You are on page 1of 137

CECW-EG Engineer Manual 1110-2-1902

Department of the Army

EM 1110-2-1902 1 April 1970

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers


Washington, DC 20314-1000

Engineering and Design Stability of Earth and Rock-Fill Dams (Inclusive of Change 1)

Distribution Restriction Statement


Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Foreword

Experiment This manual was prepared in the U. S. Army Waterways Station under direction from the Office, Chief of Engineers. General supervision and technical guidance was provided by W. E. Johnson, Chief, Engineering Division, G. E. Bertram, Chief, Soil Mechanics Branch until 1968, and R. A. Barron, Branch Chief from 1968 to date. The manual was prepared by W. E. Strohm, Jr., Trahan, Yu-Shih Jeng, and D. P. Hanrner under direction of S. J. Johnson and J. R. Compton, the U. S. Army Waterways Experiment Station. assisted by C. C. the innnediate of the staff at

A draft of the manual was reviewed by the Corps Advisory Board The Board consists of R. A. Barron, Chairman; for Soil Mechanics. R. B. Peck, University of A. Casagrande, Harvard University; Illinois; G. E. Bertram, Consulting Engineer; S. D. Wilson, Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthyShannon &Wilson, Inc; J. Lowe, III, and S. J. Johnson, Waterways Experiment Station. Stratton;

ENGCW-ES Manual No. iiiO-Z-1902

DEPARTMENT Office of the Washington,

OF THE ARMY Chief of Engineers 20314 D. C.

EM

iiiO-Z-1902

1 April

197-F..

ENGINEERING Stability of Earth

and

AND DESIGN Rock-Fill Dams

Table Paragraph 1. 2. 3. 4. Purpose Scope .................................. ...................................

of Contents Page 1 i 1 i I 1 2 2 ................... Performance .... 2 3 3 4 5 5 2 7 7 7 13 14 15 15 16 18 19 19 19 20

Applicability. References. a. b. c.

.............................. ...............................

......................... EM 1110-2-2300 .................... Other Engineer Manuals ...................... Selected References. ................................. Design Considerations.

5. 6. 7.

Notation. Basic

Embankment Causes of Unsatisfactory ........................... Shear Failure a. .................... Excessive Deformation. b. .......................... Liquefaction C. ........................... Special Problems ...................... Progressive Failure. a. .......................... Problem Shales. b. ..................... Rate of Fill Placement C. Design Shear Laboratory a. Selection b. Methods Strengths. Tests. of Design ....................... ........................ Shear Strengths. ...................

f .

8.

9.

............

10. 11.

of Stability

Analysis.

.................. Design Conditions for Analysis ................. End of Construction Case I: a. ............ Cases II and III: Sudden Drawdown. b. ..................... Partial Pool Case IV: C. Seepage with Maximum Case V: Steady d. .......................... Storage Pool Case VI: Steady Seepage with Surcharge Pool. e. ..................... Earthquake. Case VII: f. ............. At-Rest Earth Pressure Analyses. g* i

.....

EM iilo-Z-1902 1 April 1970 Paragraph 12. 13. 14. Factors Presentation Use of Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Memoranda. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX References APPENDIX Notation I II

Page 26 26 28

in Design

of Electronic

Computers.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,

APPENDIX III Estimating the Lowering of the Seepage Line in Pervious Upstream Embankment Zones During Reservoir Draivdown APPENDIX IV Simplified Procedures for Preliminary Determination of Embankment Slopes Infinite Slope Modified APPENDIX Analysis for V Cohesionless Soils

APPENDIX VI Swedish Method of Analysis Using Slice Procedure VI-I VI-I VI-5 VI-IO VI-10 VI-12 VI-13 VI-i4

1.
2. 3. 4. 5.

General. Procedure Graphical End

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of Finite Integration Slices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Procedure

of Construction--Case Drawdown--Cases Pool, Seepage, Upstream

I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II and III. Slope--Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. . . . . . . . . . . . V and VI . . .

Sudden Partial Steady

6.
7. 8. No. VI-i VI-2

Downstream VII

Slope--Cases

Earthquake--Case

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLATES

Modified Water

Swedish Forces

Method,

Finite

Slice

Procedure, Procedure,

No Sudden

Modified Swedish Method, Drawdown Impervious

Finite Slice Embankment

ii

EM

IliO-Z-1902 1 April 1970

No. VI-3 VI-4 VI-5 VI-6 VI-7 VI-8


Modified Steady Swedish Seepage, Method, Water Finite Forces Slice Procedure with

Modified Swedish Method, Integration Procedure, Modified cedure, Modified cedure, Modified cedure,

Finite Slice and Graphical Earthquake Loading Integration Integration ProProProUp-

Swedish Method, Graphical No Water Forces Swedish Sudden Swedish Steady Method, Drawdown Method, Seepage, Case Modified Graphical

Graphical Integration Water Forces I - End of Construction, Swedish Method, Finite

Stability Analysis, stream Slope, Slice Procedure

VI-9

Stability Analysis, Modified Swedish Procedure Stability Analysis, stream Slope, Slice Procedure Stability Analysis, and Semipervious down, Modified Procedure

Case I - End of Construction, Method, Graphical Integration II - Sudden Drawdown, UpSwedish Method, Finite

VI-10

Case Modified

VI-ii

Embankment with Central Core Shell, Case II - Sudden DrawSwedish Method, Finite Slice II - Sudden Drawdown, UpSwedish Method, Graphical Pool, Upstream Finite Slice Pool, Graphical Seepage, Modified Upstream IntegraDownSwedish DownSwedish

VI- 12

Stability Analysis, Case stream Slope, Modified Integration Procedure Stability Analysis, Slope, Modified Procedure Stability Analysis, Slope, Modified tion Procedure Stability Analysis, stream Slope, Method, Finite

VI- 13

Case IV - Partial Swedish Method, Case IV - Partial Swedish Method, Case V - Steady Max Storage Pool, Slice Procedure

VI- 14

VI-15

VI- 16

Stability Analysis, Case V - Steady Seepage, stream Slope, Max Storage Pool, Modified Method, Graphical Integration Procedure
111

...

EM 1110-2-190~ 1 April 1970 No. VI-17 Stability Analysis, Case VII - Earthquake, Seepage, Downstream Slope, Modified Method, Finite Slice Procedure Stability Analysis, Case Construction, Modified Graphical Integration VII - Earthquake, Swedish Method, Procedure Steady Swedish End of

VI- 18

Paragraph APPENDIX VII Wedge Analysis 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. General. Basic Basic End . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Principles. Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV . . . . . . . . .

Page

VII-i VII-I VII-2 VII-5 VII-8 VII-II VII12 VII-13 VII14

of Construction--Case Drawdown-Pool,

Sudden Partial

II and III Slope--Case Storage

6.
7. 8.

Upstream

Steady Seepage Pool - - Case Steady Seepage

with Maximum V......................... with Surcharge

Pool--Case

VI

. . . . .

9. No.
VIIVII-2 VII-3 VII-4 VIIVII-6 5 1

Earthquake

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLATES

Stability Direction Passive Use

Analysis,

Wedge

Method and

of Resultant Earth Forces and Active Sliding Planes, Wedge Method Stresses with Wedge with Wedge Central Method Inclined Method

of Conjugate

Stability Case Stability Case

Analysis of Embankment I - End of Construction, Analysis of Embankment I - End of Construction,

Core, Core,

Embankment Stability Analysis, and Semipervious Shell, Case down, Wedge Method

with Central II - Sudden

Core Draw-

iv

.-

EM No.

1110-2-1902 1 April 1970 ..-

VII-7

Stability Analysis, Embankment with Inclined and Free-Draining Shell, Case II - Sudden down, Wedge Method Stability Analysis, Embankment with and Free-Draining Shell, Case IV Pool, Wedge Method Stability Case Stability Case Analysis, V - Steady Inclined - Partial

Core DrawCore

VU-8

VII-9 VII-IO VII-11

Embankment with Central Seepage, Wedge Method with Wedge Soil, Wedge Soil, Wedge Central Method

Core, Core, Active Negative Active Nega-

Analysis Embankment Pool, VI - Surcharge Cohesionless for Active

for 8A vs +D Sliding Slope Plane 9, for

Coulomb Beneath Coulomb Beneath

VII-12

KA

vs

Cohesionless for Active

Sliding Plane tive Slope Paragraph Evaluation 1. 2. 3. 4. No. VIII-1 VIII-2 Basic

Page APPENDIX VIII of Embankment During Construction

Stability VIII-I VIII-i VIII-4 VIII-5

Consideration.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Water Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of Piezometers Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Development of Pore During Construction Installation Evaluation and Uses

of Embankment PLATES

Pore Pressures in Partially Drainage During Loading Pore Pressures of Complete. Construction in Partially Dissipation Seasons

Saturated

Soils,

No Effect Between

Saturated Soils, of Pore Pressure

VIII-3

Pore Pressures in Partially Saturated Soils, Effect of Partial Dissipation of Pore Pressure Between Construction Seasons

EM 1110-2-1902
1 April 1970

No.
VIII-4 VIII-5 Pore Pressure Coefficients of Excess Estimating Pore Pore A and Water B Pressures in Q Test Ratios

Development Data 7 for

VIII-6
VIII-

Pressures Various

Undrained of Q/Q3 Undrained Conditions

Shear Strength for at Start of Shear Shear Strength for

VIII-8

Field.

Stress

vi

ENGCW-ES Manual No. IliO-2-i902

DEPARTMENT Office of the Washington,

OF THE ARMY Chief of Engineers D. C. 20314

EM

1110-2;1902 1 April 1970

Stability 1. ity 2.
Purpose.

ENGINEERING of Earth establishes dams.

and

AND DESIGN Rock-Fill Dams procedures for analyzing the stabil-

This and

manual

of earth
Scope.

rock-fill are

Criteria requiring computing

presented analysis,

for and

(a) types (c) minimum

of strength acceptable described manual Swedish are

tests

to be used, factors. by

(b) conditions Methods examples methods, (method No. 3-777 for

safety and

embankment The prohibit given

stability methods the use in Appendix given special

are of this of the

illustrated

in the but this

appendixes. does Case not (c)) factors are not This having levees,

approved method Report used. that

slide Technical

of slices, (ref

D of WES in table tests

1) if the

of safety given, but

I, page

25, are analyses

Minimum may 3. sions analyses fill 4. dams.

requirements are

or design

be required Applicability. and Districts for dikes,

included. manual civil and is applicable works highway functions. fills, to all Corps of Engineers Divi-

It is applicable as well as for earth

to stability and rock-

References. ihfluencing and all general phases

a.

EM

IiiO-2-2300. of cross that and Rock-Fill in draft

Types section, must

of earth zoning, and

and

rock-fill

dams, utilizastability in

factors tion, during EM tion

selection design criteria

material

be satisfied operation General

to provide are Design 1969).

of construction Earth and

reservoir Dams, form

described and Construc-

liiO-2-2300, Considerations b. Other

(issued Engineer and

September following and should

Manuals. rock-fill

The dams

manuals

also

relate to for

to use criteria

and other

design than EM

of earth stability:

be referred

iiiO-i-1801 rescinds

Geological EM

Investigations 21 July

(November 1964, and

1960) EM 1110-2-1902,

This manual 27 Dee 1960.

1iiO-2-1805,

EM 1110-Z-1902 1 April 1970

EM EM EM EM EM EM Where sion

1110-2-1802 I 1iO-21803

Geophysical Subsurface Seepage Settlement Laboratory Conduits, references shall References. govern.

Explorations Investigations--Soils Control Analysis Soils Culverts and this (February

(September (March 4952) 1953)

1948) 1954)

1110-2-1901 1110-2-1904 iiiO-2-1906 1110-2-2902 the above-listed manual

(January Testing and

(10 May Pipes

1965) 1969) the proA-

(3 March do not

manual

agree,

of this c.

Selected

Selected numbers; these I.

references numbers

are

cited

herein

and are

designated numbered 5. Notation. II.

by superscript references Symbols The majority

correspond

to similarly

in Appendix used

in this

manual

are

listed

and defined recommended

in Apby the and

pendix

of them of Terms American

correspond and Society a.

to those

Committee Foundations 6. Basic

on Glosstiry Division, Design for

Definitions of Civil The

of the Soil Engineers.2

Mechanics

Considerations. construction properties information. embankment in borrow and of the

stability conditions and

of an embankment utilizing expected materials

must in and

be evaluated situ engineering

operating foundation

embankment and selecting

pertinent properties

geologic

When

determining materials,

engineering must be given of

of proposed variation

consideration (2) natural rate and water methods,

to (1) possible borrow conditions, compacted The terials b. values, judgment, ments and are decrease under Other but materials, and

materials, in placement

contents

(3) variations (5) inevitable that must angle

(4) climatic and control. ma-

variations be expected of granular stresses must

in placement with normal

water

contents

densities

construction and for foundation high

in friction high confining that

embankment be considered for

must

dams.3 design

factors can

be accounted only through

in establishing exercise

which include located

be evaluated effect

of engineering where deep embankvalleys, and of

(1) the

of differential foundations characteristics 2

settlements or in narrow, within the

on compressible of strain

(2) compatibility

embankment

EM

IiiO-i-1902 1 April 1970 in this in all .b--

the

embankment assume along Geologic and seepage

with that

the design

foundation. strengths sliding that

The are

stability mobilized

analyses

presented

manual materials
C.

simultaneously

assumed information

surfaces. should be considered stratigraphy, interpretation; geological closed, and relating tension joint evidence; etc.), and includes and (i) geologic grounddepast in-

water tails

conditions; and

(2) lithology, geologic from

disclosed

by borings at site

(3) maximum (4) structure, faulting;

overburden cluding ation

as deduced (amount,

bedding, of materials

folding

open, (6) joints

(5) alter-

by faulting; and (9) field faults,

systems; to slides,

(7) weathering; earthquake activity,

(8) slickensides; movement d. ative fects during -. validity for and The merits along

evidence and

existing

jointing. afford design and a means and for for comparing the properties depends on the relef-

results of trial

of stability cross

analyses during

sections

evaluating material

of changes and after

in assumed construction. design with experiences

embankment The shear for known. described can value

foundation

of stability and results

analyses should where

of assumed

strengths, similar

be reviewed construction

compatibility operating e. The pore for

analyses are

structures

design water all

procedures pressures

herein

utilize

effective and stresses

stresses

where stresses

be satisfactorily effective seepage

predicted, normal

total are used during and have be-

other

cases. pool where and

In general, steady

to evaluate and after

(1) partial construction

conditions, are and

(2) stability available,

piezometer dams when

observations foundation pore

(3) the come stresses rapid 7.

stability fully

of existing and

embankment exist. Total

consolidated are used

no excess for

pressures and,

normal sense, for

in designing earthquake

construction

in a general

drawdown Causes a.

and

conditions. Embankment Performance. a portion or of an embankment rotation relative A shear or to the failure is of

of Unsatisfactory Failure. and

Shear

A failure foundation

in which

an embankment remainder of the

moves

by sliding as a shear 3

mass

is designated

failure.

