2003
DOI: 10.2172/807123
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Corrosion and Potential Subsidence Scenarios for Buried B-25 Waste Containers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The second scenario is to apply the load after the containers have been buried for a longer period of time. For both scenarios, the effect of steel-volume loss due to corrosion over time is accounted for, based on estimates from the three different methods presented in Jones and Phifer (2002).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The second scenario is to apply the load after the containers have been buried for a longer period of time. For both scenarios, the effect of steel-volume loss due to corrosion over time is accounted for, based on estimates from the three different methods presented in Jones and Phifer (2002).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The estimated values of the wall thickness of the B-25 boxes after material loss due to corrosion are documented in Jones and Phifer (2002). Two scenarios are studied in the analysis.…”
Section: Scenarios Analyzedmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based upon the dry bulk density the estimated soil loss can be converted to a loss in terms of depth of loss per year. From Jones and Phifer (2002) ).…”
Section: Erosionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based upon the dry bulk density the estimated soil loss can be converted to a loss in terms of depth of loss per year. From Jones and Phifer (2002), the dry bulk density of backfill was taken as 104 lbs/ft 3 . Backfill with a natural successional forest has an …”
Section: Erosionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based upon the dry bulk density the estimated soil loss can be converted to a loss in terms of depth of loss per year. From Jones and Phifer (2002), the dry bulk density of backfill was taken as 104 lbs/ft 3 . Backfill with a natural successional forest has an estimated depth of soil loss of approximately 1.2E-04 inches/year.…”
Section: Erosionmentioning
confidence: 99%