See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/338353918

Design Considerations for Waste Dumps in Indian Opencast Coal Mines - A

Critical Appraisal.

Conference Paper · January 2020

CITATIONS READS

4 3,271

3 authors, including:

Prashant Kumar Nayak Ashish Kumar Dash

National Institute of Technology Raipur National Institute of Technology Raipur
7 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS    21 PUBLICATIONS   113 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Accident Investigation System View project

Occupational Health and Safety in Mining Industry View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Prashant Kumar Nayak on 03 January 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Conference on Opencast Mining Technology & Sustainability
Design Considerations for Waste Dumps in Indian Open-
cast Coal Mines: A Critical Appraisal
Prashant K. Nayak
Department of Mining Engineering,
NIT, Raipur
Pankaj K. Dewangan
Department of Mining Engineering,
NIT, Raipur
pdewangan.min@nitrr.ac.in
Abstract- Proper design of waste dumps in open cast mines
is essential to avoid any large-scale dump failure which may
have significant impacts on safety as well as the economics
of an open-pit project. Number of waste dump slope failures
have occurred in the recent past and resulted in huge loss of
men and machinery. With the continuous increase in depth of
open cast mines and limited availability of land area for dis-
posal of waste rock, the optimum design of waste dumps with
its maximum capacity is now need of the hour. Indian coal
measure rocks mainly consist of shale, sandstone and clay
beds which are soft to moderate in strength and having mod-
erate durability. Number of parameters like shear strength of
waste rock, its size and gradation characteristics, presence of
any weak interface or material, method of dumping, strength
of foundation rock, weatherability of dump material, pres-
ence of water, rainfall, seismic or any short term stresses due
to blasting including the dump profile govern the design con-
siderations for waste dump and affects its long term stability.
An in-depth knowledge of deformation of dump slope and its
failure mechanisms is required to install suitable monitor-
ing instruments to provide early signs of instability of waste
dumps. In this paper, a comprehensive review of various fac-
tors affecting the design and stability of waste dumps along
with a critical discussion on its failure mechanisms and defor-
mation behaviour has been addressed.
Keywords: Waste Dump, Failure, Stability, Mechanisms,
Deformation
I. Introduction
Open cast coal mining method requires removal of large
volumes of overburden (OB), which is dumped either as
internal dumps or external dumps. OB dumps are some of
the largest structures built by man considering their weight
or height aspects (Robertson, 1982). The size (height and
volume) of these dumps is increasing year by year as deeper
mines are being planned due to increased demand of coal by
A. K. Dash
Department of Mining Engineering
NIT, Raipur
thermal power plants. At the same time, limited availability
of land for OB disposal forces the mine management to go
for steepening and the heightening of the existing dumps.
The key design objective is to construct OB dumps in the
proximity of the open pit within compact footprints to
the maximum heights governed by geotechnical analyses
to minimize the operational costs. Frequent dump slope
failures occurred in recent years have focussed attention
of regulatory authority to issue stringent guidelines for the
proper scientific design of OB dumps with all geotechnical
considerations and other associated factors.
Most of the dump failures resulted in the past were due
to erroneous design, poor construction and maintenance.
In open-cast coal mining operation. Dragline and shovel
are used to excavate the blasted OB rock overlying the coal
seams and dumping of the same is carried out either in the
de-coaled area as an internal dump or outside the mine in
the non-coal bearing area as external dump. These dumps
are required to be constructed as high and steep as possible
due to the limited space of land available for dumping.
Therefore, maintaining large-sized dump at steepest
possible slope angle is becoming a challenging task for
mine management. Hence the slope stability study of OB
dumps is required to be carried out for maintaining safety
and economics of the mine (Sengupta et al., 2014).
The OB dumps are heterogeneous in terms of grain size and
structure (Fityus et al., 2008). Coal mine OB dump material
consist of natural soils, sandstone, siltstone, shale and some
coal. Dump material may range in size from clay particles
to boulders (e.g. less than 0.1 mm to greater than 1 m in
diameter). Coal mine OB dump material can be categorized
as low strength rock fill material with some fines. OB
dumps in open cast coal mines are generally constructed
using end tip dumping and the excess material is bulldozed
over the edge and the outer face of the slope rests at the
angle of repose of dump material. This method of dump
19
 Northern Coalfields Limited, Singrauli

construction results in formation of dumps with relatively of foundation slope. In the ridge crest fill, slopes are formed
low density as compared to embankment fills and other on both sides of the crest. Heaped fills consist of small
engineered fills constructed in civil engineering projects dumps with slopes in all directions (Wahler, 1979).
(Linero et al., 2007). A very little or no attention is paid
towards its compaction parameters. It has well established
fact that proper compaction of any filled structure improves
its shear strength and other engineering properties
(Sridharan, 2006; Ugbe, 2011; Wang et al., 2011; Dewangan
et al., 2016). Compaction of the dump matrix occurs by
the weight of added material and by dumper movement on
it without the use of any specific compaction equipment.
No attention is given by the mine management towards
its compaction requirement without any monitoring of
the maximum compaction density achievable in that
material (Dewangan et al., 2016). Optimum compaction
also provides benefits by accommodating more volume
of dump material at steeper slope angles by improving
its strength properties. Moreover OB dump materials
are usually subjected to a wide range of environments,
geo-morphological and climatic changes which include Figure 1: Methods of dump construction (Wahler, 1979)
erosion, ageing, wet dry cycles, seasonal temperature
fluctuations and cyclic loading due to earthquakes, blasting
The dumping method divides the dump into the following
and machine movement etc. which results in continuous
basic types (Roberston, 1982; Nichols 1986; Tran et al.
degradation of strength properties of dump material with
2003):
time and consolidation settlement with the passage of time
(Hawley and Cunning, 2017). (a) End dumping
In this paper, an exhaustive review of literatures concerned (b) Push dumping
with factors affecting the design and stability of waste
(c) Free dumping or plug dumping
dumps, its various modes of failures and a critical discussion
on its failure mechanisms and deformation behaviour has (d) Dragline spoiling
been made. In end dumping method, the slopes are generally not
flattened or compacted until closure of the dump. OB
II. Dump Types, Geometry And Methods dumps constructed from end dumping are more likely
of Construction to have a loose collapsible particle structure within the
The shape of a mine dump is mainly based on the nature dump than those constructed from the layered method.
and topography of the area where they are employed. Mine In comparison, layered or stacked dumps allow for a
dump can take the shape of one or a combination of many higher factor of safety to be maintained because they are
different configurations such as valley-fill, cross-valley, constructed in a more controlled manner from the bottom
sidehill and ridge or heaped depending on the topography up. The layers can be placed and compacted to increase the
(Zahl et al. 1992). The various dump configurations are density and strength of the material.
shown in Figure 1 (Wahler 1979; Priyadarshi and Caldwell Dumps are also constructed in a series of lifts following
2012).Valley fills are constructed parallel to the topographic either descending or ascending sequence (Stuckert et al.,
contours. Generally, three dimensional confinements are 1989). Ascending construction is advantageous as the toe of
provided by the valley walls. The dump surface is graded each lift is supported on the preceding lift in this case. The
to prevent accumulation of water. In cross valley fill, the method of construction selected is based on a combination
dump extends from one side of the valley to the other side of factors such as minimizing haulage distance, accessibility,
of the drainage. The upstream portion of the valley is not available capacity and dump stability. Stability can be
filled, and slopes are established in both upstream and enhanced by judicious use of terracing and restricting
downstream directions. Sidehill slopes are constructed in lift heights to limit shear stresses on the foundations.
sloping terrain. Dump slopes are inclined in the direction Ascending construction requires the development of lifts

