6.0
6.C
5.8
5.6
5.7
6.0
6.2
6.4
6.3
6.3
6.4
6. 1
5.9
6.5
6.2
6.3
6.7
6.3
6.5
6.7
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.8
6.9
6.7
6.9
6.8
7.0
6.8
7.5
7.6
7.0
7.0
b.9
6.7
6.5
6.8
7.1
o.7
6.7
6.9
7.C
6.9
6.2
6.4
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.7
SP.
COND.
(ftmhg)
215C
195C
195C
20CG
200C
2000
1 350
165C
IP 50
17DC
165C
1 R'^C
205C
1900
2 IOC
1950
2TOC
1600
160C
2100
190C
210C
195T
1flOO
1 95C
165C
170C
1800
IQOO
1900
1900
165C
165C
1S5C
IbOO
1-350
190C
1900
185C
1750
165C
1600
19CC
1900
1950
1750
170C
180C
1HQO
1800
171C
1800
19CC
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
110. 1C6. 475. 1258. 1.8
9C.O 100. 417. 1160. 18.0
60.0 54.9 403. 1037. 39.6
2C.O 17.0 430. 1135. 7.2
1.0 3.5 411. 997. < 4.0
2.5 < 0.0.1 343. 788. <4.0
<1.0 9.0 355. 788. 288.
33. C 102. 363. 1041. 9.0
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
156
-------
TABLE A62
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 56
(STONE 11809, 1/4 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
ft
a
10
11
12
13
14
1S
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
13
34
35
36
37
33
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
40.5
41.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
7 2 . C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. n
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.1
72. 3
72.0
^2.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
1130.
850.
790.
785.
770.
800.
840.
1040.
1C70.
1040.
1120.
1110.
1160.
1120.
1C7C.
960.
S40.
930.
920.
920.
920.
720.
765.
620.
66C.
4SC.
430.
520.
520.
55.
520.
232.
228.
168.
248.
272.
400.
390.
400.
3PO.
200.
304.
343.
40 C.
410.
340.
200.
290.
276.
288.
268.
280.
280.
PH
5.6
6. 1
6.2
6.0
5.8
5.5
5.8
4.8
5.0
4.9
4.9
4 ,4
3.2
3.3
4.1
3.7
3.5
3.4
3.7
3.7
3.8
4.1
3.8
4.2
6.5
5.1
6.4
5.0
4.4
4.8
4.7
6.4
6.2
6.8
5.8
6.6
4. 1
4.9
4.7
4.6
6.7
5.5
4.2
4.0
4.4
5.4
6.5
3.3
4.3
4.0
2.9
3.9
3.9
SP . FERROUS TOTAL
COND. IRON IRON
(/imho) (mg/1) (mg/1)
2000 160. 145.
155C
1800
1.100
1R50
18^0
17CC 170. 157.
165C
1650
1550
1550
isrr
1900
190C 180. 166.
170C
175C
1HOC
1600
1500
19f>C
U5C 180. 166.
V3CC
1850
1650
140C
15CC
13CC
165C 160. 143.
1550
14CC
150C
125C
120C
125T
160C 160. 120.
1nOO
18Cr
1700
16 OC
1550
1300
1450 160. 142.
17*0
165C
160C
1G?C
1 2C C
175C
17
-------
TABLE A63
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 57
(STONE 11809, 1/2 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
a
5
6
7
8
9
1?
11
12
IS
1<»
15
16
17
18
19
20
HEAD
(in)
31.0
30.5
3'4.A
16.0
37, ^
32.0
39.5
41.5
«iC,5
UC.5
HO. 5
UC.5
u;.o
«3.5
15. 5
U6.5
46.0
«7. 5
U
FLOW
(ml/min)
3735.
3200.
3U80.
3525.
2uqo.
3380.
32UO.
320C.
3000.
2680.
2800.
266?.
2520.
1500.
2U30.
2280.
2050.
2050.
206C.
1760.
PH
3. a
3.1
3.5
3.2
3.0
2.8
3.0
3.0
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.0
2.7
2.8
3.2
3.1
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.3
SP. FERROUS TOTAL
COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(>iinho) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
195C 2CO. 1<55. U40. 1226.
.1550
1S5T
1950
215C
2200
1800 190. 199. 200. 1170.
18-50
1850
170C
170C
185C
2350
2UOC 200. 20C. U5. 1138.
1900
1850
2C5C
1R5C
160C
2150
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
tt85.
626.
691.
*Start-up. date was 3/15/72.
158
-------
TABLE A64
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 58
(STONE #1809, 1/2 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
33
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
41.0
39.5
40.0
41.0
44.0
«7.5
50.0
50.0
52.0
50.0
46.0
48.0
50.5
56.0
60. 0
61.0
62. r>
64.0
65.0
67.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. ^
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3735.
3740.
3735.
3810.
3770.
3fc40.
3560.
3460.
3150.
3000.
2620.
245C.
2420.
1300.
2210.
2COO.
1920.
1900.
87C.
1640.
1280.
82C.
8-70.
810.
740.
430.
480.
440.
420.
37C.
360.
100.
56.
52.
208.
204 .
250.
240.
210.
200.
57.
136.
128.
124.
120.
110.
108.
96.
96.
96.
110.
110.
100.
pH
3.4
2.9
3.2
3.1
2.9
2.7
2,9
2.8
3.1
3.1
3.0
3.0
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.1
2.8
2.7
2.9
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.3
6.4
4.4
6.0
3.7
3.7
4.2
4.0
6.4
fa .4
6.6
3.9
3.9
3.4
3.8
4. 1
4.0
6.7
5.3
3.9
4.5
4.6
4.9
6.4
3.5
4. 1
3.7
3.2
3.4
3.4
SP.
COND.
QJ. mho)
1950
2050
180C
2000
220C
235C
190C
190C
1900
1850
1750
190C
261C
2500
2COC
1900
205C
185C
155C
220C
1400
195C
200C
190C
1300
1400
1200
1650
1600
145C
1S5C
125C
1300
1300
165C
1650
19CC
170C
i6^r
1550
1 30 C
1450
1700
16CC
1600
145C
1300
165C
1650
16CC
1 6 0 C
17CC
1 ?rr
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
190.
200.
200.
200.
160.
160.
150.
150.
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM
(mg/1) (mg/1)
HOT PHT.
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1)
191.
196.
259.
200.
1227.
1190.
478.
666.
194.
137.
1087.
688.
190.
155.
1097.
490.
165.
169.
988.
442.
170.
190.
1035.
449.
147.
172.
901,
332.
132.
221.
1C51.
368.
•Start-up date was 3/15/72.
159
-------
TABLE A6S
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 59
(STONE #1809, 1 x 50 M SI1CK)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
R
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
?2
23
24
25
26
27
28
70
30
jl
32
33
34
35
36
37
3R
39
4"
n i
U2
U 3
L H
ti *}
46
47
48
43
50
S 1
52
53
HEAD
(in)
2^.0
34.5
36.0
34.'i
72.5
47.0
51.0
48.5
45.5
53.-
6C.5
62.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
65.0
72. P
72.0
61.*
72."
