ANCOLD 2012 Guidance

Introduction

• ANCOLD (2012) governs much of the requirements for TSF stability

analyses in Australia

• What does it have to say on this?

• Would any edits be useful, based on failures that have occurred

from 2012 to 2016?
Relevant sections and structure

Section 6.1 – Stability Analysis

6.1.1 – Stability Evaluations

6.1.2 – Methods of Stability Evaluations
6.1.3 – Loading Conditions
Drained Condition
Undrained Condition (includes static liquefaction)
6.1.4 – Shear Strength Characterisation
Quotes

Section 6.1.1 – Stability Evaluations

The pore pressures within the tailings are a combination of

seepage pressures and consolidation pressures
Quotes

Section 6.1.1 – Stability Evaluations

The pore pressures within the tailings are a combination of

seepage pressures and consolidation pressures

Mechanism 1 Mechanism 2
Quotes

Section 6.1.2 – Methods of Stability Analyses

In addition, it may be necessary to consider the contractive and

dilative state of materials. The contractive versus dilative behaviour
could be evaluated through laboratory tests…and/or field tests, such
as CPTu
Quotes

Section 6.1.2 – Methods of Stability Analyses

In addition, it may be necessary to consider the contractive and

dilative state of materials. The contractive versus dilative behaviour
could be evaluated through laboratory tests…and/or field tests, such
as CPTu
Quotes

Section 6.1.3 – Drained Condition

This loading condition should not be used to evaluate…stability of

saturated contractive materials
Quotes

Section 6.1.3 – Drained Condition

This loading condition should not be used to evaluate…stability of

saturated contractive materials
Φ’ not appropriate in this case
Key section

Section 6.1.3 – Undrained Condition

“undrained or partially drained loading condition …. where loading

and/or failure occurs rapidly enough that there is not enough time for
drainage of induced excess pore water pressures, or where pore
pressures are developed due to the contractive nature of the tailings”
Key section

Section 6.1.3 – Undrained Condition

“undrained or partially drained loading condition …. where loading

and/or failure occurs rapidly enough that there is not enough time for
drainage of induced excess pore water pressures, or where pore
pressures are developed due to the contractive nature of the tailings”

Mechanism 3
Key section

Section 6.1.3 – Undrained Condition

Because it is difficult to predict how much drainage and where it will

occur (in a TSF), the text suggests:
“ to guard against this uncertainty, the standard practice is to check
the stability of such materials using the undrained strength envelope”

and further:
“Materials for which undrained strength is of particular importance
include saturated contractive tailings and soft foundation clay layers”
Key section
Section 6.1.3 – Undrained Condition

Static liquefaction is another important slope failure mechanism whose

potential needs to be evaluated as part of the undrained loading conditions.
As defined by Fell et al. (2007) static liquefaction occurs at relatively low
stresses and is characterised by large pore pressure development and a brittle
stress-strain response resulting in close to zero effective stresses. Further
details on static liquefaction can be obtained from Fell et al. (2007) and Duncan
and Wright (2005).

Text doesn’t discuss static liquefaction.

Paper doesn’t say exactly that? Also, it states that sands only required
Also, worth noting that while majority drained strengths
of static liquefaction case histories were under
relatively low stresses, some others appear to have
Triggered under high stress. For example:
Fundão: ~ 500 kPa σ’v when triggered
Fort Peck: ~500 kPa σ’v when triggered
Soils are generally more brittle at lower stresses (e.g. Robertson 2017)
Strength estimates

Section 6.1.4 – Shear Strength Characterisation

“Consolidated undrained shear strength should be derived in accordance with the

Undrained Strength Analysis (USA) approach of Ladd (1991). This approach is
recommended for all saturated contractive materials.”

Important:
Some parts of Ladd’s recommendations are impossible to apply to non and low
plastic materials. His recommendations are generally developed for clays. A
different approach are needed to assess undrained strengths for non plastic
materials (i.e. sandy materials)
FoS Requirements
FoS Requirements

Note: ANCOLD (2012) does not explicitly state that 1.3 applies to
construction conditions. Only differentiation between the two
conditions is “potential loss of containment”
FoS Requirements

The 1.5 FoS requirement for “Consolidated Undrained Strength” is

the most applicable to static liquefaction.

Which strength – i.e. peak, or a strain compatible average (of loading

directions) not specified. For brittle materials, or where lateral
extrusion is occurring, use of peak strengths in LE may be problematic.
FoS Requirements

The use of post-liquefaction shear strengths is only specified for a

“Post-Seismic” condition. However, owing to the danger of brittle
materials, and the difficulties in accounting for deformations occurring
within TSFs, many are not suggested that static stability should be
assured under post-liquefaction strengths.
What do other jurisdictions say
about static liquefaction?

No mention of either ‘liquefaction’ or ‘static’ in

either document
Potential improvements to
ANCOLD (2012)

• Ensure references are relevant

• Expand on the concept of ‘contractive’ materials (the Critical State
Line concept)
• Identify and reference relevant (and improved) techniques for
characterisation of strength of contractive non plastic materials
• Provide further clarification on when the 1.3 FoS criterion would be
applicable
• Consider requirement of post-liquefaction strengths for static
stability (i.e. unrelated to seismic events) for brittle materials