20
International Conference on Opencast Mining Technology & Sustainability
starting at the base of the structure and progressing to the
ultimate height. Material is placed in a controlled manner
in relatively small thickness. Once a lift is completed, the
next lift is placed on top, and the sequence is continued
until the ultimate dump height is reached. This controlled
construction technique is commonly used in situations,
where sensitive foundation soils exist. The incremental
loading allows these soils to drain and consolidate through
strain hardening at rates suitable for foundation stability.
Rapid loading of such soils may result in strain softening
and static liquefaction due to generation of pore pressure
trending to the overlying weight of material (Hoek and
Bray, 1981; Stuckert et al., 1989; Hawley and Cunning,
2017).
Descending construction is placement of material from
the operating height, which allows the dump to develop
based on natural material strength. Material is placed from
the ultimate height or the crest of the dump. Typically,
the material is end-dumped from the haul truck at this
elevation (Hoek and Bray, 1981; Pradhan et. al, 2019)
III. Factors Affecting Stability of Dumps
The forces influencing waste dump stability are categorized
by (MSHA, 1999a; 1999b; 2000):
1. Factors driving failure like gravity; loading at the top;
removing support from the bottom (trimming toe of
slope); and changes in moisture conditions and
2. Factors resisting failure like spoil strength; frictional
forces; cohesive forces; and strength can decrease due
to locked-in water pressure.
Factors which can cause a stable slope to become unstable
are developed by (MSHA, 1999a; 1999b; 2000):
1. Changes in resisting forces (material strength) i.e.,
weathering of rock; lubrication by water; internal
water pressures; loss of apparent cohesion due to
saturation or drying; exceeding the strength of a weak
layer; and sliding along weak layers or
2. Changes in driving forces, i.e., adding load to the top-
truck, dozer, loader, or dragline etc.; outward force by
truck braking near edge of a slope; adding load to top
by making the slope higher; additional water weight
(from precipitation or groundwater); and removing
support at the bottom-trimming toe etc.
Mainly the dump failures are associated with:
1. Foundation failures, in the central to toe regions of
the dump;
2. Crest and face failures, associated with excessively
rapid advances of the dump and an associated lack of
consolidation of the dumped material;
3. Face blowouts, but usually only in dumps that are
being leached and caused by a build-up in pore
pressure at the base of the horizon (lift) being leached;
and
4. Face failures caused by the uncontrolled release of
storm water over the crest of the dump.
There are several parameters that affect the stability of
the dump slope like geotechnical properties of dump
material and foundation, dump geometry, dynamic forces,
mining methods, hydrological and drainage conditions
etc. (Upadhyay et al. 1990; British Columbia Interim
Guidelines 1991; Singh et al. 1994; Mukhlisin and Aziz,
2016). Some of the key parameters are discussed in the
following paragraphs.
A. Geotechnical Properties of Dump Material
The geotechnical properties of dump material vary
significantly between projects and even between different
phases of the same project. The density, saturation and
shear strength parameters of the material forming the
dump slope affect the failure mode and the calculated
factor of safety (FoS) against sliding. An understanding of
the shear strength and deformation behaviour of material
forming these dumps is required for design and analysis
of stability of OB dumps. The effective shear strength of
dump material is affected by parameters mainly particle
size, gradation, intact particle strength, particle angularity,
presence of water, degree of saturation, compaction
density, stress and others. The dominance of cobble and
boulder sized rock fragments in typical dump imparts a
dilatant behaviour under low effective normal stresses and
significant crushing of contact points at high stresses and
affects its shear strength. Following are the parameters
controlling the shear strength of the dump material and
hence its stability (Mathur et al., 2013):
• Grain Size Distribution of the Waste Rock (Dump)
Material - It indicates the composition of dump
material comprising of clay, silt, sand, and gravels
and boulders and the individual particle size of dump
mass, which may vary from less than 0.075mm to
more than 10 cm.
• Atterberg Limits i.e., Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit,
Shrinkage Limit and Plasticity Index -Determination
of Atterberg limits is necessary to assess the expansive
properties of clay material. In the case of expansive
soil, shear strength properties drastically reduce due
to swelling when meets water. Swelling index is also
21

