CYCLIC TRIAXIAL STRENGTH OF MINE TAILINGS

By Vinod K. Garga, 1 M . ASCE a n d Larry D . McKay 5

ABSTRACT: The cyclic strength of sand deposits is influenced by a number of

factors including density, grain size, previous loading history, in situ stresses,
age, particle shape and structure. In the case of uncompacted tailings sands,
of concern because of their high potential for liquefaction, a number of these
factors do not show a large variation. Test data on uncompacted tailings sands
which the practicing engineering could use to obtain a preliminary estimate of
cyclic strength parameters are compiled and reviewed. Data from 20 tailings
and 13 non-tailings materials is presented for comparison purposes. The cor-
rection for relative density for normalizing test data is discussed. A Modified
Stress Ratio (MSR) plot is suggested which enables the determination of cyclic
strength parameters for the anisotropically consolidated case from strengths on
isotropically consolidated samples. The accuracy of this determination is ade-
quate for engineering purposes. Finally, a method outlining the use of com-
piled data for evaluation of cyclic strength of tailings sands is presented.

INTRODUCTION

Cyclic triaxial testing has become one of the established tools for eval-
uating the liquefaction potential of soil deposits under earthquake load-
ing. After testing is completed to determine behavior of samples under
cyclic loading, a number of analytical methods can be used to evaluate
liquefaction potential. These include finite element computer programs
such as QUAD-4, Idriss et al., (7) and simplified methods such as those
proposed by Ishihara (8), Nishiyama et al. (18), and Klohn et al. (14).
Tailings dams are often constructed of potentially liquefiable, sand to
silt size materials. To assess the liquefaction potential of such tailings
dams using analytical techniques, information on the behavior of iso-
tropically and anisotropically consolidated samples under cyclic loading
is required. The testing is carried out on either "undisturbed" samples
or samples reconstituted in the laboratory. Recently, Seed and his co-
workers (22) have shown that the controlled freezing method of sam-
pling for freshly deposited sands of medium density results in the least
sample disturbance. This method, however, is not readily available at
all locations and is rarely used in engineering practice. It is more com-
mon to use some form of conventional tube sampling. The field inves-
tigations required to obtain these samples, as well as the associated test-
ing are often expensive and time consuming.
The authors have recently been involved in assessing seismic stability
of a number of tailings dams. The studies included field investigations,
SPT testing, recovery of "undisturbed" Shelby samples and cyclic triax-
ial testing in the laboratory. A review of this information, subsequent
to the completion of the projects, indicated that the cyclic shear strength
2
'Staff Consultant, Klohn Leonoff Ltd., Richmond, B.C., Canada.
Aquaterre Consultants Inc., Prince George, B.C., Canada; formerly Geotechn-
ical Engineer, Klohn Leonoff Ltd.
Note.—Discussion open until January 1, 1985. To extend the closing date one
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Technical and
Professional Publications. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for re-
view and possible publication on September 12, 1983. This paper is part of the
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 110, No. 8, August, 1984. ©ASCE, ISSN
0733-9410/84/0008-1091/$01.00. Paper No. 19048.
1091
parameters could have been estimated from previously published infor-
mation and simple index tests performed in the field. Further, the use
of the cyclic strength parameters so obtained would not have affected
the analytical results significantly. Consequently, a more detailed review
of available data was undertaken to compile information in a form which
can be readily utilized by the practicing engineer prior to embarking on
a program of field investigations.

TABLE 1.—Summary of

Country of
Name origin Symbol Material type
(D (2) (3) (4)
Dam Bl sand Chile • Copper tailings sand
Dam Bl slime Chile e Copper tailings slimes
Dam B2 sand Chile ® Copper tailings sand
Dam CI sand Chile # Copper tailings sand
Dam CI slimes Chile <•> Copper tailings slimes
Brenda Dam Canada ® Copper tailings sand
Environment Canada Canada & Copper tailings sand
Kamioka sand Japan -*- Tailings sand
Kamioka sand Japan ® Tailings sand
Takara slimes Japan + Copper tailings slimes
Takara slimes Japan X Copper tailings slimes
Mochikoshi sand Japan 9> Gold tailings sand
Mochikoshi slimes Japan IS Gold tailings slimes
Kosaka slimes Japan 0 Medium plastic lead-zinc
tailings
Furutobe slimes Japan -e- Highly plastic lead-zinc
tailings
El Cobre, Old Dike sand Chile © Copper tailings sand
El Cobre, Old Dike slimes Chile -^ Copper tailings slimes
El Cobre No. 4 Dike sand Chile © Copper tailings sand
El Cobre, No. 4 Dike slimes Chile * Copper tailings slimes
Disputada slimes Chile 0 Copper tailings slimes
Monterey No. 0 sand U.S.A. e> Beach sand
Platte River sand U.S.A. v Alluvial sand
Standard concrete sand U.S.A. A Prepared sand
Reid-Bedford sand U.S.A. A Prepared sand
Ottawa sand Canada 0 Alluvial sand
Ishinomaki oil tank site sand Japan a Hydraulically-placed
sand fill
North Island sand U.S.A. H Hydraulically-placed
sand fill
Beaufort Sea sand Canada 9 Alluvial sand
Niigata sand Japan 0 Reclaimed alluvial sand
(selected data)
Quartz sand Japan © Prepared sand
Quartz slime Japan a Prepared fines
Dam A silt Canada ® Lacustrine silt
Plantsite-A silt Canada B Lacustrine silt

