Seven years of in situ stress measurements at the URL An overview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1982, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) carried out the first in situ stress measurements at the proposed site for the Underground Research Laboratory (URL). These hydraulic fracturing measurements were taken between the 12- and 540-m depth in the general area of the proposed access shaft to the URL. The URL shaft was constructed in two stages. Stage 1 (upper shaft) was excavated from the surface to a depth of 255 m between 1983 March and 1985 April. This stage was excavated as a nominal 2.8- by 4.9-m-rectangular shaft by the traditional drill and blast benching method. Stage 2 (lower shaft) was excavated as a 4.6-m-diameter circular shaft using a full-face drill and blast technique. Since 1985, an extensive in situ stress research program has been ongoing to characterize the in situ stress state around the URL access shaft and the main development level at 240-m depth, and to address some of the commonly asked questions about in situ stress results: 1) Are in situ stresses dependent on the scale of the measurement technique? 2) What is the influence of geological features on the results? 3) Is residual stress a major component of the stress results? 4) Will different measurement techniques provide the same results? and 5) How can the stress data be presented in a useful form to the design engineer? To date, some of the above concerns have been investigated using overcoring (USBM, CSIR, and SSPB), hydraulic fracturing, under-excavation, microseismic monitoring and observations (shaft-wall failure and core discing), and our results are published or in press. This paper is a summary of our findings to date.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".