to be determined in case of expansive soil;
• Coefficient of Permeability - This parameter is
important for assessing the water seepage properties
of the dump. It is pertinent here to mention that,
except for the pure clayey dump, waste rock dumps
are permeable;
• Bulk Density of Dump Mass - Bulk density of dump
mass determines the weight of the waste rock/soil
mass, which is one of the major influencing factors
for the determination of disturbing and resisting
forces.
The shearing resistance of soil comprises basically
of the following components: (1) The frictional
resistance (Ф) between the individual soil particles at
their contact points; and (2) The cohesion (c) between
the surfaces of the soil particles i.e. the structural
resistance to displacements of the soil because of
the interlocking of the particles. Shear strength in
cohesion less soil results from inter-granular friction
alone while in other soils, it results both from internal
friction and cohesion.
Coal mine OB dump material is generally soft to medium
hard in strength and degradable in nature and can be
considered as cohesion less soil. The loose coal mine OB
dump material usually has low shear strength, but its
strength increases with time as it becomes more and more
compact.
B. Geotechnical Properties of Foundation
The foundation is a critical factor in the overall stability
of the OB dump. The shear strength and thickness of the
foundation soil or rock is an important parameter for slope
stability and the dump failure mode. The permeability of the
foundation material will affect the generation of pore water
pressures in the foundation, affecting the dump stability
and limiting the permissible dumping rate. The foundation
can deform in case it is made of saturated soil or similar
zones resulting in a toe failure, or a complete circular failure
involving both the dump as well as the foundation. Porosity
and permeability decide the pore dynamics and generation
of pore water pressure. Water table rise as the dump height
increases resulting in saturation of the bottom layers of
foundation. This condition reduces the shear strength of
foundation as compared to the no dumping conditions
and can result in unexpected failures by the liquefaction
of the foundation. Hence, detailed laboratory testing of the
foundation material is required (Pradhan et al., 2019). The
foundation types are categorized into three different groups:
(a) Competent Foundation; (b) Intermediate Foundation;
and (c) Weak Foundation (Chaulya and Prasad, 2016;
22
Northern Coalfields Limited, Singrauli
Pradhan et al., 2019).
C. Ground Water and Drainage
Water at the dump can adversely affect stability in following
ways (Hoek and Bray 1981):
• By reducing the strength of the material in the dump
or the material on which the dump is founded.
• By increasing the weight of dump material thereby
providing additional disturbing forces.
• By generating water pressures in the dump, thereby
reducing the effective shear strength of the dump
material.
• By generating seepage pressures leading to piping.
An increase in the foundation water table can significantly
decrease the FoS for a deep failure through the foundation
material, whereas perched water within the dump can lead
to surface failures. Flow parallel to the surface of the slope
decreases the FoS significantly. Design and construction
elements can significantly affect seepage and drainage
through the dumps. The top surface of the dump must
be graded to prevent surface water from flowing onto the
slopes. When waste rock is dumped, the coarse fraction
ends up at the bottom of the dump, creating a rock drain
at the base.
Piezometric conditions (in the dump foundation and
within the dump) can affect the stability of a mine dump
(Caldwell and Moss, 1981; Singhal, 1988; Upadhyay et al.,
1990a; Chaulya and Prasad, 2016; Pradhan et al., 2019).
Climatic conditions, notable precipitation in the form
of rainfall, have a direct influence on the piezometric
conditions (Tassie, 1988). A critical condition develops if
a phreatic surface is generated within the waste (Pernichele
& Kahle, 1971). Water enters a dump by either direct
infiltration through its surface or groundwater seepage.
The potential inflow of water and piezometric conditions
within the dump are known based on hydrogeological and
hydrologic information obtained during field studies and
estimated material properties (Iverson, 2000; Chaulya and
Prasad, 2016; Pradhan et al., 2019). Rainwater infiltrates
the dump material as well as will runoff from the surface
based on the porosity and permeability of dump material.
Surface runoffs result in superficial erosion and choke the
drain channels as well as make the dump structurally weak
if the toe area of the dump is eroded.
Vegetation growth on the waste dump has a significant role,
as the roots of the vegetation act as a binder for the soil/
overburden material, hence holding it against the erosion
and gives an idea of the effect of water moving in and
around dumps (Pradhan et al., 2019).
International Conference on Opencast Mining Technology & Sustainability
D. Dynamic Forces
Blasting, earthquakes and the operation of heavy plant and
machinery may generate dynamic forces and can cause a
reduction in the shear strength of dump material and hence
reduces the stability of the dump.The possible effects of
earthquakes on the stability of mine dumps are discussed by
Caldwell and Moss (1981), Glass (1981) and Forbe (1984).
The utmost substantial impact on stability due to earthquakes
appears to be potential liquefaction of susceptible foundation
materials. Saturated fine-grained materials are exposed to
liquefaction. Dynamic ground motions induced by blasting
associated with mining affect dump stability (Stuckert et
al., 1989; Sharma et al., 1993). Liquefaction of the dump
foundation as a result of seismic activity sometimes results in
gradual inevitable failure (Pradhan et al., 2019). Other loads,
i.e., moving of HEMM on or near the dump performance
a role in the stability of dump slopes (Chaulya and Prasad,
2016; Pradhan et al., 2019).
E. Site Topography
Foundation slopes steeper than 25° typically results in
lower factors of safety for slope stability. On the other
hand, topographical features providing lateral support or
toe buttressing improve the stability of the dump.Together
the slope foundation and degree of confinement presented
in the shape of a foundation affect dump stability (Blight,
1969, 1981; Campbell, 1981; Tassie, 1988). If the slope
of the waste dump foundation is less than 10°, then it is
called "level foundation"; or else, it is termed as "sloping
foundation" (Crossby, 1983). Steep foundation slopes
or lack of confinement or both has considered causative
factors for slope failure. The least desirable situation is
wherever the slope angle increases towards the toe (i.e.,
a convex slope). If a slide occurs in this situation, it gains
sizable momentum as it translates downslope. The most
constructive situation is the decreasing slope towards the
toe, that is, a concave slope (Campbell, 1986; Vandre,
1986;Chaulya and Prasad, 2016).
On the other hand, when a dump is constructed on a sloping
foundation, it is required to check the stability of the dump
pertaining to shearing along its base (Okagbue, 1984;
Lau et al., 1986). The slope of the ground surface within
some areas might be so steep as to be inappropriate for the
disposal of waste materials. Where the slope of the ground
surface is relatively uniform, plane down-slope sliding of
the dump along its base must be considered. When the
base of the waste dump is provided with a drain to facilitate
excess hydrostatic pressure cannot develop, then the steepest
allowable foundation slope is given as; tan θ = tanα/F; where
θ = Maximum Safe dump foundation inclination angle; α =
Minimum Effective angle of friction of dump material; and
F = Minimum FoS desired. When the slope of the ground
surface within the probable waste disposal area is non-
uniform, then the maximum slope angle at lower elevations
is flat, whereas those at a higher elevation slope angle are
steeper. For these foundation slope conditions, the stability
compared to shearing along the base of the dump must be
checked by the wedge method of stability analysis (Campbell
and Shaw, 1986; Chaulya and Prasad, 2016).
F. Settlement
Waste rock settlement occurs on account of particle
reorientation, weathering of high clay content material,
weakening of inter-particle bonding due to water and
transport of fine particles through the dump. The rate of
settlement is marked by dump height, loading rate, location
within the dump and material type. Settlement is normally
less in layered dumps followed by in the end dumped
slopes. During placement of the dump material, self-weight
settlement might arise initially, or crest settlement can
occur far ahead due to compaction and surface sloughing
from over steepening. After waste placement, primary
settlement and creep settlement occurs at a lessening rate
with time and continue for years after dump construction.
G. Weathering and Erosion
Soft and weathered rock fragments existing in the coal
mine OB dump material are largely broken down by the
combined effects of temperature, air and water. Durability
and the prospective for physical or chemical degradation
of these fragments impact the long-term shear strength
and hydraulic conductivity of the dump. The progress
of particle sizes and the production of clay could result
in a change in the shear strength properties of the dump
material and modify the physical stability of the dump. By
most conservative analysis, the overall stability of the dump
material is determined by an internal angle of friction with
zero cohesion. Weathering of rock fragments present in
the dump material grounds decrease in its particle size
and friction angle, thus affects the stability of the dump.
Instead, the additional shear strength might be developed
by cohesion when the dump material develops a higher
fraction of sand, silt and clay.
Coal measure rocks are susceptible to physical and chemical
deterioration with changes in moisture content. This grades
in slaking and softening and thus causes reduction in its
shear strength.
Water pressure can develop both positive and negative
effects on slope stability depending on the stress states
within the dump mass, the moisture content and time-
scale measured (Bradfield et al. 2013; Fredlund et al.,
2012). Cohesion possibly will occur as effective cohesion
23

