My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2023-06-28_ENFORCEMENT - M1982121 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Minerals
>
M1982121
>
2023-06-28_ENFORCEMENT - M1982121 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/18/2023 1:21:33 PM
Creation date
9/18/2023 11:50:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1982121
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
6/28/2023
Doc Name
Rock Failure Analysis and Stability Memo
From
RMR Aggregates, Inc.
To
DRMS
Email Name
ACY
THM
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.
/
10
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
Table 2. Leadville Limestone and Interbed Strength Parameters <br /> Material Parameter Cohesion (psf) Friction Unit Weight <br /> Angle(deg) (pcf) <br /> Empirical 5,000 35 150 <br /> Leadville <br /> Limestone Post- <br /> 10,000 35 150 <br /> Backanalysis <br /> Empirical 40 25 150 <br /> Interbed <br /> Material Post- <br /> Backanalysis 550 25 130 <br /> East Face Stability <br /> Slope stability results of the East Face based on modeling of the above conditions indicate a <br /> factor of safety of 1.2 for the south facing highwall. This factor of safety is along a failure plane <br /> angle of 30 degrees which correlates to bedding dip of the soft interbed material. A tension <br /> crack was inserted as a release plane for the planar slide that correlates to the secondary joint <br /> set (mean set plane 45°; 055) mapped in the field on the East face.This joint set is perceived as <br /> the release plane for the West face 2023 ground event that can be seen in Photo 2 (Appendix <br /> A). Critically, water pressure was deterministically modeled as 30%filled with peak pressure at <br /> the tension crack base. Sensitivity analysis shows the factor of safety is particularly sensitive to <br /> water level assumptions. <br /> For any rock mass there is the possibility of large-scale, random joints with a low strength such <br /> as from weathering, historic sliding, or clay infilling. If such a joint or several joints exist and if <br /> these joints have a disadvantageous orientation and location, then there could be a large-scale <br /> slope instability. However, field observations by KUE did not reveal any such joints beyond <br /> those previously identified. <br /> ROCKFALL MODELING <br /> Rockfall modeling was performed on three transects along the East face that are representative <br /> of the varying geologic and topographic conditions (Figure 1). The three slope geometries were <br /> created from LiDAR data provided by RMRA. Modeling was performed using the computer <br /> program Rockfall v.8.004 by RocScience that simulates the bounce paths of rock blocks down a <br /> slope, and calculates block velocities, end points and kinetic energies at user specified points <br /> along the slope. The rockfall simulation uses coefficient of restitution (both normal and <br /> tangential) parameters to model the loss of kinetic energy between the rockfall block and <br /> ground surface at the point of impact. Based on the site reconnaissance, two slope materials <br /> were identified: limestone headwall and Limestone Scree/ Blast pile. A mean value was <br /> assigned for each property with a normal distribution of standard deviation. Similar to the slope <br /> stability analyses, input values for normal restitution, tangential restitution, dynamic friction <br /> Page. 7 <br /> 535 16th STREET,SUITE 620 1 DENVER,CO 80202 1 (303)732-3692 1 WWW.KILDUFFUNDERGROUND.COM <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.