Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SDMS US EPA Region VImagery Insert Form
Document ID:
Some images in this document may be illegible or unavailable inSDMS. Please see reason(s) indicated below:
Illegible due to bad source documents. Image(s) in SDMS is equivalent to hard copy.
Specify Type of Document(s) / Comments:
Includes COLOR or RESOLUTION variations.Unless otherwise noted, these pages are available in monochrome. The source document page(s) is more legible than theimages.
Specify Type of Document(s) / Comments:
Confidential Business Information (CBI).This document contains highly sensitive information. Due to confidentiality, materials with such information are not available
in SDMS. You may contact the EPA Superfund Records Manager if you wish to view this document.
Specify Type of Document(s) / Comments:
Unscannable Material:Oversized X or Format.Due to certain scanning equipment capabili ty limitations, the document page(s) is not available in SDMS.
Specify Type of Document(s) / Comments:
Document is available at the EPA Region 5 Records Center.
Specify Type of Document(s) / Comments:
EPA Region 5 Records Ctr
232494
Page 1
3 9Q
Rollins Environmental Services ffsj Inc.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SLOPE EROSION STUDY (TASK 490)
MASTER DISPOSAL SERVICE LANDFILL
Prepared byRollins Environmental Services (FS), Inc.
Technical ServicesJanuary 1988
Rollins Environmental Services IFSJ Inc.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SLOPE EROSION STUDY (TASK 490)
MASTER DISPOSAL SERVICE LANDFILL
INTRODUCTION
A slope erosion study was performed to qualitatively assess thecredibility and hence, the stability of the existing landfill slopes at theMaster Disposal Service Landfill (MDSL) in Brookfield, Wisconsin (seeFigure 1). This study consisted of the following:
a field reconnaissance to visually inspect the landfill slopes,
a topographic survey to identify drainage features andelevations across the site relative to mean sea level (MSL),
sample collection and analysis to determine soil properties,
an analysis of landfill slope characteristics to determine slopestability factors-of-safety, and
a slope incline analysis to determine the locations of areas ofthe landfill slopes potentially most susceptible to erosion.
The information obtained from the above activities was evaluated todetermine if the slopes of the landfill appear stable enough to maintain asoil and vegetative cover without additional contour site work. Theinformation obtained from these activities and conclusions drawn from theassociated data evaluation are presented below.
FIELD RECONNAISSANCE
The field reconnaissance consisted of walk-through inspections of theoutboard landfill slopes during several phases of the RemedialInvestigation (RI): the initial site reconnaissance, groundwater monitoringwell installation, groundwater and surface water sample collection andmonitoring well water level determinations. The field reconnaissancespanned six months, June, 1987 through December, 19S7. A summary ofthe field reconnaissance observations is presented below:
The predominant cover on the outboard slopes of the landfill iscomposed of common fill, sand and some silty clay. Fillmaterial was observed being delivered to the site by a localdeveloper, the McCoy Brothers Contractors, throughout the RI.
No visual evidence of chemical seeps from any of the landfillslopes was observed during the field reconnaissance.
The north, west, and southwest slopes were graded and seededbefore and during the RI. September field observationsindicated that a partial vegetative cover was established—On the
Rollins Environmental Services wine.
\N
EAST SLOK
ROLLINS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (FS). INC.MASTER DISPOSAL SERVICE LANDFILL
FIGURE 1. SITE MAP; SLOPE DESIGNATION
Rollins Environmental Services IFSJ Inc
north and southwest slopes of the landfill. November andDecember field observations indicated that a vegetative coverwas not established on the west slope of the landfill.
The east slope exhibited fairly complete vegetative cover at theonset of site activities, although coke slag, construction and/ordemolition debris were visible at the surface of the slope.Vegetation included brush, shrubs and early successional trees,such as birch and willow. It appeared as if the east slope wasthe oldest, most undisturbed face of the landfill.
The north slope appeared to be the next most stable landfillslope (ranked below the east slope) based on average slopeincline, amount of visible erosion and extent of establishedvegetative cover. Some construction debris and coke slag wereapparent in the surface fill on the north face of the landfill;however, the presence of this material did not seem to havehad an adverse affect on the establishment of a vegetativecover.
The west landfill slope exhibited the steepest grade of all theoutboard slopes. The west face exhibited the greatest amountof erosion, the least amount of vegetative cover and thegreatest number of gullies of all the landfill slopes. Thegullies generally ranged in size from six (6) inches toapproximately three (3) feet in depth and six (6) inches toapproximately ten (10) feet in width. Talus was evident atportions of the toe of the west slope and at the dischargepoints of some of the gullies, indicating that landfill slopesloughing and general erosion had occurred.
A partial grass cover was observed on the upper portion of thesouthwest slope of the landfill during a December site visit.Observations made during the site visit also indicated that thesouthwest slope potentially will be the site of a large amountof snow-melt runoff in the spring.
The southeast slope exhibited general erosion, caused in partby ongoing use of the area for truck access to the portion ofthe landfill that has remained in use as a solid waste transferstation. The main access road to the transfer area is locatednorth of the southeast slope and the transfer area occupies asignificant portion of the southeast corner of the landfill.These conditions have promoted extensive erosion in the areaand have resulted in the need for repairing culverts, shouldersand the landfill sideslope cover along the access road to thelandfill.
Rollins Environmental Services IF® Inc.
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
A topographic survey of the MDSL site was completed in July, 1987. Thesurvey identified drainage features, above-grade utilities, and siteelevations relative to mean sea level (MSL). The data collected duringthe survey were incorporated into a topographic site map that presentson-site elevations at 1-foot contour intervals. (Refer to Attachment A.)
The only significant above-ground utility feature present on-site is apower line that parallels the site access road to mid-site, then extends tothe western slope of the landfill. The power line is elevated at least 15feet above landfill grade and should not impact any potential remedialactions.
The topographic survey identified the following major landfill drainagefeatures:
The highest point on-site is located in the northeast corner ofthe site at an elevation of approximately 854 ft. (MSL).
The second highest point is located in the southwest corner ofthe site at an elevation of approximately 853 ft. (MSL).
A drainage channel, or gully has formed in a westerlydirection in the middle of the site between the two high pointsmentioned above. This gully directs a significant portion ofsite runoff toward the western slope of the landfill.
These three major drainage features control the general drainage patternof the entire site. The majority of rainfall that is intercepted by thenorthern one-third of the landfill drains to the west, and a smalleramount to the south. The majority of the rainfall intercepted by themiddle third of the landfill drains to the south and southeast; only aminor amount drains to the west. The southern third of the landfilldrains to the southwest and to the south. (See Figure 2.)
These site drainage patterns result in the majority of on-site rainfallrunoff discharge to occur across the west and south-southwestern landfillslopes. Therefore, based on the site topography, the west and south-southwest slopes potentially should exhibit the greatest amount of erosionat the MDSL site.
The 100-year flood elevation of the Fox River, which borders thesouthwest portion of the landfill site, was obtained from the City ofBrookfield Department of Public Works. The data obtained weredeveloped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) andwere incorporated into the FEMA Flood Insurance Maps for theBrookfield area on August 19, 1986. Two 100-year flood elevations wereobtained:
an upstream, 100-year flood elevation of 827.9 ft. (MSL) hasbeen established for a cross-section of the Fox River that is
Rollins Environmental Services (FSJ Inc.
\N
»sr SLOPE
ROLLINS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (FS). INC.MASTER DISPOSAL SERVICE LANDFILL
FIGURE 2. APPROXIMATE DRAINAGE PATHWAYS
Rollins Environmental Services IFSI Inc.
located approximately 2000 feet to the north-northwest of theMDSL site, and
a downstream, 100-year flood elevation of 827.0 ft. (MSL) hasbeen established for a cross-section of the Fox River that islocated approximately 1500 feet south of the Capitol Drivebridge, which is immediately to the south of the MDSL site.
The occurrence of a 100-year flood will impact the south-southwest, westand part of the north face of the outboard landfill slopes, based on acomparison of the flood elevation with topographic contours developed inthe topographic survey. The elevations of the toes of the aforementionedslopes vary from approximately 823 ft. (MSL) to 828 ft. (MSL), indicatingthat flood water would come into contact with, and potentially erode thebase of these landfill slopes.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
Two representative soil samples were obtained from each side slope onJuly 1, 1987. The samples were obtained with a hand spatula, from adepth of 0 to 6 inches (0" to 6"). The two samples from each side slopewere composited, resulting in 4 samples. The samples were submitted toLaw Engineering, located in Houston, Texas, and analyzed for cohesion(consolidated, drained), angle of internal friction (consolidated, drained),and wet weight. (See Table 1 and Attachment B.)
SAFETY FACTOR ANALYSIS
Factors of safety for rotational (overturning and resisting momements)stability were determined for the east, north, west and southwest slopesat each sampling point. The "Geotechnical Analysis for Review of DikeStability" (GARDS) software program was utilized for this analysis.Acceptable safety factors are included as Table 2. In all cases, thecalculated safety factors exceeded the recommended minimum safetyfactors (see Attachment B).
(Note: Because of the non-homogeneity of the slopes, the confidence ofthe strength measurements for each slope should be considered "low", asindicated on Table 2.)
SLOPE INCLINE ANALYSIS
Data from the topographic survey were used to calculate slopeinclination angles at 250-foot intervals along the east, north, west andsouthwest faces of the landfill. Slope inclination angles were notcalculated for the southeast slope of the landfill. (The southeast slopesupports the main access road for the landfill and is the principallocation of solid waste transfer operations. As such, the slope has beenmodified repeatedly during the course of the RI by road-workingequipment to maintain site access and to facilitate solid waste transferoperations.)
TABLE 1
MASTER DISPOSAL SERVICE LANDFILLSLOPE EROSION STUDY
SOIL PARAMETERS
LOCATION LOCATIONNO. (SITE GRID
COORDINATES)
1 NORTH SLOPE(13SON 529W)
2 WEST SLOPE(11 SON 985W)
3 SOUTHWEST SLOPE(34ON 562W)
4 EAST SLOPE(775N 103W)
SOILDESCRIPTION
DARK YELLOWISHBROWN SILTY FINETO MEDIUM SAND
DARK YELLOWISHBROWN SILTY FINE
SAND W/ CLAY BALLS
YELLOWISH BROWNSILTY CLAY
YELLOWISH BROWNCLAYEY SILTY FINETO MEDIUM SAND
WET WEIGHT(LBS/CU FT)
1O6.6
112.4
123.0
111.7
COHESION(LBS/SO FT)
3OO
O
2OO
100
ANGLE OFINTERNALFRICTION
(DEGREES)
39
50
15.5
43
I
TABLE 2
MASTER DISPOSAL SERVICE LANDFILLRECOMMENDED MINIMUM FACTORS OF SAFETY
FOR SLOPE STABILITY (1)
00
SHEAR STRENGTH CONFIDENCE OF RECOMMENDEDPARAMETER STRENGTH MINIMUM
MEASUREMENT FACTOR OFSAFETY
CU (2)
CD (3) (LONG-TERM. NOSEISMIC EFFECTS)
CD (3) (LONG-TERM. W/SEISMIC EFFECTS)
LOW (4)HIGH (5)
LOW (4)HIGH (5)
LOW (4)HIGH (5)
1.501.3O
1.6O1.40
1.5O1.30
1) OBTAINED FROM THE "GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR REVIEWOF DIKE STABILITY" (CARDS) VERSION 2.0, SOFTWARE PROGRAM
2) CU - CONFINED, UNDRAINED
3) CD - CONFINED. DRAINED
4) THE CONFIDENCE OF THE STENGTH MEASUREMENTS IS LOWEST WHENTHE SOIL CONDITIONS ARE COMPLEX AND WHEN THE AVAILABLESTRENGTH DATA DO NOT PROVIDE A CONSISTENT. COMPLETE ANDLOGICAL PICTURE OF THE STRENGTH CHARACTERISTICS.