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.:
72. C
72. *
72.0
72.0
72. A
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.)
72.1
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
"'2.0
72.0
72.0
72.C
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.*
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3735.
3500.
37(55.
39 1C.
382C.
3630.
3530.
332C.
3020.
2820.
2 f) 0 0 .
2570.
2420.
197C.
190°.
1460.
1380.
1180.
1C20.
1040.
90C.
500.
R45.
710.
730.
515.
640.
b4C.
720.
760.
700.
4,13.
364.
292.
6CO.
564.
600.
560.
520.
5HO.
250.
402.
5 1C.
510.
4-10.
490.
236.
456.
4Cfl.
334.
42^.
420.
420.
PH
4.6
3.1
3.2
3.0
2.4
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.1
2.6
2.9
3.2
3.2
3.0
2.9
3.0
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.4
6.1
4.1
5.9
3.2
3.4
3.5
3.2
6.4
6.2
6.4
3.0
3.C
2.7
2.8
3.0
2.9
6. 1
3.7
2.9
3. 1
3.2
3.4
b.2
2.5
2.9
2.7
2.3
2.7
2.9
SP.
COND.
Qimho)
1850
20-0
1850
2050
215C
2250
185C
1800
1900
1750
1650
1S5C
25CC
225C
1900
1BOO
1900
1800
160r
2200
1600
195C
2000
20*0
125C
14*0
1150
200C
1750
1450
1650
1100
1 100
1100
2 100
1950
2450
210C
1R50
1900
110C
1600
2100
1900
1ft? 0
17nC
11:0
23 1C
2050
1900
2300
2150
2C5C
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
19C.
200 .
20C.
200.
180.
190.
180.
200.
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM
(mg/1) (mg/1)
HOT PHT.
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1)
196.
200.
257.
210.
1241.
1180.
481.
630.
178.
155.
1104.
S87.
192.
158.
1107.
508.
201,
149.
1034.
545.
187.
160.
1066.
584.
179.
125.
904,
449.
174.
155.
1082.
553.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
160
-------
TABLE A66
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 60
(STONE #1809, 1x0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
HEAD
.(in).
32.5
23.0
22.0
22.0
23.0
23.0
22.5
23.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
72.0
21.5
20.5
2C.5
19.5
19.5
19.0
19.0
18.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3785.
3600.
3480.
3810.
3580.
3440.
3340.
3220.
2S20.
276C.
2720.
2570.
2480.
2430.
2340.
2240.
2000.
2060.
2040.
1460.
PH
3.2
5.8
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.5
2.6
2.5
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.4
2.6
2.7
3.0
2.8
2.5
2.8
3.1
SP.
COND.
(fimho)
1900
2100
2COC
2400
240C
2550
210C
2000
2050
2100
185C
2C5C
2950
2300
2100
1950
215C
1950
160C
2250
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT .
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(rag/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
200. 191. 245. 1216. 471.
200. 197. 177. 1170. 742.
200. 201. 113. 1125. 763.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
161
-------
TABLE A67
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 61
(STONE 11355, 1/8 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
7
T
a
s
6
7
R
9
I,"
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
2n
21
22
23
2U
25
26
27
28
29
3C
11
32
33
3U
35
36
37
3a
3=>
ar
41
142
43
<44
45
46
47
UP
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72. '">
72.'1
72.0
72. "
72. 0
72.-1
72.0
72.0
72. n
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.^
72."
72. ^
•72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.T
72.:
72."
72.0
72.:
72."
72.0
72.0
72. 1
72. C
72. a
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.*
72.0
72.0
72.0
72."
72. A
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
85.
60.
75.
R3.
9 C .
73.
96.
150.
140.
136.
130.
160.
134.
150.
1 JO.
130.
122.
116.
120.
112.
120.
104.
100.
Q ^
j ^j .
1?C.
!3C.
80.
TO.
96.
93.
100.
oO.
4C.
3fc.
ea.
'34.
74.
g«.
76.
74.
40.
68.
68.
72.
66.
68.
40.
68.
64.
62.
66.
69.
65.
PH
6.2
h.3
5.8
5.4
5.5
5.4
5.4
5.2
5.6
5.7
6.1
5.9
5.8
6.1
5.5
5.9
6.1
5.7
5.8
6.4
5.9
6.2
6.1
6.3
6.4
6.1
6.H
6.1
6.4
6. 1
6.C
6.7
6.7
6.6
6.2
5.9
6.3
5.9
6.2
6.0
6.3
6.2
5.9
6.0
S.7
5.8
6.5
5.8
5.9
5.8
5.8
5.5
5.5
SP.
COND.
(/^mho)
22^r
2r5C
2 IOC
2C^C
195C
1S50
2C5C
130C
1fl5C
180C
175C
IdflO
205C
190C
2C5T
190C
200C
1«or
1550
2 IOC
155C
2^00
190P
165C
180C
180C
165C
170C
170C
165C
175C
1350
1 J5C
1 35C
160C
170C
1900
1POC
1P50
17QC
140C
160C
1F5C
1850
1P5C
175C
140C
1P50
1100
1P.OC
165C
2000
1P5C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (rag/1) (rog/1)
50.0 51.9 515. 1276. 21.6
< 1.0 109. !435. 1137. 25.2
180. 102. 383. 1026. 21.6
5C.O «4.C 365. 100U. 10.8
flO.O 107. 331. 973. 46.0
60.0 95.0 323. 912. 7.7
30. 0 68.9 322. 888. <4.0
80. 0 116. 345. 1018. 6.0
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
162
-------
TABLE A68
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 62
(STONE #1355, 1/4 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER HEAD FLOW
START-UP* (in) (ml/min)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IS
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
as
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
72.)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72."
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. 'T
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
525.
310.
300.
290.
160.
1U6.
126.
242.
270.
216.
18U.
180.
156.
160.
160.
140.
134.
128.
140.
12U.
120.
120,
120.
100.
100.
80.
80.
80.
96.
100.
104.
64.
56.
48.
72.
76.
83.
3C.
54.
88.
40.
48.
52.
60.
49.
50.
40.
44.
12.
44.
50.
46.
52.
PH
5.9
3.0
6.0
5.8
5.9
5.6
5.8
5.6
6.0
6.1
6.3
6.2
6.1
6.3
6.1
5.6
6.0
6.1
6.2
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.8
6.6
6.7
6.5
6.6
6.4
6.4
6.3
6.3
6.8
6.8
7.0
6.8
6.5
6.4
6.3
6.2
6.6
6.7
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.5
5.9
6.8
6.2
6.4
6.1
6.3
6.1
6.3
SP . FERROUS TOTAL
COND. IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(M"fro) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
2200 110. 102. 506. 12S9.
2C50
2000
2050
1950
1950
2000 40.0 44.9 424. 1118.
1900
1850
1800
175C
1850
2100
1850 100. 65.9 395. 1037.
2050
1850
1900
180C
1650
2000
1450 40.0 61.9 383. 1038.
2000
1850
1800
165C
190C
1750
185C 30.0 44.9 400. 993.
175C
170C
180C
1450
140C
1450
170C 5.0 19.9 365. 881.