EM illO-2-1902 1 April 1970

COnVentiOnally

represented analyses, The failure although

as occurring shearing

along may

a surface occur

and

is so assumed of substantial and

in stability thickness. in soil mately foundation exists nearly several b. compacted strains slightly greater such within

in a zone

surface

in relatively of thick, arc. are deposit,

homogeneous deposits zoned

embankments may

foundations represented layers

consisting by a circular overlying

fine-grained Where involved the

be approxior thin stratum more or

embankments a weak may planes

bedrock

or where failure

a thick,

fine-grained a combination plane Deformation.

surface arcs and

approximate interconnected Excessive on the to develop dry than materials. they fill

of interconnected

surfaces. Some cohesive water soils, especially require Even equal may placed pore those large

wet given

side

of optimum of shear content

content,

relatively when compacted slightly in

levels water maximum,

resistance. and to densities large these and

of optimum standard As may

to or

relatively when

strains soils are high

develop

a consequence, deform excessively During of the

in an em-

bankment as additional should

create study,

water
soils

pressures
to be used

is placed. to the and shear shape existing

the

design

particular for

attention

be given

stress-strain foundation. strains

curves When or have average or

in an embankment tests cent tents for soil ment cially the show strain, peak

in the

Q and not

R strength

strengths

at high

peaked

at 45 percon-

it may

be necessary dry side

to (1) limit of optimum,

placement

water

to slightly design shear

on the

(2) use conservative


settlement may Excessive of the Shear

values
occur if the embankespein

strengths. too may dry also and

However, then

excessive becomes

is compacted deformation where foundation large may

saturated.

result

from

consolidation will conditions at large be installed so that occur.

foundation, deformations the

differential be high under are

settlements these mobilized should water

and also strains

where Surface

peak

strengths ment

in the

foundation and

movede-

indicators and can

piezometers pore

to detect the rate

excessive of placement

formation of fill

excessive

pressure

be controlled.

EM iiiO-2-1902 1 April 1970


C. sands, when shocks. basis Liquefaction. sensitive such materials The possibility silts, The and phenomenon quick subjected of liquefaction clays of liquefaction is of major of loose, concern, and saturated may occur b-

are

to shear must

deformations presently by special density

or earthquake be evaluated laboratory equal on the 5 tests and

of empirical judgment. are

knowledge4 Sands believed

supplemented having to be not a relative

engineering than for age

to or greater However, zones, embankment shear strength. conditions investigaare an aver-

70 percent cohesionless relative

susceptible fills

to liquefaction. and drainage

materials density or the

in embankment is required and

of 85 percent danger of piping, Certain requiring in this

to minimize adequate

settlement, 8. Special

to provide and

Problems. problems described below.

soil

types more

potential

failure stability problems

present tions briefly a. tion areas shear taneously for a soil

unusual than those

comprehensive Some of these

manual.

discussed Progressive

Failure. failure zones, may be less entire

(1) relatively

Because large

of nonuniform strains may

stress develop the

distribuin some total simulcurve

in potential and peak

strengths will the

be reached than if the surface. drop

progressively, peak strength the

so that is mobilized stress-strain after peak and

resistance along exhibits the

failure

Where stress

a significant

in shear failure

stresses the use

are of

reached, peak sible that shear

possibility strengths are than

of progressive in stability to increase analyses the safety

is increased,

would factor

be unconservative. or to use shear even

POSstrengths be necessary

solutions are less ultimate Where highly

peak

strengths. strengths. are heavily

In certain

soils,

it may

to use (2) brittle, ing

shear

embankments plastic, or

constructed overconsolidated significantly be given

on foundations clays, different

consisting or clay from the those safety shales

of havem-

stress-strain

characteristics should required at strains

of the factor

bankment, over for the the

consideration minimums embankment

to (a) increasing 25), to those (b) using in the

in table

I (page

shear foundation,

strengths or

comparable 5

EM IiiO-2-1902 1 April 1970

(c)

using (3)

ultimate progressive

shear

strengths also

of the may

foundation along

soils. tension cracks occurring by drying. can that resulting during The maxifrom depth along water asor

failure or transverse

start

from

longitudinal

differential shrinkage an infinite with the the

settlements caused slope,

subsequent mum the depth equation does

to construction of cracking, v not tan exceed

or from assuming

be estimated maximum resistance with

(45 + 3

limitation height. assumed where may have

the

sumed the

0.5 times and

slope

Shear

crack

should

be ignored analyses Shales. (compaction for

the crack

to be filled this condition into two

in all b. (a) clay

stability Problem shales

embankments (1) Shales that

is expected. broad by the groups: weight and

be divided been strength strength

shales) and lack

consolidated from produced particle usually cycles

of overlying (b) cemented siliceous, curred or

sediments shales other that types

significant substantial

cementation by calcareous, bonding slake has rapidly

have

of deposits, and pressure. when shales

or in which Clay shales to a few either

ocinto

because fine

of heat particles

noncohering ing, small (2) shales whereas pieces.

subjected are usually

of wetting or reduced

and dryto

cemented

unaffected

Foundation than

problems shales. highly and/or

have

been Clay

encountered shales,

more

frequently those

in clay

in cemented are unloading modulus conditions, with soil

particularly and

containing loss strength unalunder The of low not shear be based of

montmorillonite, strength and tered increase presence strengths. solely leading, clay aerial upon

susceptible exposure shales pore

to expansion to weathering. may water approaching be quite pressures

consequent The shear under

deformation in situ

of clay and high

low,

even

may

develop

in load

properties in clay shales

those

of clays.

of slickensides Prediction on results and

is usually of clay tests, be required.

an indication shales since should they Existence of slide areas

of the

field

behavior laboratory

of conventional field

may

be misof problem

large-scale can

tests

may

shales or

be determined reconnaissance,

by (a) observation (b) presence 6

through (c) presence

ground

of slickensides,

8b(2)

EM

11iO-2-1902 1 Aprii 1970 limits with *-

of bentonite natural (3) tain layers. all water All

layers, contents, types

(d) comparison and (e) clay may faults, and mass. are excess

of Atterberg mineralogical foundation filled water geologic In addition, properties with

liquid tests.

and

plastic

of shales

present seams pore

problems soft material, may

where

they

con-

joints,

slickensides, Such defects of the shales

and weak control the over-

pressures investigation special such

strength

A detailed

is essential laboratory strength tests and may

wherever be required pore


C.

encountered. physical

to determine pressure. of Fill

as shear

water Rate

Placement. clay, or clay

(1) shale

Foundations. foundations may

Construction create

of emexcessive pore

bankments water stalled sures ment,

on silt,

pressures to measure occurring and past VIII).

and

significant

deformations. and vertical

Instruments movements of such the rate and

should pore

be inpresjudg-

horizontal during

water

construction. are used

Analyses to control

observations, of fill placement

experience

(Appendix (2) may also

Embankments. occur greater and dry

Excessive

pore where Some even

water impervious soils when may

pressures soils develop

and are high

deformations placed pore contents movements that may be at water water

in embankments than deform optimum. excessively

contents pressures slightly and used plastic

placed

at water and vertical

of optimum. water the pressures rate

Observations during

of horizontal construction can

of pore

provide

data

to control foundations

of fill

placement.

In some to limit

cases

except water to the

on weak, contents dry water side of of

it may

be necessary outer shells

placement

semipervious optimum content. while

material placing

in the the core

of embankments slightly wet

material

of optimum

9.
values tests

Design used

Shear

Strengths. analyses three drainage

a.

Laboratory are generally of test are

Tests. determined specimen (a)

(1)

Shear from drainage.

strength laboratory Tests the water

in stability under to these

performed

conditions conditions 7

corresponding

Q tests

in which

EM IIIO-2I902 1 April 1970

content swelling kept which ditions tests

is.kept

constant under

during initial

the test, stress

(b)

R tests

in which but

consolidation content S tests in is

or

1s allowed during consolidation for

conditions stresses,

the water and the (c)

constant full

application or each swelling

of shearing

is permitted of load during

under shear. for

initial Q, R, design required

stress.conand S shear for rel-

and also will

increment on each

be conducted are needed.

representative Q tests they are

soil

which not

strengths atively loose provide loading (2) apparatus with direct

However, soils unless conditions

generally in the

free-draining condition. limiting and The shear

occur

foundation letters to various

in a very Q, R, and S

test

designated

by the

strength conditions.

values

corresponding

prototype

drainage all for

Normally, except shear of gravel using

strength S tests

tests

will

be made soils,

with

triaxial usually

compression are tested

on fine-grained Where S tests impervious should

which soils

apparatus. sizes,

contain

significant compres-

quantities sion

be performed

in triaxial

apparatus (3) Molding soils

large-diameter contents correspond and minimum should used

specimens. in preparing to standard field result placement in the strength optimum water test water specimens content The allowable density). and comreto and

water should

of cohesive to expected compaction placement Test pacted

maximum effort density

contents. minimum maximum content

applied (such should

estimated of standard water

as 95 or 97 percent also be prepared maximum graphically strength to test for

specimens

at optimum dry density. in- figure expected

to 103 percent which are

standard illustrated in shear

These 1, are

minimum intended

quirements, determine However, of expected narrow impervious tests at the

the variation it may

placement within For shear dams

conditions. the having of the Shear zone

be necessary conditions and shells

additional

specimens 1. the

placement cores

as shown of gravel important placement

central core

in figure . or rock, in the water

strength analysis.

materials

is less

stability are

maximum

estimated

content

considered

sufficient.

943)

EM

IIiO-2-1902

1 April

1970

I 0
A

DRY OF OPT IMUM MOLDING

OPT

IMUM

WET OF OPTIMUM CONTENT

WATER

LEGEND ZONE OF PLACEMENT A . 0 EXPECTED FIELDCONDITIONS

ESTIMATED MINIMUM ALLOWABLE DRY DENSITY IEXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY) AS-COMPACTED SHEAR STRENGTH CONDITION SPECIMENS FOR

Figure

1.

Compaction of shear cohesive soils

test

specimens

of

EM 1110-2-1902 1 April 1970 (4) compacted which (5) sources not is the All Strength test specimens corresponding acceptable soil relative types of free-draining to a relative density in the borrow samples it can for pervious density field areas soils should be

to densities average representative be tested.

of 85 percent, compaction. or from soil that &her. should same be

should

Composite unless soils in similar are minor more principal used planes foundation

of different

types the will not

be used

in test of the

programs individual

be demonstrated up the test composites should

proportion placed where

making

in the individual The and the

embankment samples maximum normal

proportions, representative. stress used

and

be used

(6)
tests normal posed

in triaxial should expected

compression result in prodata

stress

in direct comparable

shear

tests to those

stresses embankment analysis. When circles, This

on failure and/or

in the of shear

to obviate

extrapolation

in design (7) Mohr cles. slightly strength sponding unimportant turbance the for strength

results the

of triaxial

compression customarily when for through effective Q and the

tests

are

plotted tengent are

in the

form ciris

of

strength

envelope

is drawn stresses R tests are

to the but

procedure if total

is correct stresses pass stresses soils and

plQtted,

in error envelope to the for caused

plotted, circles error

as the correis considered effect of dissoils However, disturbance points on the in

should normal

points planes.

on Mohr The

on failure because testing.

undisturbed by sampling should

of the compensating Therefore, for Mohr

undisturbed circles.

envelope

be drawn which are

tangent presumed should on the

to the

compacted testing, envelopes 2.

specimens, the strength

to have be drawn failure

negligible through

before Mohr figure

envelopes stresses

representing

plane,

as illustrated

(a)
a constant not

Q test.
water

The content

shear

strength

resulting This means shear. as a result 10

from that

a Q test water

corresponds change

to is

condition.

content a volume

permitted

either

prior saturated

to or during samples

However,

decrease
of gas (air)

occurs

in partially

of compression

947)(a)

EM

1110-2-1902 1 April 1970

. : ENVELOPE TANGENT TO CIffCLES

Q.
ENVELOH REPEN

UNDISTURBED

SOIL

OffAWN TUffOUGn POINTS W CfRCLES TtNC S Th5SSES ON FAILURE CL AN?

b.
//

SOIL

COMPACTED
TU#OUGN PO/NTS TING STRESSES

WET
ON

OF OPTIMUM

ENVELOPT DRAWN CIRCLES MP&FSEN ON FAlLURE PLANE

c. SOIL

COMPACTED

DRY OF OPTIMUM

NORMAL

STRESS,

d.

SELECTION

OF C AND

@ VALUES,

CURVED

ENVELOPE

Figure

2.

