Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> 1. Penetration Tests and Split Barrel Sampling of Soils (ASTM D-1586-6T) <br />' (California Spoon used) <br /> 2. Thin Walled Tube Sampling of Soils (ASTM D-1587-67) <br /> 3 Unc <br />fi <br />d C <br />i <br />St <br />f C <br />i <br />th <br />h <br />D <br />1 <br />6 <br />l <br />T <br /> . on <br />ne <br />ompress <br />ve <br />reng <br />o <br />o <br />es <br />ve Soi <br />-2 <br />(AS <br />M <br />6 <br />-66) <br />' 4. Dry Preparation of Disturbed Soil Samples (ASTM D-421-58) <br /> 5. Mechanical Analysis {ASTM D-422) <br /> 6. Bulk Density and Moisture Content (ASTM D-2216-63T) <br /> 7. The Relative Density of Cohesionless Soil (ASTM D-2049-64T1 <br /> 8 P <br /> . ermeability of Granular Soils (Constant Head) {ASTM D-243«-fiST) <br />' 9. Maximum Density and Optimum Moisture (ASTM D-1557). <br /> 10. Density of Soil & Soil Aggregate In-place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow <br />' depth) (ASTM D-2922-71) <br /> The results of the laboratory tests were incorporated into stability <br /> i <br />l d <br />h <br /> ana <br />ys <br />s conducte <br />on t <br />e existing embankment. For the analysis, the <br />' tests de termined the strength of the existing materials, drainage characteristics <br /> and the in-place densities of the soils in the embankment. The anglEa of <br />' internal friction was estimated on the sand tailings composing the embankment <br /> and correlated from the standard penetration test results. For a conservative <br /> <br /> analysis it was assumed the in-place sand tailings had no cohesion and <br /> that the slime tailings had no internal friction, The laboratory test <br /> results are summarized on Figures 6 through 14 and Table 1. <br />' <br /> STABILITY ANALYSIS <br />' Sta bility evaluation of the tailings pond required that a mathematical <br /> model be established to accurately simulate conditions on the site. F"or <br /> <br /> this ana lysis, a simplified Bishop Slope Stability Method was employecl <br /> <br />' -4 - <br />