1092
 The cyclic strength of sand deposits can be significantly influenced by
a number of factors, which include density, in situ lateral stresses, grain
size distribution, seismic history, particle shape and structural arrange-
ment, chemical cementing and age of the deposit [Singh, Seed and Chan
(22), Townsend (23)]. In the case of uncompacted tailings sands, a num-
ber of these factors do not show a wide variation. For example, many
metal tailings derived from hard rocks have an angular to sub-angular
Materials Tested
Median
grain size Limiting
D 50 , in Specific Void Ratio Reference
Sample type millimeters gravity "max ''min number
(5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
Thin-walled tube 0.15 2.78 1.24 0.58 13
Thin-walled tube <0.075 2.78 — — 13
Thin-walled tube 0.15 2.79 1.25 0.59 13
Thin-walled tube 0.16 2.80 1.30 0.67 13
Thin-walled tube <0.075 2.77 — — 13
Thin-walled tube 0.21 2.70 1.02 0.58 13
Reconstituted specimen 0.29 2.77 1.01 0.53 13
Thin-walled tube 0.13 — 1.22 0.63 11
Reconstituted specimen 0.13 — 1.22 0.63 11
Thin-walled tube 0.0045 — — — 11
Reconstituted specimen 0.0045 — — — 11
Reconstituted specimen 0.13 2.72 1.32 0.65 9
Reconstituted specimen 0.02 2.74 — — 9
Reconstituted specimen 0.01 3.33 — — 9

Reconstituted specimen 0.018 3.18 — — 9

Reconstituted specimen 0.37 2.69 1.19 0.60 9

Reconstituted specimen 0.037 2.72 — — 9
Reconstituted specimen 0.12 2.74 1.31 0.66 9
Reconstituted specimen 0.019 2.71 — — 9
Reconstituted specimen 0.018 2.89 — — 9
Reconstituted specimen 0.51 2.65 0.85 0.56 13
Reconstituted specimen 2.00 2.68 0.62 0.36 24
Reconstituted specimen 0.42 2.66 0.60 0.38 24
Reconstituted specimen 0.23 2.66 0.87 0.55 24
Reconstituted specimen 0.20 2.67 0.79 0.53 24
Thin-walled tube 0.15 — 1.48 0.93 10

Thin-walled tube 0.15 — — — 5,6

Reconstituted specimen 0.25 2.68 0.84 0.57 13

Thin-walled tube and 0.35 2.66 1.09 0.65 12
large diameter samples
Reconstituted specimen 0.28 2.64 1.21 0.60 9
Reconstituted specimen 0.014 2.64 — — 9
Thin-walled tube 0.005 2.73 — — 13
Thin-walled tube 0.045 — — — 13

1093
shape and are deposited in a slurry form, and consequently exhibit a
similar structural arrangement. Being uncompacted and young in age,
such sands are also not subjected to high in situ lateral stresses. The
grain size distribution of these materials is found to lie within a re-
markably narrow range despite wide distribution in geographic location.
In view of these similarities, it is of practical interest to determine if the
cyclic strength behavior is also similar.
The intent of this paper, therefore, is to provide a compilation of data
on tailings sand which the engineer could use to obtain a preliminary
estimate of cyclic strength parameters. These parameters can be used to
evaluate the liquefaction potential of the deposit and to assess if further
detailed investigations are warranted. Generally, an undisturbed sam-
pling and cyclic strength testing program will not be necessary unless
the deposit is assessed to be only marginally stable under seismic load-
ing. If the structure is definitely unstable or stable with an adequate
factor of safety, then further investigation of cyclic strength parameters
is probably not warranted.
This paper presents data from 20 tailings and 13 non-tailings materials
for comparison purposes. Test results are synthesized for both isotropic
and anisotropic testing conditions in a convenient format to establish
typical ranges for cyclic strength parameters. All cyclic strength graphs
are plotted to the same scale for ease of comparison of results. A method
for initial evaluation of cyclic strength parameters is also proposed.

