Deep Solution Channel in Western Kentucky

Moneymaker, Berlen C.; Rhoades, Roger

doi:10.1130/0016-7606(1945)56[39:dsciwk]2.0.co;2

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To explore the effects weak points in a grout curtain used, a simplified model was set up in RS2 with the geologic context of the Kentucky Lock for an excavation. The context of this site was chosen because: 1) Kentucky Lock and Dam have previously explored significant ver tical karst features (Moneymaker, 1941) and (Moneymaker & Rhodes, 1945), 2) the current construction of the new lock has exposed large areas of part of the lock foundation and 3) grouting was successfully used in a vertical feature below the upstream cofferdam to prevent excessive water infiltration and 4) the lock foundation and cofferdams are placed on one unit of limestone. Figure 2 below on the right shows the vertical features that were located beneath the upstream cofferdam and where conventional and jet grouting were successfully used to provide seepage.…”

Section: Geology and Context Of The Kentucky Lock Sitementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Importance of Rock Structure and Infilling for Grout Curtain Installation in Karst Where there are significant vertical discontinuities in the rock such as near vertical faults, joints, steeply inclined bedding or valley stress relief features, there may be significant develop ment of vertical karst features such as those seen at Center Hill Dam (USACE, 2012) and beneath Kentucky Lock (Moneymaker & Rhodes, 1945). These can interact with near horizon tal features such as bedding to produce the complicated karst development.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Evolution of Geotech - 25 Years of Innovation

Hammah¹,

Yacoub²,

McQuillan³

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I have been teaching and researching rock engineering and practicing as a consultant since 1972. I have spent most of that time in underground mining. I have seen significant changes, both evolutionary and radical, in the sector. In this paper, I reflect on some of these changes in mining geomechanical practice. I will also comment on some of the positive and occasionally less positive impacts of these changes. One constant throughout my career is that geomechanical designs will always be fraught with uncertainty. As a result, we will discuss geomechanical design as being, in its essence, a risk management exercise. I will argue that, as impressive as modern numerical analysis techniques are, they do not on their own mitigate design risk; under worst-case scenarios, they make things worse. Empirical and simple models must be used as a check. The paper intends to provoke healthy skepticism in geomechanics practitioners, designers and managers regarding all the aspects of the geomechanical analysis and design process. A failure to recognize the risks in these processes can have catastrophic effects.

show abstract

Section: Geology and Context Of The Kentucky Lock Sitementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%