5) THE CONFIDENCE OF THE STRENGHT MEASUREMENTS IS HIGHESTWHEN THE SOIL CONDITIONS ARE UNIFORM AND HIGH QUALITYSTRENGTH TEST DATA PROVIDE A CONSISTENT. COMPLETE ANDLOGICAL PICTURE OF THE STRENGTH CHARACTERISTICS.
Rollins Environmental Services PS) Inc.
Table 3 presents a summary of slope inclination angles with respect toeach landfill face.
The data presented in Table 3 indicate that the western slope (see Figure1) exhibits the greatest angle of incline, therefore this slope shouldpotentially exhibit the greatest amount of erosion (all other conditionsbeing equal). This hypothesis has been supported to date by fieldobservations.
The landfill slope that exhibits the smallest average slope angle, thesouthwest face, should potentially exhibit the least amount of erosion.However, this has not been found to be the case, based on fieldobservations.
The southwest and south slopes have experienced erosion almost to thesame extent as the west face. Therefore, because all of the averagelandfill slopes are within a small range (21.78% to 23.97% or 12.29 to13.48 degrees) slope incline angle does not appear to be the majordetermining factor for predicting erosion potential for landfill faces atMDSL.
CONCLUSION
Based on a review of data obtained during the field reconnaissance, thetopographic survey and the incline analysis, the drainage features andvolume of water intercepted and discharged across portions of the landfillhave been determined to be the most significant factors affecting on-siteerosion. Therefore, the landfill slopes anticipated to experience thegreatest amount of erosion induced by natural causes in the future arethe west and southwest slopes. The southeast slope also exhibits thepotential for continued erosion, however the principal causes of erosionin this area of the landfill are truck traffic and solid wastetransfer/disposal activities.
Any on-site remedial alternative evaluated as part of this project shouldinclude provisions to:
Recontour the landfill cover to reduce the overland flow ofrunoff in a westerly direction.
Improve the west and southwest landfill faces by repairing thegullies and establishing a vegetative cover.
Modify the slope incline in the southeast portion of the landfillto promote slope stability and the growth of a grass cover.
Improve the vegetative cover of the east slope by sodding andreseeding surface areas that display the presence of slag and/orconstruction/demolition debris.
Stabilize the toe portions of the landfill slopes that will bepotentially impacted by the occurrence of a 100-year flood.
TABLE 3HDSL RI/FS SLOPE EROSION STUDYSLOPE INCLINATION SUMMARY
LANDFILL SLOPE AVERAGE SLOPESLOPE LOCATION LANDFILL SURFACE(COORDINATES) ELEVATION (MSL)
EAST FACE
200 NORTH450 NORTH700 NORTH950 NORTH1200 NORTH
NORTH FACE
250 EAST500 EAST750 EAST
WEST FACE
1200 NORTH950 NORTH700 NORTH
SOUTHWEST FACE
900 EAST, 650 CAST1 400 EAST
838840841843845
845846843
842842842
841841837
LANDFILL TOEELEVATION (HSL)
830.17830.17830.17830.17830.17
831828828
832829828
824824823
LATERAL SLOPEDISTANCE (FEET)
3755404772
657569
405067
878057
INCLINATIONSLOPE X (DEGREE ANGLE)
21.1617.8727.0827.3020.60
21.5424.0021.74
25.0026.0020.90
19.5421.2524.56
(11.95)(10.13)(15.15)(15.27)(11.64)
(12.16)(13.50)(12.27)
(14.04)(14.57)(11.80)
(11.06)(12.00)(13.80)
INCLINATIONSLOPE X (DEGREE ANGLE)
22.80 (12.84)
22.43 (12.64)
23.97 (13.48)
21.78 (12.29)
NOTE: LANDFILL SLOPE ANGLE (EXPRESSED AS PERCENT) = (LANDFILL SURFACE ELEVATION • LANDFILL TOE ELEVATION) * 100 / LATERAL DISTANCE
BETWEEN SURFACE AND TOESLOPE INCLINATION ANGLE (EXPRESSED AS DEGREE) = arc tan OF [SLOPE ANGLE (PERCENT) / 100)
Rollins Environmental Services IFSJ Inc.
ATTACHMENT A
TOPOGRAPHIC SITE MAP
* ** C A R D S S U M M A R Y ** ** Project: MDSL DIKE STABILITY ** File: MDSL-N ** #-* CARDS Version 2-00 ** developed by ** Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering ** Un i v e r s i t y o f C i n c inna t i ** under contract to ** U«S- Environmental Protection Agency ** Land Pollution Control Division ** Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory ** *
Site Characteristics
* ** The seismic coefficient is 0-07 ** ** The design earthquake magnitude is 6-10 ** ** The maximum flood elevation in this case is O ** ** The elevation of the seasonal high ground water is. • 0 ** ** The design waste elevation in the cell is O ** ** The soil number representing the clav liner is. ... 0 ** *
Section Geometry
**
•*
**
•»
•*#*
*
**
*
*****
The number of soil
Line 1 Point
1•->
Line 2 Point
1j3
Line 3 P o i n t
12
Line 4 Point
12T*•_'
45
boundary lines for
X
90185
X
901751S5
X
90.145
X
90100145173135
this section is 4
Y
825325
Y
S27£27S27
Y
OTc1>_• •-• •_•
i-; "*. 1
Y
S45S45o =;
;I; •"• ~!
327
*#
*
**
*
***
*
*•*
#
*****
Soil 1 Properties
******
*******#****
Un c o n s o 1 i da t e d ConsolidatedUndrained Undrained
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over c on so 1 i dat i on Ratio . . . .
Standard Penetration Number •
Consol i datedDrained
300 Clb/sq.ft)39 (degrees)
106-600 (Ib/cu.ft)0 - OOO ( 7, )0 . 0000 • 0000 • 0000 • OOO0 - OOO (f t/yr) •0-000 (mm)O • OOO ( % ')0-000 (X)O-OOO (blows /ft)
*****
*•***********
Soil 2 Properties
#•*****
#****#******
Un con so 1 i dated ConsolidateUndrained Undrained
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over-consolidation Ratio . • . -
Standard Penetration Number - •
d Con so 1 i datedDrained
3OO (Ib/sq.ft)39 (degrees)
106-600 C Ib/cu-f t)0 - OOO ( % )0 • OOO0 - OOO0 • OOO0 • OOO0-000 (ft/yr)0 - 000 ( mm )0 • OOO ( % >0 - OOO C 7* )0-000 (blows /ft)
*****•#
*****•*******
Soil 3 Properties
******
**##********
Un con so 1 i dated Consol i datedUn drained Un drained
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over-consolidation Ratio • - • •
Standard Penetration Number .
Conso 1 i datedDrained
30O C 1 b / 5 q . f t >39 < degrees)
106. t.OO (Ib/cu-ft)0-000 <.%)0 - 000o . ooo0 . 0000 . 000O-OOO fft/yr)0 • OOO <: mm >O-OOO <.%•)o.ooo <%:>0-000 (blows/ft)
#•*****
•*********
*•**
***
User DefinedPiesometric Surface for Hydraulic Condition7: User Defined
#*#
Point
90185
S27827
****
****•*****
Seepage In
Seepage Out
#**#**#*##»#*************#*#*****#**•*•*•##****•**Hydraulics Results
t Gradient • • • O-OOO
r-aulic condition there is no liner uplift-
•»**##*
.£.*.*. 4. .*.***•*•*#*#*
****
R O T A T I O N A L F A I L U R E R E S U L T S
There were no fac to rs of safe ty less than 2-5**
ZolhK. EfhironmenLfj; Ser>,:.?^ -s
ATTACHMENT B
GEOTECHNICAL RESULTS/WORKSHEETS/GARDS PRINTOUT
Ml
0.3 KSFCOHESION, c -SHEAR ANGLE,* 390
KU,
r^2
V>6.
<stw>Ultc.
AR \
5 0 \-1.0 2.0 3.0
NORMAL STRESS, o. IN KIPS PER SQ. FT.
2.0
INITIAL PROPERTIES: AVG.
U N I T W F I G H T , V 59.9WATER CONTENT," w 6.5vnin R A T i n , P 0.655SATURATION^ 26.2
100. C6.6
0.65J26.8
loo.;6.:
0.64J25.3
100.2671
0.65(726. T
SAMPLE nP.rPTPTTHN. Park Yel lowish
Rrnu/n, «;iUy Finp tn Mpdiiim
As recievea moisiure content. O . D A
DIRECT SHEAR TESTRevised 11/2/87
SAMPLE NO..DEPTH
BORING NO.._ JOB NO. HT-2264-B7G
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANY
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYDIRECT SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 1, NORTH SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS DARK YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAh
SAMPLE PROPERTIESCONSOLIDATION PRESSURESTRAIN RATEHEIGHTDIAMETER OR SIDEWET UNIT WEIGHTMOISTURE CONTENTDRY UNIT WEIGHTINITIAL VOID RATIOINITIAL SATURATION
.20 KSF.0120 INCHES/MIN.99 INCHES
2.50 INCHES106.4 PCF6.49 PERCENT99.9 PCF.65526.2 PERCENT
PROVING RING 6381. CALIBRATED 2/ 1987
HORIZONTALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000.0097.0196.0295.0494.0744.0993.1243.1492.1742.1992.2242.2492.2742.2992
VERTICALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000
-.0075-.0130-.0165-.0201-.0232-.0240-.0252-.0264-.0276-.0283-.0291-.0299-.0303-.0303
SHEARLOAD(LBS)
.02.83.84.75.65.66.66.67.57.57.57.57.57.57.5
SHEARSTRESS(KSF).00.08.11.14.17.17.20.21.24.24.25.25.25.26.26
NORMALSTRESS(KSF)
.20
.20
.20
.20
.21
.21
.21
.21
.22
.22
.22
.23
.23
.23
.24
STRESSRATIO
.000
.414
.552
.690
.828
.828
.965
.9651.1031.1031.1031.1031.1031.1031.103
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYDIRECT SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 1, NORTH SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS DARK YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAb
SAMPLE PROPERTIESCONSOLIDATION PRESSURESTRAIN RATEHEIGHTDIAMETER OR SIDEWET UNIT WEIGHTMOISTURE CONTENTDRY UNIT WEIGHTINITIAL VOID RATIOINITIAL SATURATION
SHEAR NUMBER 2
.50 KSF.0120 INCHES/MIN.99 INCHES
2.50 INCHES106.6 PCF6.61 PERCENT100.0 PCF.65326.8 PERCENT
PROVING RING 6381. CALIBRATED 2/ 1987
HORIZONTALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000.0088.0186.0483.0979.1227.1476.1975.2475.2976
VERTICALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000
-.0024-.0051-.0110-.0177-.0189-.0201-.0217-.0224-.0228
SHEARLOAD(LBS)
.011.313.216.019.721.622.623.523.522.6
SHEARSTRESS(KSF)
.00
.33
.39
.48
.61
.68
.72
.77
.79
.78
NORMALSTRESS(KSF)
.50
.50
.50
.51
.53
.53
.54
.56
.57
.59
STRESSRATIO
.000
.662
.772
.9381.1591.2691.3241.3791.3791.324
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYDIRECT SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 1, NORTH SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS DARK YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SA
SAMPLE PROPERTIESCONSOLIDATION PRESSURE =STRAIN RATE = .HEIGHTDIAMETERWET UNITMOISTUREDRY UNITINITIALINITIAL
PROVING RING
HORIZONTALDEFLECTION(INCHES)
•
.
