My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-05-07_PERMIT FILE - C2009087 (48)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C2009087
>
2010-05-07_PERMIT FILE - C2009087 (48)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:11:39 PM
Creation date
6/3/2010 4:41:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C2009087
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
5/7/2010
Doc Name
Geotechnical Designed Stability Analyses
Section_Exhibit Name
Exhibit 2.05.3-E4 Geotechnical Designed Stability Analyses
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.
/
75
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
• <br />-14- <br />for the full height of the highwall. This data indicates that rather major <br />failure could occur for cuts steeper than 75 degrees. A factor of safety <br />of o.2 was calculated for cuts steeper than 75 degrees assuming a friction <br />angle of 3 degrees between blocks. <br />Stability of a 75 degree cut was analyzed for mass stability using two <br />methods which consider failure mechanisms different from Marklin. The <br />first method assumes a shear or failure surface which passes through indivdual <br />blocks forms by bedding and joint planes. This failure mechanism was analyzed <br />using Patton's equation and described in "Rock Slope Engineering ". The cal- <br />culated factor of safety is dependent upon the inclined angle of the sliding <br />surface as shown in Appendix B (Fig. B -5), as well as the angle of internal <br />friction of the rock. For the purpose of analysis, wE'. assumed the entire high- <br />wall had similar friction angles. A friction angle of 27 degrees was used since <br />this is the lower bound friction angle indicated for the shales based upon the <br />results of testing performed by Science Applications Inc. Published data <br />suggests no cohesion for the types of rocks exposed in the highwall, therefore, <br />none was used in our analysis. A summary of our analysis is shown on Fig. 8 <br />and indicates lower bound factor of safety of 3.4 occurs at an inclination <br />angle of about 30 degrees. <br />The second method used to evaluate mass stability is based upon the <br />Modified Ladanyi and Archambault's eqaution. This procedure assumes a similar <br />failure mechanism as Patton, but considers the height, of the slope, weathering <br />of block surfaces and the unconfined compressive strength of the rock. We <br />used an angle of 27 degrees and considered an average! unconfined strength of <br />about 2800 psi. The analysis method reduces the unconfined strength by one- <br />quarter to account for weathering. The results of this analysis indicates a <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.