1800
1S50
19CO
1750
1800
1500
165C <1.0 3.5 75. 871.
190C
1950
1950
1850
155C
1E5C
190C 2.0 2.5 440. 1035.
1900
185C
205C
1900
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
< 4.0
< 4.0
< 4.0
< 4.0
15.4
9.6
< 4.0
< 4.0
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
163
-------
TABLE A69
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO, 63
(STONE 11355, 1/2 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
14
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
11
42
43
44
45
H6
47
148
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
39.0
45.5
52.0
33.0
23.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/rain)
3785.
3730.
3740.
362C.
3230.
1920.
1440.
2100.
1050.
1300.
82C.
750.
740.
680.
620.
550.
5140.
500.
480.
460.
4UO.
360.
370.
330.
310.
225.
220.
206.
176.
190.
164.
76.
48.
36.
152.
148.
160.
142.
224.
212.
73.
168.
164.
160.
150.
150.
84.
140.
132.
128.
126.
135.
128.
PH
3.3
4.5
3.5
3.3
3.1
3.3
3.3
3.0
3.8
4.0
3.7
3.7
3.2
3.4
4.0
3.4
3.5
3.5
3.5
4.2
U.2
4.1
4.1
5.0
6.1
5.1
5.9
4.9
4.9
4.8
5.1
6.6
6.5
6.7
4.9
5.0
<4.7
5.0
4.8
4.7
6.4
5.2
4.7
5.2
5.6
5.8
6.5
4.6
4.7
4.6
4.2
4.3
4.4
SP.
COND.
Qiinho)
190C
1550
175C
190C
2000
185C
1800
1800
17CO
1550
1500
1650
185C
185C
1750
175C
175C
165C
1400
2CPC
160C
1800
1800
160C
145C
1550
1300
155C
165C
1450
155C
1300
1350
1300
1550
1650
1750
1650
1550
1500
1250
145C
165C
1600
160C
1550
1250
1650
165C
1600
1550
1700
1650
FERROUS 'TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
200. 178. 251. 1263. ftHU.
180. 185. 195. 1179. 292.
70.0 176. 187. 1077. 479.
190. 166. 190. 1050. 422.
160. 1»0. 191. 968. 319.
170. 156. 200. 950. 373.
160. 147. 172. 90tt. 351.
170. 135. 222. 106U. 339.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
164
-------
TABLE A70
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 64
(STONE #1355, 1/2 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
u
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
33
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
70.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.?
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. D
72.0
72., i
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
147C.
1500.
183C.
2800.
2820.
2560.
1430.
1ROO.
1280.
800.
1140.
1125.
1060.
940.
• 900.
800.
760.
73C.
7CC.
660.
600.
360.
325.
27C.
240.
17C.
180.
192.
166.
9C.
140.
62.
52.
4C.
112.
120.
140.
124.
192.
184.
55.
140.
148.
144.
134.
130.
68.
128.
116.
120.
120.
124.
124.
pH
5.1
2.8
4.6
3.6
3.3
2.9
3.4
3.1
3.7
3.7
3.5
3.4
3. 1
3.2
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.7
3.9
4.4
4.4
5.0
6.0
5.1
6.0
5.0
5.2
5.4
5.5
6.5
6.3
6.8
5.8
4.9
4.7
4.7
4.7
4.2
6.3
4.9
3.8
4.7
4.8
5.0
6.4
3.3
4.0
4. 1
3.2
3.6
3.4
SP.
COND.
(/iniho)
1950
2200
170C
1800
1900
195C
175C
175C
170C
165C
1550
180C
199C
2MC
1800
180C
1 R0C
165C
140C
190C
1550
isor
1700
155C
150C
155C
1350
1550
165C
150C
160C
140C
145C
140C
150C
1650
175C
1650
1550
1500
130C
145C
1700
160C
160C
15CC
1300
175C
1700
160C
160C
170C
17CC
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
170.
190.
190.
200.
150.
120.
160.
160.
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM
(mg/1) (mg/1)
166.
191.
352.
210.
SULFATE
(mg/1)
1240.
1154.
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/1)
2fl2.
623.
188.
175.
1099.
547.
179.
180.
1035.
442,
137.
219.
955.
269.
124.
240.
911.
246.
162.
170.
901.
345.
190.
217.
1054.
381.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
165
-------
TABLE A71
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 65
(STONE 11355, 1 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
1 .•>
11
12
13
la
16
17
13
20
HEAD
(in)
31.
46. "•
1*7. )
4 o_ •>
lib. ?
FLOW
(ml/min)
3310.
3-70.
277%
2 1 0 C .
? i ft r.
1 f: t. " .
2 <*•}•:.
2m".
2 3 u ? .
•> •) T n
2 12 n .
'212:.
noo.
PH
3.3
3.4
3.2
3.0
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.7
3. 1
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.6
2.7
3.0
3.0
2.7
2.6
2.9
3. 1
1900
1850
2^50
195C
195^
2 IOC
205 C
1 15C
2250
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
r'0.0
TOTAL
IRON
(mg/1)
lufl.
219.
CALCIUM SULFATE
(mg/1) (rog/1)
250.
1175.
119.1.
HOT PHT.
ACIDITY
(mg/I)
U85.
769.
fir.
132.
1122.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
166
-------
TABLE A72
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 66
(STONE #1355, 1x0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2 '4
25
26
27
>9
29
30
31
32
33
3
-------
TABLE A73
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 67
(STONE 11337, 1/8 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
a
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
23
29
3"
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
3<>
4?
ai
42
4:>
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
61
1*2
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
57. 0
57.0
72.0
59.0
5U.O
U 1.0
4C.O
39.0
U2.0
it 2.0
42.5
50.0
48.0
4 s . n
72.0
72.0
72. 0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.3
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
66. 0
72.0
72. C
68.0
62.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
60.0
58.0
56.0
72.0
72.0
54.5
5«.o
52.0
52.0
72.0
54.0
52.0
FLOW
(ml/roin)
25.
10.
10.
12.
15.
10.
7.
12.
2C.
10.
8.
25.
15.
35.
20.
15.
22.
23.
30.
36.
36.
32.
35.
55.
30.
30.
28.
60.
28.
25.
28.
28.
0.
28.
28.
24.
22.
22.
26.
24.
29.
26.
24.
2U.
26.
19.
24.
20.
18.
18.
26.
24.
22.
pH
6.4
8.0
5.9
5.9
5.7
5.5
5.7
5.5
5.8
5.8
6.7
o.5
5.8
6.2
5.7
fa. 3
6.1
5.9
5.8
6.4
6.2
fa. 8
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.2
6.4
6.1
6.5
6.2
6.1
7.0
7.3
6.5
6.4
6.2
6.4
6.2
6.6
6.7
6.4
5.8
6.0
5.9
5.6
6.5
5.7
5.8
5.9
6.0
5.5
5.5
SP . FERROUS
COND. IRON
(/imho) (mg/1)
2100 S.O
-21CC
2 ICO
2050
2C5C
2050
200C < 1.0
200C
1900
18^0
175C
190C
1950
1850 < 1.0
19DC
1900
1P5C
170C
125C
200C
160C 30.0
195C
18CO
175C
180C
175C
165C
1650 30.0
170C
165C
1700
130C
135C
1650 1.0
1850
13CC
1850
1750
1750
13CC
1500 < 1.0
18CC
180C
180C
165C
135C
170C
1750 8.0
180C
160C
19CO
165C
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (rag/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
11.0 266. 1169. < 4.0
0.28 320. 1199. <4.0
0.90 440. 1037. 25.2
278. 1056. 10.8
45.0 216. 948. 154.