•
.
»
•
•
•
•
.
0000008601840282072209681215171222112711
OR SIDEWEIGHTCONTENTWEIGHT
VOID RATIOSATURATION
==
1.000120.99
2.50* 106.8= 6.12= 100.7==
6381. CALIBRATED
VERTICALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000
-.0024-.0039-.0063-.0177-.0209-.0217-.0228-.0240-.0244
.64325.3
2/
SHEARLOAD(LBS
.
13.15.16.26.30.32.35.36.36.
)0209319777
KSFINCHES/MIINCHESINCHESPCFPERCENTPCF
PERCENT
1987
SHEARSTRESS(KSF).00.39.45.50.80.93
1.031.151.211.25
N
NORMALSTRESS(KSF)1111111111
.00
.00
.01
.01
.04
.05
.07
.10
.13
.16
STRESSRATIO
,000386,441497772883965,048076
1.076
Sheet 1 of
G A R 0 S
Input Data Format
GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Identification: tfJ'zL ' S S' C'i' ~~^
Data File Name: AT 9Si- - (^
Seismic Coefficient:
Design Earthquake Magnitude:
A complete data set for a given case consists of defining the basicgeometry, soil properties, seepage conditions to be analyzed and thestability analysis options to be performed.
Forms for each of these criteria are provided. Use as many soilboundary line sheets as necessary to define the geometry, one soilboundary line per sheet. Also, use as many soil property sneets asnecessary, one soil per sheet.
Sneet of
A. DIKE GEOMETRY
Number of soil boundary lines for this section: t"'
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: 1
Number of points on soil boundary line II :
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORO Y-COORD
1 ^02 'S r3
4
5
6
7-
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
3**~ 21
S"2S 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: _
Nunoer of points on soil boundary line *_1— : 2
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORO POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORO
1 **2 'IT
3 /irr
4
5
6
7
8
Q
10
1112
13
72- - 21
S"2.1- 22
S->* 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
14 34
15
16
17
18
35
36
37
38
19 39
20 40
Snee: of
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: ?
Number of points on soil boundary line *_•»_ : 2.
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
i *,o s- r" 212 !J*£~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
***~ 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
SOIL 33'JNDARY LIME NO: S
Nun&er of points on soil Doundary line f*_T_ : r^
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-C003D Y-COO?Q
1 1*2 f°?
3 ' u S'"
4 /~3<~5~
5 /cTS"~
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ff'*"" 21
S^^T 22
222T 23
^i'3- 24
S 2.9- 25
26
27
28
29
30 •
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
33
19 39
20 40
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: _J
Cohesion:
\" unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or|_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF) 3r=x~*' -/•>
Angle of internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees) -~ "~
Wet unit weight: (PCF) '^ '•» • -
Clay content: (%)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression index: (decimal)_
Recompression index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
050=(mm)
Plasticity index: (%)_
Liquid limit:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: >
Cohesion:
~ unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or
j 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression index: (decimal)
Recompression index: (decimal)
Permeability: (ft/yr)
Plasticity index:(%)
Liquid limit:(%)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) /oa- a.
Clay content: (%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No:
Cohesion:
|~ unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) ( Ofj>
Clay content: (%)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression index: (decimal)
Recompression index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
:(mm)
Plasticity index: {%)_
Liquid limit:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
C. DRAINAGE SPECIFICATION
Metnod of Input: Internal Generation of Piezometric Surface
Manual Input of Piezometric Surface
INTERNAL GENERATION OF PHREATIC SURFACE
1. DEEP STATIC
Elevation of deep static groundwater table
2. SHALLOW SEEPAGE
Elevation of shallow seepage groundwater table
Soil number representing clay liner (0 if none)
3. FREE POOL SEEPAGE
Elevation of maximium upstream pool
Soil number representing clay liner (0 if none)
4. SHALLOW CONFINED SEEPAGE
Maximum shallow groundwater elevation
Design waste elevation in the cell
Soil nunber representing clay liner_
5. CONFINED POOL SEEPAGE
Elevation of maximun upstream pool
Design waste elevation in the cell
Soil number representing clay liner_
6. DRAWDOWN POOL
Elevation of maximun upstrean pool
Soil number representing clay liner_
Sheet of
MANUAL INPUT OF PHREATIC SURFACE
POINT NO. X-COORD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORO
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
••" '•••"" , - • — / —i ; /1 i /
/; • /1 ] /' /
-*
<5>
5
Cfl^^ gil -2
• S^>^ <J
J.-ft. -»-U
o
^-fr' ( 3
"V7
-cv
O-o- e- - - o o.
4/2..'
IS"
r
COHESION, c _SHEAR ANGLE,»
0.0 KSF
INITIAL PROPERTIES:AVG.
UNIT WEIGHT, WATER CONTENT,VOID RATIO, eSATURATION, £
S9.9w 6.50.655
100. C6.6
0.65;26.2 26.*
loo.;6.
0.64.25.3
100.2prf6.5x
0.65026.1 t
u.• 2
tcUlft.
V»
2
X
1
H
ec
Ul //9
7
//
.J
CAuni r nrcrot DTtrtu far K TCI luwibii
Rrflkin *\ i l tv FinP tn Mprliim "-ianH
As reclevW mdHtur'e COrttertt: 6.5i
1.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 DIRECT SHEAR TEST
NORMAL STRESS, o, IN KIPS PER SQ. FT.
SAMPLE NO..
DEPTH
BORING NO.._ ,JOB NO. HT-2264-B7G
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANY
* ** T R A N S L A T I O N A L F A I L U R E R E S U L T S ** ** ** Translational failure analysis was not performed. ** *
* RECOMMENDED MINIMUM FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR SLOPE STABILITY*+************#*#****#***+***##**#*****#+**************###****-***+*-**i* Shear Strength Confidence of Recommended* Parameter Strength Measurement Minimum F-S.
* UU (end of construction, no low 1 .40* waste or pool containment) high 1 • 2O** CU low 1.50* high 1 .3O
* CU (drawdown pool condition) low 1-4O* high 1.20** CD (long-term, no seismic low l.tO* effects) high 1-40** CD (long—term with seismic low 1-50* effects) high 1-30** If the dike > 3O feet in height, add 0.1O to the F.S- in each case.
* ** S E T T L E M E N T R E S U L T S ** ** Settlement analysis was not performed- ** *
* •** L I Q U E F A C T I O N R E S U L T S ** ** Liquefaction analysis was not performed. ** *
**#****
*
*
*
*
File: MDSL-NProject: MDSL
G
DIKEHydraulic Condition
Rotat
T P «i n s
Sett 1
i o n a 1
1 a t i o n
A P. D S S U M M A R Y
Date: 11-20-1987 Time: lt:4l:0lSTABILITY7: User Defined
Failure Safety Factor . . . . >= 2-50
****•**#
*
*
•£
*
1.00
0.75
lo 0.50
0.25
. = 0.2
Formulas:
tan c( = sin
C = Tf~~
0 = 15.5°
C = 0.2
0.25 0.50 0.75 1 7 0 0 1 > 2 5 i.50 1.75
P (ksf)
Sample Number 3Yel lowish Brown Silty CLAY
LAW ENGINEERING
HOUSTON TEXAS
M.D.S.L. - Milwaukee
Law Engineering Project No. HT-2264-87G
EFFECTIVE COHESION.c'JIKSL.EFFECTIVE SHEAR ANGLE, f .35.1TOTAL COHESION, c _JL_LJiSE_TOTAL SHEAR ANGLE, f2_L
INITIAL PROPERTIES:, AYg.UNIT WEIGHT, V—WATER CONTENT,VOID RATIO,*SATURATION, »
llfl ? 110.3 110.3 110.3 DC/w 11.6
0.528C.Q }
ll.fi0.528
RQ ?
11 60.5c8
SQ ?
1J.6 -A
59.2 •/.
FINAL PROPERTIES:
t 2-°b«ior
0.
0.2
::i.oMUK
C
U)IIO
-X5
! /1*iI
/•y
/,
7f
x»
*s^V
\|
X^
^^r;»J{
-s
/
^
\|
?
\\
>>^
\,
MM
\1
\
V,s^\|\
UNIT WEIGHT, y 1 1 n 7 1 1 1 ?WATER CONTENT, w ig g IP 1VOID RATIO, « 0.52Z 0.516SATURATION,* 100.0 100.0
111.? 111.0 D1Q.1 19,2*0.515 0.5l8100.0 100.0 «
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: YELLOW ,1<;H BROWN5JILTY CLAY
cATiiDATcn nniJorM inATrn1.0 2.0 3.0
NORMAL STRESS,u ,IN KIPS PER SQ.FT.
MOHR DIAGRAMS
4.0 UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL SHEARTEST WITH PORE PRESSURE
MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLE NO.
