2.2.8. Updated TSF Deformation Analyses - 114001.06-M014 PDF

MEMO
Project: Minera Las Bambas SA

Attn: Pedro Rodrguez, Pablo Gmez,
Author: Behrooz Ghahreman-Nejad Date: 4/02/16
Job No: 114001.06 ATCW Ref: 114001.06-M014
Subject: TSF Embankment Revised Seismic Deformation Analysis
1 INTRODUCTION
This technical memorandum presents the results of an updated seismic deformation analysis for the Tailings
Retaining Embankment at MMGs Las Bambas Mine in southern Peru, effectively superceding our previous
study and related correspondence, ATCW Memo 114001.06-M011 [Ref. 1], and accounts for two primary
design changes:-
(i) Updated seismic hazard assessment, and

(ii) Changed rockfill quality in the stage 1 (crest RL 4020 m) embankment.
This previous study [Ref. 1] was completed on the basis of a seismic hazard assessment completed by Golder
in 2008 [Ref. 2]. The results of the initial seismic deformation analysis were provided as an addendum
[Ref. 1] to the design report [Ref. 3].
A review of the original seismic hazard study by ATCW and Prof. Idriss indicated that the study was outdated
and could not adequately represent the earthquake hazards for the dam site. ATCW engaged URS to
conduct a seismic hazard study including both probabilistic and deterministic assessment for the dam site
[Ref. 4]. The derived design earthquakes by URS have been employed to re-assess the magnitude of the
predicted embankment deformations.
In respect of item (ii), the original study was based on rockfill that was predominantly characterised by good
quality igneous rock [Ref. 3]. During the course of construction, it became apparent that sufficient quantities
of igneous material to satisfy this requirement were not available from early pre-stripping operations, and
consequently, the proportion of igneous material contained in the rockfill is estimated to be in the order of
20%. Rockfill material in the stage 1 embankment raise can be considered to be predominantly sourced from
metamorphically altered limestone [Ref. 5].
ATC Williams Pty Ltd

222 Beach Road (P.O. Box 5286) Mordialloc Vic 3195
T +61 3 8587 0900 F +61 3 8587 0901
melb@atcwilliams.com.au www.atcwilliams.com.au ABN 64 005 931 288
ATC Williams unites the companies of Australian Tailings Consultants and MPA Williams & Associates
C:\Users\psoden\Documents\myfiles\WORK\JOBS\Las Bambas\06 TSF Stage 1 design\Correspondence\Out\M014\114001.06-M014.docx

2 METHODOLOGY
As per the previous study, the major focus of these analyses is the investigation of possible displacements
that could lead to failure modes and release of tailings and water in the event of the MDE (Maximum Design
Earthquake). One common failure mode would be earthquake induced crest settlement in excess of
available freeboard. The prediction of such movements is to some extent dependent on the analysis
procedure used.
A two dimensional, plane strain, dynamic deformation analysis of the Main Embankment was performed
using the software FLAC 2D [Ref. 6] and its built-in elastic-plastic model of Mohr-Coulomb. This was
considered to be the most appropriate method of analysis as it has been shown in previous studies (such as
[Ref. 7]), that dynamic deformation analyses using simplified methods based on the Newmark displacement
approach [Ref. 8] may under estimate the earthquake induced crest settlement for rockfill embankment
dams. Hence a more rigorous deformation analysis method has been employed here.
The Mohr-Coulomb model is an elastic-plastic constitutive model based on the Mohr-Coulomb failure
criterion to predict the soil stress-strain response subjected to various types of loading. Further details
about the Mohr-Coulomb model and its implementation can be found in the FLAC Manual [Ref. 6]. This
model may not be considered appropriate for Tailings material (which is potentially liquefiable) but as
tailings are not part of the embankment or its foundation the adopted tailings model is expected to have a
negligible effect on the predicted embankment deformations.
In the analysis, the embankment model (mesh) is generated and material properties are assigned so that the
initial state of stress within the embankment and its foundation can be established. Then dynamic
parameters are assigned and seismic calculations are performed.
A number of functions were developed using FLACs built-in programming language, FISH, in order to model
variations in properties of the embankment materials with depth/confining stress (i.e. friction angle,
undrained shear strength and shear modulus etc).
3 GROUND MOTION
The seismicity of the dam site is discussed in detail in the seismic hazard analysis study conducted by URS in
2015. The report is provided in Appendix A.
In the URS study the Maximum Design Earthquake (MDE) is defined as the 84th percentile ground motion
for the controlling deterministic seismic source. A uniform hazard spectrum (UHS) and a number of two
horizontal-component acceleration time histories from four different earthquakes are developed. The
acceleration time histories are spectrally matched to the site UHS. The peak ground acceleration (PGA) for
the MDE is 0.74g which is almost twice as that estimated by Golder Associates [Ref. 2].
The characteristics of the design earthquakes are summarised in Table 1.
ATC Williams 114001.06-M014 | Page 2

