sdms us epa region v · investigation (ri): the initial site reconnaissance, groundwater monitoring...

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.


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.


Unscannable Material:Oversized X or Format.Due to certain scanning equipment capabili ty limitations, the document page(s) is not available in SDMS.


Document is available at the EPA Region 5 Records Center.


EPA Region 5 Records Ctr

232494

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


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


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

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


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


SHEAR NUMBER 2

.50 KSF.0120 INCHES/MIN.99 INCHES

2.50 INCHES106.6 PCF6.61 PERCENT100.0 PCF.65326.8 PERCENT


HORIZONTALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000.0088.0186.0483.0979.1227.1476.1975.2475.2976


-.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


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


-.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, drained (PSF)




consolidated, drained (degrees)



Compression index: (decimal)

Recompression index: (decimal)


Plasticity index:(%)

Liquid limit:(%)

Wet unit weight: (PCF) /oa- a.

Clay content: (%)


Sheet of

B. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No:

Cohesion:

|~ unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_







Wet unit weight: (PCF) ( Ofj>

Clay content: (%)






:(mm)

Plasticity index: {%)_

Liquid limit:(%)


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


Soil number representing clay liner_

6. DRAWDOWN POOL

Elevation of maximun upstrean pool


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


* ** 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


PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 3, SOUTH SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY CLAY



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


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


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


PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MOLWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 3, SOUTH SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY CLAY



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


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


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


Design Earthquake Magnitude: £• /


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: -*


Number of points on soil boundary line II : ^


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



Angle of Internal friction:

unconsolldated, undralned (degrees)^



Wet unit weight: (PCF) ' 2-

Clay content: (%)

Overconsolidatlon ratio:

Initial void ratio: (decimal)__

Compression Index: (decimal)

Recompresslon Index: (decimal)_


:(mm)

Plasticity Index: (%)_

Liquid I1m1t:(%)


Sheet of

B. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No: 2-

Coheslon:

I"" unconsolldated, undralned (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconflned compresslve strength (PSF)_

consolidated, undralned (PSF)



unconsolldated, undralned (degrees)



Wet unit weight: (PCF) Gel- '"

Clay content: (%)




Recompression Index: (decimal)_


:(mm)


Liquid limit:(%)


Sheet of

8. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No: _2

Cohesion:

|~ unconsolidated, undralned (PSF)or| 1/2 unconflned compresslve strength (PSF)_







Wet unit weight: (PCF) ^

Clay content: (X)

Overconsolldation ratio:

Initial void ratio: (decimal)


Recompresslon index: (decimal)_


Plasticity 1ndex:(%)_

Liquid I1m1t:(%)


Sheet of

B. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No:

Cohesion:

\~~ unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)







Wet unit weight: (PCF) /2V

Clay content: (%)


Initial void ratio: (decimal}_





Liquid I1mit:(%)


Sheet of


Method of Input: Internal Generation of Piezometric Surface



1. DEEP STATIC


2. SHALLOW SEEPAGE


Soil nunber representing clay liner (0 if none)



Soil number representing clay liner (0 if none)_



Design waste elevation 1n the cell



Elevation of maximum upstream pool



6. DRAWDOWN POOL


Soil number representing clay liner

Sheet of


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-Coordinate

Y-Coordinate

?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


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


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 . . . .


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*- - ^





Sheet of

A. DIKE GEOMETRY

Number .of soil boundary lines for this section: 5


Number of points on soil boundary line II : 2^


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.


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, drained (PSF) \OO




consolidated, drained (degrees) u ^

Wet unit weight: (PCF)

Clay content: (X)






:(mm)

Plasticity index:(%)_

Liquid limit:(»)


Sheet of

B. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No: ft.