DEPTH
- BORING." JOB NO. HT-??fi4-»7G
LAW ENGINEERING
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYTRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 3, SOUTH SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY CLAY
CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED COMPRESSION TEST WITH STRAIN CONTROL
PROVING RING 1781. CALIBRATED 2 / 1987
P R O P E R T I E SSPECIFIC GRAVITY = 2.70 (ASSUMED VALUE)MEASURED VOLUME CHANGE = -.020 IN3CELL PRESSURE = 5.97 KSFCONSOLIDATION PRESSURE = .50 KSF
PROPERTYHEIGHTVOID RATIOAREAPERCENT MOISTUREWET DENSITYDRY DENSITYPERCENT SATURATION
INITIAL CONSOLIDATED• 2.791 2.787 INCHES
.528 .522= 1.590 1.586 SQ. IN.= 11.58 19.33 PERCENT• 122.99 132.11 PCF• 110.23 110.71 PCF• 59.14 100.00 PERCENT
NOTE-THE FOLLOWING QUAN'S BASED ON ASSUMED SPEC GRAV:INI VOID RATIO,SATURATION;CON'D VOID RATIO,MOISTURE CONTENT,WETiDRY DEN,SATURATION
NOTE - CONSOLIDATED PROPERTIES CALCULATED FROM MEASURED VOLUME CHANGE
READINGNUMBER
1234
O U T P
STRAIN
(IN/IN).000000.003588.007176.010765
U T D A T A
SHEARSTRAIN
.000000
.003588
.007176
.010765
VOLUMESTRAIN(CC/CC).0000.0000.0000.0000
VOIDRATIO
.521
.521
.521
.521
AFACTOR
.000
.179
.193
.211
READING SIG1 PWP EFF EFF TOTALNUMBER
1234
(KSF) (KSF) SIG1(KSF)
.50 .001.14 .121.32 .16
EFF
1.32 .17
.501.031.161.15
SIG3 STRESS STRESS (KSF)(KSF) RATIO RATIO MIT
.00
.32
.41
.50
.38
.34
.33
1.002.282.642.64
1.002.673.413.50 .41
P Q/P(KSF)
PARAMETERS.50 .00.70 .45.75 .55.74 .56
I
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYTRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 3, SOUTH SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY CLAY
CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED COMPRESSION TEST WITH STRAIN CONTROL
PROVING RING 1781. CALIBRATED 2 / 1987
P R O P E R T I E SSPECIFIC GRAVITY = 2.70 (ASSUMED VALUE)MEASURED VOLUME CHANGE = -.037 IN3CELL PRESSURE = 6.27 KSFCONSOLIDATION PRESSURE = .80 KSF
PROPERTYHEIGHTVOID RATIOAREAPERCENT MOISTUREWET DENSITYDRY DENSITYPERCENT SATURATION
INITIAL CONSOLIDATED• 2.771 2.763 INCHES
.528 .516= 1.602 1.593 SQ. LN.= 11.58 19.10 PERCENT= 123.01 132.39 PCF= 110.25 111.16 PCF= 59.17 100.00 PERCENT
NOTE-THE FOLLOWING QUAN'S BASED ON ASSUMED SPEC GRAV:INI VOID RATIO,SATURATION;CON'D VOID RATIO,MOISTURE CONTENT,WET&DRY DEN,SATURATION
NOTE - CONSOLIDATED PROPERTIES CALCULATED FROM MEASURED VOLUME CHANGE
O U T P U T D A T A
READINGNUMBER
12345
STRAIN
(IN/IN).000000.003619.007238.010857.014475
SHEARSTRAIN
.000000
.003619
.007238
.010857
.014475
VOLUMESTRAIN(CC/CC).0000.0000.0000.0000.0000
VOIDRATIO
.515
.515
.515
.515
.515
AFACTOR
.000
.158
.206
.246
.276
READING SIG1 PWP EFF EFF TOTAL EFFNUMBER (KSF) (KSF) SIG1 SIG3 STRESS STRESS (KSF) (KSF)
1 .802 1.533 1.714 1.795 1.79
Q/P
0012192427
(KSF).80
1.411.521.551.51
(KSF).80.68.61.55.53
RATIO1.001.912.132.242.24
RATIO1.002.062.482.792.88
MIT.00.36.45.50.49
PARAMETERS.80
1.051.061.051.02
.00
.35
.43
.47
.48
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYTRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MOLWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 3, SOUTH SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY CLAY
CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED COMPRESSION TEST WITH STRAIN CONTROL
PROVING RING 1781. CALIBRATED 2 / 1987
P R O P E R T I E SSPECIFIC GRAVITY = 2.70 (ASSUMED VALUE)MEASURED VOLUME CHANGE = -.037 IN3CELL PRESSURE = 6.77 KSFCONSOLIDATION PRESSURE = 1.30 KSF
PROPERTYHEIGHTVOID RATIOAREAPERCENT MOISTUREWET DENSITYDRY DENSITYPERCENT SATURATION
INITIAL CONSOLIDATED= 2.751 2.743 INCHES
.528 .515= 1.613 1.604 SQ. IN.= 11.58 19.08 PERCENT= 123.04 132.41 PCF= 110.27 111.19 PCF
59.22 100.00 PERCENT
NOTE-THE FOLLOWING QUAN'S BASED ON ASSUMED SPEC GRAV:INI VOID RATIO,SATURATION;CON'D VOID RATIO,MOISTURE CONTENT,WET&DRY DEN,SATURATION
NOTE - CONSOLIDATED PROPERTIES CALCULATED FROM MEASURED VOLUME CHANGE
O U T P U T D A T A
READINGNUMBER
12345678910
STRAIN
(IN/IN).000000.007290.014581.021871.036451.080193.127580.167677.204128.218709
SHEARSTRAIN
.000000
.007290
.014581
.021871
.036451
.080193
.127580
.167677
.204128
.218709
VOLUMESTRAIN(CC/CC).0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000
VOIDRATIO
.515
.515
.515
.515
.515
.515
.515
.515
.515
.515
AFACTOR
.000
.213
.302
.334
.397
.400
.399
.382
.349
.333
READING SIG1 PWP EFF EFF TOTAL EFF Q P Q/PNUMBER (KSF) (KSF) SIG1 SIG3 STRESS STRESS (KSF) (KSF)
(KSF) (KSF) RATIO RATIO MIT PARAMETERS123456789
1.302.652.722.802.782.882.962.963.03
.00
.29
.43
.50
.59
.63
.66
.63
.60
1.302.362 .292.302.192.252.292.322 . 4 2
1.301.01
.86
.79
.71
.66
.63
.66
.69
1.002.042.102.162.152 .222.282.282.34
1.002.342.652.903.103.393.623.513.50
.00
.67
.71
.75
.74
.79
.83
.83
.87
1.301.681.581.551.451.451.461.491.56
.00
.40
.45
.49
.51
.54
.57
.56
.5610 3.07 .59 2.48 .71 2.37 3.51 .89 1.59 .56
Sheet 1 of
C A R D S
Input Data Format
GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Identification^
Data File Name: F\O*>L - 3
Seismic Coefficient:
Design Earthquake Magnitude: £• /
A complete data set for a given case consists of defining the basicgeometry, soil properties, seepage conditions to be analyzed and thestability analysis options to be performed.
Forms for each of these criteria are provided. Use as many soilboundary line sheets as necessary to define the geometry, one soilboundary line per sheet. Also, use as many soil property sheets asnecessary, one soil per sheet.
Sneet of
A. DIKE GEOMETRY
Number of soil boundary lines for this section: -*
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: 1
Number of points on soil boundary line II : ^
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
1 Oto *>l° 21
2 f7T ZT-*3
4
5
6
7-
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
9 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sne-r.
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: 2-
Nunber of points on soil boundary line /»_£_ : -^
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORO POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
1 '3 s2 ( 30
3 /?:4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Sli" 21
*»•*••/ 22
r *f 2324
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sneet of
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: _J_
Number of points on soil boundary line * : $»
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-CQORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-C003D
1 ^2 rtf
3 'fsr4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
*2-<r 21-8Z5~ 22
S'ZS" 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sneet of
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: ^
Number of points on soil boundary line ^ H : ^_
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-C003D
1 ^o
2 ( £>
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
S-S-o 21
^?O 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sneet of
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: S>
Number of points on soil boundary line * -> : ^
POINT NO. X -COORD
1 «?«*
2 C&-&
3 /'.ST
4 c 3X~
5 cf^r
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
S^<? 21
O v C' ")")«S ' C.C.
4?>o 23
? t *r 24
S'Z'S" 25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: j[
Cohesion:
\" consolidated, undralned (PSF)or| 1/2 unconfined compresslve strength
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of Internal friction:
unconsolldated, undralned (degrees)^
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) ' 2-
Clay content: (%)
Overconsolidatlon ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)__
Compression Index: (decimal)
Recompresslon Index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
:(mm)
Plasticity Index: (%)_
Liquid I1m1t:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: 2-
Coheslon:
I"" unconsolldated, undralned (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconflned compresslve strength (PSF)_
consolidated, undralned (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of Internal friction:
unconsolldated, undralned (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) Gel- '"
Clay content: (%)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression index: (decimal)
Recompression Index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
:(mm)
Plasticity index: (%)_
Liquid limit:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
8. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: _2
Cohesion:
|~ unconsolidated, undralned (PSF)or| 1/2 unconflned compresslve strength (PSF)_
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) ^
Clay content: (X)
Overconsolldation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)
Compression Index: (decimal)
Recompresslon index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
Plasticity 1ndex:(%)_
Liquid I1m1t:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No:
Cohesion:
\~~ unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) /2V
Clay content: (%)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal}_
Compression index: (decimal)
Recompression index: (decimal)
Permeability: (ft/yr)
Plasticity index: (%)_
Liquid I1mit:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
C. DRAINAGE SPECIFICATION
Method of Input: Internal Generation of Piezometric Surface
Manual Input of Piezometric Surface
INTERNAL GENERATION OF PHREATIC SURFACE
1. DEEP STATIC
Elevation of deep static groundwater table
2. SHALLOW SEEPAGE
Elevation of shallow seepage groundwater table
Soil nunber representing clay liner (0 if none)
3. FREE POOL SEEPAGE
Elevation of maximium upstream pool
Soil number representing clay liner (0 if none)_
4. SHALLOW CONFINED SEEPAGE
Maximum shallow groundwater elevation
Design waste elevation 1n the cell
Soil nunber representing clay liner_
5. CONFINED POOL SEEPAGE
Elevation of maximum upstream pool
Design waste elevation in the cell
Soil number representing clay liner_
6. DRAWDOWN POOL
Elevation of maximum upstream pool
Soil number representing clay liner
Sheet of
MANUAL INPUT OF PHREATIC SURFACE
POINT NO. X-COORD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sheet of
D. ROTATIONAL FAILURE SEARCH SCHEMES
| x j Internally generated grid search
Grid Point No.
1
2
3
I | User defined grid search
X-Coordinate
Number of divisions between points #1 and #2:
Number of divisions between points 12 and #3:
X-increment for search:
Y-increment for search:
IZ~I User defined point search
Number of centers to be analyzed:
Point No. X-Coordinate
1
2
3
4
5
X-increment for search:_
Y-increment for search:
Y-Coordinate
Y-Coordinate
Sheet of
E. TRANSLATION FAILURE (WEDGE) SEARCH SCHEMES
|~n Automatic wedge search
| | User defined wedge
X-coordinate left side of central blockX-coordinate right side of central block
F. SOIL STRENGTH PARAMETERS
u u I i unconsolidated - undrained
CU |"~| consolidated - undrained
CD j"~| consolidated - drained
G. OTHER STABILITY ANALYSES
|~~| settlement
| j liquefaction
?0
//{
P£oi ILCL- _?o<j7jj r^-uri _ . .ZOIL_?
X
/CD
F,
u)j-*
'A
#•
a.
3.
