Skip to main content
Log in

The Plewes Method: a Word of Caution

  • Published:
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The assessment of liquefaction vulnerability is crucial to understanding the potential consequences of a tailings dam failure. The “Plewes method” is a relatively well-known and simple screening method to assess liquefaction potential based on results of cone penetration testing (CPT) which may be complemented with laboratory testing. The objective of the current work is to emphasise the screening nature of the method and its uncertainties when applied in tailings deposits. Specifically, the paper highlights the difficulties in assessing the intrinsic uncertainty of the method and the additional uncertainty that results from variations of the slope of the critical state line (λ10) along the depth of the CPT sounding. The results of the method are too uncertain for detailed characterisation of tailings even when a relatively low intrinsic uncertainty is assumed. However, the method characterises weaker soils with lower uncertainty (although still too high for detailed characterisation) than stronger soils. The uncertainty of the method is negatively affected by the relatively low λ10 values that are typical of nonplastic tailings. It is suggested that the results of the method should be presented in scatter plots in which the spread of the data is consistent with the uncertainty of the method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

All data used in the paper are in the public domain.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Roche C, Thygesen K, Baker E (eds) (2017) Mine tailings storage: safety is no accident. A UNEP Rapid Response Assessment. United Nations Environmental Programme and GRID-Arendal, Nairobi and Arendal

    Google Scholar 

  2. Santamarina JC, Torres-Cruz LA, Bachus RC (2019) Why coal ash and tailings dam disasters occur. Science 364(6440):526–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jefferies M, Been K (2015) Soil Liquefaction: a critical state approach. In: CRC Press, Boca Raton. USA, Fla

  4. Plewes HD, Davies MP, Jefferies MG (1992) CPT based screening procedure for evaluating liquefaction susceptibility. In: Proceedings of the 45th Canadian Geotechnical Conference. Canada, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  5. Robertson PK, de Melo L, Williams DJ, Wilson GW (2019) Report of the expert panel on the technical causes of the failure of Feijao Dam I. Commissioned by Vale

  6. Been K, Jefferies MG, Crooks JHA, Rothenberg L (1987) The cone penetration test in sands: part II, general inference of state. Géotechnique 37(3):285–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Been K, Crooks JHA, Jefferies MG (1988) Interpretation of material state from the CPT in sands and clays. Proceedings, ICE Conference on Penetration Testing in the U.K., Birmingham, U.K., pp 89–92

  8. Been K, Jefferies MG (1985) A state parameter for sands. Géotechnique 35(2):99–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Shuttle DA, Cunning J (2008) Reply to the discussion by Robertson on “Liquefaction potential of silts from CPT”. Can Geotech J 45:142–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Been K, Jefferies MG, Hachey JE (1991) The critical state of sands. Géotechnique 41(3):365–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Verdugo R, Ishihara K (1996) The steady state of sandy soils. Soils Found 36(2):81–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Been K, Jefferies MG (1992) Towards systematic CPT interpretation. Proceedings of the Wroth Memorial Symposium, Thomas Telford, London, pp 121–134

    Google Scholar 

  13. Reid D. (2015). Estimating slope of critical state line from cone penetration test–an update. Can Geotech J 52:46-57

  14. Torres-Cruz LA, Santamarina JC (2020) The critical state line of nonplastic tailings. Can Geotech J. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2019-0019

  15. Wride (Fear) CE, Robertson PK et al (2000) Interpretation of in situ test results from the CANLEX sites. Can Geotech J 37:505–529

  16. Taylor JR (1997) An introduction to error analysis: the study of uncertainties in physical measurements. University Science Books

  17. Shuttle D, Jefferies M (1998) Dimensionless and unbiased CPT interpretation in sand. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 22:351–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jefferies MG, Jonsson L, Been K (1987) Experience with measurement of horizontal geostatic stress in sand during cone penetration test profiling. Géotechnique 37(4):483–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Okusa S, Anma S (1980) Slope failures and tailings dam damage in the 1978 Izu-Ohshima-Kinkai earthquake. Eng Geol 16(3–4):195–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vermeulen NJ (2001) The composition and state of gold tailings. In: PhD Thesis. University of Pretoria, South Africa https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/23079

    Google Scholar 

  21. Naeini SA, Baziar MH (2003) Effect of fines content on steady-state strength of mixed and layered samples of a sand. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24:181–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Shuttle DA, Cunning J (2007) Liquefaction potential of silts from CPTu. Can Geotech J 44:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Torres-Cruz LA (2019) Limit void ratios and steady-state line of non-plastic soils. Proc Inst Civil Eng Geotech Eng 172(3):283–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Reid D, Fourie A, Ayala JL et al (2020) Results of a critical state line testing round robin programme. In: Géotechnique. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.19.P373

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Bedin J, Schnaid F, da Fonseca AV, de Costa Filho LM (2012) Gold tailings liquefaction under critical state soil mechanics. Géotechnique 62(3):263–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Li W, Coop MR, Senetakis K, Schnaid F (2018) The mechanics of a silt-sized gold tailing. Eng Geol 241:97–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Fourie AB, Papageorgiou G (2001) Defining an appropriate steady state line for Merriespruit gold tailings. Can Geotech J 38(4):695–706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Li W, Coop MR (2019) The mechanical behaviour of Panzhihua iron tailings. Can Geotech J 56(3):420–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Carrera A, Coop M, Lancellota R (2011) Influence of grading on the mechanical behaviour of Stava tailings. Géotechnique 61(11):935–946

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Chang N, Heymann G, Clayton C (2011) The effect of fabric on the behaviour of gold tailings. Géotechnique 61(3):187–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Generous and insightful comments from Mike Jefferies are gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luis Alberto Torres-Cruz.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Torres-Cruz, L.A. The Plewes Method: a Word of Caution. Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration 38, 1329–1338 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00392-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00392-0

Keywords

Navigation