6.8 228. 860. < 4.0
23. C 200. 826. < 4.0
25.0 220. 1025. 9.0
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
168
-------
TABLE A74
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 68
(STONE #1337, 1/4 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
n-
1£
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
3d
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
HEAD
(in)
72.0
72.0
72.0
53.0
61.0
50.0
55.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
59.0
72.0
72.0
67.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72. C
35.0
4C.O
49.0
47.0
49.5
57.0
72.0
47.0
33.0
36.0
42.0
72.0
52.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
72,0
49.0
63.0
53.0
43.0
44.0
36.0
57.0
52.0
53.0
55.0
72.0
72.0
72.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
180.
200.
225.
200.
50.
140.
125.
164.
80.
54.
70.
70.
70.
50.
40.
40.
41.
38.
40.
34.
15.
16.
20.
15.
15.
20.
16.
16.
12.
11.
12.
12.
0.
12.
16.
20.
21.
18.
2C.
18.
10.
14.
22.
15.
10.
8.
12.
8.
7.
8.
12.
0.
0.
PH
5.9
5.6
6. 1
6.2
6.0
6.0
5.9
5.8
6.1
6.2
6.4
6.6
6. 1
6.5
6.2
6.6
6.3
6.3
6.4
6.8
6.8
6.5
6.7
6.6
6.8
6.7
6.7
6.6
6.8
6.9
6.5
7.4
7.6
6.8
6.7
6.8
6.8
6.7
7.0
7.0
6.7
6.2
6.4
6.4
0.3
6.7
6.1
6.3
6.3
7.1
6.0
SP;
COND.
(/xmho)
2050
1600
1850
1900
1900
1900
190C
170C
1750
170C
1700
iBon
2000
175C
195C
1950
19.1C
1700
165C
210C
1700
215C
195C
2000
1900
1800
1750
1650
1750
1750
1750
165C
1550
1550
170C
175C
1750
175C
1700
15TC
1450
1b50
U5C
U300
175C
1500
1500
175C
1800
1700
185C
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
80. C
30.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
1 .0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE
(mg/1) (mg/1)
75.4
29.5
302.
235.
1178.
1072.
127.
420.
1037.
<0.03
248.
1146.
<0.03
216.
944.
< 0.03
2C3.
823.
-------
TABLE A75
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 69
(STONE #1337, 1/2 x 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
q
1C
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
IS
19
20
HEAD
(in)
31.0
27.0
24.0
25.0
24.5
26.0
25.5
26.0
27.0
24.0
25.0
22.5
25.0
26.0
25.0
24.0
24.5
25.0
25.0
24.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3785.
3640.
3€30.
3620.
3650.
3540.
340C.
3340.
3C20.
2880.
2820.
2590.
24HO.
247.
2400.
2230.
2200.
2130.
2100.
1760.
pH
3.0
1.8
3.5
3.6
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.4
3.9
4.1
3.6
3.8
3.5
3.5
3.9
3.8
3.6
3.5
4.9
4.4
SP.
COND.
(funho)
210C
5800
1P50
175C
190C
195C
185C
165C
1710
15?C
155C
^'^C
1ROO
1P50
170C
1650
175C
1bOC
1450
1800
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
200. 199. 15fl. 10fl9. 432.
200. 192. 1b5. 1162, 554.
210. 193. 120. 1095. 500.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
170
-------
TABLE A76
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 70
(STONE #1337, 1/2 x 0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
a
5
6
7
3
0
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
if.
HEAD
(in)
72..?
72. C
72.0
72. ••;
72. i
72.i
72.0
72.1
72.0
72.0
72. 0
72.0
72.0
19.0
37.0
31.5
26.^
24.5
24.0
21."
FLOW
(ml/min)
320.
245.
240.
240.
2 10.
2^0.
15fl.
48P.
560.
560.
020.
60C.
1 120.
2410.
2320.
2200.
2120.
2140.
2050.
1800.
pH
5. 1
1 .7
4.8
4 .8
4 .b
4.6
4.5
4.4
4.5
4.5
4. 3
4.3
2.9
3.1
3.4
C.C
3.0
2.9
3.4
3.6
SP.
COND.
(fimho )
1 goo-
ses c
175C
1ROC
180C
175C
1700
160C
1650
1450
150C
1fcOC
2050
2COO
1HOO
171C
1900
180C
1450
195C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
170. 165. 204. 1185. 310.
180. 175. 171. 1100. 367.
2C-0. 194. 107. 1092. 585.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
171
-------
TABLE A77
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 71
(STONE 11337, 1 X 50M SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
s
f>
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
HEAD
(in)
22.0
18.0
15.0
12.0
7I.C
72.?
5.0
n.s
9.5
10.0
9.0
8.5
8.0
5.0
9.5
10.0
1C. 5
9.0
10. C
1C.O
FLOW
(ml/min)
3785.
3440.
3500.
3420.
3360.
3260.
316C.
3C80.
2780.
269C.
2590.
2390.
2340.
24flO.
2230.
2150.
1980.
1930.
2COO.
1740.
PH
2.8
1 .6
3. 1
3.1
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.8
3.2
3.5
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.0
3.4
3.5
3.2
3.0
3.6
3.8
SP.
COND.
(Minho)
2100
535C
180C
1950
220C
225C
2C5C
185C
1H5C
165C
165C
175C
190C
2C5C
180C
170C
1Rf C
175C
145C
190C
FERROUS
IRON
(ng/1)
200.
200.
200.
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mq/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
191.
195.
135. 1092. 600.
137. 1162. 511.
196.
115. 1111. 615.
•Start-up date was 3/15/72.
172
-------
TABLE A78
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 72
(STONE 11337, 1x0 SIZE)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
HEAD
(in)
27.0
2C.5
16.0
15.0
13.5
35.5
10.5
11.5
10.5
6.0
9.0
e.o
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.5
8.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
FLOW
(ml/min)
3785.
3290.
3230.
3380.
3150.
3010.
2900.
3100.
2940.
1900.
1880.
1750.
1740.
1660.
1530.
1540.
700.
1390.
1340.
1220.
PH
2.9
1.5
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.7
3.1
3.8
3.2
3.2
2.9
3.0
3.2
3.3
3.1
3.0
3.4
3.6
SP.
COND.
(Mmho)
215C
730C
2100
195C
2200
230C
2150
1S5C
190C
155C
175C
175C
215C
2100
180C
170C
1900
170C
150C
195C
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
200. 191. 145. 1070. 622.
190. 195. 134. 1198. 64R.
21C. 195. 105. 1097. 645.
