ATTACHMENT C7 - Home - THE FUNDÃO TAILINGS DAM...
Transcript of ATTACHMENT C7 - Home - THE FUNDÃO TAILINGS DAM...
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel Report on the Immediate Causes of the Failure of the Fundão Dam Appendix C – Field Geotechnical Data and Interpretation
August 25, 2016
ATTACHMENT C7 CPT Interpretative Plots
Figure C.C7-1 Cone Penetration Test GSCPT16-02B
Figure C.C7-2 Cone Penetration Test GSCPT16-05
Figure C.C7-3 Cone Penetration Test GBCPT16-06
Figure C.C7-4 GBCPT16-06 Liquefaction Susceptibility and Soil Behavior Type
Figure C.C7-5 Cone Penetration Test GCCPT16-03
Figure C.C7-6 GBCPT16-03 Liquefaction Susceptibility and Soil Behavior Type
Figure C.C7-7 Cone Penetration Test GCCPT16-04
Figure C.C7-8 GBCPT16-04 Liquefaction Susceptibility and Soil Behavior Type
Figure C.C7-9 Cone Penetration Test GCCPT16-04B
Figure C.C7-10 GBCPT16-04B Liquefaction Susceptibility and Soil Behavior Type
Notes:1. This interpretation is based on the water and soil saturated unit weights γw=9.807 kN/m3 and γsat=22 kN/m3.2. The friction ratio Rf is calculated as Rf=fs/qt.3. The hydrostatic pore pressure is calculated using the ground water level (GWL) determined from CPT pore pressure dissipation tests (where available) or dynamic pore pressure.4. Soil boundary layers (where plotted) are based on KCB interpretation.5. The data presented have been plotted to the axis limits. Data may exist beyond the axis limits shown.6. The Material Index (Ic) boundaries are based on Robertson and Wride (1998).7. The Qtn,cs contractant/dilatant boundary=70 and is based on Robertson (2010).8. The State Parameter (Ψ) is calculated using Plewes, et al. (1992) assuming a K0 of 0.5.9. Coordinates are in UTM Zone 23K WGS84.
PROJECT
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
TITLE
CONE PENETRATION TEST GSCPT16-02BN:7764164.87m E:658580.161m 2016-04-24
FIGURE NO.
C.C7-1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Apparent Fines Content (%)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Su (LIQ) / σ'v
Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Olson & Stark(2002)Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Robertson (2010)
0 1 2 3 4
Material Index, Ic
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Pore Pressure, u (MPa)
0 2 4 6 8
Friction Ratio, Rf (%)
870
875
880
885
890
895
900
905
910
915
920
925
9300 5 10 15 20
Tip Resistance, qt (MPa)
Dynamic PWP, u2Hydrostatic PWP, uhPore Pressure Dissipation Test Result
Friction Ratio, RfCorrected Tip Resistance, qt Material Index, IcClean Sand BoundarySilt Boundary
Apparent Fines Content
Elev
atio
n (m
)
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Su (Peak) (kPa)
0 50 100 150 200
Su (Remoulded) (kPa)
Peak Shear Strength (Calculated)Peak Shear Strength(Field)
Remoulded Shear Strength (Calculated)Remoulded Shear Strength(Field)
0 100 200 300 400
Vs (m/s)
Shear Wave Velocity(Seismic Data)
Notes:1. This interpretation is based on the water and soil saturated unit weights γw=9.807 kN/m3 and γsat=22 kN/m3.2. The friction ratio Rf is calculated as Rf=fs/qt.3. The hydrostatic pore pressure is calculated using the ground water level (GWL) determined from CPT pore pressure dissipation tests (where available) or dynamic pore pressure.4. Soil boundary layers (where plotted) are based on KCB interpretation.5. The data presented have been plotted to the axis limits. Data may exist beyond the axis limits shown.6. The Material Index (Ic) boundaries are based on Robertson and Wride (1998).7. The Qtn,cs contractant/dilatant boundary=70 and is based on Robertson (2010).8. The State Parameter (Ψ) is calculated using Plewes, et al. (1992) assuming a K0 of 0.5.9. Coordinates are in UTM Zone 23K WGS84.