Construction

of failure

envelopes

ii

EM 1110-2-1902 1 April 1970 in the voids pressure. generally strength tion used, this placed envelope for the and While from increased solution for lines partially curved when the of gas Q tests parallel saturated portion the in the pore water saturated abscissa have envelope under soils of the a curved should are porbe in test are

strength

envelopes

of fully to the soils of the

represented diagram, low

by horizontal envelopes for This intercept,

in the

stress the For

range. cohesion purposes of straight cohesion ranges

including low range. with

embankment envelope parallel angle 2d). can

stresses may to the

of design, lines intercept (illustrated shear

curved

be recurved

a series the normal

approximately and friction in fig. strengths zones

so that various

be determined conditions consisting This consolidation a foundation construction, loading in the test apof

Q test

proximate impervious is also rate soil it ir is

end-of-construction soils, applicable slow or of impervious

of embankments embankments. in which In cases saturated prior the where during to axial

of zoned layers rate.

to impervious to the fill but

foundation placement will

compared that

exists advisable

is unsaturated to saturate

become specimens

undisturbed

Q test. (b) R test. The shear saturation specimens and pressures due The that have test then strength resulting from using an R test is obtained methods, estiwater due to in or

by inducing consolidating mated content. shearing; the stability field The

complete these conditions, pore

in specimens under confining the in the

back-pressure that bracket

stresses specimens R test must are

shearing

at constant only those

developed to reservoir applies fully change the and

pore

pressures

water to conditions consolidated without

be also in which under one

considered impervious set of

analysis. soils are subject test

semipervious stresses place. pervious consolidated under used high

been

to a stress

time during

for sudden

consolidation drawdown, layers period and This condition that swell test and

to take of imhave

This

approximates zones during the

behavior,

embankment fully reservoir

of impervious

foundation

embankment prior slopes

construction to sudden a partial

conditions upstream

drawdown. pool

is also

in analyzing

during 12

9d7) (b)

EM

liiO-2-1902

1 April
downstream (c) slopes S test. The a sample slowly each loading enough during shear under steady strength an initial excess Results pressures seepage. resulting confining pore from an S test and is obtained applying

1970

by

consol.idating stresses under draining strengths volume complete cussed water are

stress water are

shearing

to permit

pressures applicable

to dissipate

increment. pore

of S tests do not materials pore

. to (1) freeshear in

soils

in which

develop, that water

(2) evaluating tend to increase

of embankment during shear and

or foundation in which been excess

pressures be estimated, strengths have

due to inas diswhere occurred pore or

consolidation in Appendix pressures VIII, have

have and been

measured

or can field slope

(3) evaluating measured and

shear failures

impending. b. Selection strengths should soils stresses peak (c) the shear deviator with strength strengths. Q or where For of Design the shape Shear of the Strengths. stress-strain undisturbed drop shear tests, strain for between strengths intermediate (1) curves When for selecting individual soils and stress design soil comafter as (a) stress, in the re-

shear tests -pacted peak the or

be considered. do not are show reached, in

Where a significant

foundation in shear strength (b) the where sensitive the will peak

or deviator can peak the

the design S direct shear

be chosen deviator

stress

stress

at 15 percent strain. However,

shear foundation

resistance soils, and

creases design molded to either selected (2) strengths the design

increased should While R or

be intermediate design shear

undisturbed

generally strength

correspond values may be

S test

conditions,

appropriate. embankment be selected zone such and foundation that the two-thirds design than layer, of design the test shear values exceed

each

should

values.

In most cases, should always

shear
the

strength
lowest shear test

for
strengths

the various
for lower

zones and layers

be greater

value

the

zones and layers being considered. than laboratory test values should
tests or other

However, design be used when it results


13

is shown by field consenratlve.

means that

laboratory

are not

9b(2)

EM iliO-2-1902 1 April 1970

(3) velopes figure between gree design quired this during excess

The

shear

strength of the degree Q and since

can

be estimated degree

by interpolating of consolidation is expected must be used result testing degree

between

the

enin

on the basis 3, where that the

estimated

as illustrated

of consolidation R tests. Care

to be intermediate in estimating in unconservative program will be reWhere evall.late of the de-

in the

of consolidation, strength to assist procedure construction pore


3

an overestimate consolidation probable must

may

values.

A careful the

in estimating is used, the

of consolidation. .to measure and and

provisions rate and

be made

of consolidation, field shear

magnitude

dissipation

pressures,

strengths.

t ? ul $ I) 2

R ENVELOPE 4 = 16, C = 0.4 TON/SO DESIGN ENVELOPE FOR 60% CONSOLlDATlON n$ q 12.. C =O.S TON/SO FT

Ff

2 NORMAL STRESS, 0.

3 TONS/SQ FT

Figure

3.

Estimation of strength values intermediate between Q and R strength values Analysis. embankments The that arc more methods are and outlined sliding for of analyzing in the wedge analyzing the appendixes The stability are cir-

10.

Methods and

of Stability rock-fill

of earth simple cular

adaptations arc method

of the

circular

methods.

is generally

applicable

essentially

14
-

EM

1110-2-1902 1 April 1970 mate-

homogeneous rials, dams more tent vide whereas on firm weak

earth

dams

and

dams

on thick is generally dams

deposits more

of fine-grained applicable

..-

the wedge foundations

method and

to rock-fill containing one or ex-

to earth the arc

on foundations slope method

layers.

In addition, the circular for evaluating

infinite or wedge alternative

is used These and

to some pro-

to supplement a uniform by other The basis

method. designs

methods may

be suppleof the VI is be

mented designer. optional. ignored. 11.

methods use of the the

or alternative modified forces

procedures method sides

at the discretion given in Appendix may

Swedish on the vertical

If desired,

of slices

Design

Conditions to shear

for

Analysis. imposed or

An

embankment

and the

its

foundation

are and by sta-

subjected pool bility (II) way

stresses seepage,

by the weight-of forces. designated pool, (V) (III) steady The

embankment for which

fluctuations, analyses sudden crest

earthquake are

cases

shall

be performed from (IV) steady maximum partial seepage I and IV VII

(I) end sudden seepage pool, upstream slopes only;

of construction, from maximum applicable spill-

drawdown elevation,

drawdown with and

pool, with apply

storage (VII) slopes; VI apply a. tially those under cannot dicated, mens The are shear tests or

pool, earthquake. Cases

(VI)

surcharge to both

where and

Cases II, III, and

downstream Cases V and

apply

to upstream

and

to downstream Case entirely I: End

slopes. of Construction. soils water pressure the In an embankment placed contents will at water after contents complete composed higher parthan

of impervious to ultimate loading, readily shear pore during strengths

corresponding the imposed

consolidation the this soil is in-

be induced period. from water

because Where Q tests and

consolidate applicable compacted Q shear

construction determined

are

on specidensities. layers that of Q

to anticipated strength is also

field applicable significantly

placement

contents foundation

to impervious during pressures pore 15 water

too

thick strengths

to consolidate implies that

construction. occurring pressures.

The

use

pore

water field

in laboratory Except for

satisfactorily

approximate

EM illO-2-1902 1 April 1970

thick,

impervious since

foundation some soils, on

strata, consolidation

the use will strength

of Q shear occur based during

strength

is usually For be higher

conservative, overconsolidated than that based which

construction. may the

the average Therefore,

on Q tests reduce values. can

R tests.

swelling in selecting its

may

shear Where conby

strength, solidation performing Q and structed consolidation sult period struction foundation evaluate pletion actual b. saturated quently excess strengths the

should

be considered

design effect

during stability

construction analyses

is significant, using strength 9b. When

be estimated between

values

intermediate

R as described on clays having

in paragraph low

an embankment of the construction the time

is to be conrate would construction For stage conin the to recomthe fill. become of re-

Q strengths, may show that

evaluation stage

characteristics gain a more excess embankment, during stage, in shear Il and

in a significant and permit where or stability of each change Cases

in foundation economical pore water piezometer construction

strengths embankment pressures are

during

design. expected should VIII). be tested

to develop be used

observations (Appendix

Further,

at the

foundation strength III: during pool Sudden

samples due

must

to determine by stage may

to consolidation

caused Embankments

Drawdown. high down

by seepage the pore reservoir water

prolonged is drawn

reservoir faster than seepage be based

stages. pore forces on the water

If subsecan escape, Shear of these dis-

pressures in Cases

and unbalanced II and III (fig. shall 4).

result. minimum for

to be used R and based does not

combined are

S envelopes conservative during maximum pool the

In general,analyses that (1) pore

cases sipation

on the occur from

assumptions and II) For

pressure

drawdown pool (Case

(2) the water or spillway

surface crest

is lowered elevation of

instantaneously (Case LII) to the

minimum

elevation. friction above level; the the

embankments should

composed be determined at full pool

impervious using

materials, or moist

resisting weights this

forces line

saturated

of seepage should

and

submerged using Ilb

weights

below

d.riving lowered 16

forces pool

be determined saturated weights

saturated

weights

above

elevation,

EM

ii10-2-1902 1 April 1970

DESIGN

ENVELOPE

0 0 1 NORMAL 2 STRESS, 0. 3 TONS/SCJ FT 4 5

Figure within (assuming of free-draining age only of pore a minor water time analyses assumption drawdown analyses for net expected to evaluate III, the drawdown a horizontal shell can lag,

4. zone,

Design and

envelope submerged of the which

for

Cases

II and the level).

l.lI drawdown Shear in which of the pool zone strengths drainor with sudden this

weights minimum are defined with by S test

below pool

extension materials, proceed are

as those lowering conditions. slope

concurrently

represented the design

Where and where

drawdown drawdown possible materials, formed a flow given a basis shear den

control

of the upstream

appears rates for and

to be excessively the permeabilities incompressible rates normal lowering nets these and and seepage

conservative, of proposed materials forces

considering embankment may be perfrom

relatively

drawdown effective for the flow for

determined criteria, may effects. same

stresses. of the line

Approximate of seepage seepage be the

in Appendix for

be used The as for

as

constructing envelopes analyses.

determining should

strength drawdown

analyses

sud-

17

Ilb

EM iilo-Z-i902 1 April 1970 Partial stages at these soils S test to the 5). be the soils should envelopes S envelope The design Pool. should

C.

Case reservoir

IV:

Analyses assume stages. that

of the upstream a condition The design envelope is greater is less draining between line eliminating

slope 01 steady shear

for

inter-

mediate has

seepage of

developed

intermediate correspond where where shear

strength

impervious the R and

to a strength the S strength the strength The S strength

midway than than

between the the R R

strength strength soils

and (fig. should

of freely demarcation

cohesionless moist the the for and pool to for

S test

envelope.

submerged

may limit

be approximated of the Stability the factors minimum normal impervious analyses of safety safety

by a horizontal zone, should plotted factor. where thus

from

the downstream flow pool stage for net

need several

construction. and

be performed as a function The analysis water

elevations, to determine reduction

of reservoir must account

the

in effective

stresses

pore

pressures

1 NORMAL

2 STRESS, 0.

3 TONS/SO FT

Figure

5.

Design

envelope 18

for

Cases

IV,

V, and

VI

EM

1110-2-1902 1 April 1970 pool con_ __-.

developed dition
d.

during develop. Case V:

construction

are

not dissipated

before

a partial

can

Steady from long

Seepage the maximum

with

Maximum water storage

Storage level

Pool. that seepage can

A condition be main-

of steady tained

seepage

sufficiently

to produce for

a condition downstream the phreatic line in Case

of steady slope line

throughout A flow forces net when

an embankment should

may

be critical to determine

stability. and seepage

be constructed

the assumption conservative. shear strength

of a horizontal Shear envelope strengths used

phreatic used in Case

in the

impervious be based large

zone

is overly same zones

V should for

on the

XV, except that may

downstream by the infinite of upstream slopes composed by the circular

consisting slope need mainly finite

of cohesionless using the for

materials S strength this case. rest

be analyzed The stability

method not

envelope. Where on weak

slopes

be examined of cohesionless

downstream foundations, with plane analyses through

soils should

analyses by the

inarc is

slope

method methods

be supplemented if a failure

or wedge more

to determine

the foundation

critical. e. Case seepage thrust VI: Steady Seepage exists with Surcharge Pool. The case where horifor rocka

steady zontal

condition is imposed

in an embankment pool should

and an additional also be examined critical used should for

by a surcharge This cores. condition

downstream fill same circular rary steady f. havior methods present, the dams with

slope

stability. central in Case The

is especially strengths should should

narrow used method. causing saturation VLI: dams

Shear

be the or

as those arc condition seepage Case of earth for

V, and analyses surcharge pool

be by the wedge be considered materials

as a tempoabove the

no saturation line.

of impervious

Earthquake. subjected seismic approach an additional

Much

research

is in progress and new

on the analytical However,

be-

to earthquake effects is still are

shocks, being

evaluating

developed. This Fh

at that

the traditional imparts

recommended. force

assumes in the

earthquake

horizontal 19

acting

ilf

EM 11lo-2-1902 Change 1 17 Fell 82 direction of potential failure. The arc or set of planes found to be critical without earthquake loading Is used with this added driving force to determine the factor of safety for Case VI. It is not necessary to study effects of earthquake loading in sudden drawdown stability The horizontal seismic force is equal to the mass involved analyses. times the horizontal acceleration, i.e.

The total weight of the sliding soil mass W should be based on saturated unit weights below the saturation line and moist unit weights above the line. Selection of the seismic coefficient $ should be based on the degree of seismic activity in the region in whioh the dam is to be built. * The seismic coefficients for the various geographical areas are shown on In areas where earthquakes are likely, or for figures 6 through 6c. locations near active faults, the safety of dams should be increased by utilization of defensive design features regardless of the method or results of the earthquake analyses. The defensive design features may (a) ample freeboard to allow for the loss of crest elevation include: due to subsidence, slumping or fault displacement; (b) wide transition sections of filter materials which are less vulnerable to cracking; (c) vertical or near-vertical drainage pones in the central portion of the embankment; (d) filter materials of rounded to subrounded gravels and conducti.v%ty of ,f&lter layers and vertical sands ; (e) increased hydraulic drainage zones or the inclusion of additional properly designed filter zones of higher conductivity; (f) wide impervious cores of plastic clay materials or of suitable, well-graded materials to help insure self-healing in the event cracking should occur; (g) stabilization of reservoir rim slopes to provide for dam safety against effects caused by slides into the reservoir; (h) crest details that will mLnimize erosion in the event of overtopping; (i) removal of foundation material that may embankment sections be adversely affected by ground motion; (j) flaring at abutment contacts; and (k) zoning of embankments to minimize saturation of materials. In some cases, stock-piling of filter material * may be desirable for use in emergency repairs. (1) An at-rest earth pressure g- At-Rest Earth Pressure Analyses. de as an independent check of the ( K, > analysis is sometimes stability of an embankment. b This analysis is particularly applicable to earth and rockfill*dams with narrow central cores, and is performed to check analyses of Case I (end of construction) and Case V (steady seepage ) conditions. (2) For Case I and assuming are negligible or have dissipated; that construction the horizontal pore water pressures earth force acting on a

llg(2)

20

Bf 1110-2-1902 1 April 1970 vertica.1 plane through base the crest of the is compared with the shear resistance along

..-

the dowlstrcarr. using an equation

embankment

to determine

the factor

of safety

ermilar

to the following.

F.S.

CL+ Wptan+
i z Z H YmKo used for other should sliding Case X analyses. if a the norma!