MATERIALS

Table 1 shows the materials for which data have been reviewed. The
list includes both tailings and non-tailings materials. The geographic dis-
tribution of materials examined in this study extends over North and
South America, and Japan. The non-tailings materials include materials
from natural deposits, concrete sand and three standard sands. Most
tailings samples were obtained from copper mines. The material prop-

SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE) MEDIUM | FINE
U.S. STANDAR D SIEV E SIZE
3/8" A 10 2 0 4 0 60 IC» zoo
EL COBRE
No. 4 DYK
Nt II
90 ap Jn
| ^ o.\
ENVIRONMENT'
l A \i A' .
! L«r
•A \
-FURUTOBE
Z B0-

X „.
CANADA——""^
>^
U ;S \ -E . COBRE,N0.4DYKE
EL COBRE,
^
1 \\
OLD DYKE
<\y r f"
a: BRENDA D A M - — r-NVV f, MOCHIKOSHI

CHILEAN DAM CI T \U -KOSAKA

u. CHILEAN DAM B2 ir 3 \ ^ \i \ * /TAKAR

-«J33 a"- - ,Si V* \
•Z. 40-
KAMtOKA--^^
•
^ 1• 1
MOCHIKOSHI--^
^ , "\ _

g 30- CHILEAN DAM Bl ^ ^ ^ •,\n \ *

xX^ ^ v "v- s\
°" 20-
V . i i' • <s ^
\ %& i i N v\
JJ 1 1
0- ,1 I 1 i rmT
II
T;
I TAILINGS 5AH0S TiTfe h FILLS
'" ' 1""
AILIHQS S L I M E S
1
GRAIN SIZE-MILLIMETRES

FIG, 1.—Grain Size for Tailings Sands in Dam Fills, and Slimes
1094
 10 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.00) 0.0001
GRAIN SIZE-MILLIMETRES

FIG. 2.—Grain Size for Non-Tailings Sands and Fines

erties for tailings from other hard rock mines, e.g. gold and silver, are
often similar to those from copper mines (11,13). Grain size curves from
all materials presented in this study are shown of Figs. 1 and 2. It should
be noted that the samples from dams constructed with tailings (Fig. 1)
show remarkably similar grain size characteristics. However, the tailings
slimes and the non-tailings materials show a larger variation.
Table 1 also indicates whether the test results were obtained on un-
disturbed tube samples or on laboratory reconstituted samples. Data on
tailings material obtained by the controlled freezing method (22) were
not available for this study.

TEST PROCEDURES

Cyclic triaxial test procedures for most of the test data presented in
this paper closely follows the procedure outlined by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (25). All samples were saturated and tested to ensure that
a minimum B-value of 0.95 was achieved. Samples were consolidated to
the desired initial stress conditions. Cyclic loading was carried out using
electro-pneumatic or mechanical devices. In the case of laboratory re-
constituted samples, a number of methods for sample preparation were
used.

PRESENTATION OF DATA

Failure Criteria.—The most common form of presentation of cyclic

strength test data is in the form of plots of cyclic stress ratio (ddp/2(r'3c)
versus number of loading cycles (N) to failure. adp denotes cyclic devia-
tor stress, while cr' 3c denotes minor effective principal stress after con-
solidation (see Appendix II—Notation). A number of criteria are used
to define failure in the literature. The most commonly used are the num-
ber of cycles required to achieve: (1) 5 percent double amplitude strain
for isotropically consolidated conditions, or 2.5 percent strain in com-
1095
pression for anisotropically consolidated conditions; (2) 10 percent dou-
ble amplitude strain for isotropically consolidated conditions or 5 per-
cent strain in compression for anisotropically consolidated conditions;
(3) 100 percent pore pressure ratio (PPR) (u = a 3 ); and (4) 50 percent
pore pressure ratio (or other intermediate ratio).
In this paper use has been made of data in the form of limiting strain
criteria as follows: (1) 5 percent double amplitude strain for isotropically
consolidated samples; or, (2) 2.5 percent strain in compression for ani-
sotropically consolidated samples.
The reasons for selecting these criteria included the readily available
published data in this form and the ease of comparison of isotropically
and anisotropically consolidated test data. It is important to note that
number of cycles (N) on isotropically consolidated samples using the
aforementioned criteria compared very closely to those obtained using
100 percent pore pressure ratio. This observation permits the use of data
presented in this paper for analyses requiring data for 100 percent pore
pressure ratio. This generalization does not hold for anisotropically con-
solidated samples, since 100 percent pore pressure ratio is seldom achieved
for such conditions.