PROJECT
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
TITLE
CONE PENETRATION TEST GSCPT16-05N:7763379.344m E:659116.505m 2016-05-05
FIGURE NO.
C.C7-2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Apparent Fines Content (%)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Su (LIQ) / σ'v
Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Olson & Stark(2002)Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Robertson (2010)
0 1 2 3 4
Material Index, Ic
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Pore Pressure, u (MPa)
0 1 2 3 4
Friction Ratio, Rf (%)
870
875
880
885
890
895
900
905
910
915
920
925
9300 1 2 3 4
Tip Resistance, qt (MPa)
Dynamic PWP, u2Hydrostatic PWP, uhPore Pressure Dissipation Test Result
Friction Ratio, RfCorrected Tip Resistance, qt Material Index, IcClean Sand BoundarySilt Boundary
Apparent Fines Content
Elev
atio
n (m
)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Su (Peak) (kPa)
0 10 20 30 40 50
Su (Remoulded) (kPa)
Peak Shear Strength (Calculated)Peak Shear Strength(Field)
Remoulded Shear Strength (Calculated)Remoulded Shear Strength(Field)
Measured Fines Content
0 100 200 300 400
Vs (m/s)
Shear Wave Velocity(Seismic Data)
Notes:1. This interpretation is based on the water and soil saturated unit weights γw=9.807 kN/m3 and γsat=22 kN/m3.2. The friction ratio Rf is calculated as Rf=fs/qt. PROJECT
3. The hydrostatic pore pressure is calculated using the ground water level (GWL) determined from CPT pore pressure dissipation tests (where available) or dynamic pore pressure.4. Soil boundary layers (where plotted) are based on KCB interpretation.5. The data presented have been plotted to the axis limits. Data may exist beyond the axis limits shown. TITLE
6. The Material Index (Ic) boundaries are based on Robertson and Wride (1998).7. The Qtn,cs contractant/dilatant boundary=70 and is based on Robertson (2010).8. The State Parameter (Ψ) is calculated using Plewes, et al. (1992) assuming a K0 of 0.5.9. Coordinates are in UTM Zone 23K WGS84.
FIGURE NO.
C.C7-3
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
CONE PENETRATION TEST GBCPT16-06N:7763631m E:660586m 2016-05-16
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Apparent Fines Content (%)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Su (LIQ) / σ'v
Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Olson & Stark(2002)Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Robertson (2010)
0 50 100 150 200
Equivalent Clean Sand Tip Resistance, Qtn,cs
0 1 2 3 4
Material Index, Ic
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1
State Parameter, ψ
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Pore Pressure, u (MPa)
0 2 4 6 8
Friction Ratio, Rf (%)
805
810
815
820
825
830
835
840
845
850
8550 10 20 30 40 50
Tip Resistance, qt (MPa)
Dynamic PWP, u2Hydrostatic PWP, uhPore Pressure Dissipation Test Result
Friction Ratio, RfCorrected Tip Resistance, qt Material Index, IcClean Sand BoundarySilt Boundary
Equivalent Clean Sand TipResistance, Qtn,csContractant/Dilatant Boundary, Robertson (2010)Tailings Failing LiquefactionCriteria
Apparent Fines ContentState Parameter, Ψ (Plewes)Contractant/Dilatant BoundaryTailings Failing Liquefaction Criteria(> state parameter of -0.05)
Elev
atio
n (m
)
0 100 200 300 400
Vs (m/s)
Shear Wave Velocity (Seismic Data)
DRILLED OUT
DRILLED OUT
DRILLED OUT
DRILLED OUT
FIGURE NO.