The The !owet

strengths shear shear

would resistance resistance into

be the terms

same

as those

in the equation by shifting

above the

be modified plane from at low

is obtained

foundation stresses. struction, Appendix force following

the embankment water pressures he estimated

and/or are using

by using expected methods

the

S strength at the
ss

Lf pore they VIII, should

to exist such

end of condescribed force. from This the in

should and

those

included

in the computation pressure

of the horizontal diagram developed

be based

on a horizontal

equation. ph :- (zy, is often for .= i! normally with taken as 0.5, consolidated plasticity _ u) K. although clays index + u values with (PI).7 greater than 0.S

The clayratio &no ample

value

for

Ko

be required of I 13 ior for (3) (GZR.

an overconsolidation -4 relationehiy in figure 7. of X 0

d high

overconsolidation cade I is given 4, the used using

ratios in figure water force 8.

of i and 2 is shown

An ex-

-For Case dre

from

the maximum force following.

pool and

and

submerged the

suil factor

walghts

in computing an equation

the horizontal similar CL+ = -i z(Y,h;


used 21

checking

of safety

to the W tan+

F.S.

+ Y H2Ko) for Case V, and it is assumed that

The
llg(3)

strengths

shown

in table

I are

:,:H 1110-2-1902 dlangc 1 I ? I',-I, 81

m UJ %

s 0 E z a

I
EM 1110-2-1902 C11mj.y 1 I'! I.C.Il r(.!

CALIFORNIA.

NEVAOA

C ARIZONA

------SCALE

22-A

-\

ZcNE

,ElWlC -

PROBABILITY
DAH.ACE COEFF. HOHE MINOR

0
1

. .

2 3

MODERATE MAJOR 1 GREAT I

0 0.025 0.05 0.10 0.15

PACIFIC

0CEA.N

SEISMIC ZONE MAP


Alaska

:t

Figure

6b.

Seismic

Zone Flap of

Alaska

/ /

KAUAI

/ / /

NIIHAU / 1 / / / / flC
N N A

0-l
2

-E-P

I/
/ -

/ I

OCE

PN

MOLOKAI

/
IO 20 30 40

/ /

KAHOOLAWE
IO 0

STATUTE MILES

3
SEISMIC~~~ PROBABILITY 1-~~--

a 3

1 1

GREAT MAJOR

0.15 0.10 SEISYIC ZOHE YAP HaAJlr

0.9

0.S

AFTER:

E.

W.

BROOKE,R

AND

H. 0.

IRELAND

30 PI, PLASTICITY INDEX

SO

00

70

Figure

7.

K versus

PI

and

overconsolidation

ratio

(Brooker

and Ireland)

i ,

hw
, .

SHELL N c YlV! = 0.130 KCF

!i
AssuL(y srmsrn Zfrn SEAR Iv cm -

1
W,, TAN 32.

c=O, c=o.

#=37*=35*

Ymi

= 0.140

KCF ==-.-4zkEk&J. ROCK

34

wcz TAN 35. 4

CASE

I.

EN0 OF CONSTRUCTION: Ko = 0.5 FROM FIGURE 7 FOR PI = I5 AN0 OCR = I. SEEPAGE:


F.

F S. =

40&OlAN32-+ 20,230TAN35f (0 I30)(450)~(0.5)

_ -

2540

14.160

I- 2,,5

65eo

CASE

P,

STEADY

S. =

4080

TAN 32.
l

+ 18,350 TAN 35 t (0 0676)(450)*(0 65)

L1

K, = 0.65 FROM FIGURE 7 FOR PI = 15 AN0 OCR = 2.

t (0.0624)(440?

6050

15.300 + 4450

= 47

Figure

8.

Examples

of at-rest

earth

pressure

analyses,

Cases

I and

Minimum Minimum Factor of Safety i.3tt from from or top i*O$$ 1*2$$

Table I Factors

of Safety1

Case No. I II III End

Design

Condition

Shear Q or SS

Strength Upstream slopes Upstream posite Upstream posite

Remarks and downstream slope only. Use comenvelope. See fig. 4 slope only. Use comenvelope. See fig. 4 Use inSee

of construction

Sudden drawdown maximum pool Sudden drawdown spillway crest of gates Partial pool with steady seepage

R, S R, S
R+S -for 2 S for

IV N ul V

1.5

RCS, R > S

Upstream slope only. termediate envelope. fig. 5

Steady seepage with maximum storage Steady seepage with surcharge pool Earthquake IV, and seismic (Cases V with loading) I,

1.5 pool 1.4 I 1.0 * R+S 2 for R C S, R > S Downstream intermediate fig. 5 slope only. envelope. Use See

VI VII

S for

Upstream siopes

and downstream

Not applicable to embankments on clay shale foundations. For embankments over 50 ft high on relatively weak foundations use minimum factor of safety of 1.4. $ In zones where no excess pore water pressures are anticipated, use S strength. The safety factor should not be less than 1.5 when drawdown rate and pore water $.$ pressures developed from flow nets (Appendix III) are used in stability analyses. 5 Use shear strength for case analyzed without earthquake except that it is not necessary to analyze sudden dravdown for earthquake effects. tt

E! t-cr g: 10 I ZN .I 5;s so N

EM

1110-2-1902

1 April
the from core

1970
has an overconsolidation to submerged for Case values) ratio of 2 (since weights for have K. changed figure 7.

moist

in selecting in figure 8.

a value

from

An example 12. pend shear tures strain terials, on past Factors on the strength within

V is given

of Safety. (a) design design the

Appropriate condition values, being

values analyzed,

of computed

safety

factor-s reliability

deof

(b) estimated height,

(c) embankment (e) thoroughness compatibility of construction and rock-fill

(d) presence

of struc(f) stress-

embankment, and quality with earth with are for for are

of investigations, and and In the life,

characteristics (g) probable experience

of embankment control, dams. to human considerations projects. design and Table conditions,

foundation

mabased the and ac-

(h) judgment final analysis, damage,

consequences impairment ceptable safety dam for

of a failure of functions

respect important specific

property

in establishing I lists the minimum portions

factors factors which

of safety required analyses

the various required, described circular wedge

of the tests.

applicable

types

of shear

Methods Swedish alternative The factor

of stability (normally

analyses considering the is based

in the appendixes arc surfaces) and shear the

are the modified


method with several method. slope

procedures, of safety

method,

infinite

on developed

strength

SD where

Trial reached. to the

fac.rs

of safety In the infinite shearing

are

tried

until method,

a condition the and factor slope

of limiting of safety inclination. factors

equilibrium is related Due

is directly

slope

frictional

resistance

to differences should be

in basic made cular safety materials. 13. with arc

assumptions caution. method for

, comparisons For example, soils by infinite

of relative factors are not slope

of safety determined

of safety directly

by the cirin degree granular of

plastic

comparable for

to those

determined

computations

Presentation

in Design

Memoranda. 26

Uniformity

in presenting

results

of stability randa. appendixes. a. showing for the

analyses Analyses Each A cross the

and should analysis section

supporting generally should of the

data conform include embankment for flow

facilitates in scope the following and the lowest

review to those data:

of design given

memoin the

....

foundation factor

being of safety or lines values cross

analyzed obtained of satuused, sections All on and

assumed

failure

surface applicable

condition zones or

analyzed, strata

net

construction shear strength Separate

ration, graphical should centers these circular the the

corresponding of all forces and

to the

delineation be included of circles sections. arc

reactions.

as necessary with The factors

to indicate of safety of the trial and

thoroughness circle radii surfaces

of analyses. should

be shown either for

locations and the

failure found

analyzed,

or wedge, surface will stability

safety

factors

in addition number

to those

critical extent b.

be presented analyses of shear comprising

in sufficient performed. values, embankment Atterberg presentations charts, be presented. for the

to demonstrate

of the

A tabulation materials

strength the with

together and limits,

with

unit

weights Correlasumand borrow

for

.-

each tions maries

.of the

foundation. graphical

of foundation of shear Atterberg aids c. d.

shear strength limits

strength envelopes,

of foundation and similar

material valuable

on plasticity and should

correlations

are

to reviews

A tabulation A brief rate rate

of the

computations of the rate

critical rise, drawdown

arc the

or wedge. duration of full or

discussion of drawdown of drawdown

of reservoir for apply sudden

pool, for

and a slow

as a basis that may

computations flood control

to an ungated

embankment. e. mediate tation support f. Presentation S and of shear the of, design shear strength as shown representative shear strengths. Complete with guidance information contained on in i3f data and composite 3 and 4. or interPresento

R strength strength test

envelopes, data for

in figures samples

is required

selection

of these instrumentation

design

Proposed

to be installed. in accordance 27

instrumentation

should

be included

EM

iiiO-2-1902

1 April
Civil 14.

1970
Works Engineer Letter 65-7 (ref

9).
The use of electronic (b) evaluate computers effects is receffort, of possible embankment program used

TUse of Electronic to (a) reduce in material and zoning.

Computers. computational properties, To obtain all valid and

ommended variations sections must

(c)

investigate the boundary that the critical

alternative computer conditions. circle or

solutions,

be capable must found some or set

of evaluating be reviewed

significant

Computer set of

solutions planes Under circle The radius, that tions patible the

to establish limited by the

have

not

been

computer may or more

program search potential should of trial obtained. programs herein. the

employed. critical areas. the location, to verify soluare com-

conditions, of planes presented safety factor circle

computer in only in the for or set one

programs of two

out the failure include surfaces

analyses and

design a sufficient of planes

memoranda number has that criteria been computer

critical also

Computer used

must with

be verified procedures

to ensure and

design

presented be made

Consequently, critical The so that or sets an of circle

an analysis or set

by manual found

procedures by the must

must

to check design

of planes

computer

for

each

condition. memoranda circles

manual

computations check can

be presented if desired,

in the

design critical

independent planes.

be made,

of all

28

EM

1110-2-1902 1 April 1970

FOR

THE

CHIEF

OF

ENGINEERS:

8 Appendixes Appendix I Appendix II Appendix III

Appendix

IV

Appendix Appendix

V VI

Appendix Appendix

VII VIII

- References - Notation - Estimating Seepage During Reservoir Drawdown - Procedures for Determination of Embankment Slopes - Infinite Slope Analysis for Cohesionless Soils - Modified Swedish Method of Analysis Using Slice Procedure - Wedge Analysis of Embank- Evaluation ment Stability During Cons true tion

RICHARD Colonel, Executive

F. McADOO Corps of Engineers

29

EM

ii10-2-1902 1 April 1970

APPENDIX References 1.

..-

U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, chanics Design, Stability of Slopes and Foundations, Apr port No. 3-777, Appendix D, Feb 1952 (reprinted Vicksburg, Miss.

CE, Soil Technical 1967),

MeRe-

2.

Progress Report on Glossary of Terms and Definitions ASCE, Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, chanics, Vol 84, Paper 1826, No. SM4, Ott 1958.

in Soil MeJournal,

3.

in Angle of Internal Banks, D. C. and MacIver, B. N., Variation Miscellaneous Paper S- 69 - 12, Friction with Confining Pressure, Apr 1969, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, CE, Vicksburg, Miss. Banks, D. C. and Strohm, W. E., Slides, Potamology Investigations Engineer Waterways Experiment Jr., Methods of Preventing Flow Report 12-16, Ott 1965, U. S. Army Station, CE, Vicksburg, Miss. of Saturated Sands During and Foundations Division, Nov 1966, pp 105-134. Rockfill Journal, Design Vol 92, - Carters Paper 4906,

4.

5.

Seed, H. B. and Lee, K. L., Liquefaction ASCE, Soil Mechanics Cyclic Loading, Journal, Vol 92, Paper 4972, No. SM6, Robeson, F. A. and Crisp, Construction Dam, ASCE, No. C03, Sept 1966, p 51. Brooker, E. W. and Ireland, Canadian to Stress History, Feb 1965, pp 1-15. R. L., Jr., Division,

6.

7.

H. O., Earth Geotechnical

Pressures Journal,

Vol

at Rest Related 2, No. 1,

8.

Risk Algermissen, S. T., Seismic ceedings, Fourth World Conference Santiago, Chile, 14 Jan 1969.

Studies in the on Earthquake

United States, Engineerinq,

Pro-

9.

Inclusion of Proposed Office, Chief of Engineers, Embankment and Foundation Design Memoranda, neer Letter 65-7, 2 Mar 1965, Washington, D. C. Schnitter, G. and Zeller, J., SickerstrGmungen gelschwankungen in Erddammen (Seepage Flow tion or Level in Earth Dams), Schweizerische Nr. 52, 28 Dee 1957, pp 808-814. I-l

Instrumentation Civil Works

in Engi-

10.

als Folge von StauspieResulting from FluctuaBauzeitung, 75 Jahrgang,

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix I 1 April 1970 II. Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R. B., Soil P/echanics 2d cd., Wiley, New York, 1967, p 138. Janbu, eters, Harvard Scott, Mass., N., Stability Analysis Soil Mechanics Series University, Cambridge, R. F., 1963. Principles of Soil in Engineering Practice,

I2.

of Slopes with Dimensionless No. 46, Jan I954 (reprinted Mass. Mechanics, Addison-Wesley,

ParamMay I959),

13.

Reading,

14.

and Passive Earth Jumikis, A. R., Active Tables , Engineering Research Publication University, College of Engineering Research, Clough, G. W. and ing Construction, Engineer Waterways

Pressure Coefficient No. 43, 1962, Rutgers New Brunswick, N. Y.

15.

Pore Pressures DurSnyder, J. W., Embankment Technical Report No. 3-722, May 1966, U. S. Army Experiment Station, CE, Vicksburg, Miss. Construction Pore Pressures Second International Conference Engineering, Rotterdam, Vol in Rolled Earth on Soil Me3, 1948, p 234. Notes on 592, p 124,

26.

Hilf, J. W., Estimating Dams , Proceedings, chanics and Foundation

17.

Bruggeman, J. R., Zanger, C. N., and Brahtz. J. H. A., Technical Memorandum No. Analytic Soil Mechanics, June 1939, U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colo. Factors Controlling the Pore Bishop, A. W.. Some -Proceedings, During-the Construction of Earth Dams, national Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation London, Vol 2, 1957, pp 294-300.

18.

Pressure Set Up Fourth InterEngineering,

19.

Moran, Proctor, Mueser & Rutledge, Consulting Engineers, Study of Deep Soil Stabilization by Vertical Sand Drains, June 1958, Bureau of Yards and Docks, Department of the Washington, D. C. Skempton, technique, 147. Pore-Pressure A. W., The Institution of Civil Engineers, Coefficients London,

New York, NOy88812, Navy,

20.

A and B, Vo1.4, 1954,

Geopp 143-

21.