CORRECTION FOR RELATIVE DENSITY

The cyclic strength characteristics of a cohesionless soil depend, in part,

on its relative density. In order to compare data from different tests it
is useful to normalize the data to a common relative density. Data for
tests on sand-sized materials presented in this paper have been nor-
malized to 50% relative density.
Based on published data by Lee and Seed (5), Seed and Idriss (19),
which show the cyclic stress ratio required to cause a given strain to be
approximately proportional to relative density, for relative densities in
the range of 40%-80%. The following linear expression has been used
to reduce data to a common relative density:

1= !^_ (1)
RDj RD = 50%
in which SRX = cyclic stress ratio during testing; RDi = relative density
of the sample (as a percentage); and SR50 = cyclic stress ratio corre-
sponding to 50% relative density.
Test data presented by Ishihara, Troncoso, et al. (9), on copper tailings
sand indicate that the relationship becomes nonlinear at high relative

72 < OK) CYCLES, # 30 CYCLES

< £ — RECONSTITUTED TAILINSS SAND,
IK S) « EL C03RE, OLD DYKE (REF 91
« ^ * " b 0.5 RECONSTITUTED SAMO (HEF. 2)

fJrPB
o 20 40 60 SO
RELATIVE DENSITY (%l
100

FIG. 3.—Cyclic Stress Ratio versus Relative Density

1096
densities. However, liquefaction is unlikely to be of concern at relative
densities above 75%. It was also observed in this study that Eq. 1 does
not apply to very loose soils (relative density <40%), which exhibit higher
strengths than predicted by using this expression. Fig, 3 shows experi-
mental data on dependence of cyclic strength on relative density.
A problem lies in the applicability of the concept of relative density
to fine grained tailings. The ASTM Specification (1) precludes the use of
relative density concept for soils with fines content (fraction passing #200
mesh) greater than 12%. It is not unusual to obtain fines content of up
to 60% in many mill grinds. However, the fines content of sands used
for dam construction, and deposited on beach slopes, is generally less
than 30% (Fig. 1). Eq. 1 has been used to normalize cyclic test data to
a relative density of 50% for tailings materials with up to 40% fines. In
the absence of other acceptable means of normalizing data, the proce-
dure is justified by the following considerations:

1. The fine tailings fraction is a cohesionless rock flour similar in or-

igin, grain shape, texture and hardness to the coarser fraction.
2. Atterberg limits carried out on tailings materials with fines less than
40% indicated zero to negligible plasticity.

It should be noted that the use of relative density concept for fine
grained natural deposits is not recommended since the fine fraction may
differ widely in origin, mineralogy and particle shape from the coarse
fraction.

RESULTS

Isotropic Tests.—Figs. 4-7 show plots of cyclic stress ratios versus

number of cycles to 5% double amplitude strain at principal stress ratio,
Kc[= (vu/v3c)], equal to 1.0 for tailings sands and slimes as well as non-
tailings sands and fines. As mentioned earlier, the results on sands (Figs.
4 and 6) have been normalized to a relative density of 50%. The results
for slimes and non-tailings fines (Figs. 5 and 7) have been plotted with-
out adjustments.
The following observations may be noted:

1. Tailings sands exhibit a notably narrow range of cyclic strength be-

havior, when normalized to 50% relative density. It is well recognized
TAILINGS SANDS
6= 5% D.A.
r ai
9 ~*
:i
it
S "1*03

11
A !.
••

1
A pt» pi
1 .
3J„,
C al

1 1
NUMBER OF CYCLES
s

FIG, 4.—Cyclic Stress Ratio versus Number of Cycles for all Tailings Sands (Refer
Table 1 for Symbols)
1097
 TAILINGS SLIMES
e = s% D.A.
? 01