TABLE 1 MAXIMUM CREDIBLE EARTHQUAKE (MCE)-84TH PERCENTILE INTRASLAB
Earthquake Magnitude Station Distance (km)
Casa Huaco 89
1974 Peru Coast 7.6
IGP 84
Valparaiso 129.2
1985 Valparaiso 7.8
Santiago - Endesa 122.2
San Miguel 92.2
2001 El Salvador 7.8
Sensuntepeque 108.6
2014 Iquique, Chile 8.2 Chusmiza (GO01) 171
In order to reduce the computation time for the seismic deformation analysis only two time histories were
selected from the provided records on the basis of earthquake magnitude, distance from the dam site and
duration. The adopted earthquake records are 1974 Peru Coast (IGP) and 2014 Iquique Chile (Chusmiza).
The former has the lowest magnitude and closest distance whilst the latter has the highest magnitude and
furthest distance to the dam site. From the two horizontal components of each of these two earthquake
records the one with longest duration was adopted. These two earthquake time histories are considered to
cover the range between upper and lower boundaries with respect to the earthquake magnitude and
distance.
The spectrally matched earthquake records together with the design uniform hazard spectrum adopted for
the modelling are presented in Figure 1-1 and Figure 1-2 for Peru IGP and Iquique earthquakes respectively.
For each of these bedrock (input) motions, a Fourier amplitude spectrum has been derived in order to
identify the dominant range of frequencies. The rock outcrop acceleration time histories together with
the derived Fourier power spectra are shown in Figure 2-1 and Figure 2-2.
Reference to Figure 2-1 and Figure 2-2 indicates that most of the energy in the input motions are at
frequencies less than 18 and 12 Hz for Peru IGP and Iquique earthquakes respectively. These seismic
records were filtered to remove frequencies greater than the above frequencies. The filtering process was
performed to limit the size of zones and to ensure accurate wave transmission.
Numerical distortion of the propagating wave can occur in a dynamic analysis if the spatial element (zone)
sizes are very coarse as compared to the propagating wave length. Kuhlemeyer and Lysmer [Ref. 9] showed
that the displacement could not be modelled accurately when less than 4 elements per wave length are
allowed. Hence the zone (element) sizes adopted in the embankment model were limited to 1.5 m to
comply with this criterion.
After filtering was completed, the waves were corrected for a base line drift (i.e. continuing residual
displacement after the motion has finished).
Finally the adopted earthquake records were de-convoluted for use in the FLAC model as within ground
motions. The input motion to the FLAC model was applied as a stress boundary in order to establish quiet
boundary conditions along the same boundary as the dynamic input. The input motion was converted into a
shear stress boundary condition using the method described in the FLAC manual [Ref. 6].

4 GEOMETRY AND PHREATIC SURFACE
The analyses were carried out for the embankment dam geometry at the end of Stage 1 (crest RL 4020 m)
and Final Stage (crest RL 4150 m) as described in [Ref. 3]. The adopted tailings and decant pond water levels
for each of these stages are as follows:
- Stage 1 : Tailings level at RL 3978 m (approx. mid dam height) and water level at RL 4015 m
(assumed full supply level);
- Final Stage: Tailings level at RL 4118 m and water level at RL 4125 m. This is considered to represent
conditions at completion of the Stage 6 embankment raise, and filling of stage 5 with tailings.
It should be noted that the above tailings and water levels selected for analysis of the Final Stage have been
chosen to ensure a significant portion of the embankment upstream face remains exposed. This is
considered to be conservative with respect to the possible seismically induced deformation of the upstream
PVC lined embankment slope.
The embankment section was simplified for the purpose of undertaking the analysis. The simplified
embankment models used in the analysis are shown in Figure 3 and Figure 11 for the Stage 1 and Final Stage
embankments respectively.
In the FLAC analyses, permeability and porosity of the embankment materials and tailings were estimated
based on the material type and previous experience.
Figure 4 and 12 show the predicted pore pressure contours for the Stage 1 and Final Stage embankments
respectively.
5 MATERIAL PARAMETERS
5.1.1 Overview
The properties of the embankment materials used in the FLAC analysis are essentially similar to those
adopted in the previous work [Ref. 1] and are presented in Table 2.
TABLE 2 - PROPERTIES OF EMBANKMENT MATERIALS