Pressures Snyder, J. W., Pore nical Report S-68-2, July 1968, periment Station, CE, Vicksburg, Gould, J. P., Analysis at Logan International

in Embankment Foundations, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Miss. Settlement Series

TechEx-

22.

of Pore Pressure and Soil Mechanics Airport, I-2

Observations No. 34,

EM

iliO-a-i902 Appendix I 1 April 1970 .-

Dee 23.

1949,

Harvard

University,

Cambridge,

Mass.

Lowe III, J. and Karafiath, L., Effect of Anisotropic Consolidation on the Undrained Shear Strength of Compacted Clays, ASCE Research Conference on Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colo., June 1960, pp 837-858.

I-3

EM

IilO-2402 1 April

1970

APPENDIX Notation 1. The symbols possible that follow are used

Il

throughout by the

this

man.ual

and correspond Society of Civil

wherever Engineers. Symbol A, B ah b

to those

recommended

American

Term Skemptons coefficients Horizontal experimentally seismic acceleration of the force force force force area per layer of slice wedge block wedge force polygon in wedge analysis unit area (cohesion required for of passive wedge embankment of active of central slope wedge block angle with the determined pore pressure

Cot p = cotangent horizontal Developed Developed Developed Developed cohesion cohesion cohesion cohesion per unit

cA CB cD -cP
C

Cohesion Developed equilibrium) Depth Earth Resultant Resultant Resultant Force Resultant (modified Resultant unit width Graphical Resultant Resultant Resultant

CD D E EA ECB EP AEH AE AE

cohesion

of foundation force on side force force force required of earth Swedish

of active of central of passive to close forces method:

on left and right sides of slice Finite Slice Procedure) right sides of the Swedish method: wedges block

forces acting on left and of earth (modified slice in units of ybase Integration Procedure) of normal of normal of developed and and frictional frictional normal and forces forces frictional

FA FCB FD

of active of central forces

EM IiiO-Z-1902 Appendix II 1 April 1970 Symbol Fh FP F.S. g H HD h h h


W

Term Horizontal Resultant Factor seismic of normal of safety constant force and frictional forces of passive wedge

Gravitational Height Height Vertical Modified Piezometric mum pool Ratio Active Coefficient Passive Coefficient

of embankment of drawdown distance height to failure obtained from surface from slope surface

h(y/ybase) surface; pressures height of maxi-

level above above sliding

the failure surface earth

K KA
KO

of horizontal earth pressure of at-rest earth

to vertical coefficient earth

pressure

KP k L L AL N ND NK Ns n n e

pressure

coefficient

of permeability beneath passive block is assumed to develop line

length Length of arc or failure surface; along which cohesive shear resistance Width Length Total of the slice parallel to the

saturation

of base normal

of slice force

Developed Active Stability Porosity Effective Dimensionless Horizontal earth

normal

force stability number, bcD YH

pressure _yH CD

factor,

porosity parameter pressure = & e z at constant water content

pD % Q

at depth tested pressure II-2

Shear test for specimen (unconsolidated-undrained) Q shear test with pore

measurements

EM

iiiO-2-I902 Appendix II 1 April 1970 . ..;;.

Symbol R

Term (a) Radius of failure arc (b) Shear test for specimen consolidated constant water content (consolidated-undrained) R shear test with pore pressure

then

sheared

at

i? S
8

measurements and sheared without (consolidated-drained) re-

Shear test for specimen consolidated striction of change in water content Shear strength; shear force pressure drawdown or soil mass s = c t u tan strength; +

sD U
U

Developed Hydrostatic Pore Velocity Total Weight frictional water

sD = cD t u tan

+D

V W W P

of pool weight

of slice

above

failure

plane along which

of passive block or shear resistance height beneath of inclination of inclination. test results) crest of the ratio

subblocks above plane is assumed to develop (Appendix III)

X
-

Dimensionless Distance Angle Angle shear

z a
af

saturation plane

line (based

with

the

horizontal

of failure of the volume of the soil

on laboratory with the

P
Y Y
ybase
ym

Angle of inclination horizontal Weight Buoyant per unit unit

embankment

slope

weight

Base unit weight modified Swedish Moist unit weight unit

used in graphical method of the soil soil

integration

procedure

of

Ysat
YW

Saturated Unit weight

weight

of the

of water or small part of the of the failure base arc of the with active the horizontal with the

A 8 %A

Increment Angle

of inclination

Angle of inclination horizontal

wedge

II-3

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix II 1 Xpril 1970 Term 9P u Off =h Q.


=i

.passive wedge with the

Angle of inclination horizontal Normal, stress

of the

base

of the

Normal stress test specimen) Horizontal Conjugate Major Minor Deviator Effective Effective Effective Effective Shear Shear Shear stress stress principal principal stress normal normal major minor stress stress stress

on failure on vertical

plane

at failure plane

(in

laboratory

shear

on a plane stress stress

parallel

to the

outer

slope

u3 5 - u3 ;fc Qff F i 7 3 T Tfc fff 4 9 +D 4

stress stress principal principal

on failure on failure stress stress

plane plane

prior

to start

of test

at failure

on failure on failure

plane plane (or

at end at failure slope slope friction

of consolidation

Angle based Angle based

of internal friction on total stresses of internal on effective angle coefficient,

angle angle

of strength of strength for

envelope) envelope) equilibrium)

friction (or stresses of internal ah 5

Developed Seismic

(required

II-4

EM

iii@-2-1902 1 April 1970

APPENDIX Estimating the Lowering in Pervious Upstream During Reservoir 1. General. time In stability rates analyses

III of the Seepage Line Embankment Zones Drawdown embankment desirable slopes to construct such of the line flow nets, subjected flow nets

of pervious it is often

to various for use

of drawdown, seepage the lowering core. The

in determining to determine

forces. of the lowering

To construct intercept of the and

it is necat the

essary face mated meability as sands during 2. ratio -

of seepage

of the

impervious

as shown and and

in a method drawdown rate.

by Schnitter This relation

seepage line can 10 Zeller that relates only in materials content

be estifill persuch changes

is valid volume

gravel

which

do not

change

as the

water

drawdown. Relation. the ratio The of height equations of saturation of drawdown) for the line and dimensionless at face the of core height at end of

Mathematical X (i.e.,

drawdown eter P D

expressed are

in percent

dimensionless

param-

x=

HD-

mDxloo HD

where HD AI-ID= = height change of drawdown in height of saturation line of shell porosity; to unit wi at face material i.e., volume the ratio of void n space is poand w2 of impervious core

k = coefficient n wi e =Tbx

of permeability - w2 w1 = effective drained rosity, is water

of soil water drainage

where content,

is saturated after

content

V = velocity

of pool

drawdown III-i

EM iiiO-2-1902 Appendix III 1 April 1970 All 3. quantities Computations. for the case should be expressed Although of full the reservoir pool in consistent curves presented drawdown, level units. in plate they above the may III-i also were be used base dewhen by

veloped drawdown considering The

is to some the

intermediate pool

embankment of the in plate

intermediate illustrates

elevation the use

as the base of the chart central

embankment. III-i. core base

following a. Assume

example

a i05-ft-high slope.

dam The

with pool

a narrow

impervious the embankment

and and gravel

a i-on-3

upstream down

is 100 ft above The shell ft per is

is to be drawn having

60 ft in 30 days.
of saturated 500 X iOD4 water

is assumed min i2 and

to be a sandy of

a permeability The average content porosity

a porosity

20 percent. drainage The

content

percent,

and after

the water effective

is 3 percent. n e is

12 - 3 20 x = 0.15 12 100 is

The

velocity

of pool

drawdown

60 (ft) ?O X 24 X 60 (min)
V = 0.00139 ft per min = 13.9 X 10 -4 ft per min

500 x io-4 0.15 From the chart, for a i-on-3 x 13.9 x io-4

= 240 Solving the equation

slope,

X = 10 percent.

-= X 100

HD

- AHD for HD AHD

-=10 100

60 - AHD 60
III-2 or AH D = 54 ft

EM

IiiO-2-1902 Appendix III 1 Apri 1 1970 pool

Thus, level,

the height

of saturation the base

at the of dam,

core

is 54 ft below

the

original pool.

or 46 ft above b. Assume soil the

or 6 ft above
except ft per that min and

the lowered the shell

same

conditions

is constructed content after

of

less

pervious

with

k = 5 x iOW4

the water

drainage

is 9 percent.

1212

9,

20 = 0.05 100

5 x io-4
pD =Fo5 . x 13 9 x 10-4 . is AI-ID obtained = 7*2

A value for

of

equal slope.

to 51 percent Solving for

from

the

curve

in

plate

III-i

a i-on-3

AL
In this 70.6 4. for case, ft above Limitations. determining at the the the height the base The rate

60 - AI-I~ 60
or AH D

100
of saturation

= 29.4 ft

is 29.4 or 30.6 III-1 of shell

Yt below the only

the

original

pool pool.

or

of the curves

dam,

ft above give

lowered approximate and

in plate

criteria the line

of drainage core

material

lowering must

of seepage

face

of central velocity given

embankments.

Judgment

be used

in determining
and k. selecting complete, must values virtually

probable

of drawdown, and values

Information of n

by Terzaghi for

and reasonable values of ne Ii may be used as a guide in Peck of X to approach of the shell material), 0 percent the shell (i.e.

In order e instantaneous pervious

drainage condition.

approach

a highly

III-3

1 April

LII-4

EM

iiiO-2-3902 1 April 1970

APPENDIX

IV

Simplified Procedures for Preliminary Determination of Embankment Slopes

1. using for

General. design determining by the

Two charts

methods are

for

determining in this

approximate appendix. slopes prior VI, VII, The

embankment methods to more and and VIII. are detailed The

slopes useful

presented

approximate methods

embankment outlined

analyses method overlying arc

in Appendixes clay

first

is applicable a rigid

to homogeneous boundary IV1. and The assume

embankments failure

foundations along a ci.rcular

s that

occurs

as shown

in plate

second

method clay

is applicable overlying surfaces These Due

to homogeneous a rigid in the founda-

cohesionless boundary tion yses and are and in the

embankments assumes that

on shallow failure

foundations aiong plane

occurs

embankment for cases

as shown involving two

in plate

IV-6.

methods to the

of anal-

applicable

no seepage. methods presented,

differences of as those conservacrests. Boundary.

in the basic factors prepared tive 2. results

assumptions

of the

comparisons such more or wide a Rigid case

of safety

should be made with caution. Other charts 12 13 by Janbu may also be used; they yield or Scott because they apply to slopes and having horizontal Overlying the general

Homogeneous a. The design

Embankment charts and are

Foundation for

developed overlying are the

of a homogeas shown in and

neous plate the IV-2

embankment IV1. The width IV-

foundation slopes

a rigid assumed

boundary

embankment is equal 5, the

to be symmetrical, height. for between

crown through

to one-eighth stability layer D factor

embankment

In plates ratios of 1.

Ns = g

is presented height to those The H

thickness Embankment

of foundation slopes and strength for the are

to embankment in these plates

0 and 1 vertical is re-

limited

between factor angles 0 and critical

on 2 horizontal lated friction to shear +D

1 vertical of the embankment

on 4 horizontal. soil by values and values IV-i foundation

stability

of developed between The

of internal 25 deg, arc with

no restrictions

as to developed

of cohesion.

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix IV 1 April 1970 originates beyond section impervious The following Example structed weight bankment shear should follows. -D = - 40 = 0.33 H 120 D tan +D
- 950 - 731 lb per

on the slope embankment is not suitable example :

opposite

that under depending

investigation (The

and emerges thickness given method on clay

at or of the

the toe of the embankment,

on the relative

and foundation for cohesionless illustrates earth

layer.

in this

embankments embankment, underlain estimated Q tests of weight

foundations.) is to be conThe unit ema design of 1.3 are as

the use of the charts. 120 ft high, by bedrock. indicate that 40 ft thick, Results

A homogeneous foundation,

on a clay are

of the foundation strength be used of

and the unit

for the compacted may be used for the of safety charts

110 lb per cu ft.

c = 950 lb per sq ft, tan + = 0.165 What slope having analysis for a detailed

foundation condition?

and embankment. as a basis The values

a factor

of the end-of-construction design

to be used in the appropriate

1.3

sq ft

0.165 =i .3

_ - 0.127

and

+J~ = 7.2 deg Stability From from plate plate IV-4, factor IV-3, the stability the stability Thus, analysis. IV- 2 factor chart chart N _ YH = 110 x 120 = 18 731 cm = 0.25, = 0.50, slope the slope the slope corresponding 1 on 3.30; is found to be for

for D/H for D/H slope

to a stability 1 on 3.55. for D/H mole 2a

of 18 and a tan 0,

of 0.12i

is approximately

By interpolation, = 0.33.

an embankment

of 1 on 3.38 is indicated

an embankment

of 1 on 3.5 may be chosen

detailed

EM

iiio-2-1902 Appendix IV 1 April 1970 and .

b. foundation weighted Such more 3. The resting plate utilizes of the Figure and for

The

design soils have

charts similar

are

limited unit

to cases and

where shear

the

embankment

weights and a trial justified stability Foundations

strengths. arc the must effort

Otherwise, be selected. involved can be

averages

are is not used

required considered

failure since

a refinement appropriately Embankment outer slopes on a shallow IV-6, can

in detailed Clay

analyses. Overlying a Rigid Boundary. material as shown This chart ratio in

on Shallow

of a symmetrical clay foundation

embankment overlying from figure

of cohesionless a rigid i in plate KA boundary, IV-7.

be approximated earth pressure earth values

an active horizontal 2 in plate negative slope

coefficient pressures of KA slope for

corresponding center of the ground side of and stability then

to the dam.

to vertical IV-7 slopes can IV-7 KA gives (i.e.

at the

a horizontal

surface

reverse

on opposite a value slope of the slope can

of embankment). KA from figthis

A design ure trial

be estimated for an assumed

by determining embankment a value This figure 1.

2 of plate value bcD of

substituting number be used and adequate, and . the

in figure

1 to obtain slope. KA from figure small

and a corresponding NK=yH mine a second trial value of stability value bility bility of number A number chart K and slope slowly

to detera revised as the stasta-

2, if necessary, A few trials in slope changes that of the the are

from for

changes is relatively

changes to small

angles in KA

insensitive IV-7 shear and

The

in figure soil is Q The account

1 of plate The strength

assumes strength

thickness

of plastic soil corre-

foundation sponds cohesion is taken ample

small. shear shear

foundation in terms plane The

to the c . into illustrates

is expressed along the failure

of an equivalent in the embankment ex-

resistance earth

by the

pressure chart. embankment, of internal

coefficient.

following

the use :

of the

Example strength weight having

A homogeneous

100 ft high, friction on a layer What

having

a shear

corresponding of 120 lb per a shear

to an angle

of 28 deg and a unit of clay, 10 ft thick, slope should

cu ft is to be constructed of 1200 lb per sq ft.

strength

approximate

IV-3

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix IV 1 April 1970 be used in an analysis angle of the stability of internal ) . friction of the dam for a factor +,, of the embankment cD of safety of 1.3?

