My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HYDRO24859
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Hydrology
>
HYDRO24859
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:44:48 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 5:05:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981033
IBM Index Class Name
Hydrology
Doc Date
1/31/1998
Doc Name
EVALUATION OF BEAR 3 MINE LANDSLIDE
Permit Index Doc Type
OTHER SURFACE WATER
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.
/
24
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
Evaluation of Bear No. 3 Mine Landslide <br />' Geotechnical Analyses <br />This section compares the results of previous stability analyses conducted on a neazby hillside <br />with the field observations made at the subject landslide. The theoretical calculations confirm <br />' the field observations that the current landslide is a shallow translational failure with a failure <br />surface in the upper and middle portions, which is located near the contact of the colluvial <br />overburden and the underlying bedrock surface. <br />' The stability of the slopes in the vicinity of portals and access roads for the Bear No. 3 Mine site <br />just east of the subject landslide was the focus of an investigation conducted for Bear Coal <br />' Company by Rocky Mountain Geotechnical submitted on April 16, 1982. The results of this <br />report which included the collection of field data at five test hole locations and laboratory testing <br />to develop shear strengths are summarized in Figure 9, Sensitivity Analysis. <br />The subsurface conditions encountered generally consist of a varying thickness of colluvial soil <br />overlying interbedded sandstone, siltstone, and shale bedrock. The vertical thicknesses of <br />' colluvium utilized in the stability analysis typically was on the order of 30 Y'eet. However, <br />thicknesses of the colluvial layer varied, being thinner at higher elevations and thicker at the base <br />' of the slope. No free water was observed in any of the colluvium materials on site at the time of <br />drilling. <br />' Rocky Mountain Geotechnical analyzed the stability of five proposed topographic cross sections <br />(A through E) using peak and residual shear strengths in the colluvium and two different <br />groundwater conditions. The location of Sections A and D, which represent the range of slope <br />angles evaluated, are shown on Figure 8. The residual shear strength was a combination of a <br />' friction angle of 16° and a cohesion of 210 pounds per square foot. Peak shear strengths were <br />based on a friction angle of 23° and a cohesion of 360 pounds per square foot. Assumed <br />' groundwater conditions included no seepage and a 4 foot seepage zone at the bedrock/colluvial <br />interface. Bedrock was assumed to have a friction angle of 33° and a cohesion of 4000 pounds <br />per square foot. <br />831-032.411 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.