fc~
S "C3
II *
0*i

l MI
\l
f
<• ' a*? .1

cue
SR,
f>

3
a *

NUMBER OF CYCLES

FIG. 5.—Cyclic Stress Ratio versus Number of Cycles for Tailings Slimes

NON-TAILINGS SANDS
e = s% D.A.
r n, 1.0
9 -:
8 ". - fi ::;;
i>:;
i i

1
f1, ' -1!a =«b&
">» r.f B E
I!1 ,
i

3*„,
5
(1

NUMBER OF CYCLES

FIG. 6.—Cyclic Stress Ratio versus Number of Cycles for Non-Tailings Sands

NON-TAILINGS FINES
= SV. DA.
i? 04- te= 1,0
if-
£ " b 03^

It S
,H

II
E

[
a a
fi

3 "„,'
5
a c S

NUMBER OF CYCLES

FIG. 7.—Cyclic Stress Ratio versus Number of Cycles for Non-Tailings Fines

that both the method of undisturbed sampling (13) and the method of
sample preparation in the laboratory (19) can significantly affect cyclic
strength. The relatively small scatter in Fig. 6 is remarkable considering
that results from tests on both undisturbed and laboratory reconstituted
samples are included. It is important to note that the variation in cyclic
stress ratio for tests on any given tailings sand may be as large as the
range observed in Fig. 4. As expected, the scatter of results is much
larger for undisturbed samples than for reconstituted samples. The un-
disturbed samples show larger variations in grain size and fabric thus
affecting the results.
2. The reconstituted tailings sand samples tend to be weaker than the
undisturbed samples. For example, data by Ishihara et al. (11) on un-
disturbed and reconstituted samples of Kamioka tailings sand lies ap-
proximately on the upper and lower bounds of the range observed in
Fig. 5. However, very few such comparisons for tailings sands are avail-
able in the literature.
1098
 CHILEAN DAM Bl
UNDISTURBED 7«UW3S SAND
d Ks-1.0 6 - 3 % D.A.
j
, 7
«
i

... ' i . j

i 1
1
CHILEAN DAM Bl
j

UNDISTURBED TAILINGS SAND

BKe»I.O 6>9%O.A.
tomprmloo
--
*
—
10
• •II

100
1
NUMBER OF CYCLES (Nl
j!
ii

i!
•
•
1

1000

FIG. 8.—SR and MSR versus N Plots

3. A comparison of Figs. 4 and 6 shows that the non-tailings sands

are generally stronger than tailings sands and also depict a wider range
of strengths. This is due to the wide differences in origin, grain size,
structure and stress history experienced by these sands. The non-tailings
sands examined in this study are, in general, coarser than tailings de-
posits especially with respect to the fraction finer than No. 200 sieve.
4. No appreciable difference in cyclic strengths of slimes and non-tail-
ings fines can be discerned.

Anisotropic Tests.—Relatively little published cyclic strength data are

available on anisotropically consolidated samples of tailings sands. Figs.
8-12 show results of isotropic and anisotropic cyclic strength tests for
sands from five tailings dams. The upper graph is the conventional plot
of SR50, versus number of cycles. The cyclic strength data can be nor-
malized with respect to the principal stress ratio, Kc, by plotting the
Modified Stress Ratio, MSR, defined as aiv/2a'ic. Such normalized plots
based on test data are shown in the lower halves of Figs. 8-12. The data
presented on an MSR plot can be transformed to a conventional SR plot,

CHILEAN DAM B2
,, 0 UH013TURBED TAILINGS SAND

J? '
- • Ke-1,0 G»S% D.A.
O Ke»Z.O e«Z,S% In
comprttiiofl
"b
0
*cr
s »• •• » il

0
CHILEAN DAM B2
ED TAILINGS SAND
6 » 9 % D.A
~b O Ke«2.0 6-2.9% In
0 c ampliation

• • •"

IVf
i l(

a:
v>
E Q. 1
10 100 10 0
NUMBER OF CYCLES I N )

FIG. 9.—SR and MSR versus N Plots

1099
 "•" CHILEAN DAM CI
UNDISTURBED TAIUKOS SAND
*Kc»I.O t'i% B.A.
3
J* ''
- OKoz.0 e-2.5% In
eomprtition
o
-."-3
5
!: 0
(,
>:
«> «
*„
0-
MCI

t
CHILEAN D*
IUNGS SAND
l: • Kci.0
OKCZ.0
e - s % D.A.
e - z 5% In

i .0 « >
I
i: 10 100
l
1000
NUMBER OF CYCLES I N )

FIG. 10.—SR and MSR versus N Plots

B 3ENDA DAM
„ ! u DISTURBED TAJUMGS SAN0
• e-1.0 C»5% D.A.
0 * " ! . 0 J companion

1 ° i

1° | i i_[ M

*.,
•• : J ! i

0
IT M
I 1 iBREHDA DAM
-5" • W t O 6 * 5 % D.A.
0 O W L 5 T 6*2.5% in
O He "2.0 J ompiMilon

^
s
p.
1
<i

J _
d -

NUMBER OF CYCLES I N )
[ jj

FIG. 11.—SR and MSR versus N Plots

f ENVIRONMENT CAN4CJ
RECONSTITUTED TAIUHS3 SAN
IKc.LO C 5 % D.A.
c, - ""' *"
iKe.a.O-r"mp,",leo
1 T 1
A f j
>: -A-
); * 1 i
fn. A
! A

"J i
ENVIRON MENT CANAW
i

- 9 °" A
AKe«LO
AKc«l.5
C-S%D.A.
e»a.s% in
£. Ke-a.O-t eomprMilen
-Ba" <>
A A

s ^ J f> ' 'k a I!!