The developed 0.532 tan C$J~= 13 . (

is 22 deg is

= 0.409 sq ft.

The developed The ratio of

cohesion D/H is 0.1. is 0.40.

of the foundation trial,

1200 = 923 lb per 1.3 of IV-7 Solving KA. for assuming D/H for

As a first From number figure

the Value

a slope and

of 1 on 4-l/2, KA = 0.40,

1 of plate

= 0.1

the stability

NK is 0.300.

b in the equation NK=yH bcD NK yH CD

or

b=

b = 0.300

x 120 x 100 = 3 9 . 923

Thus, trial

a slope values of

of 1 on 4 may KA

be selected

for

detailed

analysis;

additional

are unnecessary.

IV-4

HOMOGENEOUS

EMBANKMENT

0 I + RIGID BASE

HOMOGENEOUS

FOUNDATION

I4 = HEIGHT D = DEPTn Ns % = STABILITY = DEVELOPED y = WEIGHT MATERIAL TAN &, = TANGENT INTERNAL

OF OF

EMBANKMENT FOUNDATION FACTOR COHESION =yll/C, PER AND OF VOLUME ANGLE ANGLE B OF UNIT OF AREA LAYER

OF

EMBANKMENT PER OF UNIT DEVELOPEQ OF SLOPE

FOUNDATION

CROSS

FRICTION

SECTION AND SYMBOLS STABILITY CHARTS I%? THROUGH

FOR m-5)

= COTANGENT

(SEE PLATES

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix IV 1 April 197(


200 a0

200

loo a0 m 70 00 80

40

20

20

10 0 (I 7 6 0 0.1 0.2 TAN 40 0.2 0.4 0.8

NOTE:

8Ct

PLATE=-1 OP

FOR SYMBOLI.

DtPlNITIONS

STABILITY CHART FOR HOMOGENEOUS EMBANKMENT AND FOUNDATIONa


FDUNDATION HEIGHT DEPTH-EMBANKMENT RATIO, D/H = 1.0

Plate

IV-2

Iv-6

EM

iilO-2-1902 Appendix IV 1 April 1970

0.1

0.2 TAN &,

0.8

0.4

0.1

NOTE:

SEC l LAtEsl DLFlNltlONI

OF

FOR SYYDOLS.

STABILITY CHART FOR HOMOGENEOUS EMBANKMENT AND FOUNDATION FOUNDATION HEIGHT DEPTH-EMBANKMENT RATIO, D/H = 0.50

Plate

IV-:

IV- 7

EM IIIO-21902 Appendix IV 1 April 1970

0.1

0.2 TAN 4.

0.1

0.4

0.1

NOTL:

SLL PLATE DtFlNlTlONS

Ip;l OF

COR
SYMbOLI.

STABILITY CHART FOR HOMOGENEOUS EMBANKMENT AND FOUNDATION


FOUNDATION HEIGHT DEPTH-EMBANKMENT RATIO, O/H = 0.25

slate IV-4

IV-8

EM

1liO-2-1902 Appendix IV 1 April 1970

mo

20

NOTE:

SEE PLATEI% DEFINITIONS

OF

FOR SYMBOLS.

STABILITY CHART FOR HOMOGENEOUS EMBANKMENT AND FOUNDATION FOUNDATION HEIGHT DEPTH-EMBANKMENT f:ATIO. D/H = 0

Plate

IV- 5

IV- 9

msmv~

SLOPE

&

NEGATIVE
OPPOSITE

SLOPE WllW RESPECT UImJwMENT SLOPE

To

COl4ESlONLESS

EMBANKMENT

v CLAY RIGID BASE / FOUNDATION / 0

l4 = HElGt4T D = THICKNESS K. = RATIO EARTH

OF

EMBANKMENT OF CLAY FOUNOATION TO ACTIVE SLOPE UNIT UNIT OF AREA ANGLE, AND VOLUME OF FOUNDATION SOIL VERTICAL CASE /3 FOUNDATION LAYER

OF

HORIZONTAL OF

PRESSURES,

= COTANGENT OF MATERIAL

y = WEIGHT C = COHESION

EMBANKMENT PER PER

CROSS

SECTION AND SYMBOLS STABILITY CHART


(SEE PLATE IS&71

FOR

EM

1110;2-1902 Appendix IV 1 April 1970

E _ DEPTb4 nHEIGHT

OF OF

FOUNDATION EMBANKMENT

FIGURE

1. N,

VERSUS

K,

AND

FIGURE

2.

dr,

VERSUS

b AND K4

EM

i110-2:1902 1 April 1970

APPENDIX Infinite
1.

V for Cohesionless Soils (c = 0)) an estimate equaof the It is as-

Slope

Analysis For slope may

Infinite

Slope

Computations. to an infinite

cohesionless be used where

materials to obtain

tions stability sumed 2. flow

applicable of the that the

slope seepage

of an embankment flow is uniform factor

seepage the

is involved. soil case mass. where

throughout for the general outer

General is neither

Case. parallel

The

safety nor

seepage

horizontal

to the

slope

is

y - (VW 9)
F.S. where y1 = submerged
YW

= Y sat

cotptan+

unit

weight

of soil

= unit

weight between

of water seepage flow line and embankment slope with slope horizontal (cot p = b)

(Y = angle p = angle Y sat 3. with

of inclination unit weight

of embankment of soil

= saturated

+ = angie
Seepage

of internal

friction For seepage safety flow parallel to and coincident

Parallel

to Slope. slope

the

embankment

((Y = 0) , the

factor

becomes

F.S. where b = cot 4. Horizontal is p Seepage.

= y Ysat

cot

j3 tan

Y + =Ysat

b tan

(p

Where

seepage

flow

is horizontal

(a = p) , the

factor

of safety

YW

F.S.

Y - 2 Ot = Y sat

p (cot

/3 tan

bzy by +) =

- y w (tan sat 4-4

V-l

EM iilO-Z-1902 Appendix V 1 April 1970 5. factor No Seepage. of safety is F.S. = s = b tan +I Where no seepage forces exist, i.e. for a dry slope, the

6. to all term

Earthquake of the b

. previous

The

effects equations

of an earthquake for factor

loading

can

be applied b with the

of safety

by replacing

where

4 = seismic

coefficient

(see

fig.

6, main

text)

7.

Example. factor

An

example

of the influence in the Factor

of the direction following of safety Horizontal seepage tabulation. for

of seepage

flow

on the

of safety

is illustrated

.No seepage

As sumed design values b = 3.5 Ysat = 2Yw tan + = 0.7 qJ = 0.1 b = 2.52 t tt

Seepage parallel to outer slope

1.23t

I.137

2.45t

0.88tt

0.74tt

1.76tt

Without earthquake loading. With earthquake loading.

v-2

EM iilO-2-1902 1 April 1970 APPENDIX Modified VI

Swedish Method of Analysis Using Slice Procedure presented analyses in this assuming appendix failure
shape.

1.

General. detailed arc

The procedures slope or along stability a surface

are would
For

for use in occur


uniformity

making a circular simplicity arc. sliding important the slices sumed forces requires solve balance this modified
procedures

along
and

of any arbitrary is assumed the sliding of trial

of presentation, finite surfaces feature are parallel are either or unit width,

failure

to occur mass which forces

along

a trial into

circular slices An of be asThis to to in the dams should The the be

In the modified

Swedish

method,

is divided arcs

of either

and a number to determine is that slope must

failure acting forces

or arbitrary

are investigated of this method considered. to the average forces, they

is most

critical. on the sides should the side computer integration

earth

The direction

of the side be balanced

of the embankment. to obtain using procedures by iteration polygons simplicity applicable zoned method of this since graphical

Since a digital

internal

a solution.

the use of analytical equations force The relative composite forces. of their used

a set of simultaneous

or the use of graphical or graphical are described While

involving internal Swedish earth because it is also

procedures

appendix

and clarity. embankments.

method

is particularly for analyzing Swedish or lack surfaces, methods a. into VI- 1. Slices.

to homogeneous method

and dikes, whether based circular most only 2.

The decision mass.

to use the modified on the stratification arcs critical shown trial failure the various of Finite mass 1 of plate accuracy, is divided

or the wedge appendix the examples

of stratification

of the soil have

in the examples

are not necessarily

been developed Forces. width are and as sufficient

to illustrate Procedure in figure

and procedures. Embankment of slices Without Seepage slices zonation of convenient

The sliding shown for reasonable

a number Generally,

six to twelve

depending

on the embankment VI-1

EM ii10-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 foundation figure resisting and FD fective ing the conditions. VI- 1. force AB +D at the A typical The CD force slice W with is the forces total acting weight parallel unit to AB on it is shown of the slice. AB in The (fig. 2)

2 of plate cohesive

is assumed the the and forces

to act

to chord CT;, . resultant force. are

is equal acting

to chord at an angle force

times with base the

developed normal

cohesion is the frictional slice VI-I,

The-force of the Assuminto ef-

normal factor

the developed acting in figure

a trial composite

of safety, force polygon and weight developed

on each 3 of plate

combined a con-

shown

using

venient (1) (2) slice. (3) weight (4) tablishes frictional (5) vector vector, the

force Draw Draw

scale the the

following vector

steps

1 through

5 as outlined slice (slice

below: 1). of the

of the uppermost vector CD

cohesion

parallel

to the base

Draw vector.

a line

normal

to the base

of the

slice

from

the upper

end

of the

Construct the

a line

at an angle of the base of the vector of the

of

4,

from

the

normal

line.

This

esand

direction on the the head

FD , the slice. vector,

resultant

of the normal

forces From parallel thereby

cohesion

draw slope

the

side

earth the

force resultant of con-

to the closing vector the force since

average the FD .

embankment force The polygon. forces force must

to intersect establishes subsequent previous

This on each

the magnitude slice slice scale are then

developed using

structed, The curate errors factor trial

side

earth

vector be drawn

of the

as a base. to ensure small the safety ac-

composite results, can have

polygons they are effect

to a large diagrams of closure. force

cumulative-type on the error

in which To obtain

a large external are

of balanced factors

forces, constructed force are VI- 1.

composite

polygons what safety

for

different factor for results each

of safety of the

to determine polygon. plotted The versus errors the

in closure trial

composite force polygon

of closure trial drawn to zero factors through error

composite in figure

of safety, the plotted

as shown points 2a

4 of plate the factor

A smooth

curve

establishes

of safety

corresponding VI-2

ofclosure.

EM iiio-24902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 b. before illustrated ing before composite In this pore increase The value drawdown increase sidered above moist force before Sudden drawdown in plate drawdown force Drawdown. embankments to determine normal A typical
show-n TWO

analyses

for normal before

each trial drawdown, forces drawdown.

failure

arc are made drawis

.--:

for impervious down using

subject

to sudden

one for conditions and one after with forces The procedure actof the VI-2. the zone. since is conhaving no sections

developed forces slice in figure shown that

the developed VI-2. is

in an embankment 1, and corresponding has occurred after

polygons acting weight

are

in figures no seepage of the slices force over slice ND

2(a) and 2(b) of plate drawdown from polygon, state

procedure pressures in soil analysis

it is assumed from

and that the reflect

on the bases normal force

submerged

to saturated

in the drawdown force with

of the developed in developed

is determined

the before-

and is used normal (i.e.,

in the after-drawdown For any slice

the before-drawdown is composed analysis shown

for an impervious the upper unit weight force determined drawdown balanced lines friction pool before polygon. are

embankment. the entire and after Steps

a base located of the side earth in the afterforce polygon VI-i. The by conof the VI-2. in figsubmerged The the drawsatufailure 2b through after pool,

of material

drawdown),

the magnitude is used the composite in figure (zero force error lines polygon before below to extend in figure are from from

in the before-drawdown the same as those forces force

drawdown magnitude drawdown structing developed Steps ure upper down rated pool, weights 2(b). pool

in constructing

3 of plate

of the developed composite vectors perpendicular

normal

is determined

the beforethe tail

polygons for

of closure)

to the normal as shown the weight portion

one slice force

2(a) of plate indicated

in constructing In determining are used level

the after-drawdown for that

of the slice of the slice assumed

drawdown, horizontally of the slice the upper

the upper

pool level.

is conservatively sliding on the saturated

embankment is based weight

to the trial between

surface. or moist pool

The weight weight above pool.

the upper weight

and horizontal

extension

of the lowered

and submerged

below

the lowered

When the trial

EM iiio-z-i902 Appendix VI I April 1970 surface puted cessity ure given


C.

is a circular as indicated of constructing plate VI-2. VI- 1 i. embankment in plate in figure below 2 of plate water VI-3. Embankment They VI-3. R

arc,

the factor

of safety in plate VI-2.

after

drawdown eliminates force flow this type

can be comthe nein figare as semipolygon

by the equation

This

the after-drawdown The use of a sudden zones with

composite drawdown for

Z(b),

net for

pervious

and the procedures Seep= the water

of analysis seepage

Steady VI-3,

In the case forces from acting flow nets on typical forces of safety the factor in figure effects failure

of steady

shown linearly figure sloping

i of plate the saturation

on each slice or assumed slices are slice

must to vary shown having in a The 4 of

be determined.

can be determined line. To simplify of the weight is determined, for one trial as that

The forces construction and water as shown factor shown earthquake imparts of potential force

of the composite for each is shown of safety 4 of plate in figure 3 of plate for VI-i.

force VI-3.
zero

poly-

gon, the resultant composite plate error d. oil, force graph force

surface polygon

in figure

The procedure is the same

for determining

of closure Earthquake. Fh acting it is assumed

To consider that the earthquake in the direction text. This

in a stability horizontal as discussed from

analyin para-

an additional

i if of the main

is computed

the equation

Fh = +W where W = weight += The weight and moist water a guide computed 2d above for assumed W unit of sliding seismic
on

mass coefficient saturated this line, slope. unit Figure weight below the saturation the weight text force as shown Fh in line of any is

is based weight

above

and does not include 6 of the main The horizontal polygon

the embankment the seismic slice each

can be used as

in selecting

coefficient.