Liquefaction susceptibility after Robertson (2010)"Evaluation of Flow Liquefaction and Liquefied Strength Using the Cone
Penetration Test"
Liquefaction susceptibility after Olson & Stark (2003) "Yield Strength Ratio and Liquefaction Analysis of Slopes and Embankments"
State parameter approximation - Robertson (2009)"Interpretation of cone penetration tests - a unified approach"
PROJECT
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
TITLE
GBCPT16-06 Liquefaction Susceptibility and Soil Behavior Type
C.C7-4
Notes:1. This interpretation is based on the water and soil saturated unit weights γw=9.807 kN/m3 and γsat=22 kN/m3.2. The friction ratio Rf is calculated as Rf=fs/qt. PROJECT
3. The hydrostatic pore pressure is calculated using the ground water level (GWL) determined from CPT pore pressure dissipation tests (where available) or dynamic pore pressure.4. Soil boundary layers (where plotted) are based on KCB interpretation.5. The data presented have been plotted to the axis limits. Data may exist beyond the axis limits shown. TITLE
6. The Material Index (Ic) boundaries are based on Robertson and Wride (1998).7. The Qtn,cs contractant/dilatant boundary=70 and is based on Robertson (2010).8. The State Parameter (Ψ) is calculated using Plewes, et al. (1992) assuming a K0 of 0.5.9. Coordinates are in UTM Zone 23K WGS84.
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
CONE PENETRATION TEST GCCPT16-03N:7766173.838m E:657275.192m 2016-05-05
C.C7-5FIGURE NO.
0 100 200 300 400 500
vs (m/s)
Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Olson & Stark(2002)Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Robertson (2010)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Apparent Fines Content (%)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Su (LIQ) / σ'v
0 50 100 150 200
Equivalent Clean Sand Tip Resistance, Qtn,cs
0 1 2 3 4
Material Index, Ic
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1
State Parameter, ψ
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Pore Pressure, u (MPa)
0 2 4 6
Friction Ratio, Rf (%)
935
940
945
950
955
960
965
970
975
980
985
990
995
1000
10050 10 20 30 40 50
Tip Resistance, qt (MPa)
Dynamic PWP, u2Hydrostatic PWP, uhPore Pressure DissipationTest Result
Friction Ratio, RfCorrected Tip Resistance, qt Material Index, IcClean Sand BoundarySilt Boundary
Equivalent Clean Sand TipResistance, Qtn,csContractant/Dilatant Boundary, Robertson (2010)Tailings Failing LiquefactionCriteria
Apparent Fines ContentState Parameter, Ψ (Plewes)Contractant/Dilatant BoundaryTailings Failing Liquefaction Criteria (> state parameter of -0.05)
Elev
atio
n (m
)
Shear Wave Velocity (Seismic Data)
C.C7-6
Liquefaction susceptibility after Robertson (2010)"Evaluation of Flow Liquefaction and Liquefied Strength Using the Cone
Penetration Test"
Liquefaction susceptibility after Olson & Stark (2003) "Yield Strength Ratio and Liquefaction Analysis of Slopes and Embankments"
State parameter approximation - Robertson (2009)"Interpretation of cone penetration tests - a unified approach"
PROJECT
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
TITLE
GCCPT16-03 Liquefaction Susceptibility and Soil Behavior Type
FIGURE NO.
Notes:1. This interpretation is based on the water and soil saturated unit weights γw=9.807 kN/m3 and γsat=22 kN/m3.2. The friction ratio Rf is calculated as Rf=fs/qt. PROJECT
3. The hydrostatic pore pressure is calculated using the ground water level (GWL) determined from CPT pore pressure dissipation tests (where available) or dynamic pore pressure.4. Soil boundary layers (where plotted) are based on KCB interpretation.5. The data presented have been plotted to the axis limits. Data may exist beyond the axis limits shown. TITLE
6. The Material Index (Ic) boundaries are based on Robertson and Wride (1998).7. The Qtn,cs contractant/dilatant boundary=70 and is based on Robertson (2010).8. The State Parameter (Ψ) is calculated using Plewes, et al. (1992) assuming a K0 of 0.5.9. Coordinates are in UTM Zone 23K WGS84.
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
CONE PENETRATION TEST GCCPT16-04N:7766315.865m E:657417.5m 2016-05-13
FIGURE NO.