c or Su Gmax (MPa)
Material Modulus Reduction Curve
(kPa) Min. Function %
Bedrock Elastic 0.25 2,000 0.5 Shake-Rock (Schnable 1973) [Ref. 10]
Zone 1B 1 42 0.3 400 33m0.5 0.5
Concrete Curb& Liner Elastic 0.2 600 0.5 Konno et al (1994) [Ref. 11]
Zone 2 (Rockfill) Function 0.3 400 33m0.5 0.5
Sumin = 2
Shake-PI=0 (Vucetic& Dorby 1991) [Ref. 10]
Tailings Su/vo = 0 0.45 15 6.6m0.5 0.5
0.05
c is cohesion, is friction angle, is Poissons ratio, Gmax is small strain shear modulus, is initial damping % , is shear stress, is
normal stress, m is mean effective stress (kPa) , Su is undrained shear strength; vo is vertical effective stress and PI is the Plasticity
Index.

The properties were selected based on the available geotechnical investigation data, published literature,
established correlations and previous experience. Further details regarding selection of these parameters
could be found in ATCW document [Ref. 1]. The highlighted items indicate changes from the previous work
and are discussed in the following sections.
5.1.2 Material Strength
The friction angle for Zone 1B has been slightly increased from that used in the previous analysis (39) on
the basis of field observation and a high level of quality control adopted in the production of Zone 1B.
Choice of material strength for Zone 2 was based on the recommendations of Leps [Ref. 12], whereby the
friction angle of the rockfill decreases with increased confining stress (i.e. increased depth). This negates the
dilation effect, as dilation ceases to occur with increase in confining stresses. In the previous analysis
[Ref. 1] it was assumed that the material used for construction of Zone 2 rockfill is predominantly
characterised by igneous rock selectively quarried from the mine overburden. However, the observation
during construction of the Stage 1 embankment indicated that a significant amount of metemorphically
altered limestone rock has been incorporated into Zone 2 with a lower than expected quality. Hence, the
friction angle capping has been reduced to 45 from the previously adopted value of 48.5 (for the Stage 1
only) in order to include variations in the Stage 1 rockfill quality.
The adopted strength curve for Zone 2 is plotted in Figure 5 together with the Leps lower and upper bound
strength limits.
5.1.3 Small Strain Shear Modulus
The initial (maximum) Shear Modulus, Gmax, is a measure of the stiffness of the material at very small strains,
whilst the Modulus Reduction function describes how the stiffness degrades at larger strains.
The minimum Gmax value for all embankment zones and tailings were slightly increased from the previously
adopted values in order to address bad geometry errors encountered during numerical modelling for the near
surface elements (zones).
FISH functions were developed in FLAC in order to model the variations in shear modulus with mean
effective stress (or depth).
5.1.4 Modulus Reduction
The modulus reduction curves used in the dynamic analysis are presented in Figure 6 for the various
embankment and foundation materials. These curves are used in the analyses as hysteretic damping to
describe how the stiffness decreases at larger strains in the elastic region.
Based on the sensitivity analysis carried out in the previous analysis [Ref. 1] and lower than expected quality
of the rock the modulus reduction curve by Konno et al [Ref. 11] was adopted for the Zone 2 rockfill, which
allows for a greater strain softening with cyclic shear strain.

6 ANALYSIS RESULTS
The results of the analyses are summarised in Table 3.
TABLE 3 - SUMMARY OF PREDICTED DISPLACEMENTS FROM FLAC ANALYSES
Predicted Crest Maximum Relative3