*Start-up date was 3/15/72.
173
-------
TABLE A79
COMPARISON OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
BEFORE AND AFTER 50 DAYS OF MINE WATER PERCOLATION
MATERIAL NO. 1809
(PERCENT OF MATERIAL SMALLER BY WEIGHT)
Sieve
Size
1 1/2
3/4
3/8
4
8
16
30
50
100
200
1/2x0
Before
___
100.0
84.0
42.5
24.9
14.2
8.1
4.8
2.9
1.9
After
Ferric
TV 10
— _—
100.0
91.7
64.9
44.4
30.1
21.1
15.9
12.6
10.7
Ferrous
TV 38
-,__
100.0
90.6
62.1
40.4
26.0
17.2
12.3
9.4
7.9
Ferric-
Ferrous
TV 34
_*_ —
100.0
81.2
49.8
30.0
19.9
14.2
11.3
9.5
8.5
1/4 x 0
Before
__«.
100.0
88.3
58.1
34.2
19.5
10.9
6.1
3.9
After
Ferric-
Ferrous
TV 32
_ _ *_
100.0
84.1
47.7
26.0
14.4
8.7
5.8
4.5
1/8 x 0
Before
___
100.0
65.9
33.3
16.6
9.0
5.5
3.9
After
Ferric-
Ferrous
TV 31
«_
100.0
67.8
37.4
19.2
11.0
7.5
5.8
NOTE: TV indicates test vessel.
174
-------
TABLE ASO
COMPARISON OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
BEFORE AND AFTER 100 DAYS OF MINE WATER PERCOLATION
MATERIAL NO. 1355
(PERCENT OF MATERIAL SMALLER BY WEIGHT)
Sieve
Size
1 1/2
3/4
3/8
4
8
16
30
50
100
200
1x0
Before
100.0
87.6
65.6
35.5
20.4
11.8
6.6
4.0
2.7
1.9
After
Ferric-
Ferrous
TV 42
100.0
88.6
77.1
47.5
32.1
24.1
19.4
15.9
12.3
9.4
1/4 x 0
Before
100.0
77.6
42.0
23.8
15.4
10.6
7.7
5.6
After
Ferric-
Ferrous
TV 38
100.0
82.7
48.5
30.9
21.2
15.1
10.4
7.1
1/8 x 0
Before
100.0
84.5
51.6
32.6
20.5
13.1
8.5
After
Ferric-
Ferrous
TV 37
100.0
75.7
51.8
35.4
25.3
18.6
13.7
NOTE: TV indicates test vessel.
175
-------
TABLE A81
Specimens Tested in Lab Cycle II
Test
Vessel
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83*
84*
NOTE:
Description
5% Portland cement
5% Calcium sulfate hemihydrate
5% Sodium silicate
2X original fines content
2X original fines content
3X original fines content
3X original fines content
5% Fe2(SO4)3 + 15% Na2S04 zone
3/8 x 0 stone
3/8 x 0 stone
3/8 x 0 stone
3/8x0 stone
Approximate
Relative Density
(%)
30
! 30
30
30
60
30
60
: 30
30
60
0
30
Actual
Density
(LB/FT3)
105
105
105
105
116
105
116
105
105
116
98
105
* Tested on South Pittsburgh City water
Others tested on ferric/ferrous water
176
-------
TABLE A32
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 73
(5% PORTLAND CEMENT, 30% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min)
155
120
96
82
100
70
52
40
32
22
20
12
8
3
6
4
4
3
3
3
4
6
6
10
16
PH
12.4
11.8
11.9
11.7
11.5
11.5
11.2
11.5
10.1
10.7
10.0
10.2
10.5
10.7
10.7
10.8
10.8
10.9
10.7
10.5
10.2
9.5
8.9
SP.
COND.
J^tmho)
8800
5700
3950
3000
2650
1950
2300
2300
1950
2100
2250
1850
2400
2650
2450
2350
2600
2550
2500
2500
2450
2400
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
1.0 1.0 1211. 4.0
1.0 1.0 600. 1319. 4.0
1.0 1.0 588. 1566. 4.0
*Start-up date was 8/15/72.
177
-------
TABLE AS3
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 74
(5% CALCIUM SULFATE HEMIHYDRATE, 30% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min)
240
154
150
126
258
138
180
108
40
23
24
14
12
10
8
8
8
6
5
6
12
20
32
52
PH
7.4
6.9
7.2
7.6
7.2
8.3
8.5
7.7
7.2
7.6
7.7
7.5
8.1
8.4
8.3
7.5
7.2
7.6
8.0
7.6
7.3
7.1
SP.
COND.
Qimho)
2900
2850
2750
2650
2700
2100
2600
2450
2350
1900
2450
2150
2700
2600
2700
2700
2600
2650
2500
2800
2200
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
18.8
1.0
19.0
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
1599.
12.0
2.0
672.
1550
11.4
21.0
656
1501
4.0
*Start-up date was 8/15/72.
178
-------
TABLE A84
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 75
(5% SODIUM SILICATE, 30% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
~2
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min)
104
136
144
148
206
235
176
100
44
22
75
24
23
20
12
12
16
20
17
18
12
12
26
24
16
PH
9.9
6.7
7.2
7.1
7.3
7.5
7.6
7.6
7.0
7.5
7.5
7.0
7.7
8.1
7.9
7.5
7.6
7.5
8.0
8.0
7.5
7.4
7.4
SP.
COND.
(^mho)
2850
2400
2800
2500
1950
1700
2300
2350
1950
1900
2300
2050
2600
2550
2400
2550
2750
2500
2800
2700
2700
2750
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
4.0 5.0 1653. 4.0
1.0 1.0 596. 1518. 7.6
1.0 1.0 612. 1441. 4.0
•Start-up date was 8/15/72.
179
-------
TABLE A85
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 76
(2X ORIGINAL FINES, 30% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min )
64
80
70
64
64
56
52
43
18
12
16
8
6
6
4
4
4
3
2
2
26
4
2
2
2
PH
7.5
6.6
7.2
7.3
7.5
6.7
7.5
6.9
7.0
7.5
7.4
7.3
7.6
7.5
7.9
7.9
7.8
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.9
7.8
7.9
SP.
COND.
(^mho)
3000
2400
2900
2200
2000
1750
2200
2300
2000
1950
2350
1950
2650
2400
2600
2650
2450
2550
2550
2600
2700
2500
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
1.9 1.5 1609. 12.0
1.0 1.0 620. 1461. 4.0
1.0 1.0 632 1502. 4.0
•Start-up date was 8/15/72.
180
-------
TABLE AS6
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 77
(2X ORIGINAL FINES, 60% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min)
0
35
30
24
21
20
24
36
16
10
12
6
4
4
3
2
2
1
1
1
4
3
2
1
1
PH
7.7
7.0
7.4
7.5
7.7
7.3
7.6
7.3
7.3
7.7
7.7
7.5
7.9
7.4
8.0
8.0
7.7
7.4
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.9
8.0
SP . FERROUS
COND. IRON
(pmho) (mg/1)
2850 1.0
2300
2750
2350
1950
1750
2150
2350
1850
1900
2300 1.0
1750
2350
2450
2400
2800
2550
2400
2600
2650
2600
2550 1.0
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/lL (mg/1 (mg/1)
1.0 1773. 11.2
1.0 580. 1416. 4.0
1.0 628. 1472. 4.0
*Start-up date was 8/15/72.
