{"title":"尾矿边坡稳定性比较设计的发展与成果","authors":"David Reid, Andy Fourie","doi":"10.1139/cgj-2022-0065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tailings storage facilities (TSFs) have undergone an unacceptably high failure rate for decades, leading to an increased focus on improving the safety of these structures. One aspect that has not received sufficient attention is examining how reliably and consistently engineers analyse the stability of TSFs. An understanding of the current state of practice is needed as there are a range of analytical methods available to engineers, while the high failure rate of these structures strongly points to some deficiencies in practice. To examine some of these issues, a tailings-focussed slope stability comparative design exercise was organised to compare the methods and results used by tailings engineers to analyse the same slope within which the phreatic surface was to rise under a specified pattern. Twenty-eight practitioners participated in the exercise to predict at what phreatic surface level the slope would fail. A wide range of predictions were made, ranging from assuming the slope would liquefy and fail instantly (i.e. before any rise in phreatic surface), to a range of techniques based on (i) yield strength ratios, (ii) stress path methods, and (iii) numerical analyses, each predicting various failure levels, and finally some predictors who applied drained strengths, resulting in predictions that the slope would not fail.","PeriodicalId":9382,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geotechnical Journal","volume":"84 10","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and outcomes of a tailings slope stability comparative design exercise\",\"authors\":\"David Reid, Andy Fourie\",\"doi\":\"10.1139/cgj-2022-0065\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Tailings storage facilities (TSFs) have undergone an unacceptably high failure rate for decades, leading to an increased focus on improving the safety of these structures. One aspect that has not received sufficient attention is examining how reliably and consistently engineers analyse the stability of TSFs. An understanding of the current state of practice is needed as there are a range of analytical methods available to engineers, while the high failure rate of these structures strongly points to some deficiencies in practice. To examine some of these issues, a tailings-focussed slope stability comparative design exercise was organised to compare the methods and results used by tailings engineers to analyse the same slope within which the phreatic surface was to rise under a specified pattern. Twenty-eight practitioners participated in the exercise to predict at what phreatic surface level the slope would fail. A wide range of predictions were made, ranging from assuming the slope would liquefy and fail instantly (i.e. before any rise in phreatic surface), to a range of techniques based on (i) yield strength ratios, (ii) stress path methods, and (iii) numerical analyses, each predicting various failure levels, and finally some predictors who applied drained strengths, resulting in predictions that the slope would not fail.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Geotechnical Journal\",\"volume\":\"84 10\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Geotechnical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2022-0065\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Geotechnical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2022-0065","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Development and outcomes of a tailings slope stability comparative design exercise
Tailings storage facilities (TSFs) have undergone an unacceptably high failure rate for decades, leading to an increased focus on improving the safety of these structures. One aspect that has not received sufficient attention is examining how reliably and consistently engineers analyse the stability of TSFs. An understanding of the current state of practice is needed as there are a range of analytical methods available to engineers, while the high failure rate of these structures strongly points to some deficiencies in practice. To examine some of these issues, a tailings-focussed slope stability comparative design exercise was organised to compare the methods and results used by tailings engineers to analyse the same slope within which the phreatic surface was to rise under a specified pattern. Twenty-eight practitioners participated in the exercise to predict at what phreatic surface level the slope would fail. A wide range of predictions were made, ranging from assuming the slope would liquefy and fail instantly (i.e. before any rise in phreatic surface), to a range of techniques based on (i) yield strength ratios, (ii) stress path methods, and (iii) numerical analyses, each predicting various failure levels, and finally some predictors who applied drained strengths, resulting in predictions that the slope would not fail.
期刊介绍:
The Canadian Geotechnical Journal features articles, notes, reviews, and discussions related to new developments in geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, and applied sciences. The topics of papers written by researchers and engineers/scientists active in industry include soil and rock mechanics, material properties and fundamental behaviour, site characterization, foundations, excavations, tunnels, dams and embankments, slopes, landslides, geological and rock engineering, ground improvement, hydrogeology and contaminant hydrogeology, geochemistry, waste management, geosynthetics, offshore engineering, ice, frozen ground and northern engineering, risk and reliability applications, and physical and numerical modelling.
Contributions that have practical relevance are preferred, including case records. Purely theoretical contributions are not generally published unless they are on a topic of special interest (like unsaturated soil mechanics or cold regions geotechnics) or they have direct practical value.