Maximum Deformation Displacement (cm)
Peak Crest
Stage Earthquake (cm)
Acceleration
@ Location Horizontal Vertical
(m/sec2)
Peru IGP 7.7 443 @D/S upper quartile 320 -212
Stage 1
Iquique 5.6 276 @D/S upper quartile 156 -110
Peru IGP 5.9 606 @D/S upper quartile 373 -281
Final Stage
Iquique 6 313 @D/S upper quartile 175 -127
U/S and D/S are upstream slope and downstream slope respectively.
1
Positive horizontal displacement indicates movement in the downstream direction and vice versa.
2
Negative vertical displacement indicates settlement and vice versa.
3
Relative to the top of rock foundation.
General patterns of predicted deformations are provided in Figures 7-1 to 10-2 and Figures 13-1 to 16-2 for
Stage 1 and Final Stage embankments respectively.
Reference to the information in Table 3 indicates that Peru-IGP Earthquake (with shorter distance to site)
produced the greatest level of deformation in the embankment sections for both Stage 1 and Final Stage
and also the effect of the design earthquake is more critical for the Final Stage embankment than that for
the Stage 1.
In summary the results of the revised FLAC analysis predict that the maximum deformation will generally
occur near the crest and along the upper part of the downstream slope. The patterns of deformation are
similar to those observed in the previous study [Ref. 1] but with higher magnitudes. The balance of the
overall embankment displacement is towards the downstream slope although some limited sliding of the
upstream liner system (along the upstream slope) might have occurred during the analysis. The maximum
predicted horizontal displacement of the PVC lining (for the Final Stage) ranges from approximately 1.5m at
the crest to less than 0.2 m at around 30 m below the crest level (tailings level). Consequently, the induced
stresses in the geomembrane sealing system as a result of these deformations are expected to be within the
allowable tolerances. The specified PVC geomembrane has a stated failure strain of 250% to 300%, and
exhibits strain-hardening behavior towards failure. These properties allow it to respond to high stress with a
nearly proportional deformation which acts to limit fracture propagation.
The predicted maximum crest settlement of around 2.1 m does not exceed the minimum embankment
freeboard of 2.6 m for Stage 1. Freeboard provisions to be established for the Final Stage 6 embankment
raise will need to account for the predicted maximum crest settlement of 2.8 m in order to maintain the
dam impoundment.
Some indication of the possible magnitude of crest settlement when the embankment is not subject to
liquefaction can also be obtained from the results presented by Swaisgood [Ref. 13].

Swaisgood examined the observed crest settlements in embankments following past earthquakes and
provided an empirical relationship to determine earthquake induced crest settlement as follows:
% Settlement = e (6.07 PGA + 0.57 M -8.00),
where % Settlement is the amount of settlement of the crest of the dam (in meters) divided by the height of
the dam plus the thickness of the alluvium in the foundations (in meters); PGA is peak horizontal ground
acceleration of the foundation rock (in g) recorded or estimated at the dam site; and M is earthquake
magnitude (in surface-wave scale: MS).
The predicted induced deformations from Swaisgoods relationship are around 2.36% and 2.2% of dam
height for the Peru IGP and Iquique earthquakes respectively. For the Peru IGP earthquake this is translated
to approximately 229 cm and 544 cm of crest settlements for the Stage 1 and Final embankments
respectively. The Iquique earthquake resulted in slightly lower calculated crest settlements compared to
Peru IGP. With the exception of Stage1-Peru IGP earthquake the calculated settlements are significantly
greater than those predicted in Table 3. It should be noted that the Swaisgoods relationship is based on the
maximum PGAs experienced by the dams in the collected database, none of which exceeded 0.68 g, and
therefore it may not be reasonably used for PGAs around and greater than this value.
7 SUMMARY
The magnitude of the crest settlements predicted by the revised Flac modelling are significantly greater than
those predicted by the previous analysis mainly due to the application of relatively stronger ground motions
and also adoption of a different modulus reduction curve for the Zone 2 rockfill that forms the main body of
the embankment.
In summary, the preceding analyses demonstrate that the predicted crest settlement is not in excess of the
available freeboard for Stage 1 embankment. It will, however, be necessary to make allowance for at least
2.8m of freeboard in the future embankment raise designs to allow for the potential of seismic induced crest
deformations. Unacceptable deformation of the geomembrane sealing is not predicted as a result of seismic
loading. Notwithstanding, any damage to the PVC lining may only result in increased seepage but dam
breach and uncontrolled release of tailings and water are not expected.
Author Reviewed
Behrooz Ghahreman-Nejad Phillip Soden
Ingeniero Principal Ingeniero Principal