181
-------
TABLE A37
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 78
(3X ORIGINAL FINES, 30% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min )
0
0
0
0
0
1.6
1.0
2.2
2.8
2.6
2.0
2.0
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
pH
7.3
8.7
8.4
7.0
7.3
8.0
7.8
8.0
7.7
8.0
7.9
8.0
8.0
8.1
8.1
8.2
8.1
8.0
8.1
8.0
SP.
COND.
fctmho)
4050
3150
3150
1900
1800
1650
1850
1850
2200
1750
2400
2400
2450
2350
2500
2400
2450
2450
2300
2450
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(rog/1) (rog/1) (rag/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) ,
1.0 1.0 472. 1323. 4.0
1.0 1.0 576. 1375. 4.0
•Start-up date was 8/15/72.
182
-------
TABLE A88
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 79
(3X ORIGINAL FINES, 60% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW pH
(ml/min)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SP . FERROUS
COND. IRON
(fjmho) (mg/1)
TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (rog/1)
*Start-up date was 8/15/72.
183
-------
TABLE A89
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 80
("ZONED" PLUG, 30% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
3 0 min .
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min)
62
236
196
130
181
300
208
72
34
26
29
20
16
16
15
12
12
13
12
14
16
24
24
2
20
pH
6.8
6.5
7.1
7.0
7.2
7.2
6.9
7.1
7.2
7.4
7.3
7.1
7.0
7.5
7.5
7.3
7.4
7.3
7.5
7.4
7.3
7.4
7.3
SP.
COND.
(Mmho)
3000
2800
2850
2500
2550
2050
2450
2300
1850
1950
2300
2100
2550
2500
2650
2600
2600
2750
2800
2750
2550
2650
FERROUS TOTAL HOT PHT.
IRON IRON CALCIUM SULFATE ACIDITY
(rag/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (rag/1)
15.0 17.5 1707. 4.0
1.0 1.0 608. 1482. 4.0
3.0 3.0 636. 1476. 4.0
•Start-up date was 8/15/72.
184
-------
TABLE A90
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 81
(3/8 x 0 STONE, 30% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min)
406
360
280
170
160
176
136
80
17
12
12
8
6
4
4
4
4
2
2
2
4
4
2
2
2
pH
6.8
6.5
6.5
6.9
7.1
7.0
7.1
7.3
7.3
7.5
7.7
7.3
7.8
7.8
6.4
8.0
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.9
7.8
7.7
8.0
SP. FERROUS
COND. IRON
Gxmho) (mg/1)
2900 18.8
2400
2600
2250
2000
1900
2100
2300
1800
1900
2250 <1.0
2050
2650
2450
2700
2600
2500
2650
2600
2700
2650
2550 <1.0
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM
(mg/1) (mg/1)
18.8
HOT PHT
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/l)
1665
4.0
612.
1456.
<4.0
660.
1518.
<4.0
*Start-up date was 8/15/72.
185
-------
TABLE A91
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 82
(3/8 x 0 STONE, 60% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
33
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
{ml/min)
44
116
104
96
78
120
104
35
9
9
6
4
5
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
3
2
2
2
2
pH
7.0
6.8
7.2
7.0
6.7
7.4
7.4
6.2
7.8
7.6
7.7
7.1
8.0
8,0
6.8
7.9
a.o
8.1
8.0
8.1
8.0
7.9
8.0
SP . FERROUS
COND . IRON
^Mraho) (mg/1)
2800 <1.0
2250
2700
2200
1900
1600
1950
2200
1750
1800
2100 <1.0
1700
2500
400
2500
2300
2400
2350
2500
2450
2500
2300 <1.0
*Start-up date was 8/15/72.
TOTAL
IRON CALCIUM
(rog/1) (mg/1)
HOT FHT.
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1).
1639
<4.0
532
1504
<4.0
584
1509
<4,0
186
-------
TABLE A92
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 83
(3/8 x 0 STONE, 0% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min)
600
530
480
400
464
456
328
1400
2000
1880
1960
1720
1800
1480
1400
1340
1220
1180
1100
1100
1100
1080
1060
1040
1000
PH
7.4
8.4
8.4
8.1
7.3
8.1
6.8
7.8
8.0
8.2
7.3
8.5
8.4
7.2
8.1
8.7
8.6
8.3
8.4
8.3
8.3
7.7
SP.
COND.
(umho)
600
700
800
800
600
700
800
800
650
600
900
600
700
700
600
750
750
850
900
850
800
900
FERROUS
IRON
(mg/1)
CALCIUM
(mg/1)
HOT PHT.
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (mg/1)
223.
<4.0
40.
242.
7.6
104.
247.
<4.0
* Start-up date was 8/15/72.
187
-------
TABLE A93
FLOW AND EFFLUENT COMPOSITION DATA
FOR TEST VESSEL NO. 84
(3/8 x 0 STONE, 30% DR)
DAYS
AFTER
START-UP*
30 min.
3 hr.
8 hr.
1
3
6
8
10
13
15
17
20
22
24
27
29
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
48
50
HEAD
(in)
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
FLOW
(ml/min)
420
370
310
232
300
324
280
840
1240
1160
1160
1080
1000
960
960
800
800
740
760
720
680
700
700
640
640
PH
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.2
7.7
8.8
7.3
8.8
8.0
8.6
7.1
8.5
8.6
7.5
8.5
8.6
7.5
8.5
8.5
8.3
8.3
7.8
SP.
COND.
Q*mho;
600
700
700
750
600
650
700
600
600
550
700
500
600
6OO
750
650
800
800
800
750
750
850
•Start-up date was 8/15/72.
FERROUS TOTAL
IRON IRON
(mg/1) (mg/1)
CALCIUM
(mg/1)
HOT PHT.
SULFATE ACIDITY
(mg/1) (rog/1)
228. <4.0
44.
247.
7.6
92.
328.
<4.0
188
-------
TABLE A94
COMPARISON OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
BEFORE AND AFTER 50 DAYS OF FERRIC-FERROUS MINE WATER PERCOLATION
VARYING QUANTITIES OF FINES AND DENSITIES IN TEST VESSELS
MATERIAL NO. 1809
(Percent of Material Smaller by Weight)
Sieve
Size
3/8
4
8
16
30
50
100
200
(a)
Natural
100
99.7
69.7
42.7
26.0
15.8
10.1
6.9
a
Natural
Before
100
99.7
69.7
42.7
26.0
15.8
10.1
6.9
After
DR =30%
TVe 81
100
99.8
71.5
46.5
27.2
16.8
11.5
8.7
After
DRd-60%
Tve 82
100
100
69.3
43.6
24.7
15.4
10.9
8.6
2 x Fines
Before
100
99.0
59.6
40.8
31.4
26.0
17.4
11.6
After
DR =30%
TVe 76
100
98.7
63.5
42.6
32.8
27.2
19.2
14..