and/or apparent cohesion. Effective cohesion describes the
cohesive strength resulting from inter-particle cohesion
due to the presence of clay minerals and the precipitation of
secondary mineral products i.e., as grain to grain cements.
Apparent cohesion defines the cohesive strength associated
with matric suction. The matric suction in the unsaturated
dump material causes an increase in its shear strength. On
the contrary, positive water pressure reduces shear strength
by pushing rocks fragments apart and reducing their inter
granular friction. Erosion of void filling material or zones
of percolation efficiently decrease cohesion among grain
boundaries and results in increased permeability and
ground water flow in the slope. This lead to failure due
to formation of gully and deep flow channels in dump
(Kaintholaet al. 2011, Fredlund et al., 2012).
IV. Types of Dump Failure
The differenttypes of dump failure modes are described
below and are shown in Figure 2 (Caldwell and Moss
1981).
A. Rotational Failure or Circular Failure
Rotational failure of the dump involves mass sliding of the
dump along a circular or curvilinear surface formed within
the embankment. The shape of the failure surface varies
depending on the characteristics of the material in the
dump. Creep failure is a unusual case of rotational failure
involving widespread rotational shearing through the mass
without the movement along a single failure surface.
Figure 2: Modes of dump failures (Caldwell and Moss 1981)
Creep failure establishes itself by a long-term progressive
bulging at the toe of the dump. Rotational failures
are associated with OB dumps consisting of weak or
fine-grained dump material. Rotational failures can
24
Northern Coalfields Limited, Singrauli
be triggered by high water pressures in the dump. A
comprehensive selection of proven methods is available
for analyzing rotational failures, including simple slip
circle analysis and various methods of slices. Circular
failures are common in the case of soil consisting of sand,
silt and smaller particle sizes. It occurs on slopes of even
few meters high.
The actual shape of the “circular” slide surface is influenced
by the geological conditions on the slope. Circular failure
is classified into subsequent types depending on the area
that is affected by the failure surface (Suman, 2015):
a) Rotational failure: This type of failure occurs in a
homogeneously weak or weathered rock mass or a
rock-fill. The failure occurs along a shallow and large
radius surface extending from a tension crack close
behind the crest to the toe of the slope.
b) Slope Failure: In this type of failure, the arc of the
rupture surface meets the slope above the toe of the
slope. This happens when the slope angle is very
high and the soil close to the toe possesses the high
strength.
c) Toe Failure: In this type of failure, the arc of the
rupture surface meets the slope at the toe.
d) Base Failure: In this type of failure, the arc of the
failure passes below the toe and into the base of
the slope. This happens when the slope angle is low
and the soil under the base is softer as well as more
plastic than the soil above the base.
In directive to detect important changes in the rate
of deformation and evaluate likely causes along with
consequences, there is a need for constant monitoring
of dump slope and given that early warning before the
occurrence of slope failure. The best sign of approaching
failure is the increase in the rate of movement of pit
wall slope. It is, therefore, vital to use the rate of ground
movement as a tool for prediction of imminent pit wall
failure (Chaulya and Prasad, 2016). The different failure
types, its causes and warnings signs are described in
Table 1.
International Conference on Opencast Mining Technology & Sustainability

TABLE 1: FAILURE TYPES, CAUSES, AND WARNING SIGNS (Chaulya and Prasad, 2016)

Failure
Usual Cause Likely Effects Warning Signs
Types

Over-steepened crest due to high Crest cracking, subsidence near the crest, steep
Small-scale crest failure,
Silver failure fine content, rapid dumping rate, wet slope blow crest, increasing crest displacement
subsidence at the crest of a dump.
material. rates.

Weak material in the foundation, rapid

Foundation Can cause large failure involving a Seepage at the toe, building or spreading of dump
loading rate, high pore pressure in
failure significant part of the dump. toe, cracks well behind dump crest.
foundation/blasting.

O v e r a l l Weak material along base of dump, Cracking of dump surface back as far as to contact
Entire dump fails along the base.
failure steep foundation, rapid loading rate. with the ground, settlement of the entire platform.

