This paper focuses on pore-water pressure accumulation in loose sandy tailings during three (3) earthquakes within four minutes and the accompanying decrease in effective stress to assess the dynamic stability of the Fundão Tailings Dam, which failed on 5 November 2015. Results of laboratory cyclic direct simple shear tests are used to illustrate the accumulation of pore-water pressures with closely spaced low-level cyclic events. The seismically-induced pore-water pressures in the loose sands below the left abutment downstream slope and setback area are used to estimate the decrease in factor of safety with time until failure occurred within 20–30 minutes of the earthquakes. Field cone penetration and standard penetration test conducted prior to the failure are used to calculate the factor of safety against liquefaction to estimate pore-water pressures generated during the fore, main, and aftershocks in the sandy tailings. The effective stress stability analyses utilise a liquefied shear strength ratio for the sand tailings below the left abutment downstream slope and toe of the plateau because the sand tailings reached the critical state condition due to a reduction in the effective stress.
AtkinsonGM.2016. Analysis of ground motions from November 5, 2015 earthquake sequence near Fundão Dam. Brazil, July 20, 2016, 48 p.
2.
BoulangerRW.2003. Relating Kα to relative state parameter index.J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 129(8):770–773.
3.
CarraroJAH, BandiniP, SalgadoR.2003. Liquefaction resistance of clean and non-plastic silty sands based on cone penetration resistance.J Geotech Geoenviron Engrg. 129(11):965–976.
4.
ChuJ, LeongWK, LokeWL, WanatowskiD.2012. Instability of loose sand under drained conditions.J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 138(2):207–216.
5.
ChuJ, LeroueilS, LeongWK.2003. Unstable behavior of sand and its implication for slope instability.Can Geotech J. 40(5):873–885. doi:10.1139/t03-039.
6.
CiardelliC, AssumpcaoM.2019. Rupture lengths of intraplate earthquakes in Brazil determined by relative location of aftershocks: evidence for depth dependence of stress drops.J South Am Earth Sci. 89:246–258. doi:10.1016/j.jsames.2018.11.017.
DowdingCH.1996. Construction vibrations. Upper Saddle River, NY:Prentice–HallSage UK: London, England; 604 p.
9.
GreenRA, BommerJJ.2019. What is the smallest earthquake magnitude that needs to be considered in assessing liquefaction hazard?Earthq Spectra. 35(3):1441–1464.
10.
GreenRA, BommerJJ, Rodriguez-MarekA, BWMaurer, PJStafford, EdwardsB, BPKruiver, de LangeG, van ElkJ.2019. Addressing limitations in existing ‘simplified’ liquefaction triggering evaluation procedures: application to induced seismicity in the Groningen gas field.Bull Earthquake Eng. 17:4539–4557. doi:10.1007/s10518-018-0489-3.
11.
HolzerTL, YoudTL, HanksTC.1989. Dynamics of liquefaction during the superstition hills earthquake (M = 6.5) of November 24, 1987.Science. 244, April 7:56–59.
12.
IdrissI, BoulangerR.2014. CPT and SPT Based liquefaction triggering procedures, Rep. No. UCD/CGM-14/01. University of California at Davis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2014, at 1–23.
13.
IshiharaK.1984. Post-earthquake failure of a tailings dam due to liquefaction of the pond deposit. Proceedings 1st International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering, Missouri University of Science and Technology, 13, 112–1143, https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge/1icchge/1icchge-theme5/13.
14.
IshiharaK, ShimizuK, YamadaY.1981. Pore water pressues measured in sand deposit during an earthquake.Soils Found. 21(4):85–100.
15.
JefferiesMG, BeenK.2016. Soil liquefaction: acritical state approach, 2nd ed. London: Taylor and FrancisSage UK: London, England; 700 p.
16.
LadePV.1992. Static instability and liquefaction of lose fine sandy slopes.J Geotech Eng. 118(1):51–72.
17.