After
DR *60%
TVe 77
100
99.6
61.0
41.5
33.1
28.2
18.9
16.5
3 x Fines0
Before
100
99.5
85.4
68.5
56.5
48.2
32.6
21.1
After
DRd-™2
Tve Tfl
100
100
83.1
67.3
56.1
47.5
34.0
24.9
After
m?d=fi02
TVe 79
100
99.8
84.2
66.2
55.7
48.3
35.0
25.6
00
10
(a) Natural - as obtained from stone quarry.
(b) 2 x Fines - Approximately double percent of fines as measured by No. 50 Sieve.
(c) 3 x Fines - As above, but three times fines.
(d) DR - Relative Density
(e) TV - Test Vessel.
-------
TABLE A95
COMPARISON OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
BEFORE AND AFTER 50 DAYS OF FERRIC-FERROUS MINE WATER PERCOLATION
MATERIAL NO. 1809 WITH ADDITIVES
(PERCENT OF MATERIAL SMALLER BY WEIGHT)
Sieve
Size
3/8
4
8
16
30
50
100
Natural
100
99.7
69.7
42.7
26.0
15.8
10.1
5% Cement
Before
100
100
72.2
47.5
31.2
21.0
14.9
DRa=30%
TVb 73
100
99.5
51.5
39.4
35.8
22.7
14.0
5% Calcium Sulfate
Before
100
99.5
58.6
35.0
22.6
15.8
11.0
DRa=30%
TVb 74
100
99.6
68.6
42.0
26.3
17.5
12.8
5% Sodium Sulfate
Before
100
99.4
70.4
46.6
24.5
13.4
7.8
DRa=30%
TVb 75
100
99.5
65.6
40.1
25.6
17.3
12.4
Zoned
Before
100
99.7
69.7
42.7
26.0
15.8
10.1
DRa=30%
TVb 80
100
100
60.1
35.8
21.6
14.0
10.2
\£>
O
(a) DR - Relative Density.
(b) TV - Test Vessel.
-------
LEGEND
T r
w-Y^a I Hffjr1 T "";;"'v;>;'">'
P'-J- -J-'
[j — «
T|N A ilGMM. Gf Mf
— WLCMOID
Kj — CHfCK WM.«
Dtf - 1 .« M,vl
•Vi.I GAL '••> WL
0 -
DlAPtWACH »UMP
f J
• IK,I * m
wfLTfll
5
•i
•HP
1 II i
]] ' "
v "a
'"•- J
Bt "J"?-
V, .,-,
'L i'il,«,( .
mi
n«i
D
* ' -•
lit
^ JCHBTwuQa j
j
mr — 1
V<- M .
i
;f^ V
NOTES:
1.-UQU1O !l'*NiIIO fMCMQQl TolTll *U) (OITntOl
«***i CO] 'O ft^J51,rT^lp * H -|SI TO K "(ftlLtD O
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
FIGURE Al
-------
-n
7 n-
'"""
-' '»•"
1 1 1 1
_££_3±
im
.,- • •* '-
tiHiff ?-L f a.g j
V r3
/ U 1
:, U
\ • i
L ?
r^/"
/'tt'
/ -; *4
j i
2
^ -^r- -T^
r*.^r ^/-33*
rV /
tr
T __- -yr
\i '
.^i;^^! /»•»«•/!•-
/
*-'**
/
• /
-/ •-
^
"iir
-'/
CffMMWVWmiO
v>
i-.-r
I-V
k^;
\ p
ll-L
fcK=
"C'
J_
>M:=:
TEST VESSEL DETAIL
FIGURE A2
-------
X
ft "*r
c
L^
>
_ii
-1*
•<$*
'-\
'**!
"'1
st
ft
fttfcb
j-
. 5
ftj&jtitf'h' out fffe
JAUIM
3 J'rtt/af
'*ai'
TEST VESSEL DETAILS
FIGURE A3
-------
I6r
TEST VESSEL 10
1/2x0
FERRIC
WKTER
, INITIAL
DENSITY 94.3 PCF
c
1 8
o:
te
X
<
16
IO 15
AXIAL STRESS,T, ,TSF
20
25
TEST VESSEL 58
1/2 x 0
FERROUS
WATER
INITIAL
DENSITY 94.3 PCF
< 8
o:
= 7.5%
X
<
5 10 15 20
AXIAL STRESS,Ti ,TSF
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A4
194
25
-------
TEST VESSEL 31
1/8 x 0
a
at
16
UNDISTURBED
INITIAL
DENSITY 875 PCF
COMPACTED
INITIAL
DENSITY 113.0 PCF
10 15 20
AXIAL STRESS,T, ,TSF
TEST VESSEL 32
1/4x0
INITIAL
DENSITY 945PCF
8
tr
X
<
=8.6%
" 5 10 15 20
AXIAL STRESS, T| ,TSF
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A5
25
195
-------
TEST VESSEL 33
1/2 x50
16
10 15
AXIAL STRESS.T, ,TSF
TEST VESSEL 34
1/2 x 0
UNDISTURBED
INITIAL
DENSITY 77.2 PCF
COMPACTED
INITIAL
DENSITY 118.8 PCF
10 15
AXIAL STRESS,Ti ,TSF
20
25
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A6
196
-------
TEST VESSEL 37
1/8 K 0
DENSITY 106.8 PCF
10 15
AXIAL STRESS,T, ,TSF
<
X
u>.
