Laserfiche WebLink
The cross-sections located in Appendix B show the estimated phreatic surface <br /> associated with each case as well as the geometry used in the mining. <br /> METHODOLOGY <br /> The mining embankment configuration shown in the computer analysis represents the <br /> estimated conditions for this site. If mining conditions differ from the estimated <br /> conditions, the slope stability will need to be re-evaluated on a case by case basis. The <br /> Bishop Method was used in the computer analysis for determining safety factors. The <br /> procedure searches for circular shear failures and automatically searches for the lowest <br /> safety factor. 20,000 separate failure surfaces were analyzed for each case. The <br /> required minimum safety factors are based on the policy of the Mined Land Reclamation <br /> Board (MLRD) for Factors of Safety for Slope Stability/ Geotechnical Analyses. <br /> SLOPE STABILITY RESULTS <br /> The MLRB requires minimum safety factors of 1.50 for static condition analyses and <br /> 1.30 for pseudo-static (earthquake loading) condition analyses for embankments <br /> adjacent to critical structures. The calculated factors of safety are within the design <br /> criteria specified for this project and can be considered indicators of the mining slope <br /> performance under the various conditions. The slopes were analyzed using full and <br /> empty reservoir conditions. The results of the static condition and pseudo-static <br /> condition slope stability analyses are shown in Table 2 and Table 3. <br /> J-2 Contracting Company-DPG Pit <br /> Slope Stability A <br /> J&T Consulting, Inc. Page/4 <br />