K [ i i
10 100 1000
NUMBER OF CYCLES I N )

FIG. 12.—SR and MSR versus JV Plots

1100
 ™

. ! IfEDUU
SAND SIZES
| FINE
1
| ""~~ """"' OII.I BHU b L A I —-_— :
BUtS

TAILINGS "l
e = s% D.A. Jl
10 CYCLES
KC = 1,0
r n-

'* •"
si f
o !• «" V
0J
o

0
30 I.C 0 0-0 a 003
MEAN GRAIN SIZE, D B0 In mm

FIG. 13.—Variation of Stress Ratio with Grain Size (N = 10 Cycles)

by multiplying the stress ratio for each data point by the principal stress
ratio, Kc, at which the sample was consolidated.
From these plots, the following observations may be summarized:

1. Cyclic strength of tailings sand is related to the principal stress ra-

tio, Kc. The cyclic strength increases with increase in Kc.
2. The relationship between cyclic strength, as expressed by SR, and
principal stress ratio, Kc, appears to be linear, at least for the materials
and range of Kc examined in this study.
3. Anisotropically and isotropically consolidated test data can be nor-
malized with respect to Kc and presented on an MSR plot. The MSR plot
permits the estimation of strength behavior under anisotropic consoli-
dation from results of isotropic testing. The results from Figs. 8-12 in-
dicate that for practical purposes, anisotropic cyclic strengths can be ad-
equately predicted from isotropic strengths, especially if the scatter of
test results on anisotropically consolidated undisturbed samples is taken
into account. As expected, the MSR plots shows slightly larger scatter
of results for undisturbed samples.

Note that the use of the MSR to normalize the test data is similar to the
concept of plotting the data in the form of Ka correction to isotropically
consolidated test data recently suggested by Seed (21).

SAND SIZES
1 MEDIUM | FINE

TAILINGS
e - s % D.A.
SO CYCLES
Ke=I.O
S 03-
+

Si
i «
*-
•
«
(10
"

ai
0
r
G

0.0] Q003
MEAN GRAIN SIZE, 0 5 0 In mm

FIG. 14.—Variation of Stress Ratio with Grain Size (N = 30 Cycles)

1101
 SAND SIZES 1
MEDIUM 1 FINE
I °""' " " " *"""' ,
""•"

NON-TAIL ING9
• G = 5 % D.A.
10 CYCLES
& Kc » 1.0

A
•
0 El
LI
tl a
3 »

0
30 1.0 0. 0.0 Q003
MEAN GRAIN SIZE, Dso in r

FIG. 15.—Variation of Stress Ratio with Grain Size (N = 10 Cycles)

SAND SIZES [
I MEDIUM | FINE I
-. N0N-TA1LI KGS
e • a % D.A.
30 CYCLES -AFTER WONG, SEED
Kol.O
/ AND CHAN 128}

a
,* & B '
a
i

s B
i a
"
a
i - D .
a

0
3.0 LO O.I QOI 0003
MEAN GRAIN SIZE, Ds0 In mm

FIG. 16.—Variation of Stress Ratio with Grain Size {N = 30 Cycles)

Influence of Grain Size.—Figs. 13 and 14 show plots of cyclic stress

ratios causing 5% double amplitude strain in 10 and 30 stress cycles ver-
sus the mean grain size, D 50 of tailings materials including slimes. Sim-
ilar plots for non-tailings sands and fines are shown in Figs. 15 and 16.
All tests are for Kc = 1.0. For sand-sized materials, the data has been
normalized to 50% relative density. No adjustment has been made for
slimes and non-tailings fines.
In general, the materials in the fine sand range (D50 = 0.1-0.3 mm)
exhibit the lowest cyclic strength behavior. In the fine sand range, non-
tailings materials generally show higher strengths than tailings mate-
rials. The only exception was found in the case of a sample of ground
quartz sand tested by Ishihara et al. (9). The data presented in Figs. 13-
16 are consistent with data by Wong, Seed and Chan (26), whose results
have been normalized to a relative density of 50% and plotted in Fig.
16.