MarcusonWF, HynesME, FranklinAG.1990. Evaluation and use of residual strength in seismic safety analysis of embankments.Earthq Spectra. 6(3):529–572.
18.
MasonHB, MontgomeryJ, GallantAP, Hutabarat D, Reed AN, Wartman J, Irsyam M, Simatupang PT, Alatas IM, Prakoso W, et al. 2021. East Palu Valley flowslides induced by the 2018 MW 7.5 Palu-Donggala earthquake.Geomorphology. 373:107482, 17 p. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107482.
19.
MatasovicN.1993. Seismic response of composite horizontally-layered soil deposits [Ph.D. dissertation]. Los Angeles, CA: Civil Engineering Dept., Univ. of California; 483 p.
20.
MatasovicN, OrdóñezG.2012. User's guide: D-MOD2000: a computer program for seismic site response analysis of horizontally layered soil deposit, earthfill dams, solid waste landfills. Lacey, Washington: GeoMotions, LLC; 162 p. http://www.geomotions.com/Download/D-MOD2000Tutorial.pdf.
21.
MohammadHB, HabibS, HassanS.2011. A laboratory study on the pore pressure generation model for Firouzkooh silty sands using hollow torsional test.Int J Civil Eng. 9(2):126.
22.
MorgensternNR, PriceVE.1965. The analysis of the stability of general slip surface.Geotechnique. 15(1):79–93.
23.
MorgensternNR, VickSG, ViottiCB, WattsBD.2016. Fundão Tailings Dam review panel: report on the immediate causes of the failure of the Fundão Dam. Report prepared for Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, New York, http://fundaoinvestigation.com/the-panel-report/.
24.
OlsonSM, StarkTD.2002. Liquefied strength ratio from liquefaction flow failure case histories.Can Geotech J. 39(3):629–647. doi:10.1139/t02-001.
25.
OlsonSM, StarkTD.2003. Yield strength ratio and liquefaction analysis of slopes and embankments.J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 129(8):727–737. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2003)129:8(727).
26.
RezendeVA.2013. Estudo do Comportamento de Barragem de Rejeito Arenoso Alteada por Montante [M.Sc. thesis]. Ouro Preto, Brazil: Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto.
PBSchnabel, LysmerJ, SeedHB.1972. SHAKE: a computer program for earthquake response analysis of horizontally layered sites. Report No. EERC72-12. Berkeley: University of California.
29.
SeedHB, LeeKL, IdrissIM, MakdisiF.1973. Analysis of the slides in the San Fernando Dams during the earthquake of February 9, 1971. Earthquake Engineering Research Center Report No. EERC 73-2, June 1973.
30.
SeedHB, MartinPP, LysmerJ.1976. Pore water pressure change during soil liquefaction.J Geotech Eng Div. 102(4):323–346.
31.
SinghS.1994. Liquefaction characteristics of silts. ground failures under seismic conditions. In: PrakashS., DakoulasP., editors. Proc., ASCE convention, GSP. 44, Oct. 1994. Atlanta, GA: ASCESage UK: London, England; p. 105–116.
32.
StarkTD, BeatyMH, CastroG, WalbergFC, NicholsonPJ, PerleaVG, AxtellPJ, DillonJC, EmpsonWB, MathewsDL.2012. Seismic deformation analysis of Tuttle creek Dam.Can Geotech J. 49, March:323–343.
33.
StarkTD, MesriG.1992. Undrained shear strength of liquefied sands for stability analyses.J Geotech Eng. 118(11), November:1727–1747.
34.
TangYK, TangHT.1992. Lotung Large-Scale Seismic Test strong motion records. Vol. 1–8, Report NP-7496, Paloma Alto: Electric Power Research Institute.
35.
TerzaghiK, PeckRB, MesriG.1996. Soil mechanics in engineering practice. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & SonsSage UK: London, England; 549 p.
36.
TokimatsuK, YoshimiY.1983. Empirical correlation of soil liquefaction based on SPT N-value and fines content.Soils Found. 23(4):56–74.