Cohesion:

I"" unconsolidated, undrained (PSF)or| 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_







Wet unit weight: (PCF) G Z,

Clay content: (%)


Initial void ratio: (decimal)




:(mm)


Liquid limit:(%)


Sheet of

B. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No: _2

Cohesion:

I"" unconsolldated, undrained (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)






consolidated, drained (degrees) _

Wet unit weight: (PCF)

Clay content: (1)







Liquid limit:(%)


Sheet of

8. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No: _

Cohesion:

|~ unconsolidated, undralned (PSF)or| 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_


consolidated, drained (PSF) \_D_



consolidated, undralned (degrees)


Wet unit weight: (PCF) /"• "=?•

Clay content: (%)


Initial void ratio: (decimal^

Compression index: (decimal)__



:(mm)


Liquid limit:(%)


Sheet of





1. DEEP STATIC


2. SHALLOW SEEPAGE














6. DRAWDOWN POOL



Sheet of



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

E. TRANSLATIONAL FAILURE (WEDGE) SEARCH SCHEMES

| | Automatic wedge search

1 | User defined wedge



U U 1 j unconsolidated - undrained

CU |j consolidated - undrained

C D j | consolidated - drained


|| 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



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


HORIZONTALDEFLECTION(INCHES).0000.0094.0192.0291.0490.0739.0989.1240.1490.1741.1991.2241.2491.2741.2991


-.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


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


SHEAR NUMBER 2

.50.0096.99

2.50111.712.4199.4.66449.5


PERCENT




-.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


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


PERCENT


SHEARSTRESS(KSF)

.00

.30

.70

.861.001.041.091.071.041.07


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

*•****

*********•*


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


Unit Weight


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


Unit Weight

Over con so 1 i dat i on Ratio . . . .


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


Unit Weight


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. ** *


**

***

*

*******•*

*

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



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



PERCENT


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,


PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 2, WEST SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS DARK YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY PINE




PERCENT '

SHEAR NUMBER 2


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


PROJECT NAME & NO. ARE M.D.S.L.- MILWAUKEE, HT-2264-87GSAMPLE NUMBER 2, WEST SIDE SLOPESAMPLE IDENTIFICATION IS DARK YELLOWISH BROWN SILTY FINE


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


PERCENT


SHEARSTRESS(KSF).00.36.56.82

1.031.291.341.331.311.33



-.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<_ -





Sheet of

A. DIKE GEOMETRY

Number .of soil boundary lines for this section: S


Number of points on soil boundary line II : ^~


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


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 _ : *-__


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, drained (PSF) Q




consolidated, drained (degrees) S

Wet unit weight: (PCF) )\ 2,. -4

Clay content: (%)



Compression index: (decimal)_



:(mm)


Liquid limit:(%)


Sheet of

B. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No: ^

Cohesion:

I"" unconsolldated, undrained (PSF)or

J 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_







Overconsolidatlon ratio:





:(mm)

Plasticity Index:(%)_

Liquid I1m1t:(%)

Wet unit weight: (PCF) fr £ •

Clay content: (%)


Sheet of

B. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No:

Cohesion:

|~ unconsolldated, undralned (PSF)orj 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_

consolidated, undralned (PSF)


Angle of Internal 'friction:

unconsolldated, undrained (degrees)



Wet unit weight: (PCF) / ' 2 . <-/

Clay content: (%)

Overconsol1dat1on ratio:





Plasticity Index: (%)_

Liquid I1m1t:(%)


Sheet of

B. SOIL PROPERTIES

Soil No: l'

Cohesion:

|~ unconsolidated, undralned (PSF)or_ 1/2 unconfined compressive strength (PSF)_




unconsolldated, undralned (degrees)



Wet unit weight: (PCF) //

Clay content: (I)

Overconsol1dat1on ratio:





:(mm)


Liquid lim1t:(S)


Sheet of





1. DEEP STATIC


2. SHALLOW SEEPAGE


Soil nunber representing clay liner (0 if none)












6. DRAWDOWN POOL



Sheet of



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

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

*•******•**#**


****#****•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


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


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. ** *


»#

***##*#*********

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 *

sdms us epa region v · investigation (ri): the initial site reconnaissance, groundwater monitoring...

Documents