SUGGESTED METHOD FOR ESTIMATING CYCLIC STRENGTH OF TAILINGS

MATERIALS

The following steps outline the proposed method for evaluation of

cyclic strength of tailings materials. It is important to emphasize that the
method should not be used by engineers inexperienced in this field. Also,
the method is not meant to replace other means of evaluating liquefac-
1102
tion potential such as SPT and cone penetration tests.
Identification of Problem.—The method is proposed for use with po-
tentially liquefiable, saturated uncompacted tailings sands. If these sands
are adequately compacted or otherwise densified, then further investi-
gations on liquefaction potential are generally not justified.
Initial Field Investigation.—Obtain representative samples for index
testing to determine grain size, maximum and minimum densities, spe-
cific gravity, Atterberg limits and in situ densities. Generally, adequate
information can be obtained from test pits. However, selected boreholes
may sometimes be required, especially if changes in ore type and grind-
ing circuits have taken place. In such cases, test pits may not be ade-
quate to obtain samples of sands from greater depths.
Initial Evaluation of Cyclic Strengths.—With mean grain size data,
D 5 0 , determine cyclic stress ratio causing 5% double amplitude strain in
10 and 30 cycles from Figs. 13 and 14. Engineering judgment should be
exercised in determining how conservative the choice of cyclic strengths
in Figs. 15 and 16 should be. Next, locate the above two points on Fig.
4 and generate a SR50 versus numbers of cycles plot parallel to the gen-
eral trend for all tailings sands. This plot can be corrected to the appro-
priate field relative density by using Eq. 1. The cyclic strength curves
for anisotropically consolidated conditions can be obtained by simply
multiplying the SR values previously determined by the principal stress
ratio, Kc.
These parameters can now be used to evaluate the liquefaction poten-
tial using analytical tools such as QUAD-4 (7), SEISLOP (14), etc. Gen-
erally, more detailed investigation would only be warranted if the struc-
ture is assessed to be marginally stable.
This method is difficult to apply to non-tailings sands. These sands
show a wider range of cyclic strengths due to larger variations in grain
size, age, origin, particle shape and structure and stress history. It is
also difficult to apply the proposed method to tailings slimes and non-
tailings fines because of the wide variation in strength data and the lack
of a suitable method for normalizing these data to a common density or
void ratio. A comparison of Figs. 4 and 6 shows that the tailings slimes
tested were often stronger than the tailings sands at a relative density
of 50%. This may be due to their finer grain size and the influence of
even a small degree of plasticity. In design analyses, the slimes are often
assumed, a priori, to be liquefiable whereas they may develop higher
strengths than generally assumed. Preliminary information on field in-
strumentation of a tailings pond in Chile tends to corroborate this view.
More field research is required on this subject.

CONCLUSIONS

A compilation of cyclic strength data on tailings and non-tailings ma-

terials has been presented. The results indicate that cyclic strength data
for hard rock tailings sands, normalized to a common relative density,
fall within a relatively narrow range. A procedure has been suggested
to make a preliminary evaluation of cyclic strength characteristics, both
under isotropic and anisotropic conditions. The results may provide an
economical means of evaluating liquefaction potential of tailings deposits.
1103
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writers acknowledge the support from Klohn Leonoff Ltd. in

preparation of this Paper. They also wish to acknowledge Professors K.
Ishihara, J. Troncoso a n d Mr. E. J. Klohn for their comments. The writ-
ers are especially indebted to Professor H. B. Seed for his critical review.

APPENDIX I.—REFERENCES

1. "Standard Test Method for Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils," Annual