Can cause failure involving a

major part of the dump. Building pressure at the toe, cracking, and
Rotational Weak material in dump or foundation,
May involve dump only, or dump settlement well behind the crest, rock noise,
failure high pore pressure, rapid loading rate.
and foundation. possible scarps well behind the crest.
May be circular or noncircular.

Weak foundation materials on the toe,

Loss of support of the toe may lead Spreading of a toe, yielding of foundation soil or
Toe failure high pore pressure at the toe, steep
to the propagation of failure. dump material at the toe.
slope at the toe.

Presence of silt and sand materials in

the foundation, possibly confined by
Foundation
aquitards, pore pressure build-up due
liquefaction
to rapid loading seismic forces may be
important.
A possible major failure ofa
High piezometric pressure on a foundation in
significant portion of the dump
the same class, sandy soils may present prior to
with large run-out distance may
complete failure.
occur on flat foundation slopes.

Weak plane in dump material approx.

May involve a large amount of Slumping of dump crest, the buildings of toe or
Planar failure parallel to dump face. Due to poor
material with large run outdistance. face crack on a platform well behind the crest.
material or rapid loading.

B. Surface or Edge Slumping
In surface slips, the failure surface is parallel to the front
face of the dump. Such slides generally take place in dry,
cohesionless and granular material tipped at or above the
angle of repose. This may occur as the surface layer dries
out and any temporary cohesion is lost. Debris flow, edge
slumps and sheet like failures are examples of surface failure
modes. Debris flow results from the flow of water over the
crest and down the face of dump. The most common failure
mode is edge slumping (crest slumping), where a thin wedge
of material translates down the slope, parallel to the dump
face. Edge slumps occur primarily on high active truck
dumps. These failures may include significant volumes of
material. They are invariably due to an over steepening of
the upper portion of the dump slope. The over steepening is
caused by the tendency of finer spoil to temporarily hang up
near the top of the dump. Cohesive or low-permeability OB
dump material allows the development of over steepened
slopes. End dumping in thick lifts or pushing material over
the dump crest also leads to a higher risk of over-steepening
and edge slumping. Edge-slumping failures often occur
after heavy precipitation, which leads to increased pore
pressures in the low-permeability dump material. Sheet
like failures, also known as plane shears or infinite-slope
failures occur where cohesion is a minor component of the
material strength. This mode of failure dominates where
dumps are placed by draglines, shovels or other methods
of loose dumping.
D. Shallow Flow Slides
Flow slides are shallow slumping failures of saturated or
partially saturated dump. Typically, triggered by rain or
snow melt, they result in material flowing down the slopes
due to shear failure or collapse of the soil structure.
E. Base Failure (Spreading)
Base failure may occur if a thin and weak base layer is
placed over the foundation, especially if the foundation
is inclined. If a slope wedge of the OB dump translates
laterally along a shear surface, the foundation soils may

25

spread and be squeezed ahead of the advancing dump toe.
This phenomenon, known as foundation spreading, may
result in progressive failure of the overall dump.
F. Plane Failure
Plane failure of the dump involves sliding along a single
plane of weakness. If the weakness plane does not daylight
on the dump face or at the toe, some shearing through dump
material at the toe of the failure will be required. Weakness
planes may be created during construction, if poor quality
or fine dump material is dumped over the dump crest
and form zones or layers parallel to the dump face. It also
forms, if the zones of susceptible dump material slake or
degrade due to exposure or shear strain within the dump.
High pore pressures within the dump may also contribute
to plane failure. In the case of a weakness plane parallel
to the dump face, plane failure is like edge slumping. The
exception being that the failure surface is generally deeper
within the dump mass and failure results in substantially
more break back.
G. Non-Circular Rotational Failure
Non-circular rotation also referred to as a form of base
or foundation spreading. It is like a rotational foundation
failure, except that part of the failure surface occurs along
a weakness plane. This plane may occur along the interface
between the dump and the foundation (e.g. base failure),
or within the foundation. High pore pressures in the
foundation may trigger non-circular failure. Non-circular
rotational failure could also occur along weak zones within
the dump.
H. Block Translation
Block translation (planar sliding) may result from any of
the inducing factors mentioned for rotational failure. It is
favoured by steep foundation slopes and a thin and weak
soil cover or lined surface. The bulk of the dump slides as a
rigid block along a plane of weakness. This weak plane may
be within the foundation soil along the interface between
the dump and the foundation or along a liner interface.
I. Liquefaction
Liquefaction susceptible soils normally consist of loose silts
and fine to medium size sands. Liquefaction occurs when
the effective stress on the soil becomes very low due to high
pore pressures. If the soil foundation or the OB dump it
is composed of liquefiable material and high pore-water
pressures exists, then liquefaction possibly will pose a
noteworthy stability risk.
26
Northern Coalfields Limited, Singrauli
J. Piping
Piping is a localized failure caused by internal erosion
within the dump as soil particles are washed out by the
passage of water. Collapse due to piping may occasionally
trigger other forms of failure.
K. Mud Runs
A mud run is a localized failure caused by a rapidly moving
flow of waterborne soil having the consistency of mud. This
is brought about following heavy rainfall by flows or issues
of water eroding gulleys in the side slopes and forming
mud runs at the base of the dump.
V. Review Of Shear Strength Behaviour
Of Coal Mine Ob Dump Material
Richards et al. (1981) performed shear tests on coal
mine OB dump material collected from Goonyella mine,
Australia. They found peak cohesive strength of 15 kPa
and peak friction angle ranging between 15° and 30° for
the dump material. In residual condition, cohesion of 50
kPa and friction angle ranging from 3° to 5° was reported.
Hoek and Bray (1981) emphasized the use of curved
linear strength envelope for colliery dump material and
concluded that the cohesion and angle of internal friction
depends upon normal stress and water pressure existing in
the dump.
Ulusayet et al. (1995) carried out geotechnical
characterization of OB dump material collected from
Eskihisar strip coal mine of South-western Turkey. They
reported very small difference in shear strength parameters
of OB dump material in terms of peak and residual
conditions. They also demonstrated negligible difference
in the shear strength values for OB dump material using
both linear and curved shear strength envelopes. The peak
cohesion and friction angle were found as 12 kPa and 34.3°
respectively.
Simmons and McManus 2004 (cited in Bradfield et al.
2013) developed a strength framework for dragline
scaled dump and characterized dump material into
four different categories. Spoil category identification
is based on the assessment of five geological attributes,
comprising predominant particle size, consistency,
structure, plasticity and age (Table 2). It is based on
laboratory tests with empirical adjustments using
back analysis of several large spoil dump failures.
The framework provides a visual-tactile method for
identifying any type of spoil into one of four categories.
International Conference on Opencast Mining Technology & Sustainability