and included

in the force VI-4

EM iiio-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 figure with plate e. drawdown posite veloped quently, down, mal with the force i(a), VI-4, plate VI-4. and water In the case forces Strength for of steady each slice seepage, as shown Stability pool) strength earth Fh can be combined i(b), diagram. for sudden force ,,..-.:

the weight

in figure analyses depends forces. by trial for force by AL

and the resultant and steady seepage which shear polygon

R can be used Envelopes. partial (including is influenced strength must

in the composite require

Use of Composite strength normal envelopes. force, force

the use of comon the deCons@and error drawnoris to be Z(a) of porforce S and govapin the

The applicable

shear

by the side

the applicable S strength is determined stress R

be determined In analysis for ND +D divided For normal for

as the composite

is constructed. as a basis slice force

sudden polygon

is assumed for each normal value

and the developed

as the composite of the

constructed. the normal determine analyses determined plate tion divided erns.
plicable:

The developed if the (including The


AL

is compared seepage also

at the intercept S strength pool), the developed

S and force +D

R envelopes must

or the partial

governs.

the steady

in a manner

similar

to the procedure as a basis stress more

illustrated

in figure in the first normal of the of soil,

VI-2. by Where

S strength force is compared

is assumed polygon, with when normal RtS the 2

of the composite

and the resulting strength for each side forces. along using earth Vertical factor from diagram,

developed or the than slice.

at the intercept one type

R envel-apes values

to determine the failure of shear Integratinn for

S strength

arc

passes

through

strength

are used

3. factor are

Graphical of safety taken arc

Procedure. the internal external

Graphical

integration forces section slices

may be used and determine of unit width above the trial the repolygon

stability

analyses

to balance balanced

at appropriate or surface earth slices slice

intervals of sliding. forces must is plotted

the cross the trial an area

failure sultant ber

of safety, the force

of the side width width

AE to form be used

determined to define forces

for num-

each unit of unit

A sufficient the area on the left

accurately acting

diagram. and right

AE , which

is the resultant

of the earth VI-5

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 sides area ternal a. with into of the unit slope AE of the forces respect

width being slice, analyzed. is zero surface Seepage. section width slice is assumed The trial being to act parallel factor of safety mass to the average for which for a balance emthe net of ex-

bankment

of safety

diagram

is the factor

for the sliding Without section VI-5. to density, of feet)

analyzed. is not homogeneous may be transformed force h polyis illustrated at any weight a is weight weight of h of above the arc This

Embankment

If the soil density slices. times weight

the cross of uniform for the unit

an equivalent 1 of plate soil

for use in obtaining procedure section as a base. unit ybase convenient of each soil

gons (in units in figure point slice embankment includes weight obtained its unit of water feet) plate (1) (2) (3) (4) Of 9, (5) (6) (7) ular
Nl;(tan

The height of a unit soil types

of the equivalent used different height weight more

is equal

to the height in the slice together used strata for h . two or more divided

the ratio

of the unit weights,

to the unit the incremental

Where

having base unit

by adding is often

type times the unit

by a selected as the base, or zones each unit

. The unit polygon in figure

but where may be used. width slice

of one of the soil is constructed VI-5 using Construct Draw

The force

(in units 1 of

as illustrated

the following

steps:

C =&x D a normal a resultant AE of This section

1
Ybase line

X-

1
CO8 8

at the base of the width C;> . force width 5. FD and AE force vector slice h

slice

Construct Construct from Construct vector.

from

the head of and normal

friction

at an angle to intersect

the normal. from FD from the top of the unit is defined by step of

the friction

The magnitude Construct a line

the intersection

perpendicND and

to the normal.
+D) l

step defines must be drawn

the developed to a large

normal scale

The embankment 3a

so that

the force

VI-6

EM IilO-2.-i902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 polygons for plots toward toe near diagram these responding corresponding lower units, which shown for factor the size of the
be noted

for each unit slice that the force the crest in figure

slice

can be constructed as shown for each unit part VI-5,

accurately. 2 of plate slice

A plot VI-5.

of

AE

.:

each unit in either

is then made polygons

in figure

It should vector AE acts


area When

are continuous so that section


are

a clockwise

or counterclockwise section.
and pius

direction
Consequently, areas

in the upper 2 of plate are equal, of safety

of the embankment
minus

and toward-the
in the obtained.

the bottom

of the embankment the summation is correct internal

two areas factor

of

AE

equals

zero

and the coranalyzed, a that using

for the sliding forces. It is useful of the -AE

surface to note area rule. trial

being

to balanced of safety +AE area.


of the

increases

the size The areas

and decreases any arbitrary of C AE as , of safety

can be measured, by Simpsons versus

using A plot factors

by planimeter is the net area in figure internal less

or approximated
area

diagram, can be used

3 of plate time further rule) shown

VI-5,

to determine integration and various For than the finite example, Dividers

the factor procedure slice techniques the equivalent

of safety requires procedure can be disection to

balanced

forces. drawdown

The graphical manually analysis), required. when diagram. 1 of plate

substantially (except utilized viders transfer b. for sudden of uniform

to complete the time can be used in figure to the area requires

for the sudden to reduce (or a slide density AE Sudden

proportional can be used procedure embankment,

constructing VI-5.

vectors

Drawdown, slice arc For procedure.


i5

The use of the graphical two analyses The cross into section

integration

drawdown

for an impervious section


or

as in the finite the trial before of plate weights below figure failure drawdown VI-6. this level.

of the embankment as shown saturated weights using 9,

above i

transformed before

an equivalent after drawdown moist before stress,

for conditions in figure unit are used in on 3b based

and also conditions above VI-6. The unit

for conditions pool force

drawdown, level polygon normal

are used 2(a) of plate

the upper slice

and submerged

drawdown

is shown

The developed VI-7

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 the S strength, S and R must be compared with the normal R stress or S at the
strength the

intersection
gov.erns.

of the The mal versus determine magnitude ment oped C AE

envelopes stress by ybase

to determine is determined cos 8.

if the

developed force trial for

normal Nb factors

by multiplying diagram shown side and

developed

nor-

An area to that

a plot VI-5

of are

C AE used to the

of safety of safety

similar for

in plate

the of

factor h the force

balanced

forces.

After

drawdown, in the embank-

is increased upper Nb pool found

to include and drawdown the

the weight pool.

of water The before values

between normal = 0)

of the devel(where drawdown side of

from force VI-6.

condition polygons The factor will = 0 for

drawdown after for than

are

used

in the unit 2(b) = 0 forces of plate before with

conditions of safety

as shown forces safety separate imize for with for

in figure C AE balanced sections

balanced the factor Consequently,

drawdown C AE should above-described investigated.

be greater drawdown. for the

after

and errors.

diagrams The surface

be used

two

analyses

to min-

possible each trial are

procedure The procedures

must for

be performed this type of

failure given

analysis c. of each the slice,

in plate with width

VI-

12. (1) the Water effective forces normal VI-7. manner, The on both - Ul - U1 line , are applies The on the force sides on the and base of

Embankment slice of unit

Seepage. influence 1 and in any

base

as shown

in figures for

2 of plate appropriate required. same UR UR

influence but the

of these following presl(a)). and of the to it, as side slice l(b), to deof pro-

forces cedure sure

can

be accounted the

simplifies with depth the each side

computations to be the UI, that force the U1 resultant forces necessary force and

variation sides equal

of water of the and slice(fig.

is assumed total forces, Note slice l(a),

Therefore, cancel right shown the can l(c), termine 3c(l)

opposite portion

other. of the

to that

from and the

saturation to the

to a line

parallel portion acting

in figure

applies

remaining water alone these can forces

of the on the

slice.

Although

U of all U1 and U2

be determined and l(d), the

from it is not

as shown forces be done

in figures separately if desired.

to compute this

resultant

U ; however, VI-8

EM iiiO-Z-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 (2) direction It can be shown perpendicular graphical both either friction that the resultant force line. 1J This (i.e. makes U/y,) acts in a to VI-7 U of on the -.~

to the saturation procedure U1 force or the magnitude

it possible force force

use the simple for determining without base AE

illustrated and direction U2.

in figure

2(a) of plate determination normal force is valid of this plotted

of the resultant

determining of the slice are illustrated weight in figure in plate 0. In analyses integration Details

The graphical side earth weight are

(a) the developed

FD , (b) the developed 2(b). This construction the validity forces safety

ND , and (c) the resultant in figure required VI-4 for of water 1 of plate

on the slice only when slice are procedure and summed corresponds using multiplied of the

the unit procedure. shown to as shown CAE= (3) graphical

is used as the base unit for verifying VI-7. The AE the correct seepage

in the unit

to obtain steady

factor, partial

which pool)

(including

procedure,

the developed

normal

force

to the normal stress at the intersection bY YW cos 0 must be compared R+S strength the S and R envelopes to determine when the S and 2 governs. material. d. quake potential graph 2d. Earthquake. imparts failure For the earthquake horizontal should in paragraph be computed slices weight case it is assumed force Ilf Fh acting of the main for each unit in figure mass h1 (total) When the trial composite sliding surface passes through different for materials, each the appropriate strength envelope should be used

that the earthof text slice and in paraand added VI-4. to slice

an additional as discussed Fh

in the direction

The force polygons height the water line

to the force Note that based weight effective the equivalent above

of the unit for the total unit height

as shown

2, plate

in the equation

Fh = JI h (total),

the term of the soil

is equal

in the unit

on the saturated equivalent

weight below the water table and moist unit This equivalent height is not the same as the table. h (effective) unit based weight
VI-9

on submerged it.

unit

weight

be-

low the saturation

and moist

above

3d

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 4. End of Construction--Case this condition as discussed analysis and the for the should 1.t Unit weights to those 9 of the main and shear strengths at the Examples the finite end of slice VI-8 used of in

analyzing construction stability procedure and tion record further 5. -9, using

correspond

expected text. using are given

in paragraph end of construction integration analyses

condition procedure should

graphical Additional of field

in plates

respectively. results

be made

during and

consfrucon is

instrumentation pore VU. II and III. water

measurements pressures are

of tests This

samples discussed

where

high

measured.

in Appendix

-Sudden strengths, are where developed effective pected described

Drawdown--Cases and design


in

Appropriate in sudden text.

unit

weights,

shear analyses cases pressures in ex-

assumptions lib condition are be made drawdown. Plate slices

to be used of the main

drawdown extreme water

paragraph

In some pore

a rapid during

drawdown

is possible dissipated, using excess

before

construction should of rapid (1) using dam one the

an appropriate pore water

reduction pressures

stresses at the Finite failure time

a.
for case a trial

Slices. arc

VI-IO of finite

shows width

an example for the For forces

of computations sudden each that drawdown trial arc two beslope

of a homogeneous are required, and using weights

of impervious to deterrnine to determine forces the

material. the normal the factor

analyses fore after

develop of the analysis. the beforeand

drawdown drawdown unit

second the normal below saturated

of safety in the first for

determined pool are

Submerged drawdown merged drawdown safety safety the zero are for unit

maximum weights pool

used

condition; weights condition. assumed, approximate error

unit

in the level

drawdown are used

zone for trial until the

sub-

below For and

the the

minimum

afterof of for the

before-drawdown of closure is found constructed are

analysis, determined (fig. 3). The

factors a factor polygon 4, and

errors zero

closure

force

of closure

is then

as shown

in figure

Case

designations

are

those

described VI- 10

in paragraph

ii

of the

main

test.

EM iilO-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 normal safety plate (2) equation forces for VI-10. from this force polygon condition, after are used drawdown must soils. saturated as shown for computing in,tabular is determined the factor form in from the analyses flow efnet. of

the after-drawdown The factor in plate shown VI-2.

as shown

of safety

The effect slopes

of seepage

forces with

be considered In these unit in plate cases, VI-ii. weights

in stability a drawdown to determine

of upstream fective forces plate weights sider slice near normal

of semipervious and forces

net can be used

in conjunction stresses R and base of the weight to construct below

The water from slice the flow (fig. 4, unit to. conboth of the condition the top of part way the consider computations for the sudTwo are used for the procedure. of safety were VI-12). to the

on the aides VI-ii) is used

of each slice and water the force pool as part

are determined forces polygon level, for each (fig. 5).

The resultant

Saturated way,

are used the water of water

the minimum slopes the slice Seepage level

and it is necessary In this forces arcs arcs on the sides critical through emerging should

on the outer above pool slope

of the slice.

the weight

and the water may create by failure for failure

can be evaluated. the lowered

forces analyses

a more

than is shown

the embankment, up the upstream riprap b. Graphical failure

and additional

may be desirable. material. Procedure. the graphical each trial ND force arc,

Such analyses Plate

as a free-draining Integration arc using for case required normal

VI- 12 shows procedure

for a trial analyses to construct trial (1) until R

integration

den drawdown are The developed

of a homogeneous forces using LIE for

dam of impervious as in the finite for before-drawdown polygons. steps: factors Trial

material. slice condition

the after-drawdown

The factor of safety 4a, plate corresponds

arc was determined Before-Drawdown of the the base of safety depending

the following

Analysis. diagram slice

assumed Shear S or re-

and the net area a factor along strength, sistance

(Z AE ) was determined of unit normal VI-ii width

for each trial

C AEf = 0 was found(fig. stress

of each

on the effective

(ND COB 9)

on the base 5b(i)

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 of the slice. plotting S strength, The shear as shown strength normal in figure developed stresses, 2a, plate along VI-i2. the arc (In this was determined using the example problem, by

the developed

Nb COB 8 , determined

the S strength was used when the value of Nb cos 8 was less than 4.150 kips per sq ft = 5, ft ) 0.073 kips per cu ft (2) Using the factor o; safety found in paragraph 5b(i) above for Z AE were (3) struct for after determining safety 6. found for Partial = 0, corresponding of Nb force of from polygons Nl!, were for before-drawdown determined. were then used to conThe factor factors until of safety and of is If a factor of safety analysis. trial for VI-12). The critical for various the center are varied the surface pool elevation pool levels. should for the of the pool of the arc until 5b(2) above conditions constructed Values force and values

paragraph

polygons

for the after-drawdown was determined of the AE (fig. diagram 4b, plate IV. arc, below arcs should

drawdown

by assuming

the net area Pool, failure The radii this level. Slit e s . in plate Upstream

each trial

Z AE 1 = 0 was found the critical surface slope Subsequent A stability VI- 13. of the

Slope-

-Case failure

by determining

surfaces

the assumed intersect first radius a. width above velopes arc. trial.

is a circular directly circular trials analysis

the embankment is determined. Finite is shown pool level

of the trial

the critical the pool above slices of finite below enfailure arc

be made with Case IV using

and below

for

Moist unit

weights

are used are used design along

for the material; for materials shear strength the assumed

and submerged in computing of different critical trial

pool level.