-rvN:
Iw y
160
dJfZ* , 7
a
c.c
T
o
i'
0
/c/
*r
a
-is:
/07
/ /S"
* ** C A R D S S U M M A R Y ** ** Project: MDSL DIKE STABILITY #* File: MDSL-S . ** ** CARDS Version 2.00 ** developed by ** Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering ** University of Cincinnati ** under contract to ** U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ** Land Pollution Control Division ** Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory ** *
Site Characteristics*#***•**•*•***•»•**•**#*#•**•*•#•*••*•<
* ** The seismic coefficient is • 0-07 ** ** The design earthquake magnitude is 6-10 ** ** The maximum flood elevation in this case is . . . . . O ** ** The elevation of the seasonal high ground water is. • O *» ** The design waste elevation in the cell is O ** ** The soil number representing the clay liner is- ... 0 ** *
S e c t i o n G e o m e t r y
**
****
**#**
##***
****
***#***
The number of soil boundary
Line 1 Point
12
Line 2 Point
123
Line 3 Point
123
Line 4 Point
12
Line 5 Point
1•-i1
34
^
1 ines
X
90185
X
175ISO185
X
901751S5
X
90150
X
901001501751S5
for this section is 5
Y
82082O
Y
82582482 a
Y
825825825
Y
83O83O
Y
84084083O825825
**
****
*****
****#
****
#******
Soil 1 Properties
******
*#***•***
*»*•>
Un consolidate'! ConsolidatedUn dra i n e d Un dra i n e d
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 0
Over con so lidation Ratio • • • •
Standard Penetration Number . .h******-************-**********-*******-*-***-*
Con so 1 i datedDrained
200It.
L 23. OOO (Ib/cuo.ooo <:%>0 - OOO0 . 000o . oooo . ooo0-000 (ft/yrO . OOO <: mm )0-000 OX)0 • OOO ( % )O.OOO (blows
****
( 1 b / s q • f t ) *(degrees) *
*• ft) *
****•*
) *
**
/ft) *****•»***•»*****
Soil 2 Properties
*•**»#*
***********•*
Unc on so 1 i dated ConsolidatedU n d r a i n e d U n d r a i n e d
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over-consolidation Ratio . . . .
Standard Penetration Number • •
C o n s o 1Dra
62 • 4000 - 000O • 000o . oooo . oooo • oooo . ooo0 • 0000 • OOOo . oooo • ooo
i datedi n e id
0 <lb/sq.ft)0 ( d e g r- e e s )
( 1 b / c n . f t )<: % :>
(f t/yr)(mm)( */- )<: % )(blows/ft)
******
#*#****•*#**#
************•***
*******•*****
Un consolidated Con soli datedUndrained Undrained
Cohesion 0 OPhi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over con so 1 i dat i on Ratio . . . .
Standard Penetration Number • •
C o n s olidatedDrained
1 23 . OOO0 . 0000 . OOO0 • OOO0 • OOO0 . 0000 . 0000 . 0000 • 0000 . 0000 • 000
200 (lb/sq.ft)16 (degrees)
( 1 b / c u . f t )( % )
(ft/yr)(mm)(%)( % )(blows/ft)
*****
*
************
Soil d Proper t i e s
#*****
************
Un consolidated ConsolidatedUn dra i n e d Un dra i n e d
Cohesion 0 OPhi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Overconso 1 i dat i on Ratio . . . .
Standard Penetration Number . •
C o n s oDr
123- 0000 • 0000 . 0000 • OOOO • 0000 . 0000 . OOO0 . OOO0 • 0000 • 0000 . 000
1 i da teda i n e d
2OO (lb/sq.ft)It. (degrees)
( 1 b / c u . f t )(%)
(ft/yr)(mm)( 7<- )(2)(blows/ft)
•******
*****•*******
* U s e r D e f i n e cl ** Piezomett-i c Surface for Hydraulic Condition ** 7! User Defined *
* #* Point X Y ** ** 1 90 325 ** 2 185 S25 *
Hydraulics Results**********-**-***********-tH
* ** Seepage In O-OOO (cu-ft/yr) ** ** Seepage Out 0-000 (cu-ft/yr) ** ** Critical Exit Gradient . . . 0-000 ** ** For this hydraulic condition there is no liner uplift- *
********•*•*
**
**
#
*
***u
»
R
The siareas
.£..£..£..*..£..£.£..£..£.
Co-ord.
XY
TheTheThe1 IIC
Thei i i t?
O T A T I O N A L
Automat
opes were analyzeddefined by the fol4t .g. 4t 4t .£ .g .£ 4t 4t .£ 4t .£. ,)t t 4t £. 4t 4t
Point 1
10O344
F A I L U R E
ic Grid Search
for f ai lure arcslowing parallelogr.£..£..£.£.£..£..£..£.£..*..*..£..£..£..*..£..£..£
Slope 1
R E S U L T S
having centers inams :. . . . . . . . . . . • . . • . . . • . .
Point 2 Point 3 Point 4
175829
number of divisions between pointsnumber of divisions between pointsY — i *• r ¥•• o t*n a r +• i ieo H
. ' '1 \"i ^ h 0 C. P A !"• C hi UJ A ^XII v l l C T 9 C 7 O I ^11 r^l O 3
i T"i ^HiO CO3l~*rhi LU J3 C.xit uiitr 3 c el i uii *N& s-
190 115855 870
1 and 2. were 42 and 3 were 4
. . . . . 1 0
*****«•
*«•#*
****
**
*•*
*y
^»
R O T A T I O N A L F A I L U R E R E S U L T S
#
*
**
*******•****••**•**•***************#**
Hydraulic Condition 7: User Defined
Consolidated Drained (CD) Case
SafetyFactor
1 . 851 . 351 . 351 • 361 .361 • 361 . 361 . 861 .371 . 371 . 371 -371 .371.871 . 831 • 891 - 891 . 891 .911 . 931 .931 • 931 -962 • 052 - 052 • 052 . 1 02-132-172.212-312-352 • 36
Se i smi c Coef f i
FailureRadi us
93 . 396 . 391 .3OO C1
93.8i^> O O
86 • 333 . S33 . 331.331.381.378 • 376-376 . 390 . 883.476.166 . 376.. 392 . 885 • 356 • 346 . 346 . 346-346 • 342.539.735-971 .333. 129 . 4
cient = 0-07
X-Co-ord
143.3143-3143-3143 .3151 -3146.3146.3146.3151-3146-31 43 • 3143.3143-3143-314fc. .3146-31 43 • 3141 .31 43 . 3153.8146. -3143.3143-3143-31 33 . 3133-3153-3152.51 30 • 01 43 • 3133-3126.3145-0
Y-Co-ord
913.3916.3911-390S - 3913- 390S • 8906. - 3903 • 8903 • 890 1 . 390 1 . 390 1 - 3898 - 8396 • 339 1 • 3911-3903-3396 - 3336. . 3396. • 3913. 3906. . 3876 • 336.6 • 3366 • 386.e. . 3366. • 3362 • 5359.7855 . 9396 . 3853 . 1349 . 4
*****
**
•**#*******•*•*•*•******•******••**#*****«***»«,,»»#*»«,»»*««»«»»»»*»***»»«**«»*»«»*»*^#»»»**#*,»»*»****»*,»»**»»
* ** T R A N S L A T I O N A L F A I L U R E R E S U L T S *•* ** ** Translateonal failure analysis was not performed. ** *
RECOMMENDED MINIMUM FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR SLOPE STABILITY
*#
*##********#***•*
Shear Strength Confidence ofParameter Strength Measurement
UU (end of construction, nowaste or pool containment)
CU
CU (drawdown pool condition)
CD ([long-term, no seismiceffects)
CD (long-term with seismiceffects)
If the dike > 30 feet in height,
1 owhigh
lowh igh
lowhigh
1 owhigh
1 owh i g h
add O.10 to the F-S.
Re commendedMin imum F • S •
11
11
11
11
11
in each
• dO
• 20
. 50
. 3O
.dO• 2O
. SO
.dO
. 50
. 30
case •
**
***#*•*•*»#*#*•*#**
» ** S E T T L E M E N T R E S U L T S ** #* Settlement analysis was not performed- ** *
* ** L I Q U E F A C T I O N R E S U L T S ** ** Liquefaction analysis was not performed. ** *
**#****
*
£.
4t
£.
£.
4t
#
C A R D S S U M M A R Y
File: MDSL-S Date: 1 1-20-1987 Time:Project: MDSL DIKE STABILITYHydraulic Condition 7: User Defined
Rotational Failure Analysis Safety Factor
It.: 53: 27
Pin-,P 1 t Ti
1 . SS
P 1 | \;
P i in
Run
**#****
*
.£
>
•K.
-£.
*
#
rii
|-JO /so (60
Sheet 1 of
G A R D S
Input Data Format
GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Identification: ftM^SL- 1>ix£
Data File Name: AlG?S*- - ^
Seismic Coefficient:
Design Earthquake Magnitude:
A complete data set for a given case consists of defining the basicgeometry, soil properties, seepage conditions to be analyzed and thestability analysis options to be performed.
Forms for each of these criteria are provided. Use as many soilboundary line sheets as necessary to define the geometry, one soilboundary line per sheet. Also, use as many soil property sheets asnecessary, one soil per sheet.
Sheet of
A. DIKE GEOMETRY
Number .of soil boundary lines for this section: 5
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: 1
Number of points on soil boundary line II : 2^
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
1 ^O
2 l<*0
3
4
5
6
7-
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
?a5~~ 21
SvXS""" 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Snee:
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: £
Number of points on soil boundary line t 2. : 'S.
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
1 IV*,* -Z-T.O 21
2 /H«T 52_
3 te>*> ^2-
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
.? 22
£ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
of
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO:
POINT NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Number of points on soil boundary line # 3 : 75*
X-COORO Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-C003D
^0 **<=* 21
f2,q-,<f ?V^ 22
((,0 &*& 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
POINT NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: J_
Number of points on soil boundary T i n -
X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO.
9o *lf 21flg'-T 8*>! ~ 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
snee:
•I,X-COORD Y-COORD
POINT NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: _£
Number of points on soil boundary Tin
X-COORO Y-COORD POINT NO.
9o 1*40 21
(00 S & 22
// r &*>$ 23
t l' 2V=> 24
f£,o S 9 25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Snee*. of
X-COORD Y-COOPD
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: _/ V 3
Cohesion:
I"" unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or|_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF) \OO
Angle of Internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees) u ^
Wet unit weight: (PCF)
Clay content: (X)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression index: (decimal)
Recompression index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
:(mm)
Plasticity index:(%)_
Liquid limit:(»)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: ft.