The ‘structure’ attribute is a fabric-related parameter, particles. Framework abundant spoils are said to be
where larger particles represent the ‘framework’, and finer stronger and less compressible than matrix abundant spoils
particles the ‘matrix’. Matrix represents the finer-sized (Simmons and McManus 2004 cited in Bradfield et al.
component that fills the void spaces between framework 2013).

TABLE 2: SPOIL CATEGORIES AND ATTRIBUTES (Simmons and McManus 2004; Bradfield et al., 2013)

Category 1 2 3 4
Fine-grained Fine-grained low Large blocks,
Description Weighting Larger clasts with fine
clay-rich, high plasticity with larger minor fines, minor
Attributes (excl. age) matrix, low plasticity
plasticity clasts slaking
P r e d o m i n a n t 3/31=9.7%
Clay Sand Gravel Cobbles
particle size (11.6%)
Consistency:
7/31=22.6% Soft to firm Stiff Hard XLS+ rock
Cohesive
(26.9%) Loose Med. dense Dense Very dense
Cohesion less
7/31=22.6% Framework
Structure Matrix only Matrix supported Framework only
(26.9%) supported
9/31=29.0% High Intermediate Low Not plastic
Liquid Limit
(26.9%) (>50) (35-50) (20-35) (<20)
5/31=16.1%
Age 0-2 y 2-10 y 10-30 y >30 y
(26.9%)

TABLE 3: SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS FOR CATEGORIES AND MOBILIZATION MODES (Simmons and McManus 2004, cited in
Bradfield et al. 2013)

Unsaturated Saturated Remolded

Category γ c’ φ’ γ c’ φ’ c’=0,
(kN/m3) (kPa) (deg) (kN/m3) (kPa) (deg) φ’(deg)
18 20 25 20 0 18 18
1
(1) (10) (2.5) (1) (0) (3) (1.5)
18 30 28 20 15 23 18
2
(1) (15) (3) (1) (7.5) (2.5) (1.5)
18 50 30 20 20 25 18
3
(1) (15) (2) (1) (10) (2.5) (1.5)
18 50 35 20 0 30 28
4
(1) (15) (2.5) (1) (0) (1.5) (2)
(Parameter standard deviation in parentheses)

Bradfield et al. (2013) pointed out that the above
framework is not suitable in the very low stress range and
for very high dumps.
Based on direct shear tests performed on weak pit floor
material at the South Blackwater coal mine, Mallett et al.
(1983) (cited in Bradfield et al. 2013) inferred that accurate
shear strength models can only be achieved by testing
representative size samples of the stress range of interest.
Kainthola et al. (2011) conducted, consolidated drained
direct shear tests on dump material samples collected from
a failed dump slope of an open cast coal mine situated in
the Wardha valley coal field, India. They reported peak
cohesion and friction angle of the dump material in the
range of 85 kPa to 95 kPa and 23.5° to 25.5° respectively.

27

Verma et al. (2013) conducted tests on OB dump material
collected from 80 m high internal dump slope of an open-
cast coal mine in the Wardha valley coal field, India. They
reported cohesion and friction angle of the OB dump
material as 91 kPa and 25° respectively.
Poulsen et al. (2014) found cohesion and friction angle of
the OB dump material collected from a failed dump slope
of coal mine in the range of 27 kPa to 48 kPa and 25° to 34°.
Koner and Chakravarty (2015) carried out geotechnical
characterization of OB dump material collected from
various sites of external dumps of an open cast coal
mine located in the Wardha valley coal field, India. They
conducted compaction and shear tests on OB dump
material and found the average values of dry unit weight
varying between 14.88 kN/m3 and 18.10 kN/m3 and
cohesion and friction angle ranging between 5 kPa to 80
kPa and 20° to 45° respectively.
Dewangan et al. 2016 developed generalized peak shear
strength criteria for soft and weathered coal mine OB
material. The shear strength parameters were evaluated by
combining all the shear test results which were performed
at various moisture content, compaction density, stress
levels and material having a difference in gradations and
fragment sizes. The shear strength envelope so established
is presented in Figure 3 which gives apparent cohesion and
angle of internal friction angle of soft and weathered coal
mine OB dump material as 4.72 kPa and 31.21° respectively.
However, these values of apparent cohesion and angle of
internal friction of OB dump materials can be used for
designing up to a maximum height of 60 m.
Figure 3: Generalized shear strength envelope for soft and
weathered Coal mine OB dump material (Dewangan et al. 2016)
VI. Design Consideration
Selection of the dump site constitutes the primary step
28
Northern Coalfields Limited, Singrauli
for the OB dump design. The dumping site is restricted
by factors i.e., open-pit size and location, topographical
features of the considered area, surface and groundwater
flow, working boundaries, rehabilitation requirements
and foundation conditions. The information gathered
throughout mining exploration, i.e., topography, geology,
hydrology and climate etc. be effectively used for the
assessment and selection of a dumping site for waste rock
generated from mining activities.
Factors designate considered for selection of the dump site
are following - (1) Size of the dump area - The capacity of
the dump and its height will determine the size of the dump
site; (2) Presence of infrastructure and other features - The
haulage cost is given the prime importance while selecting
the site, neglecting the location of critical infrastructures.
In the event of failure, these features are severely affected,
causing high cost of dump failure; (3) Topography and
landforms - The sloping site lowers the safety factor of
dump stability, and hence present larger risks associated
with sliding than level sites. The study shows that the
FoS reduces with increase in floor slope dipping in an
unfavourable direction. Lands with irregular topography
influence stability; thus type of landforms essential be
known; (4) Soil Characteristics - The factor of safety is
higher for better soils for higher values of cohesion and
angle of internal friction respectively; (5) Rainfall - Areas
of high rainfall require special construction methods to
control run-offs and minimize infiltration; (6) Hydrology
- Study on the effect of the height of water table in waste
dump shows that increase in the height of water table in
a dump reduces factor of safety significantly; and (7)
Regional Seismicity - Seismicity affects the stability of
waste dumps depending on its degree of compaction, type
of dump material, and moisture content, so the study of the
regional seismicity is important.
The DSR system provides a semi-quantitative method
for assessing the relative potential of dump stability and
recommends the appropriate level of dumping investigation
and design (Table 4). This is based on individual point
ratings for each of the main factors affecting dump stability.
Each factor is given a point rating based on qualitative and/
or quantitative descriptions accounting for the possible
range of conditions. An overall DSR is calculated as
the sum of the individual ratings for each of the various
factors. The maximum possible DSR is 1800. It must be
recognized that the behaviour of a mine dump, and the
potential for instability, depends on a wide range of diverse
and interrelated factors, as discussed above. Not all of these
factors lend themselves to easy quantitative assessment.
Consequently, any comprehensive stability rating scheme
for mine dumps will be partially subjective. Similarly, no
rating scheme can hope to realistically evaluate all possible
permutations. To simplify the rating scheme for possible
practical application, four categories or Dump Stability
Classes have been defined, based on Dump Stability
International Conference on Opencast Mining Technology & Sustainability