ATC Williams Pty Ltd Gerente de Proyecto

FIGURES:
Figure 1-1 Design Uniform Hazard Spectrum Spectrally Matched Peru IGP Earthquake
Figure 1-2 Design Uniform Hazard Spectrum Spectrally Matched Iquique Earthquake
Figure 2-1 Input Ground Motion Earthquake Peru IGP 278 Matched (MCE 84th Percentile)
Figure 2-2 Input Ground Motion Earthquake Iquique Chusmiza 90 Matched (MCE 84th Percentile)
Figure 3 Stage 1 Embankment Flac Model
Figure 4 Stage 1 Embankment Pore Pressure Contours
Figure 5 Zone 2 Rockfill Strength Function
Figure 6 Modulus Reduction Curves
Figure 7-1 Stage 1 Embankment IGP EQ, Exaggerated Deformed Grid (Mag. Factor = 5)
Figure 7-2 Stage 1 Embankment Iquique EQ, Exaggerated Deformed Grid (Mag. Factor = 5)
Figure 8-1 Stage 1 Embankment IGP EQ, Crest Acceleration and Relative Displacement
Figure 8-2 Stage 1 Embankment Iquique EQ, Crest Acceleration and Relative Displacement
Figure 9-1 Stage 1 Embankment IGP EQ, Vertical Displacement Contours (m)
Figure 9-2 Stage 1 Embankment Iquique EQ, Vertical Displacement Contours (m)
Figure 10-1 Stage 1 Embankment IGP EQ, Horizontal Displacement Contours (m)
Figure 10-2 Stage 1 Embankment Iquique EQ, Horizontal Displacement Contours (m)
Figure 11 Final Stage Embankment Flac Model
Figure 12 Final Stage Embankment Pore Pressure Contours
Figure 13-1 Final Stage Embankment IGP EQ, Exaggerated Deformed Grid (Mag. Factor = 5)
Figure 13-2 Final Stage Embankment Iquique EQ, Exaggerated Deformed Grid (Mag. Factor = 5)
Figure 14-1 Final Stage Embankment IGP EQ, Crest Acceleration and Relative Displacement
Figure 14-2 Final Stage Embankment Iquique EQ, Crest Acceleration and Relative Displacement
Figure 15-1 Final Stage Embankment IGP EQ, Vertical Displacement Contours (m)
Figure 15-2 Final Stage Embankment Iquique EQ, Vertical Displacement Contours (m)
Figure 16-1 Final Stage Embankment IGP EQ, Horizontal Displacement Contours (m)
Figure 16-2 Final Stage Embankment Iquique EQ, Horizontal Displacement Contours (m)

REFERENCES:
[1] ATC Williams Memo 114001.06-M011-Final, Las Bambas Mining Company, TSF
Embankment Seismic Deformation Analysis, April 2015
[2] Golder Associates (Dec 2008), Report on Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Analysis for
Concentrator and Port Sites, Las Bambas Project, Peru, 07-1118-0027.
[3] ATC Williams, 114001.06 R02-0, Tailings Storage Facility Embankment Design Update
Report, April 2015.
[4] URS, Site Specific Seismic Hazard Evaluation of the Las Bambas Tailings Dam Peru,
Revision 2, 26 August 2015.
[5] ATCW, 114001.06 R03-A, Las Bambas Copper Project TSF Embankment Construction
Report, Stage 1A Construction to RL 3980, January 2016.
[6] ITASCA Consulting Group, FLAC Version 7.0 Manual, Minnesota, USA.
[7] Ghahreman Nejad, B., Soden, P., Taiebat, H. and Murphy S. (2010) Seismic Response
and Dynamic Deformation Analysis of Shur River Dam, Australian Geomechanics
Society, Proceedings of the 2010 Symposium on Seismic Engineering Design for
Management of Geohazards, pp. 57-66.
[8] Newmark, N. M. (1965) Effects of Earthquakes on Dams and Embankments,
Geotechnique 15(2), pp. 139-160.
[9] Kuhlemeyer, R.L. and Lysmer, J. (1973), Finite Element Method Accuracy for Wave
Propagation Problems, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, SM5, PP421-
427.
[10] Ordonez, G.A. (2003) SHAKE2000, A Computer Program for the I-D Analysis of
Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Problems, Shakedit Software, Washington, USA.
[11] Konno, T., Hatanaka, M., Ishihara, K., Ibe, Y. and Izuka, S. (1994) Gravelly Soil
Properties Evaluation by Large Scale In-situ Cyclic Shear Tests, Ground Failures Under
Seismic Conditions Geotechnical Special Publication, No. 44, ASCE Reston, Va., 177-
200.
[12] Leps, T.M. (1970), Review of Shearing Strength of Rockfill, Journal of Soil Mechanics
and Foundations Division, SM4, pp. 1159-1170.
[13] Swaisgood, S.R. (2003), Embankment Dam Deformations Caused by Earthquakes, 2003
Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper #14.