I 8
(T
TEST VESSEL 38
1/4x0
INITIAL
DENSITY 00 PCF
4
e, =85%
"0 5 10 15 20 25
AXIAL STRESS,T, ,TSF
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A7
197
-------
24
TEST VESSEL 39
1/2 x 0
2C-
16
< 12
tr
CO
X
<
8
0
INITIAL
DENSITY 72 2 PCF
10
15
20 25
AXIAL STRESS,^ ,TSF
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A8
198
-------
32
TEST VESSEL 42
24
INITIAL
DENSITY 72.7PCF
10 15
AXIAL STRESS,T, ,TSF
20
25
TEST VESSEL 46
/2 x 0
INITIAL
DENSITY 92.0 PC F
AXIAL STRESS ,T| ,TSF
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A9
199
-------
co 6
O 4
CO
CO
LU
or
\-
co
SE 2
UJ
X
CO
0=0.641
(c=«00)l
-*-
PSF
TEST VESSEL
. 1/2*0
FERRIC WATER
SIN 0 = TAN"4
10
0
co 6
0*0.25
«40>
PSF
C =
oos o
-*=27.0°
(0=30.6°)
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 84.0 PCF
Q 94.3 PCF
A 96.8 PCF
246
MEAN NORMAL STRESS, P =
10
12
TEST VESSEL 58
1/2 x 0
REMOLDED
FERROUS WftTER
SIN 0 =TAN°t
C =COS 0
-=30.7°
(0=36.7°)
PCF
NOT MEASURED
1 j
246
MEAN NORMAL STRESS ,P =
10
12
,TSF
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST RESULTS
FIGURE AID
200
-------
8
CO 6
-
O 4
co
CO
LJ
cr
CO
5 2
LJ
T
CO
CO
0=0.45
[csllOOPSF
TEST VESSEL 31
1/8x0
SIN 0 = TAN0'
C =
1-30.0°
(0 =35.3°)
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 96.9 PCF
Q 99.4 PCF
A 98.5 PCF
246
MEAN NORMAL STRESS,P =
10
12
TEST VESSEL
1/8 x 0
COMPACTED
SIN 0 =TAN°C
C =
31
(0=37.0°)
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O H7.8 PCF
Q 113.5 PCF
A H3.0 PCF
MEAN NORMAL STRESS,P=
10
12
,TSF
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST RESULTS
FIGURE All
201
-------
V) 6
-
4
CO
UJ
an
co
UJ
X
in
0*030
(e=TOO
PSti-<
TEST VESSEL 32
1/4x0
SIN 0 = IAN"4
-*=SO.O°
(«=35.3°)
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 105.8 PCf
Q 91.6 PCF
A 96.6 PCF
2 4 6
MEAN NORMAL STRESS,P
2468
MEAN NORMAL STRESS , P= (^4^) ,TSF
10
12
TEST VESSEL 33
I /2 x 50
SIN 9 =TAN
C =
•4=31.2"
(0s 37.3°)
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 102.8 PCF
83.2 PCF
A 81.2 PCF
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST RESULTS
FIGURE AI2
202
-------
V) 6
$
CVJ
O 4
to
(/)
LU
£T
h-
C/)
UJ
r
CO
0*0.20
(CS53OPS
0
0
co 6
ii
O
CO
CO
uu
oc
CO
5 2
LL)
X
CO
0=085
-------
8
-
q 4
en
en
UJ
oc
h-
co
UJ
X
TEST VESSEL 37
1/8 x 0
SIN 0 = TAN**
<=34.7°
(0=43.8°)
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O H7.2 PCF
D 107.8 PCF
A 108.6 PCF
_L
4 6 T T8
MEAN NORMAL STRESS,P=(^|^-),TSF
10
12
•4=33.0°
(0=40.5°)
TEST VESSEL 38
1/8 x 0
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 111.9 PCF
Q 96.0 PCF
A 101.2 PCF
(c=670
8
10
MEAN NORMAL STRESS ,P=
,TSF
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST RESULTS
FIGURE AI4
204
-------
8
to 6
-
a 4
co
CO
UJ
DC.
h-
CO
UJ
I
CO
0
0
TEST VESSEL 39
1/2x0
SIN 0 = TAN«*
r - Q
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 92.3 PCF
D 81.8 PCF
A 84.6 PCF
246
MEAN NORMAL STRESS,P=(
8
10
12
,TSF
co
TEST VESSEL 42
I x 0
SIN 0 =TAN°<-
C =
<*= 32.0°
(0= 38.7-)
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 96.9 PCF
Q 74.8 PCF
A 76.5 PCF
10
12
MEAN NORMAL STRESS »PS JSF
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST RESULTS
FIGURE AI5
205
-------
TEST VESSEL 46
SIN 0 = TAN«*
<*= 33.5
(0 = 41.5°)
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 99.3 PCF
D 88.4 PCF
A 91.0 PCF
246
MEAN NORMAL STRESS,P =
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A16
206
-------
TEST VESSEL 73
5% CEMENT
DENSITY 99.0 PCF
)0 15
AXIAL STRESS,T, ,TSF
16
12
TEST VESSEL 74
5% CALCIUM SULFATE
INITIAL
DENSITY 1037 PCF
< 8
o:
<
X
10
20
25
AXIAL STRESS ,T| ,TSF
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE AI7
207
-------
I6r
12-
Ci>
1 8
-------
TEST VESSEL 77
2 x FINES
>l INITIAL
DENSITY 118.0 PCF
Ci)
3
cc
te
X
<
0
10 15
AXIAL STRESS,T, ,TSF
20
25
16
TEST VESSEL 78
3x FINES
INITIAL
DENSITY I2I.2PCF
8
X
<
5 10 15
AXIAL STRESS ,T, ,TSF
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE AI9
209
25
-------
6r
TEST VESSEL 79
3 x FINES
12
INITIAL
DENSITY II76PCF
a:
X
16
10 15
AXIAL STRESS,T| ,TSF
20
25
TEST VESSEL 80
ZONED
12
INITIAL
DENSITY 90.4 PCF
AXIAL STRESS,T| ,TSF
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A20
210
-------
TEST VESSEL 81
NATURAL
_ INITIAL
DENSITY 952PCF
10 15
AXIAL STRESS,T, ,TSF
16
TEST VESSEL 82
NATURAL
INITIAL
DENSITY I07.7PCF
^
u7
cc
X
<
0
10
20
25
AXIAL STRESS ,T| ,TSf
ONE DIMENSIONAL COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A2I
211
-------
II
O 4
LL)
CE
cn
LU
X
0=030
(CS930PSF)
TEST VESSEL 73
5% CEMENT
SIN 0 =TAN°C
C =COS0
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 108.4 PCF
Q 86.5 PCF
A 97.0 PCF
246
MEAN NORMAL STRESS,P=
8
,TSF
(0=38.8°)
10
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A22
212
-------
8
a =0.19
(c*36O
to 6
-
O 4
CO
CO
UJ
-------
8
co 6
EL
?i ^
q 4
to
LU
CL
\-
00
5 2
LU
X
en
0=0.98
CO 6
II
O
CO
co
LU
or
h-
co
LU
X
CO
Q=O.I8
(ciSOOHF)^
TEST VESSEL 76
2 K FINES
SIN 0 =
C =
(0=39.6* )
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 119.8 PCF
D M5.0 PCF
A I 15.8 PCF
2 4 6
MEAN NORMAL STRESS,P=(
8
10
12
. TSF
TEST VESSEL 77
2 x FINES
SIN 0 =tANot
C =COS0
O
^=34.0°
(0=42.4° )
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 124.5 PCF
Q I 18.6 PCF
A 1179 PCF
8
10
12
MEAN NORMAL STRESS ,P=
,TSF
CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIAL TEST RESULTS
FIGURE A24
214
-------
8
co 6
-
q 4
co
CO
LU
cr
co
5 2
UJ
X
CO
0=0.20
ci56O PSF1 (
co 6
ii
O
CO
CO
UJ
or
CO
ir ?
< d
UJ
X
CO
a-o.ao
-------
8
if) 6
-
CO
tn
UJ
cc.
UJ
X
CO
o=O.2S
(c^SOPSF)
T
TEST VESSEL 80
ZONED
SIN 0 =
r - 0
C " COS"0
' = 31 8°
(0=38.3° )
0
_L
_L
246
MEAN NORMAL STRESS,P=
SPECIMEN DENSITY
O 108.2 PCF
D 100.8 PCF
A 1039 PCF
_L
8
10
TEST VESSEL 81
NATURAL
SIN 0 =TAN°<-
C = COS
-------
8
-------
* 1 At'Of.vMon Number
r\ Sti bj <• if /"»«'/o: IQ6C-
------- |