Cohesion:
I"" unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or| 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) G Z,
Clay content: (%)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)
Compression index: (decimal)
Recompression index: (decimal)
Permeability: (ft/yr)
:(mm)
Plasticity index: {%)_
Liquid limit:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: _2
Cohesion:
I"" unconsolldated, undrained (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees) _
Wet unit weight: (PCF)
Clay content: (1)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression index: (decimal)
Recompression index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
Plasticity index: {%)_
Liquid limit:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
8. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: _
Cohesion:
|~ unconsolidated, undralned (PSF)or| 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF) \_D_
Angle of Internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undralned (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) /"• "=?•
Clay content: (%)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal^
Compression index: (decimal)__
Recompression index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
:(mm)
Plasticity index: (%)_
Liquid limit:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
C. DRAINAGE SPECIFICATION
Method of Input: Internal Generation of Piezometric Surface
Manual Input of Piezometric Surface
INTERNAL GENERATION OF PHREATIC SURFACE
1. DEEP STATIC
Elevation of deep static groundwater table
2. SHALLOW SEEPAGE
Elevation of shallow seepage groundwater table
Soil number representing clay liner (0 if none)_
3. FREE POOL SEEPAGE
Elevation of maximium upstream pool
Soil number representing clay liner (0 if none)_
4. SHALLOW CONFINED SEEPAGE
Maximum shallow groundwater elevation
Design waste elevation in the cell
Soil nunber representing clay liner_
5. CONFINED POOL SEEPAGE
Elevation of maximum upstream pool
Design waste elevation 1n the cell
Soil number representing clay liner_
6. DRAWDOWN POOL
Elevation of maximum upstream pool
Soil number representing clay liner
Sheet of
MANUAL INPUT OF PHREATIC SURFACE
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sheet of
D. ROTATIONAL FAILURE SEARCH SCHEMES
| x | Internally generated grid search
Grid Point No.
1
2
3
| | User defined grid search
X-Coordinate
Number of divisions between points #1 and #2:
Number of divisions between points #2 and #3:
X-increment for search:
Y-increment for search:
| | User defined point search
Number of centers to be analyzed:
Point No. X-Coordinate
1
2
3
4
5
X-increment for search:
Y-increment for search:
Y-Coordinate
Y-Coordinate
Sheet of
E. TRANSLATIONAL FAILURE (WEDGE) SEARCH SCHEMES
| | Automatic wedge search
1 | User defined wedge
X-coordinate left side of central blockX-coordinate right side of central block
F. SOIL STRENGTH PARAMETERS
U U 1 j unconsolidated - undrained
CU |j consolidated - undrained
C D j | consolidated - drained
G. OTHER STABILITY ANALYSES
|| settlement
| I liquefaction
COHESION, c_^SHEAR ANGLE,*
KSF
43°
c^2
**•
V»
Ul
1.0 2.0 3.0
INITIAL PROPERTIES: AVG.
UNIT HEIGHT! Xf "*9
WATER CONTENT, wli 7VOIP RATIO, f 0 £*>*SATURATION, $ 47.3
99T.4
1? 4Q.66'49.5
99". 4
i? 10,663
49.2
TO* f
i? i t0.66148. 7 t
(_//
y•y
(•*//
// QJAMPIF nFsrRlPTTQN. Yellowish Brown Clayeybiity nne to Medium band
As recieved Moisture Lontent: 11. /X
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
NORMAL STRESS, o, IN KIPS PER SQ. FT.
SAMPLE N0.__i_ BORING NO
DEPTH JOB NO. HT-2264-87G
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANY
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYDIRECT SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 4, EAST SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS YELLOWISH BROWN CLAYEY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND
SAMPLE PROPERTIESCONSOLIDATION PRESSURE = .20STRAIN RATE = .0096HEIGHT = .99DIAMETER OR SIDE = 2.50WET UNIT WEIGHT = 111.6MOISTURE CONTENT = 11.69DRY UNIT WEIGHT = 99.9INITIAL VOID RATIO = .655INITIAL SATURATION = 47.3
KSFINCHES/MININCHESINCHESPCFPERCENTPCF
PERCENT
PROVING RING 6381. CALIBRATED 2/ 1987
HORIZONTALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000.0094.0192.0291.0490.0739.0989.1240.1490.1741.1991.2241.2491.2741.2991
VERTICALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000
-.0012-.0020-.0028-.0047-.0039-.0039-.0043-.0047-.0051-.0055-.0063-.0071-.0079-.0087
SHEARLOAD(LBS)
.05.67.58.59.410.310.39.49.48.58.58.58.58.58.5
SHEAR NORMAL STRESSSTRESS STRESS RATIO(KSF) (KSF)
.00 .20 .000
.17 .20 .828
.22 .20 1.103
.25 .20 1.241
.28 .21 1.379
.32 .21 1.517
.32 .21 1.517
.29 .21 1.379
.30 • .22 1.379
.27 .22 1.241
.28 .22 1.241
.28 .23 1.241
.28 .23 1.241
.29 .23 1.241
.29 .24 1.241
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYDIRECT SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 4, EAST SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS YELLOWISH BROWN CLAYEY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND
SAMPLE PROPERTIESCONSOLIDATION PRESSURESTRAIN RATEHEIGHTDIAMETER OR SIDEWET UNIT WEIGHTMOISTURE CONTENTDRY UNIT WEIGHTINITIAL VOID RATIOINITIAL SATURATION
SHEAR NUMBER 2
.50.0096.99
2.50111.712.4199.4.66449.5
KSFINCHES/MININCHESINCHESPCFPERCENTPCF
PERCENT
PROVING RING 6381. CALIBRATED 2/ 1987
HORIZONTALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000.0186.0481.0970.1218.1468.1719.1970.2471.2971
VERTICALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000
-.0071-.0118-.0213-.0228-.0232-.0232-.0236-.0240-.0244
SHEARLOAD(LBS)
.013.217.928.230.130.129.128.227.327.3
SHEAR NORMALSTRESS STRESS(KSF) (KSF).00 .50.39 .50.54 .51.87 .53.94 .53.95 .54.94 .55.92 .56.92 .57.94 .59
STRESSRATIO
1,1,
,000772,048,655
1.7651.7651.7101.6551.6001.600
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYDIRECT SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 4, EAST SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS YELLOWISH BROWN CLAYEY SILTY PINE TO MEDIUM SAND
SAMPLE PROPERTIESCONSOLIDATION PRESSURE = 1.00STRAIN RATE = .0096HEIGHT = .99DIAMETER OR SIDE = 2.50WET UNIT WEIGHT = 111.7MOISTURE CONTENT = 12.31DRY UNIT WEIGHT = 99.4INITIAL VOID RATIO = .663INITIAL SATURATION = 49.2
KSFINCHES/MININCHESINCHESPCFPERCENTPCF
PERCENT
PROVING RING 6381. CALIBRATED 2/ 1987
SHEARSTRESS(KSF)
.00
.30
.70
.861.001.041.091.071.041.07
HORIZONTALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000.0089.0275.0720.1216.1465.1714.1965.2467.2967
VERTICALDEFLECTION(INCHES)
.0000-.0031-.0106-.0134-.0161-.0169-.0169-.0173-.0173-.0177
SHEARLOAD(LBS)
.010.323.528.232.032.933.832.931.031.0
NORMALSTRESS(KSF)
,00,00,01,04,07,08,10,11
1.141.18
1.1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
STRESSRATIO
.000
.303
.690
.828
.938
.965
.993
.965
.910
.910
_£ 0
uocrf:
EJ^
/»
K o 0 o /Vo A5
IV '
IS*
o L
i; SAGPc:^>
a-
f:^;. 56 Co yc "<
n3 f
*> a
S U M M A R Y
*******•***#
C A R D S
Project: MDSL DIKE STABILITYFile: MDSL-E
CARDS Version 2-00developed by
Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUn i ve r-s i ty of Cincinnati
under contract toU-S- Environmental Protection Agency
Land Pollution Control DivisionHazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory
*•****
*********•*
Site Characteristics
The seismic coefficient is 0-07
The design earthquake magnitude is- • • • • 6.-10
The maximum flood elevation in this case is 0
The elevation of the seasonal high ground water is- • 0
The design waste elevation in the cell is (-'
The soil number representing the clay liner is- • • • 0
•***
******#*•
Section Geometry
#•*
**##
*##*#
#*#**
#-»*•*.
*#*•**#*
The number of soil
Line 1 Point
12
Line 2 Point
1.— i
3
Line 3 Point
1.—i
-•
Line 4 Point
1±.
Line 5 Point
1•~j
T§
41
boundary lines
X
901 60
X
1 331451 6O
X
9013S160
X
90119
X
901 0011913S160
for t h i s section is 5
Y
S25825
Y
330323i~i -n~iC1 «L. <!'
Y
330330330
Y
!-! " I
>r* • j- •_>
Y
34034033533033O
*#
##**
*****
**#**
**#*
*#*****
MDSL DIKE STABILITY File: MDSL-EHydraulic Condition 7: User Defined
MDSL EAST SLOPE
DDDDDDDDDDDDDD
< SO , 3 0 > SCALE 1 inch 10 fee
MDSL DIKE STABILITY File: MDSL-EHydraulic Condition 7: User- Defined
MDSL EAST SLOPE
DDDDDDDDDDDDDD
(. 30 , S 0 ) SCALE 1 inch 10 fee
Soil 1 Properties
•ftft•ft#
ft*•ftft•ft•ft•ft•ftft•ftft*
Un con so 1 i dated Consolidated Consolidated »Un d ra i n e d Un d r a i n e d
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over-consolidation Ratio . . . .
Plasticity Index .
Standard Penetration Number- • •
111 •0-o.0.o.0-o.o.o.o.0.
Drai ned
1 00 ( 1 b / s q . f t >d3 (degrees)
70O (lb/cu.ft>000 (%>OOO000000OOOOOO (ft/yr)OOO (mm)OOO (%)OOO (%')OOO (blows /ft)
#***
*ft»*ftftft•»****
Soil 2 Properties
*•ft•ft•ft**
*•*##**•*••M-
*
#
*
*
Un con so 1 i dated ConsolidatedUn d r a i n e d Un d r a i n e d
Cohesion O 0Phi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over-consolidation Ratio . . . .Initial Void Ratio
Liquid LimitStandard Penetration Number . .
C o n s o 1 i
62o0OO0o00oo
Drai
. 40O
. OOO• OOO. OOO. OOO. OOO. OOO. OOO• OOO• 000. 000
datedned
0 ( 1 b / s q . f t )0 < d e g r e e s ')
( 1 b / c u . f t ><: % >
< ' f t / y r >(mm )<*>( 7, )(blows /ft')
**•*•***
***•***•*•*****
Soil 3 Properties
*•*****
***********#
Un con soli da ted ConsolidatesUnd rained Und rained
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over con so 1 i dat i on Ratio . . . .
Standard Penetration Number • •
1 C
1 110000oo0000
onso 1 i datedDrained
1 00 ( 1 b / s q • f t )43 <" degree s )
• TOO < ib/cu. ft:>•000 (%). GOG. 000• 000• ooo. GOO < f :;/yr)• OOO < mm ). GOO < % ). OOO ( % >•GOO (blows/ft)
*****#
•********•*•***
Soil 4 Properties
*•**•***
*****•*******
Un c onso 1 i dated Consolidated ConsolidatedUnd rained Und rained
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over-consolidation Ratio . . . .
