Laserfiche WebLink
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM <br />Page 10 <br />June 3, 1992 a <br />SAC31583.AC.ZZ j <br />purposes of the slope stability and settlement analyses, the unit weight of refuse for the <br />proposed landfill extension was assumed to be 50 pounds per cubic foot. <br />For the composite lining, both smooth and textured FML liner were considered in the slope <br />stability analyses. For smooth FML liner, a conservative FML -clay liner interface strength <br />based on residual friction angles on critical interfaces in the Kettleman Hills Landfill Liner <br />System was used (Mitchell et al., 1990). Only limited interface strength properties for <br />textured FML -clay liner is available in the literature. Published friction angles of soil to <br />rough PVC geomembrane ranged from 25 to 27degrees (Martin et al., 1980). Analyses <br />performed on the Kettleman Hills Landfill liner System have shown, however, that interface <br />friction angles may be greatly reduced in a saturated condition (Mitchell et al=, 1990). Direct <br />shear testing performed for the Keller Canyon Landfill project in Contra Costa; ,County, <br />California, confirmed this trend. For the Keller Canyon project, direct shear testing of <br />FML -clay interface under unsaturated and under saturated ions - confirmed fhat friction <br />angle may be significantly reduced in saturated conditions (CH2M HILL, 1991). For <br />unsaturated conditions, friction angles ranged from 28.4 to..31.8 e,es..with cohesion <br />intercepts of 310 to 809 psf. For saturated conditions, friction angles ranged from 8S to 9.5 <br />degrees with cohesion intercepts of 420 to 697 psf. Because of ibis latively,,,wide-range-in <br />properties, both unsaturated and saturated conditions were analyzed for the textured FML' <br />liner using direct shear test results from the Keller Canyon La fill project. <br />UU triaxial compression shear strength and pocket penetrometer test- results were used .to <br />estimate the shear strength of clay layers. The use of unconsolidated undrained shear <br />strength properties and pocket penetrometer test results for clay layers likely- resulted. in <br />conservative static safety factors because LTU and pocket penetrometer shear strength tests <br />do not 'take into account Consolidation effects of the foundation material under:,refuse fill <br />of shear strength <br />clay material as refuse fill material is placed will <br />result iConsolidation <br />h gh hdshea of the th properties. SPT blow -counts were used to estimate friction <br />angles for sandy layers (sand, silty sand, clayey sand). A summary of material shear strength <br />properties -and, unit weights -,used in stability analyses is presented -in Table 1. _ In,,,general, the <br />shear strength properties summarized in Table 1 represent a conservative lower -bound range <br />of the available data. <br />