FIGURES
LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY
222 Beach Road LAS BAMBAS COPPER PROJECT
(P.O. Box 5286)
Mordialloc Vic 3195 TSF SEISMIC DEFORMATION ANALYSIS
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 DESIGN UNIFORM HAZARD SPECTRUM - SPECTRALLY MATCHED PERU IGP EARTHQUAKE
F +61 3 8587 0901
AUSTRALIAN TAILINGS CONSULTANTS melb@atcwilliams.com.au Date: 13/01/2016 Job No: 114001.16b FIGURE 1-1
www.atcwilliams.com.au
C:\Users\behrooz\Desktop\LasBambas\Def-Fig-LB-Rev1 Fig 1-1

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 DESIGN UNIFORM HAZARD SPECTRUM - SPECTRALLY MATCHED IQUIQUE EARTHQUAKE
F +61 3 8587 0901
C:\Users\behrooz\Desktop\LasBambas\Def-Fig-LB-Rev1 Fig 1-2

8
4
Acceleration (m/sec2)
-2
-4
-6
-8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time (sec)
0.00200
0.00180
0.00160
0.00140
0.00120
Fourier Power
0.00100 42382.00 114001.16b
0.00080
0.00060
0.00040
0.00020
0.00000
0 5 10 15 20 25
Frequency (Hz)
LAS BAMBAS PROJECT

EARTHQUAKE PERU IGP 278
DESIGN OF TAILINGS EMBANKMENT DAM MATCHED (MCE 84th PERCENTILE)
SEISMIC DEFORMATION ANALYSIS - INPUT GROUND MOTION
Job No: 114001.16b

Date: 13/01/2016
222 Beach Road (P.O. Box 5286)
Mordialloc Vic 3195 AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN TAILINGS CONSULTANTS T +61 3 8587 0900 F +61 3 8587 0901 FIGURE 2-1
melb@atcwilliams.com.au www.atcwilliams.com.au
C:\Users\behrooz\Desktop\LasBambas\Def-Fig-LB-Rev1 Fig2-1
8.00
6.00
4.00
Acceleration (m/sec2)
2.00
0.00
-2.00
-4.00
-6.00
-8.00
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Time (sec)
0.00140
0.00120
0.00100
Fourier Power
0.00080
42382.00 114001.16b
0.00060
0.00040
0.00020
0.00000
0 5 10 15 20 25
Frequency (Hz)
LAS BAMBAS PROJECT

EARTHQUAKE IQUIQUE CHUSMIZA 90
DESIGN OF TAILINGS EMBANKMENT DAM MATCHED (MCE 84th PERCENTILE)
SEISMIC DEFORMATION ANALYSIS - INPUT GROUND MOTION
Job No: 114001.16b

Date: 13/01/2016
222 Beach Road (P.O. Box 5286)
Mordialloc Vic 3195 AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN TAILINGS CONSULTANTS T +61 3 8587 0900 F +61 3 8587 0901 FIGURE 2-2
melb@atcwilliams.com.au www.atcwilliams.com.au
User-defined Groups
'Foundation:Bedrock-MW Gran
Tailings:RL3978
x100 m
'Embankment:Liner-Concrete
'Embankment:Zone 1B - Grave
'Embankment:Zone 2 - Rockfi 1.250
Grid plot
0.750
0.250
x100 m
0.250 0.750 1.250 1.750 2.250 2.750 3.250 3.750 4.250

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - FLAC MODEL
F +61 3 8587 0901
AUSTRALIAN TAILINGS CONSULTANTS melb@atcwilliams.com.au Date: 13/01/2016 Job No: 114001.16b FIGURE 3
C:\Users\behrooz\Desktop\LasBambas\Def-Fig-LB-Rev1 Fig3
Pore pressure contours (Pa)
0.00E+00
2.00E+05
4.00E+05 x100 m
6.00E+05
8.00E+05 1.250
1.00E+06
0.750
3
2
0.250
1
x100 m
0.250 0.750 1.250 1.750 2.250 2.750 3.250 3.750 4.250

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - PORE PRESSURE CONTOURS
F +61 3 8587 0901
60
55
Effective Friction Angle
50
45
40
35
30
10 100 1000 10000
Normal Stress (kPa)
Leps Upper Bound Leps Mean Leps Lower Bound Zone 2 (Stage 1) Zone 2 (Final Stage)

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 ZONE 2 ROCKFILL - STRENGTH FUNCTION
F +61 3 8587 0901
Modulus Degradation Curves
1.2
0.8
G/Gmax
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Shear Strain (%)
Bedrock (Shake-Schnabel 1973) Bedrock (Flac-Schnabel 1973) Zone 2 Rockfill (Flac-Kono et al 1994)
Tailings (Shake-PI 0 Vucetic&Dobry 91) Tailings (Flac-PI 0 Vucetic&Dobry 91)