R e c o mp r e s s i o n Index
Liquid LimitStandard Penetration Number • •
111000o00o00o
Drained
1 OO C 1 b / s q . f t )43 (degrees)
•70O (Ib/cu. ft)• ooo <:%:>. 000• 000. OOO. ooo•GOO (ft/yr)•000 <mm)• OOO ( % )• OOO < % >. GGG (blows/ft)
******
********#***
* User Defined ** Piesometric Surface for Hydraulic Condition ** 7: User Defined *
* ** Point X Y ** ** 1 90 S25 ** 2 160 325 *
Hydraulics Results
*#******
Seepage In
Seepage Out
Critical E::it Gradient
0 .000
0 • 000
0.000
< cu-ft/yr)
Ccu.ft/yr)
For this hydraulic condition there is no liner- uplift
#*
****
* ** R O T A T I O N A L F A I L U R E R E S U L T S *•» ** There were no fac to rs of safety less than 2-5 *
* *
* ** T R A N S L A T I O N A L F A I L U R E R E S U L T S ** ** ** Translational failure analysis was not performed. ** *
RECOMMENDED MINIMUM FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR SLOPE STABILITY
**
***
*
*******•*
*
Shear Strength Confidence of RecommendedParameter Strength Measurement Minimum F-S.
UU
CU
CU
CD
CD
If
(end of construction, nowaste or pool containment)
(drawdown pool condition)
(1e
(1e
th
onff
g-e c
o n g —f f "
e
tets
rm , no seismic)
term with seismicects
di ke
)
> 30 feet in height,
1h
1h
1h
1h
1
owi gh
owigh
owi gh
owi gh
owhigh
add 0. 1 0 t o
11
11
11
11
11
the F • S • in each
.40• 20
. 50
.30
.40• 20
.60
. 40
. SO
. 30
case-
**
**#******•****#
*
* ** S E T T L E M E N T R E S U L T S ** ** Settlement analysis was not performed- ** *
* ** L I Q U E F A C T I O N R E S U L T S ** ** Liquefaction analysis was not performed- ** *
*#•**#*#
*
-H.
•it
*
C A R D S S U M M A R Y
File: MDSL-E Date: 11-20-1937Project: MDSL DIKE STABILITYHydraulic Condition 7: User Defined
Rotational Failure Safety Factor' • •
***
Time : It : 33: 16 ****
. . ":•- '•' . ="ii') *
• • N o t P i in •**"
NORHAL STRESS, o, IN KIPS PER SQ. FT.
COHESION, CSHEAR ANGLE,•
0.0 KSF
INITIAL PROPERTIES:
1.0 2.0 3.0
1) AVG.
UNIT WEIGHT, VWATER CONTENT, wVOID RATIO, eSATURATION. 5
9912 4n 61150 3
98781.1.7n 67154 1
9?1173.4
p fifif11 1
W7711 ? t0.66117 6 t
u.
•O'l/>•eUl*-2-v>
^X
*
1-v»Wl
w>•eUl
So
r/
(/{
y//
j><uffi\f nF<;rBTPTTnN. Dark Yellowish BrownSilty Fine Sand with Clay Balls
As Recieved Moisture Content: 12.4%
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
SAMPLE NO..DEPTH
BORING NO.JOB NO. HT"2264-87G
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANY
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYDIRECT SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 2, WEST SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS DARK YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY FINE
SAND WITH CLAY BALLS
SAMPLE PROPERTIESCONSOLIDATION PRESSURE = .20STRAIN RATE = .0048HEIGHT = .99DIAMETER OR SIDE = 2.50WET UNIT WEIGHT = 112.3MOISTURE CONTENT = 12.44DRY UNIT WEIGHT = 99.9INITIAL VOID RATIO = .655INITIAL SATURATION = 50.3
KSFINCHES/MININCHESINCHESPCFPERCENTPCF
PERCENT
PROVING RING 6381. CALIBRATED 2/ 1987
HORIZONTALDEFLECTION( INCHES ).0000.0097.0196.0294.0492.0741.0991.1240.1490.1741.1991.2241.2491.2741.2991
VERTICALDEFLECTION( INCHES ).0000
-.0031-.0047-.0055-.0083-.0118-.0122-.0134-.0146-.0150-.0157-.0165-.0169-.0173-.0177
SHEARLOAD(LBS)
.02.83.85.67.58.58.59.49.48.58.58.58.58.58.5
SHEAR NORMALSTRESS STRESS(KSF) (KSF).00 .20.08 .20.11 .20.17 .20.23 .21.26 .21.26 .21.29 .21.30 .22.27 .22.28 .22.28 .23.28 .23.29 .23.29 .24
STRESSRATIO
.000
.414
.552
.828,103,241.241
1.3791.3791.2411.2411.2411.2411.2411.241
1,1,1,
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYDIRECT SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 2, WEST SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS DARK YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY PINE
SAND WITH CLAY BALLS
SAMPLE PROPERTIESCONSOLIDATION PRESSURE = .50STRAIN RATE = .0048HEIGHT = .99DIAMETER OR SIDE = 2.50WET UNIT WEIGHT = 112.4MOISTURE CONTENT = 13.74DRY UNIT WEIGHT = 98.8INITIAL VOID RATIO = .673INITIAL SATURATION = 54.1
KSFINCHES/MININCHESINCHESPCFPERCENTPCF
PERCENT '
SHEAR NUMBER 2
PROVING RING 6381. CALIBRATED 2/ 1987
HORIZONTAL VERTICAL SHEAR SHEAR NORMALDEFLECTION DEFLECTION LOAD STRESS STRESS(INCHES) (INCHES) (LBS) (KSF) (KSF).0000 .0000 .0 .00 .50.0187 -.0043 12.2 .36 .50.0478 -.0110 20.7 .62 .51.0723 -.0134 25.4 .77 .52.0972 -.0146 26.3 .81 .53.1222 -.0150 26.3 .82 .53.1472 -.0154 26.3 .84 .54.1973 -.0165 25.4 .83 .56.2473 -.0173 25.4 .85 .57.2973 -.0177 25.4 .88 .59
STRESSRATIO
,000,717,214.490.545.545.545.490.490
1.490
LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANYDIRECT SHEAR TEST
PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 2, WEST SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS DARK YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY FINE
SAND WITH CLAY BALLS
SAMPLE PROPERTIESCONSOLIDATION PRESSURE = 1.00STRAIN RATE = .0048HEIGHT = .99DIAMETER OR SIDE = 2.50WET UNIT WEIGHT = 112.6MOISTURE CONTENT = 13.43DRY UNIT WEIGHT = 99.3INITIAL VOID RATIO = .666INITIAL SATURATION = 53.5
KSFINCHES/MININCHESINCHESPCFPERCENTPCF
PERCENT
PROVING RING 6381. CALIBRATED 2/ 1987
SHEARSTRESS(KSF).00.36.56.82
1.031.291.341.331.311.33
HORIZONTALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000.0087.0280.0471.0714.1206.1455.1706.2208.2959
VERTICALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000
-.0031-.0067-.0114-.0154-.0173-.0169-.0169-.0161-.0154
SHEARLOAD(LBS)
.012.218.827.333.841.442.341.439.538.5
NORMALSTRESS(KSF)1.001.001.01,02.04,07,08,10
1.131.18
1,1,11,1,
STRESSRATIO
.000
.359
.552
.800
.9931.2141.2411.2141.1591.131
Sheet 1 of
G A R D S
Input Data Format
GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Identification:
Data File Name: j*-?DS<_ -
Seismic Coefficient:
Design Earthquake Magnitude:
A complete data set for a given case consists of defining the basicgeometry, soil properties, seepage conditions to be analyzed and thestability analysis options to be performed.
Forms for each of these criteria are provided. Use as many soilboundary line sheets as necessary to define the geometry, one soilboundary line per sheet. Also, use as many soil property sheets asnecessary, one soil per sheet.
Sheet of
A. DIKE GEOMETRY
Number .of soil boundary lines for this section: S
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: 1
Number of points on soil boundary line II : ^~
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
1 So
2 /SiT
3
4
5
6
7-
8
9
IQ
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
*2:T 21
Tii'" 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Snee: of
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: _%_
Number of points on soil boundary line * 2- : 3
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
1 /So ? *
2 /rV **'3 W *;4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
0 21
*« 22
^ 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Snee:
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: J_
Number of points on soil boundary line *J _ : *-__
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
1 4o 33®
2 (*><=> f 2»<
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sneet
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO: ^
Number of points on soil boundary line t *v : 2-
POINT NO. X-COORO Y-COORO POINT NO. X-COORO Y-COORD
I ?&
2 /Z/3-
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
% 5£~ 21
S ?S~ 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
SOIL BOUNDARY LINE NO:
Number of points on soil boundary line #_
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORO Y-COORD
1 So
2 I0~
3 ("2.^
4 /SO
c / 2? ^i
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
n18
19
20
r^i 21%^ ' 22
S3*~ 23
2>^> 24
^ ^ 25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: J
Cohesion:
|~ unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or|_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF) Q
Angle of internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees) S
Wet unit weight: (PCF) )\ 2,. -4
Clay content: (%)
Overconsolidation ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression index: (decimal)_
Recompression index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
:(mm)
Plasticity index: (%)_
Liquid limit:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: ^
Cohesion:
I"" unconsolldated, undrained (PSF)or
J 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of Internal friction:
unconsolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Overconsolidatlon ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression Index: (decimal)
Recompresslon Index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
:(mm)
Plasticity Index:(%)_
Liquid I1m1t:(%)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) fr £ •
Clay content: (%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No:
Cohesion:
|~ unconsolldated, undralned (PSF)orj 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_
consolidated, undralned (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of Internal 'friction:
unconsolldated, undrained (degrees)
consolidated, undralned (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) / ' 2 . <-/
Clay content: (%)
Overconsol1dat1on ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression Index: (decimal)
Recompresslon Index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
Plasticity Index: (%)_
Liquid I1m1t:(%)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
B. SOIL PROPERTIES
Soil No: l'
Cohesion:
|~ unconsolidated, undralned (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_
consolidated, undrained (PSF)
consolidated, drained (PSF)
Angle of internal friction:
unconsolldated, undralned (degrees)
consolidated, undralned (degrees)
consolidated, drained (degrees)
Wet unit weight: (PCF) //
Clay content: (I)
Overconsol1dat1on ratio:
Initial void ratio: (decimal)_
Compression Index: (decimal)
Recompresslon Index: (decimal)_
Permeability: (ft/yr)
:(mm)
Plasticity index: (%)_
Liquid lim1t:(S)
Average standard penetration resistance: (blows/ft)
Sheet of
C. DRAINAGE SPECIFICATION
Method of Input: Internal Generation of Piezometric Surface
Manual Input of Piezometric Surface
INTERNAL GENERATION OF PHREATIC SURFACE
1. DEEP STATIC
Elevation of deep static groundwater table
2. SHALLOW SEEPAGE
Elevation of shallow seepage groundwater table
Soil nunber representing clay liner (0 if none)
3. FREE POOL SEEPAGE
Elevation of maximium upstream pool
Soil number representing clay liner (0 if none)_
4. SHALLOW CONFINED SEEPAGE
Maximum shallow groundwater elevation
Design waste elevation 1n the cell
Soil nunber representing clay liner_
5. CONFINED POOL SEEPAGE
Elevation of maximum upstream pool
Design waste elevation 1n the cell
Soil number representing clay liner_
6. DRAWDOWN POOL
Elevation of maximum upstream pool
Soil number representing clay liner
Sheet of
MANUAL INPUT OF PHREATIC SURFACE
POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD POINT NO. X-COORD Y-COORD
12
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Sheet of
D. ROTATIONAL FAILURE SEARCH SCHEMES
| x | Internally generated grid search
Grid Point No.
