State Parameter Estimation by CPTu Interpretation for Liquefaction Susceptibility – A Comparison of Methods

Matthew Schafer, Matt Dugie, Rosa An, Adrian Wightman

In the proceedings of GeoSt. John's 2019: 72nd Canadian Geotechnical Conference

Session: Geotechnical Characterization

ABSTRACT: The attention to liquefaction susceptibility of mine tailings has recently increased following widely publicized tailings dam failures including the Fundao tailings dam failure in Brazil. Cone penetration testing with pore pressure measurements is widely used within the geotechnical industry as a means to estimate in-situ properties of tailings materials, including state parameter. These properties are a key part of assessing the liquefaction potential of a tailings deposit. There are several methods for assessing state parameter based on CPT and laboratory data. This paper reviews three of these methods and applies them to CPT data from a case study to compare these different methods, and their results.

RÉSUMÉ: médiatisées dans les mines du monde entier, y compris la rupture du barrage de résidus miniers de Fundao au Brésil. s essai de pénétration au cône (CPT) avec mesure de la pression ase de données CPT et de laboratoire. Cet article passe en revue une sélection de ces méthodes et les applique aux données CPT d'une étude de cas. Les méthodes sélectionnées et leurs résultats sont comparés et discutés.

Access this article:
Canadian Geotechnical Society members can access to this article, along with all other Canadian Geotechnical Conference proceedings, in the Member Area. Conference proceedings are also available in many libraries.

Cite this article:
Matthew Schafer; Matt Dugie; Rosa An; Adrian Wightman (2019) State Parameter Estimation by CPTu Interpretation for Liquefaction Susceptibility – A Comparison of Methods in GEO2019. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Geotechnical Society.

@article{Geo2019Paper552,author = Matthew Schafer; Matt Dugie; Rosa An; Adrian Wightman,title = State Parameter Estimation by CPTu Interpretation for Liquefaction Susceptibility – A Comparison of Methods ,year = 2019}