My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2024-03-29_REVISION - M1982121 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1982121
>
2024-03-29_REVISION - M1982121 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/29/2024 7:50:53 PM
Creation date
3/29/2024 5:07:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1982121
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
3/29/2024
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response #2
From
RMR Aggregates, Inc
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR6
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.
/
130
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
KIL D UFF4L RMR Aggregates,Inc. <br /> U N U E R a R G U N E. Rock Failure Analyses and Stabilization Report <br /> ENGINEER IN G,INC-I'dw Mid Continent Limestone Quarry <br /> a steeper slope angle to consider the rolling and steepening beds towards the bottom of the slope as <br /> identified by CGS at 38 degrees and in the <br /> Secondarily in SlopeW the slope was reduced to 30 degrees to mimic the release plane at the top of <br /> the failure. Ultimately the back analysis parameters were taken from the more conservative 30- <br /> degree release plane. Plane water pressure was modeled at 30%filled.The empirical strength <br /> parameters, corroborated by the back analysis are summarized in Table 2 below. <br /> 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 <br /> Backanalysis 10,000 35 15P <br /> Empirical 40 25 150 <br /> I nterbed <br /> Material <br /> Backanalysis 550 25 130 <br /> Modeling for long-term steady state analysis (Section 6.0) and mechanical stabilization (Section 9.0) <br /> use the empirical parameters as those are the more conservative values that have been corroborated <br /> by the back analysis. <br /> East Fare Stability <br /> Slope stability results of the East Face based on modeling of the above conditions indicate a factor of <br /> safety of 1.2 for the south facing highwa11. This factor of safety is along a failure plane angle of 30 <br /> degrees which correlates to bedding dip of the soft interbed material. A tension crack was inserted as <br /> a release plane for the planar slide that correlates to the secondary joint set(mean set plane 45'; <br /> 055) mapped in the field an the East face.This joint set is perceived as the release plane for the West <br /> face 2023 ground event that can be seen in Photo 2 (Appendix A). Critically, water pressure was <br /> deterministically modeled as 30%filled with peak pressure at the tension crack base. Sensitivity <br /> analysis shows the factor of safety is particularly sensitive to water level assumptions. <br /> For any rock mass there is the possibility of large-scale, random joints with a low strength such as <br /> from weathering, historic sliding,or clay infiIIing. If such a joint or several joints exist and if these <br /> joints have a disadvantageous orientation and location,then there could be a large-scale slope <br /> instability. However, field observations by KUE did not reveal any such joints beyond those previously <br /> identified. <br /> Page 7 <br /> 535160'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.