Ratings. Table 5 summarizes the four classes and ranges of DSR values for each class.

TABLE 4: DUMP STABILITY RATING (DSR) (BCMWRPRC, 1991a)

Key Factors Range of conditions or description Point Rating

Low < 50 m 0

Moderate 50-100 m 50
Dump Height
High 100-200 m 100

Very High > 200 m 200

Small < 1 x 106 BCM (bank cubic meters) 0

Dump Volume Medium < 1 x 10 -5 x 10 BCM

6 7
50

Large > 5 x 107 BCM 100

Flat < 26° 0

Dump Slope Moderate 26-35° 50

Steep > 35° 100

Flat < 10° 0

Moderate 10-25° 50
Foundation Slope
Steep 25-32° 100

Extreme > 32° 200

Concave in plan or section; valley or cross-valley fill, toe buttressed against

Confined opposite valley wall; incised gullies that can be used to limit the foundation slope 0
during development.

Degree of Confinement Moderately Natural benches or terraces on a slope; even slopes, limited natural topographic 50
Confined diversity; heaped, sidehill or broad valley or cross-valley fills.

A convex slope in plan or section; sidehill or ridge crest fill with no toe confinement,
Unconfined 100
and no gullies or benches to assist any development.

Foundation materials as strong or stronger than dump materials; not subject to

Competent 0
adverse pore pressure; no adverse geologic structure.

Intermediate between competent and weak; soils gain strength with consolidation;
Intermediate 100
Foundation Type adverse pore pressures dissipate if loading rate controlled.

Limited bearing capacity, soft soils; subject to adverse pore pressure generation
Weak upon loading; adverse groundwater conditions, springs or seeps; strength sensitive 200
to shear strain, potentially liquefiable.

High Strong, durable; less than ~10% fines 0

Dump Material Quality Moderate Moderately strong, variable durability; 10-20% fines 100

Poor Predominantly weak rocks of lower durability; greater than ~25% fines, overburden 200

Thin lifts (< 25m thick), wide platforms; dumping along contours; ascending
Favourable 0
construction; wraparounds or terraces.

Mixed Moderately thick lifts (25-50 m); mixed construction methods. 100
Method of Construction

Thick lifts (> 50 m), narrow platforms (sliver fills); dumping down the fall line of
Unfavourable 200
the slope; descending construction

29
 Northern Coalfields Limited, Singrauli

Low piezometric pressures, no seepage in foundation; development of phreatic

Favourable surface within dump unlikely; limited precipitation; minimal infiltration into 0
dump; no snow or ice layers in dump or foundation.

Moderate piezometric pressures, some seeps in foundation; limited development

Piezometric and Intermediate of phreatic surface within dump possible; moderate precipitation; high infiltration 100
Climatic Conditions into dump; discontinuous snow or ice lenses in dump or foundation

High piezometric pressures, springs in the foundation; high precipitation;

Unfavourable significant potential for the development of phreatic surface or perched water 200
tables in the dump; continuous layers of snow or ice in the dump or foundation

Slow < 25 BCM/m of crest/d; crest advancement rate < 0.1 m/d 0

Dumping Rate Moderate 25-200 BCM/m of crest/d; crest advancement rate 0.1-1.0 m/d 100

High > 200 BCM/m of crest/d; crest advancement > 1.0 m/d 200

Low Seismic Risk Zones 0 and 1 0

Seismicity Moderate Seismic Risk Zones 2 and 3 50

High Seismic Risk Zones 4 or higher 100

TABLE 5: DUMP STABILITY CLASSES AND RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF EFFORT (BCMWRPRC, 1991a)

Dump Stability Dump Stability Failure Recommended level of effort for

Rating(DSR) Class (DSC) Hazard Investigation, design and construction

Basic site reconnaissance, baseline documentation; minimal laboratory

< 300 I Negligible testing; routine check of stability, possibly using charts; minimal
restrictions on construction; visual monitoring only.

Thorough site investigation; test pits, sampling may be required; limited

laboratory index testing; stability may or may not influence design;
300-600 II Low
basic stability analysis required; limited restrictions on construction;
routine visual and instrument monitoring.

Detailed, phased site investigation; test pits required, drilling or other

subsurface investigations may be required; undisturbed sampling may
be required; detailed laboratory testing, including index properties,
shear strength & durability testing likely required; stability influences
& control design; detailed stability analysis, possibly including
600-1200 III Moderate
parametric studies, required; Stage II detailed design report may
be required for the approval/permitting; moderate restrictions on
construction (e.g. limiting loading rate, lift thickness, material quality);
detailed instrument monitoring required to confirm design, document
behavior & establish loading limits.