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 MODULUS REDUCTION CURVES
F +61 3 8587 0901
x100 m
1.250
Exaggerated Grid Distortion (m)
Magnification = 5.000E+00
Max Disp = 4.427E+00
0.750
0.250
0.250 0.750 1.250 1.750 2.250 2.750 3.250 3.750 4.250 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - IGP EQ, EXAGGERATED DEFORMED GRID (MAG. FACTOR =5)
F +61 3 8587 0901
x100 m
1.250
Boundary plot
0.750
0.250
0.250 0.750 1.250 1.750 2.250 2.750 3.250 3.750 4.250 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - IQUIQUE EQ, EXAGGERATED DEFORMED GRID (MAG. FACTOR =5)
F +61 3 8587 0901
Crest Acceleration and Relative Displacement
Horizontal (3.2 m)
4.000 3.000
Crest Horizontal Acceleration ( m/sec2)
Crest Relative Displacement (m)

2.000 2.000
0.000 1.000
-2.000 0.000
-4.000 -1.000
-6.000 -2.000
Vertical (-2.12 m)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Time (Sec ) x10 Time (sec) x10

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - IGP EQ, CREST ACCELERATION AND RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
F +61 3 8587 0901
Horizontal (1.56 m)
4.000 1.500

1.000
2.000
0.500
0.000
0.000
-2.000
-0.500
-4.000
-1.000
Vertical (-1.1 m)
2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time (Sec ) x10 Time (sec) x10

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - IQUIQUE EQ, CREST ACCELERATION AND RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
F +61 3 8587 0901
Y-displacement contours (m)
-2.20E+00
-1.80E+00
-1.40E+00
-1.00E+00 x100 m
-6.00E-01
-2.00E-01 1.250
Contour interval= 2.00E-01

Boundary plot
0.750
0.250
0.250 0.750 1.250 1.750 2.250 2.750 3.250 3.750 4.250 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - IGP EQ, VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT CONTOURS (m)
F +61 3 8587 0901
-1.20E+00
-1.00E+00
-8.00E-01 x100 m
-6.00E-01
-4.00E-01
-2.00E-01
1.250
0.00E+00
2.00E-01

Boundary plot 0.750
0.250
0.250 0.750 1.250 1.750 2.250 2.750 3.250 3.750 4.250 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - IQUIQUE EQ, VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT CONTOURS (m)
F +61 3 8587 0901
X-displacement contours (m)
0.00E+00
5.00E-01
1.00E+00 x100 m
1.50E+00
2.00E+00 1.250
2.50E+00
3.00E+00
3.50E+00
4.00E+00
0.750
Boundary plot
0.250
0.250 0.750 1.250 1.750 2.250 2.750 3.250 3.750 4.250 x100 m
(*10^2)

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - IGP EQ, HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT CONTOURS (m)
F +61 3 8587 0901
0.00E+00
x100 m
5.00E-01
1.00E+00
1.50E+00
2.00E+00 1.250
2.50E+00
0.750
0.250
0.250 0.750 1.250 1.750 2.250 2.750 3.250 3.750 4.250 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 STAGE 1 EMBANKMENT - IQUIQUE EQ, HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT CONTOURS (m)
F +61 3 8587 0901
User-defined Groups
'Foundation:Bedrock-MW Gran
Tailings:RL3978 x100 m
'Embankment:Liner-Concrete
'Embankment:Zone 1B - Grave
'Embankment:Zone 2 - Rockfi
2.500
1.500
0.500
0.500 1.500 2.500 3.500 4.500 5.500 6.500 7.500 8.500 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - FLAC MODEL
F +61 3 8587 0901
Pore pressure contours (Pa)
0.00E+00
4.00E+05
8.00E+05
1.20E+06 x100 m
1.60E+06
2.00E+06
2.500
1.500
3
0.500
2
1
0.500 1.500 2.500 3.500 4.500 5.500 6.500 7.500 8.500 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - PORE PRESSURE CONTOURS
F +61 3 8587 0901
x100 m
2.500
Boundary plot 1.500
0.500
0.500 1.500 2.500 3.500 4.500 5.500 6.500 7.500 8.500 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - IGP EQ, EXAGGERATED DEFORMED GRID (MAG. FACTOR =5)
F +61 3 8587 0901
x100 m
Exaggerated Grid Distortion (m) 2.500

1.500
0.500
0.500 1.500 2.500 3.500 4.500 5.500 6.500 7.500 8.500 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - IQUIQUE EQ, EXAGGERATED DEFORMED GRID (MAG. FACTOR =5)
F +61 3 8587 0901
Horizontal (3.73 m)
4.000 3.000

2.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
0.000
-2.000
-1.000
-4.000
-2.000
Vertical (-2.81 m)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Time (Sec) x10 Time (sec) x10

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - IGP EQ, CREST ACCELERATION AND RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
F +61 3 8587 0901
Horizontal (1.75 m)
6.000 1.500

4.000 1.000
2.000 0.500
0.000 0.000
-2.000 -0.500
-4.000 -1.000
Vertical (-1.27 m)
2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time (Sec) x10 Time (sec) x10