Book of ASTM Standards, Part 19, ASTM D 2049-69, 1981.
2. Cho, Y., Rizzo, P. C , and Humphries, W. K., "Saturated Sand and Cyclic
Dynamic Tests," Liquefaction Problems in Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE
Annual Convention and Expo, Philadelphia, Pa., 1976.
3. "A Simplified Procedure for the Analysis of Sandfill Tailings Dams Subject
to Seismic Loading," Report prepared by Klohn Leonoff Ltd. for Environ-
ment Protection Branch, Environment Canada, Contract No. 05576-00137, May,
1979.
4. Ferrito, J. M., Forrest, J. B., and Wu, G., "A Compilation of Cyclic Triaxial
Liquefaction Test Data," Geotechnical Testing Journal, GTJODJ, Vol. 2, No. 2,
1979, pp. 106-113.
5. Forrest, J. B., Ferritto, J. M., and Wu, G., "Seismic Soil Liquefaction Stud-
ies," Technical Note, TN No. N-1566, Civil Engineering Laboratory, Naval
Construction Battalion Center, Calif., 1979.
6. Forrest, J. B., Ferritto, J. M., and Wu, G., "Site Analysis for Seismic Soil
Liquefaction Potential," International Conference on Recent Advances in
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Dynamics, Rolla, Mo., Vol. I, 1981, pp.
155-160.
7. Idriss, I. M., Lysmer, J., Hawang, R., and Seed, H. B., "QUAD-4, A Com-
puter Program for Evaluating the Seismic Response of Soil Structures by
Variable Damping Finite Element Procedures," Report No. EERC 73-16, Col-
lege of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Calif., July, 1973.
8. Ishihara, K., "Simple Method of Analysis for Liquefaction of Sand Deposits
During Earthquakes," Soils and Foundations, Japanese Society of Soil Me-
chanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 17, No. 3, 1977.
9. Ishihara, K., Troncoso, J., Kawase, Y., and Takahashi, Y., "Cyclic Shear
Strength Characteristics of Tailings Materials," Soils and Foundations, Japa-
nese Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 4,
1980.
10. Ishihara, K., Kawase, Y., and Nakajima, M., "Liquefaction Characteristics of
Sand Deposits at an Oil Tank Site During the 1978 Miyagiken-Oki Earth-
quake," Soils and Foundations, Japanese Society of Soil Mechanics and Foun-
dation Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 4, 1980.
11. Ishihara, K., Yasuda, S., and Yokata, K., "Cyclic Strength of Undisturbed
Mine Tailings," International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechni-
cal Engineering and Soil Dynamics, Rolla, Mo., Vol. I, 1981, pp. 53-58.
12. Ishihara, K., and Yoga, Y., "Case Studies of Liquefaction in the 1964 Niigata
Earthquake," Soil and Foundations, Japanese Society of Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Vol. 21, No. 3, 1981.
13. Klohn Leonoff Ltd., "Project Files," Richmond, B.C., Canada.
14. Klohn, E. J., Maartman, C. H., Lo, R. C. Y., and Finn, W. D. L., "Simplified
Seismic Analysis for Tailings Dams," Proceedings in the Specialty Confer-
ence on Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, ASCE, Pasadena, Calif.,
1978, p. 540.
15. Lee, K. L., and Seed, H. B., "Dynamic Strength of Anisotropically Consol-
idated Sand," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE,
Vol. 93, No. SMS, 1967.
16. Lee, K. L., and Seed, H. B., "Cyclic Stress Conditions Causing Liquefaction
1104
 of Sand," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol.
93, No. SMI, 1967.
17. Mulilis, J. P., "The Effects of Methods of Sample Preparation on the Cyclic
Stress-Strain Behavior of Sands," EERC Report 75-18, College of Engineering,
University of California, Berkeley, Calif., July, 1975.
18. Nishiyama, H., Yahagi, K., Nakagawa, S., and Wada, K., "Practical Method
of Predicting Sand Liquefaction," Proceedings of the Ninth International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, Vol. 2,
1977, pp. 305-308.
19. Seed, H. B., and Idriss, I. M., "A Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil
Liquefaction Potential," EERC Report No. 70-9, College of Engineering, Uni-
versity of California, Berkeley, Calif., Nov., 1970.
20. Seed, H. B., Singh, S., Chan, C. K., and Vilela, T. F., "Considerations in
Undisturbed Sampling of Sands," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Di-
vision, ASCE, Vol. 108, No. GT2, 1982, pp. 265-283.
21. Seed, H. B., "Earthquake-Resistant Design of Earth Dams," Presented at ASCE
Spring Convention, Philadelphia, Pa., May, 1983.
22. Singh, S„ Seed, H. B., and Chan, C. K., "Undisturbed Sampling of Satu-
rated Sands by Freezing," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE,
Vol. 108, No. GT2, 1982, pp. 247-264.
23. Townsend, F. C , "A Review of Factors Affecting Cyclic Triaxial Tests," Dy-
namic Geotechnical Testing, ASTM, STP 654, American Society for Testing
and Materials, 1978, pp. 356-383.
24. Townsend, F. C , and Mulilis, J. P., "Liquefaction Potential of Dams and
Foundations," Report 6, Research Report S-76-2, U.S. Army Waterways Ex-
periment Station, Vicksburg, Miss., 1979.
25. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, "Laboratory Soils Testing," Engineer Man-
ual, EM 1110-2-1906, 1970.
26. Wong, R. T., Seed, H. B., and Chan, C. K., "Cyclic Loading Liquefaction of
Gravelly Soils," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol.
101, No. GT6, 1975, pp. 571-583.

APPENDIX II.—NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

B = Skempton pore pressure parameter (= Au/Ao-3);

o> = cyclic deviator stress;
<T3c = minor principal effective stress during consolidation;
°"lc = major principal effective stress during consolidation;
e = strain;
Kc = principal stress ratio at consolidation (= o-ic/o-3C);
D.A. = double amplitude strain;
D50 = mean grain size;
N = number of loading cycles;
SR = cyclic stress ratio (= a'dv/2a'3c);
MSR = modified cyclic stress ratio (= vdp/2<j[c);
PPR = pore pressure ratio; and
RD = relative density.

1105