Detailed, phased site investigation; test pits, and possibly trenches,

required; drilling and possible other subsurface investigations probably
required; undisturbed sampling probably required; detailed laboratory
testing, including index properties, shear strength and durability
testing probably required; stability considerations paramount; detailed
> 1200 IV High stability analysis, probably including parametric studies and full
evaluation of alternatives probably required; Stage II detailed design
report probably required for approval/permitting; severe restrictions on
construction (e.g. limiting loading rate, lift thickness, material quality);
detailed instrument monitoring required to confirm design, document
behaviour and establish loading limits.

30
 International Conference on Opencast Mining Technology & Sustainability
VII. CONCLUSIONS
Overall stability and improved mechanism of dumping is
a function of three factors: (a) Placement of materials; (2)
Control of water, and (3) Foundation. Safe and optimum
design of dumps requires a detailed study of different
geotechnical properties and detailed determination of
shear strength parameters of OB dump material in addition
to bearing capacity of foundation rock. Several factors,
i.e., groundwater content and seepage conditions; the
presence of geological structures, the effect of differential
settlements etc. affects the stability of dump and therefore
requires correct assessment by scientific methods. The
environmental problems during a dump construction
as well as reclamation requirements after the completion
of dumping have a direct impact on the designing of a
dump and must be taken into considerations. Closure
plan essential aim is to return the dumpsites to a state
like surrounding lands and to ensure long-term physical
stability (slope stability) and chemical stability of the waste.
Reference
1. Blight, G.E., 1969. Shear stability of dumps and dams of gold
mining waste. Trans. South Afr. Inst. Civil Eng. 11, 46-49.
2. Bradfield, L., Simmons, J. and Fityus, S. 2013. Issues related to
stability design of very high spoil dumps. Proceedings of 13th
Coal Operators Conference, The University of Wollongong,
pp. 376-386.
3. British Columbia Mine Waste Rock Dump Research
Committee, BCMWRPRC (1991b). Operating and
Monitoring Manual. Interim Guidelines, Klohn Leonoff Ltd.,
Canada.
4. British Columbia mine waste rock pile research committee.
1991a. Mined rock and overburden piles. Investigation and
Design Manual, Interim Guidelines, North Vancouver, pp.
1-177.
5. Caldwell, J.A., Moss, A.S.E., 1981. Simplified stability
analysis. In: Proceedings of Design of Non-Impounding
Waste Dumps, American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical,
and Petroleum Engineers (AIME), New York, pp. 47-61.
6. Campbell, B.D., Shaw, W.H., 1986. Performance of a waste
rock dump on moderate to steeply sloping foundation. In:
Proceedings of First International Symposium on Stability in
Coal Mining, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, pp. 395-
405.
7. Campbell, D.B., 1981. Construction and performance in
mountainous terrain. In: Proceedings of Workshop on
Design of Non-Impounding Mine Waste Dumps, Society
for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration (SME), USA,
November.
8. Campbell, D.B., 1986. Stability and performance of waste
dumps on steeply sloping terrain. In: Proceedings of
International Symposium Geotechnical Stability in Surface
Mining, Calgary, November.
View publication stats
9. CANMET, 1977. Pit Slope Manual, Chapter 8-Monitoring,
Ministry of Supply and Services, Canada, Report 77-s15.
10. Chaulya, S. K., and Prasad, B. M., Sensing and Monitoring
Technologies for Mines and Hazardous Areas, (2016), Ch-1,
pp 1- 86, Elsevier Inc.
11. Crossby, W.A., 1983. Design of waste rocks, Australian
Mineral Foundation Workshop Course No-228/ 23, pt. I-D3,
pp. 71-91.
12. Dewangan P. K., Pradhan M. and Ramtekkar G.D., 2016.
Generalized Shear Strength Criteria for Soft and Weathered
Coal Mine Overburden Dump Materials, Academic Journal
of Science, 06 (01): 131-146.
13. Fityus, S., Hancock, G. and Wells, T. September 2008.
Geotechnical characteristics of coal mine spoil. Australian
Geomechanics 43 (3), pp. 13-22.
14. Forbe, P. J., 1984. Dynamic effects in waste dumps and tailings
dams. Trans. Inst. Min. Metall. Assoc. 93, A197-A202.
15. Glass, C.E., 1981. Influence of earthquakes. In: Proceedings
of Workshop on Design of Non-Impounding Mine Waste
Dumps, SME, November.
16. Hawley, P.M., and Cunning, J. (2017), Guidelines for Mine
Waste Dump and Stockpile Design, CRC Press, USA.
17. Hoek, E. and Bray J. W., 1981. Rock slope engineering.
Revised Third Edition: Institution of Mining and Metallurgy.
18. Iverson, R.M., 2000. Slope failure triggering by rain
infiltration. Water Resour. Res. Geol. Surv. 36, 1897-1910.
19. Kainthola, A., Verma, D. and Singh, T.N. 2011. Computational
analysis for the stability of black cotton soil bench in open
cast coal mine in Wardha valley coalfield, Maharashtra,
India. International Journal of Economic and Environmental
Geology 2 (1), pp. 11-18.
20. Koner, R. and Chakravarty, D. 2015. Characterization of
overburden dump material: A case study from Wardha
valley coal field. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the
Environment, pp. 1-13
21. Lau, R.K., Perez, A., Khahn, J., 1986. Design, construction
and performance of sidehill waste dumps at byron creek
colliery in Corbin; British Columbia. In: Proceedings of
International Symposium on Geotechnical Stability in
surface Mining, Calgary, pp. 331.
22. Linero, S., Palma, C. and Apablaza, R. 2007. Geotechnical
characterization of waste material in very high dumps with
large scale triaxial testing. Proceedings of International
Symposium on Rock Slope Stability in Open Pit Mining and
Civil Engineering. 12-14 September, Perth, Australia, pp. 59-
75.
23. Mathur, S. P., and Singh, N.K.,Coal Mining & Management,
Vol-1, Ch-5, Slope Stability Study in Open Cast Mining, pp
no. 1-14, KhananPrakashan, 2012.
24. Nichols, R. S. 1986. Rock segregation in waste dumps in
flow through rock drains. Proceedings of the International
symposium convened at the Inn of the South Cranbroo B. C.,
8-11 Sept., pp. 105-120.
31