1
2
3
| | User defined grid search
X-Coordinate
Number of divisions between points #1 and #2:
Number of divisions between points #2 and #3:
X-increment for search:
Y-increment for search:
| I User defined point search
Number of centers to be analyzed:
Point No. X-Coordinate
1
2
3
4
5
X-increment for search:_
Y-increment for search:
Y-Coordinate
Y-Coordinate
Sheet of
E. TRANSLATIONAL FAILURE (WEDGE) SEARCH SCHEMES
| | Automatic wedge search
| | User defined wedge
X-coordinate left side of central blockX-coordinate right side of central block
F. SOIL STRENGTH PARAMETERS
UU l~"j unconsolidated - undrained
CU |~"j consolidated - undrained
CD L~| consolidated - drained
G. OTHER STABILITY ANALYSES
|~"| settlement
|~l liquefaction
JL 0/1/M
t"-
/O 121
01
02A 37
o
30 IOO
- 10
**
********
C A R D S S U M M A P. Y
Project: MDSL DIKE STABILITTYFile: MDSL-W
i 00CARDS Version :developed by
Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUn iversity of C i n c i n n a t i
under contract toU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Land Pollution Control DivisionHazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory
*•******•**#**
Site Characteristics
****#****•w-#*
Thie seismic coefficient is
The design earthquake magnitude is
The maximum flood elevation in this case is •
The elevation of the seasonal high ground water is
The design waste elevation in the cell is • • • •
The soil number representing the clay liner is. •
-r-*.» #**##**
*
•**••**•*•***•*•*
O . O7
fc - 10
0
o
o
*******
*
***••••"
»
*•»••<•*-'
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
#
*
•*
*
*
*
*
*
#
•*
*
fr-***-******-**-** *•***•••*******-**•••*•<
Section
The number of soil boundary
Line 1 Point
1•7'
Line 2 Point
123
Line 3 Point
1
^3
Line 4 P o i n t
12
L i n e 5 Point
1•".'
TJ
4e-
(•**-»*** ..*.H«.i
Geometry*•#•****•*•*•-*•*-'
lines f o r
X
90185
X
1501541S5
X
90150185
X
90127
X
901 001271501S5
(.****** .*** + . *.-*-)(-**
(.*.*..*..*..*..*..*..*..*..*..**..*..*..*.•*
this section is
Y
S25i-. --1 e1
Y
S3OS29S29
Y
S3083083 O
Y
8 3 5835
Y
841841I-' "
830830
•*•-*•*****•*••**•*.*
#5 *
*
*
*
*
***
*
**•*
*
*
*
•«•
***•**
Soil 1 Properties[••*•«• *•*•*•* *•*•#*••* #*
*
•ft•ft•ft•ft•ft*
•ft•ft•ft•ft•ft-•ft•ft•ft•ft•ft•ft•ft
Un con so 1 i da t ed Con so 1 i da tedUn d r a i n e d U n d r a i n e d
C o h e s i o n 0 0Phi A n g l e 0 0
U n i t W e i g h t 1
O v e r - c o n s o l i d a t i o n R a t i o . . . .
P l a s t i c i t y I n d e x
S tandard P e n e t r a t i o n N u m b e r - •
Con so 1 i da tedD r a i n e d
0 < 1 b / 5 q . f t >50 ( d e g r e e s )
12.400 < l b / c u . f t )0-000 (%)0 - 000O • 0000 • 000o . oooO-OOO ( f t / y r - >0 • 000 ( mm >0 • 000 ( % ;•0 • OOO ( % )O - O O O ( ' b l o w s / f t ' . )
#**•ft**
•»•ft•»***#*#*•ft•ft
•ft**-ft*-ft-ft •**•** *-****•* •**•»#-ft •»**•*-**•*-ft* *•»*•*-ft*** !
Soil 2 Prooerties
**#***
•ft***#«•*•ft•ft•ft**
U n c o n s o l i d a t e d C o n s o l i d a t e dU n d r- a i n e d U n d r a i n e d
C o h e s i o n 0 0Phi A n g l e 0 0
U n i t W e i g h t
O v e r - c o n s o l i d a t i o n R a t i o . . . .
P l a s t i c i t y I n d e x
S tandard P e n e t r a t i o n N u m b e r • •
C:
620OOo000ooo
o n s o 1 i d a t e dDr-a i n e d
0 < 1 b / s q . f t ">0 ( d e g r e e s )
. 40O ( I b / c u . f t )• 000 < '% >. 000. ooo• OOO. ooo•OOO < f t / y r ). OOO <' mm )• 000 ( % >. ooo <: % "/•000 ( b l o w s / f t )
•ft*•ft•ft•ft-•ft
•ft•ft-#•ft•ft•ft•ft•ft*•ft•ft•ft
t * •* -ft * * •* * * *
Soil 3 Proper-tits**•»***
**
#•*
4t
**.
•*
•*
*•
•*
4.
•*.
*
Unconso 1 i dated ConsolidatedUn d ra i n e d Un d ra i n e d
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 O
Unit Weight . • • . 1
Over-consolidation Ratio . . . .
Plasticity I n d e " « • • • « • •
Standard Penetration Number • .
C o n s oDr
1 2 • d.000 • 0000 . OOO0 • 0000 • 0000 . 0000 > OOO0 • 000O • 00<I'0 . 0000 • 000
**-x- *•***•* **•*•* **#*..**•*•**
1 i da teda i n e d
0 < 1 b / s cr • f t >0 < d e g r e e s >
<; 1 b / c u • f t >(.t ')\ •+ /
<• f t / y i- >( /rim )(' %}\ '* .•( 'X )\. S& ./
<:t-i ows/f t >
*****
**
**•M.*•M-
•M-
*•
•K-
*
•M-
**
Soil Properties
***•**•*
**•****#*****
Un consolidated ConsolidateLi n d r a i n e d U n d r a i n e d
Cohesion 0 0Phi Angle 0 0
Unit Weight
Over con so 1 i da t i on Ratio . . . .Initial Void RatioCompression Index
Standard Penetration Number . .
d C o n s o 1Dra
112. 4000 . 0000 • OOOO • OOOo . oooo . oooo . ooo0 • OOOo . oooo . oooo . ooo
i datedi n e d
0 ( 1 b / s q . f t )O (degrees >
( 1 b / c u . f t >( % )
(f t/yr )(mm >( % >c/o(blows/ft)
****#
***********
* User Defined ** Piezometric Surface for Hydraulic Condition ** 7: User Defined *
* ** Point X Y *
* 1 90 330 ** 2 135 S30 *
Hv d r a ulies Results«•*•****#**#**•*•****•*••*•
* Seepage In O-OOO (cu-ft/yr) ** ** Seepage Out 0-000 (cu-ft/yr) *» ** Critical Exit Gradient • . . O-OOO ** ** For this hydraulic condition there is no liner uplift. ** *
*•*•**•*#**•*•#****&
*#
•*##•g.
4t
*
#**
R
—
The siareas
•*•#•* #*•***#
Co-ord •
XY
TheTheThe1 IIC
TKo1 I * C
0 T A T I 0 N A L
Automat i
opes were analyzeddefined by the foil
Point 1
100844
F A I L U R E R E S U .L T S
c Grid Search
for failure arcs having centers inowing parallelograms:
Slope 1
Point 2 Point 3 Point 4
150 Ifcl 111S33 S52 S63
number of divisions between points 1 and 2 were 4number of divisions between points 2 and 3 were 4X "" i ri c i~* s m s v*i t 1 1 s G >rl xY~- i \"\ r !"• P rti P TI t" 1 1 o i*i ix i P L. i cr 111 tr 1 1 i/ I.L a cr '_i A
***###*
****
*
*
•****#•*
•*•••*
***^ -M M- .K****
*****
**#
**
__R 0 T A T I
„ w . < ^ > L L M. M* M-Tf TTT^ TT TT TUP " IF TT TF TF TP IP TP TP
Hydraul
SafetyFactor-
2 . 292 • 40
0 N A L F
^ u ^L L^ ^ ^^ TP 'JPTPIPIPIPIPIP
ic Condition
Consol idateSeismic Coe
FailureRadius
13.4lfc-0
A I L LI R E RE
, L . ^ ^L^ <Mi -Up -A 4fc > A -A . JTTTP1PTPTPTpTriHP^**^WTP'ff-^*Tp1
7: User Defined
d Drained (CD) Casefficient = 0-07
X-C o - o r d
105-3105.3
S U L T S
Y-Co-or d
843.3845 • 3
*»*
<. " M r *****
*
*
*
#
*
*
*
*
*
* •** T R A N S L A T I O N A L F A I L L I R E R E S U L T S ** ** ** Translational failure analysis was not performed. ** *
RECOMMENDED MINIMUM FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR SLOPE STABILITY
»#
***##*#*********
Shear- Strength Confidence ofParameter Strength Measurement
UU (end of construction, nowaste or pool containment)
CU
CU (drawdown pool condition)
CD (long-term, no seismiceffects)
CD (long-term with seismiceffects)
If the dike > 30 feet in height,
1h
1h
1h
1h
1h
add 0
owigh
owigh
owi gh
owi gh
owigh
.1C to the F.S.
Re commendedMin imum F • S-
11
11
11
11
11
in each
.40
. 2O
. 5O
. 30
. 40
.20
.to
.40
.50
.30
case .
##
******#•****•*#***
* ** S E T T L E M E N T R E S U L T S ** — ** Settlement analysis was not performed- ** *
* ** L I Q U E F A C T I O N R E S U L T S ** ** — Liquefaction analysis was not performed. ** *
* ** C A R D S S U M M A R Y ** — ** File: MDSL-W Date: 11-20-1937 Time: 17:05:17 ** Project: MDSL DIKE STABILITTY ** Hydraulic Condition 7: User Defined ** **. *.* Rotational Failure Analysis Safety Factor ** ** Unconsolidated Undrained Case Not Run ** Consolidated Undrained Case Not Run ** Consolidated Drained Case 2-29 *y _[ ^^ ^ ^ ^^^ ^ .^^ __ _B __ , t|_ _r J_l » ••i 10. __ _ ^ __ ^ ^^ •—^^«™ «_^^^ ^ ,• _« .1- - - _ _ _ _mm ^^ . _-_ „ _ _
* Trans lat i onal Failure Analysis Not Run ** ** Settlement Analysis • • Not Run *