C.C7-7
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Pore Pressure, u (MPa)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Apparent Fines Content (%)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Su (LIQ) / σ'v
0 50 100 150 200
Equivalent Clean Sand Tip Resistance, Qtn,cs
0 1 2 3 4
Material Index, Ic
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1
State Parameter, ψ
0 2 4 6 8
Friction Ratio, Rf (%)
935
940
945
950
955
960
965
970
975
980
985
990
995
1000
10050 10 20 30 40 50
Tip Resistance, qt (MPa)
Elev
atio
n (m
)
Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Olson & Stark(2002)Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Robertson (2010)
Dynamic PWP, u2Hydrostatic PWP, uhPore Pressure Dissipation Test Result
Friction Ratio, RfCorrected Tip Resistance, qt Material Index, IcClean Sand BoundarySilt Boundary
Equivalent Clean Sand TipResistance, Qtn,csContractant/Dilatant Boundary, Robertson (2010)Tailings Failing LiquefactionCriteria
Apparent Fines ContentState Parameter, Ψ (Plewes)Contractant/Dilatant BoundaryTailings Failing Liquefaction Criteria(> state parameter of -0.05)
0 100 200 300 400
Vs (m/s)
Shear Wave Velocity(Seismic Data)
Water table not encountered
C.C7-8
Liquefaction susceptibility after Robertson (2010)"Evaluation of Flow Liquefaction and Liquefied Strength Using the Cone
Penetration Test"
Liquefaction susceptibility after Olson & Stark (2003) "Yield Strength Ratio and Liquefaction Analysis of Slopes and Embankments"
State parameter approximation - Robertson (2009)"Interpretation of cone penetration tests - a unified approach"
PROJECT
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
TITLE
GCCPT16-04 Liquefaction Susceptibility and Soil Behavior Type
FIGURE NO.
Notes:1. This interpretation is based on the water and soil saturated unit weights γw=9.807 kN/m3 and γsat=22 kN/m3.2. The friction ratio Rf is calculated as Rf=fs/qt. PROJECT
3. The hydrostatic pore pressure is calculated using the ground water level (GWL) determined from CPT pore pressure dissipation tests (where available) or dynamic pore pressure.4. Soil boundary layers (where plotted) are based on KCB interpretation.5. The data presented have been plotted to the axis limits. Data may exist beyond the axis limits shown. TITLE
6. The Material Index (Ic) boundaries are based on Robertson and Wride (1998).7. The Qtn,cs contractant/dilatant boundary=70 and is based on Robertson (2010).8. The State Parameter (Ψ) is calculated using Plewes, et al. (1992) assuming a K0 of 0.5.9. Coordinates are in UTM Zone 23K WGS84.
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
CONE PENETRATION TEST GCCPT16-04BN:7766315.865m E:657417.684m 2016-05-13
FIGURE NO.
C.C7-9
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Pore Pressure, u (MPa)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Apparent Fines Content (%)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Su (LIQ) / σ'v
0 50 100 150 200
Equivalent Clean Sand Tip Resistance, Qtn,cs
0 1 2 3 4
Material Index, Ic
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1
State Parameter, ψ
0 2 4
Friction Ratio, Rf (%)
935
940
945
950
955
960
965
970
975
980
985
990
995
1000
10050 10 20 30 40 50
Tip Resistance, qt (MPa)
Elev
atio
n (m
)
Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Olson & Stark(2002)Su (LIQ)/σ'v , Robertson (2010)
Dynamic PWP, u2Hydrostatic PWP, uhPore Pressure Dissipation Test Result
Friction Ratio, RfCorrected Tip Resistance, qt Material Index, IcClean Sand BoundarySilt Boundary
Equivalent Clean Sand TipResistance, Qtn,csContractant/Dilatant Boundary, Robertson (2010)Tailings Failing LiquefactionCriteria
Apparent Fines ContentState Parameter, Ψ (Plewes)Contractant/Dilatant BoundaryTailings Failing Liquefaction Criteria(> state parameter of -0.05)
0 100 200 300 400
Vs (m/s)
Shear Wave Velocity(Seismic Data)
Water table not encountered
C.C7-10
Liquefaction susceptibility after Robertson (2010)"Evaluation of Flow Liquefaction and Liquefied Strength Using the Cone
Penetration Test"
Liquefaction susceptibility after Olson & Stark (2003) "Yield Strength Ratio and Liquefaction Analysis of Slopes and Embankments"
State parameter approximation - Robertson (2009)"Interpretation of cone penetration tests - a unified approach"
PROJECT
Fundão Tailings Dam Review Panel
TITLE
GCCPT16-04B Liquefaction Susceptibility and Soil Behavior Type
FIGURE NO.