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - IQUIQUE EQ, CREST ACCELERATION AND RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
F +61 3 8587 0901
-2.75E+00
-2.25E+00
-1.75E+00
-1.25E+00 x100 m
-7.50E-01
-2.50E-01 2.500
2.50E-01
1.500
0.500
0.500 1.500 2.500 3.500 4.500 5.500 6.500 7.500 8.500 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - IGP EQ, VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT CONTOURS (m)
F +61 3 8587 0901
-1.50E+00
-1.25E+00
-1.00E+00
-7.50E-01 x100 m
-5.00E-01
-2.50E-01
0.00E+00 2.500
2.50E-01

Boundary plot
1.500
0.500
0.500 1.500 2.500 3.500 4.500 5.500 6.500 7.500 8.500 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - IQUIQUE EQ, VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT CONTOURS (m)
F +61 3 8587 0901
0.00E+00
7.50E-01
1.50E+00
2.25E+00 x100 m
3.00E+00
3.75E+00 2.500
4.50E+00
5.25E+00

Boundary plot 1.500
0.500
0.500 1.500 2.500 3.500 4.500 5.500 6.500 7.500 8.500 x100 m
(*10^2)

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - IGP EQ, HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT CONTOURS (m)
F +61 3 8587 0901
2.50E-01
7.50E-01
1.25E+00
1.75E+00 x100 m
2.25E+00
2.75E+00
2.500
1.500
0.500
0.500 1.500 2.500 3.500 4.500 5.500 6.500 7.500 8.500 x100 m

(P.O. Box 5286)
AUSTRALIA
T +61 3 8587 0900 FINAL STAGE EMBANKMENT - IQUIQUE EQ, HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT CONTOURS (m)
F +61 3 8587 0901

2.2.8. Updated TSF Deformation Analyses - 114001.06-M014 PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

2.2.8. Updated TSF Deformation Analyses - 114001.06-M014 PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

MEMO

Project: Minera Las Bambas SA

Author: Behrooz Ghahreman-Nejad Date: 4/02/16

Job No: 114001.06 ATCW Ref: 114001.06-M014

Subject: TSF Embankment Revised Seismic Deformation Analysis

(i) Updated seismic hazard assessment, and

ATC Williams Pty Ltd

C:\Users\psoden\Documents\myfiles\WORK\JOBS\Las Bambas\06 TSF Stage 1 design\Correspondence\Out\M014\114001.06-M014.docx

The characteristics of the design earthquakes are summarised in Table 1.

ATC Williams 114001.06-M014 | Page 2

ATC Williams 114001.06-M014 | Page 3

TABLE 2 - PROPERTIES OF EMBANKMENT MATERIALS

Zone 1B 1 42 0.3 400 33m0.5 0.5

Zone 2 (Rockfill) Function 0.3 400 33m0.5 0.5

ATC Williams 114001.06-M014 | Page 4

5.1.2 Material Strength

5.1.3 Small Strain Shear Modulus

5.1.4 Modulus Reduction

ATC Williams 114001.06-M014 | Page 5

The results of the analyses are summarised in Table 3.

TABLE 3 - SUMMARY OF PREDICTED DISPLACEMENTS FROM FLAC ANALYSES

Predicted Crest Maximum Relative3

ATC Williams 114001.06-M014 | Page 6

% Settlement = e (6.07 PGA + 0.57 M -8.00),

Ingeniero Principal Ingeniero Principal

ATC Williams 114001.06-M014 | Page 7

ATC Williams 114001.06-M014 | Page 8

ATC Williams 114001.06-M014 | Page 9

C:\Users\behrooz\Desktop\LasBambas\Def-Fig-LB-Rev1 Fig 1-1

C:\Users\behrooz\Desktop\LasBambas\Def-Fig-LB-Rev1 Fig 1-2

0.00100 42382.00 114001.16b

LAS BAMBAS PROJECT

ATC Williams Pty Ltd

LAS BAMBAS PROJECT

ATC Williams Pty Ltd

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

Normal Stress (kPa)

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

Tailings (Shake-PI 0 Vucetic&Dobry 91) Tailings (Flac-PI 0 Vucetic&Dobry 91)

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

Crest Relative Displacement (m)

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

Crest Relative Displacement (m)

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

Contour interval= 2.00E-01

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

Contour interval= 2.00E-01

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

Exaggerated Grid Distortion (m) 2.500

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

Crest Relative Displacement (m)

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

Crest Relative Displacement (m)

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY

LAS BAMBAS MINING COMPANY