Review of `Demonstration of cryogenic ground freezing technology -- Phase 1: Site selection and development plan report` Page: 1 of 12
This report is part of the collection entitled: Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports and was provided to Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Demonstration of Cryogenic Ground Freezing Technology - Phase I. Site
Selection and Development Plan Report
Reviewer 1 Comments:
a. Page 1, pp1.0. Purpose of report is understandable, but purpose and
scope of entire project is not described.
b. Page 1, pp 2.1. Site selection does not address other sites that were
investigated (if any) and why this site was selected. Does not state that this
selected site meets all required criteria, or is good in some respects, or lacking in
some desired parameter.
c. General location of selected site is not clear. Here on page 1 it says
Gallaher Road, yet page A-3 of Law Engineering says Gallaher Ferry Road. Since
Fig.1 mentions Poplar Springs Road, I presume it is in the area shown on the
attached copy of a section of a map of Gallaher/Poplar Springs Road area.
d. Page 1. Figure 1 shows only approximate test location. It does not show
contours and area surrounding test location, such that one has a feel for down hill
drainage, proximity to neighboring houses (and wells), reservoirs, etc. Figure 2 is
not dimensioned to property lines and corners, nor how far B-3 is from B-1 through
e. Page 1, pp 2.2. More information on fill would appear to be important.
When was fill placed? Where did it come from? Is it contaminated with anything?
Why wasn't it tested (chemically) as part of site selection? Was fill compacted into
place or just dumped. What is ground cover (i.e. grass, trees)? What is slope of
surface? Will it require grading?
f. Page 4 (Top) Was drilling contract only for determining moisture content,
with one wet unit weight sample, at bottom of hole B-5? Why? Why weren't holes
changed over to ground water wells, to investigate ground water table? Holes
drilled on 8 and 9 Sept. Should one expect a high groundwater table in the Spring,
or even a perched ground water (in fill)? What is permeability of fill and soils at
g. Page 4, pp3.0. Lacking specifics on purpose and scope of project its
hard to evaluate why 56 x 56 and 33 x 33 ft were selected.
h. Page 6, pp 3.1.1. Strange that Law Engineering report (Appendix A) did
not mention stability of augured holes, with respect to proposed drilling for freeze
pipe installation, i.e. will hole walls slough or otherwise fill with mud or water, etc.
0gy~ m O N 0,1 THIS D O G UE
Here’s what’s next.
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Review of `Demonstration of cryogenic ground freezing technology -- Phase 1: Site selection and development plan report`, report, July 1, 1998; United States. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc690105/m1/1/: accessed January 22, 2019), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.