My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-06-16_REVISION - M1977493
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977493
>
2014-06-16_REVISION - M1977493
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2020 3:05:25 AM
Creation date
6/20/2014 7:26:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977493
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
6/16/2014
Doc Name
Addendum
From
Climax
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR22
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Christopher Schmitz June 2, 2014 <br /> Climax Molybdenum Company 5 1402712 001 TM01 RevO <br /> sedimentary rock derived overburden (i.e., approximately 30 percent). Golder considers the low strength <br /> Leps (1971) curve an appropriate "lower bound" strength envelope for the OSF. The low strength Leps <br /> envelope is suitable for evaluating the stability of the OSF in the event that a significant contiguous <br /> portion of the facility is constructed primarily from sedimentary overburden. <br /> Table 2 presents the material properties used for the pseudo-static stability analyses. For this case, all <br /> native soil shear strengths were reduced by 20 percent, in accordance with Makdisi and Seed (1977) to <br /> simulate the elastic reduction in strength (i.e., strain softening) that may be imparted by seismic shaking. <br /> This practice was also adopted by Hynes-Griffin and Franklin (1984) for pseudo-static stability analyses. <br /> This reduction factor was not applied to the overburden material since seismic shaking is not expected to <br /> produce strain-softening conditions resulting from the development of excess pore pressure for the <br /> overburden materials. The results of a liquefaction screening analysis have shown that the tailings <br /> material will not liquefy under the expected seismic loading conditions. <br /> 5.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS <br /> The stability analyses results are summarized in Table 3. Cross-sections showing the critical failure <br /> mechanisms for each case considered are presented in Figures 2 through 9. Based on the analyses <br /> performed for this study and the summary of results presented in Table 3, all computed factors of safety <br /> meet or exceed the factors of safety established by the Project Design Criteria. <br /> 6.0 REFERENCES <br /> Golder Associates Inc. (Golder). 2012. North 40 and McNulty Gulch Overburden Storage Facility Design <br /> Report. May. <br /> Hoek, E., C. Carranza-Torres, and B. Corkum. 2002. Hoek-Brown criterion -2002 edition. Proc. NARMS- <br /> TAC Conference, Toronto, 1, 267-273. <br /> Hynes-Griffin, M.E., and A.G. Franklin. 1984. Rationalizing the Seismic Coefficient Method. Waterways <br /> Experiment Station, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Misc. Paper GL-84-13. <br /> Leps, T.M. 1971. Review of Shearing Strength of Rockfill. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations <br /> Division, Proc. of the American Society of Civil Engineers.Vol. 96, No. SM4, pp. 1159-1170. <br /> Makdisi, F.I., and H.B. Seed. 1977. A Simplified Procedure for Estimating Earthquake-Induced <br /> Deformation in Dams and Embankments, Report UCB/EERC-77/19, Earthquake Engineering <br /> Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA. <br /> Spencer, E. 1967. A Method of Analysis of the Stability of Embankments Assuming Parallel Inter-Slice <br /> Forces." Geotechnique,Vol.XVII, No. 1, pp. 11-26. <br /> Golder <br /> I:\14\1402712\0100\0122\001 TM01 RevO\1402712 001 TM01 RevO ClimaxMolyOSFStabilityAnalysis 02JUN14.docx RAAssociates <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.