A composite

weights RtS S and 2 should

is used A number for

the shear pool levels pool arcs. Procedure. procedure arc level

strength

be analyzed

for each trial

to determine ess repeated b. using the same

the most other

and factor A stability is illustrated VI-i3.

of safety, analysis in plate

and the procfor Case IV VI-14, using

Graphical the graphical section

Integration integration and trial

as in plate VI- 12

In figure

1, the section

EM

iiio-24902
Appendix VI 1 April 1970

above density weight. values factors tributed

the trial Qsing of

arc

is converted ehear

into weight

an equivalent used 2,

embankment

of uniform by plotting differences in are at-

---

the submerged

of the foundationsoil can be determined There are These

as the base unit slight

The correct of safety mainly

strength plates VI-13

Nb COB 8 as shown between to small

in figure

and - 14.

differences

differences

in measurements Slope--Cases

of the small-scale A simplifying the curve the saturation more of finite on a to above for is and of pieline.

diagrams. 7. Steady Seepage, pressures the piezometric Finite is shown slice linearly must 2c of thie Slices. in plate appendix. pool Downstream often along V and VI. analysis a flow the failure for Case is that with arc. V using slices the forces forces conservative zometric However, closely
a.

assumption

made

in this arc along

the failure

coincides

it may be desirra.ble

to construct analysis The method water example, line.

net to determine

pressures A stability VI- 15. as that using In this (Case VI), forces

width finite graph vary pool given b. using height material

of computing forces the water of water it acts.

is the same below seepage be added shear

as discussed pool

in paraare assumed exists

the saturation to those resisting 2~. Integration integration slices

Where

a surcharge

the steady determining

the weight upon which using

due to the surcharge The procedure strength analysis in plate envelopes

composite A stability is illustrated VI-15.

in paragraph Graphical the graphical section having Unit conditions VI-15 and -i6 of the soil

Procedure. procedure as in plate arc equal are arc

for Case V VI-16 using the of water in between is inpool. VI-16, height

the same

and trial above a unit width

In figure into

i, plate equivalent

the failure weight slices

is converted at intervals to small that

to water selected mainly

for convenience where in factors differences

in handling change8 of safety height

pressures. boundary plates ments creased

occur.

The slight diagrams.

difference

is attributed for those

in measurethe surcharge

of the small-scale accordingly

In Case VI the equivalent pass through

,u.nit slices VI-13

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 8. made used a. method analyzed ally Earthquake9 or Case by using to compute Finite under is shown -Case V with either Slices. in plate earthquake earthquake Integration. method example earthquake unit weights are used VII. effective This case loadings or total force
In

consists stresses, Fh. for

of an analysis but only total

of Case I, can be are slice is weights the finite seepage) is baeicexcept the

..-

Case IV,

seismic

included.

The analysis

the earthquake A stability VI-17.

analysis this

Case VII using

example,

Case V (steady of analysis in plate

c onditione. force Fh

The procedure is added. analysis in plate with

the same b.

as that followed

in the Case V example An example is presented is analyzed force

VI-15

that the horizontal Graphical integration graphical only Moiet

for Case VII using VI-18. In this loading. The

example, in plate polygon. moiet h1 . and

Case I (end of construction) difference in this is that the horizontal and saturated unit weights

an earthquake

and the example are used

of Case I given to the force Fi,

VI-9

J?i, is added in computing

while height

submerged

in computing

the equivalent

VI- 14

EM IliO-i-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970

ASSUME0 TRIAL FAILURE ARC

FIGURE

I. EMBANKMENT

SECTION
(1) THROUGH ARE STEPS CONSTRUCTION (5) IN

*ALL E FORCES ARE PARALLEL TOAVERAGE OUTER SLOPE BEING ANALYZED.

FIGURE WITH

2. SLICE FORCES

2 2 G )jii
ti ii
W

%
FD6 50

-10 1.2 1.4 TRIAL 1.6 F.S.

1.1B

LEGEND
W = WEIGHT OF SLICE ON BASE

IS!= EARTH
N = NORMAL

FORCE TO

SIDE
OF BASE

OF SLICE

SLICE OF SLICE

FIGURE 4. TRIAL F. S. VERSUS ERROR OF CLOSURE

36

: ERROR OF CLOSURE

AL =
CO FO 90

LENGTH

ACROSS

= DEVELOPED = RESULTANT VELOPED = DEVELOPED FRICTION

COHESION

FORCE DE-

OF NORMAL AND FRICTION FORCE OF ANGLE SOIL TAN OF INTERNAL

FIGURE 3. COMPOSITE FORCE POLYGON FOR ONE TRIAL F. S.

= ARC

TAN # F.S.

MODIFIED SWEDISH METHOD FINITE SLICE PROCEDURE NO WATER FORCES


Plate VI-

EM iilO-Z-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970 .POOL LEVEL

BEFORE

DS

n
FIGURE I. EMBANKMENT SECTION AND FORCES ON TYPICAL SLICE BEFORE SUDDEN DRAWDOWN +o

W,Cl,~ (SATURATED WEIGHT ABOVE + SUBMERGED WEIGHT BELOW DRAWDOWN POOLi

Ws iUBMERGE0 EIGHT)

USING F.S. REQUIRED FOR CLOSURE.

C .,(2)

(UFING
l

TRIAL STEPS

F.S.) IN CONSTRUCTION.

P. BEFORE

DRAWDOWN 2. PORTION
DRAWDOWN TO 2b)

b. AFTER OF COMPOSITE FORCE

DRAWDOWN

FIGURE
EQUATION FOR (ALTERNATIVE XND F.S. NO W = WEIGHT c AND SHEAR =

POLYGONS

F.S. AFTER PROCEDURE TAN ZW 4 SIN

+ XChL 6 FORCEBEFOREDD

=DEVELOPEDNORMAL OF SLICE $!B AREFORTOTALAVAILABLE STRENGTH

AFTER

DO

MODIFIED SWEDISH METHOD FINITE SLICE PROCEDURE SUDDEN DRAWDOWN IMPERVIOUS EMBANKMENT

Plate

VI-2

EM iiiO-Z-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970


i
FIGURE 1. EMBANKMENT SECTION

I\\
FAILURE

I--_

TAILWATER

ARC

BLANKET

\/I,

\-

,W,

I TOTAL)

R3

&I-)

SLICE WATER

WITH SLOPING SURFACE

lb)

SLICE WITH HORIZONTAL WATER SURFACE

FIGURE

2.

FORCES

ACTING

ON TYPICAL

SLICES

FIGURE FIGURE 4. COMPOSITE FORCE POLYGON FOR ONE TRIAL F.S.

3. RESULTANT OF WEIGHT AND WATER FORCES

LEGEND

UF4= UL = uEl =

WATER WATER WATER

FORCE FORCE FORCE

ON ON ON

RIGHT LEFT BASE

SIDE SIDE OF

OF OF

SLICE SLICE

SLICE

MODIFIED SWEDISH METHOD FINITE SLICE PROCEDURE WITH STEADY SEEPAGE WATER FORCES Plate VI-17 VI-

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970


I DIRECTION POTENTIAL OF FAILURE

\ \
w3
(TOTAL) W6 (EFFECTIVE)

DIRECTION POTENTIAL

Of FAILURE

.-

06

YF,,~

= J, W5 (TOTAL)

Fh3 ~~~

Wj (TOTAL) = 4 wj FORCES

j 0 ) NO SEEPAGE FORCES (SEE FIG. 3. PLATE~-I) FIGURE 1. FINITE SLICE

lb)

WITH SEE

SEEPAGE FIG.

3. PLATE=-3)

PR_OCEDURE

DIRECTION POTENTIAL

OF FAILURE

r; (EFFECTIVE)

(TOTAL)
cl DIRECTION 4POTENTIAL OF FAlLURE

e/
/ 2 e-F; =$h (TOTAL)

(0) (SEE

NO

SEEPAGE FIG.

FORCES

(b)
GRAPHICAL INTEGRATION

WITH FIG.

SEEPAGE

FORCES

1. PLATE=-5) FIGURE 2.

(SEE

zb, PLATE=-7)

PROCEDURE

MODIFIED SWEDISH METHOD FINITE SLICE AND GRAPHICAL INTEGRATION PROCEDURE EARTHQUAKE LOADING
Plate VI-4 VI-18

EM :iiO-2-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970


(+I ii 40 W (-) FIGURE

TRIAL

F. S. EAE

4
VERSUS TRIAL F.S.

3.

(+I

$0
WHEN: +hEAREA = -AEAREA TRIAL F.S. FOR WHICH XAE BALANCE OF INTERNAL SIDE (ARBITRARY IS F.S. FORCES UN IITS) FOR

t-1

=0

FIGURE

2. AEAREA

DIAGRAM
CURVE DEVELOPED BY PLOTTING h AT SELECTED INTERVALS

STEPS

IN CONSTRUCTION

\,

WAE, .

(-)AE

(5)

--

IYl\ k
TRIAL FAILURE

FIGURE 4OTE: ALL ARE COMPONENTS IN UNITS OF OF FEET UNIT SINCE SLICE FORCE POLYGON

I.

EMBANKMENT

SECTION

ha = h x - Y YBASE
=

LEGEND h rE = HEIGHT OF UNIT WIDTH SLICE

h XL YBASE

= INCREMENT TO BALANCE WIDTH SLICE = DEVELOPED =DEVELOPED

OF EARTH FORCE FORCE POLYGON COHESION NORMAL FORCE FORCE

REQUIRED FOR UNIT , = cI F. S. 1

%
N;J

= RESULTANT FRICTIONAL $ D = DEVELOPED

Fb

OF DEVELOPED NORMAL AND FORCES ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION OF TRIAL FAILURE

8 = ANGLE OF INCLINATION ARC WITH HORIZONTAL

MODIFIED SWEDISH METHOD , . ,-RATION GRAPHICAL INTFC PROCEC XJRE -----NO WATER FORCES
Plate
VI-5

VI-19

EM 1110-2-I Appendix VI 1 April 1970

902
CURVE DEVELOPED BY PLOTTING h AT SELECTED INTERVALS: BEFORE DRAWDOW LAFTER 0RAWcmw

,/P,

POOL LEVEL BEFORE DRAWDOWN

(00)

POOL LEVEL AFTER

1.Yr.s

AFTER

DO

YSAT I/ In8 BEFORE DCJ

h" = th, t h,, y'


YBASE

AFTER

DD

h
hl q

IY

+ h2

YSAT

Yt3ASE

FIGURE

I. EMBANKMENT

SECTION

40 R CD
FOR

\
= 0 1 XYe*sEXCOs 1 Nb FIG. FROM 2a

h AFTER

ZA ,E

h BEFORE

DO

a. BE FORE

DRAWDOWN FIGURE 2. UNIT SLICE FORCE POLYGON

b. AFTER AT A

DRAWDOWN

MODIFIED SWEDISH METHOD GRAPHICAL INTEGRATION PROCEDURE, SUDDEN DRAWDOWN


late VI-6 VI-20

EM iiiO-Z-1902 Appendix VI 1 April 1970


OUTER SLOPE EMBANKMWT TANGENT TO Lit&Q SATURATION OF

cos 8 AL=-!-COS a

AL=~

u2=h,ywA~
SATURATION LINE PlEZOMETRlC LEVEL ABOVE FAlLURE ARC U SIN (90 U coS= - 8) = SIN
U2

(90

t al

we,&
COS a

hwy,,,A~-A~@ u=
- a) .a)

AL u =hwywA~'

SATURATION

L/NE

FIGURE

I. RESULTANT

U FORCE

TANGWT

TO SATURATION

LINE

/ h

PIEZOMETRIC ABOVE TRIAL

LEVEL FAILURE

I
TRIAL FAILURE

(0)

FIGURE

2. GRAPHICAL

DETERMINATION

OF U AND ND

MODIFIED SWEDISH METHOD GRAPHICAL INTEGRATION PROCEDURE, STEADY SEEPAGE WATER FORCES
Plate m-2 i VI

EM

IilO-2.1 April

1902 1970

APPENDIX Wedge 1. failure proximated is generally larly and dation applicable a relatively materials. of the or rock General. may The occur procedures presented and These

VII

.,.

Analysis in this its appendix assume along are This that shear apof what is particuouter stratified emphasize impervious of the for with of the that shells founthe cores location of

in an embankment of planes.

foundation

a surface

by a series termed

procedures

variations method

the wedge

method

of analysis. containing

to a zoned thin core The wedge shells

embankment resting

cohesionless or

on either presented

homogeneous in this appendix having influence given

analyses method and stability. cores,

application with the with vious planes amples amples 2. into Basic three gravel core

to embankments demonstrate Examples and for the

on embankment impervious located the within

are

embankments inclined imperThe in the the ex-

central cores defining are are

embankments portions

the

upstream of the

embankments. are shown since

boundaries the

sliding critical the method,

mass failure

not

necessarily only

most

planes,

ex-

presented Principles. segments

to illustrate wedge wedge, VII-i. the active separately values are

procedures the soil block, boundaries passive

involved. mass and are is usually a passive assumed The forces divided wedge, beon 4 of friction of

In the : an active 1 of plate block and

a central Vertical and

as shown tween each plate along safety, the

in figure central are The

wedges. in figures angle

segment VIIthe 1.

considered developed surfaces

as shown and

2 through

of cohesion

of internal trial factor

failure F.S.,

controlled

by the assumed

so that - c/F.S. = (tan resultant VII-i +)/F.S. earth forces EA and Ep also

tan 9,
Consequently, the magnitudes of the

EM iiiO-2-1902 AppendixVII 1 April 1970


depend vertica; constructing of plate block the m-i, (fig. first 4). on the trial safety of the polygons, are then factor. passive The resultant earth wedges in figures in the will with necessary force generaliy different to close As the trial forces are acting at the --

boundaries force and

and active

determu~ed.by 3, respectively, for the central

as illustrated incorporated of equilibrium


trial

2 and polygon

A condition

not be obtained
safety the factors polygon are (fig.

on
4,

trial

and several
analysis,

analyses force The vary factors of safety the

required.

In each

the AEH. sign

plate
tally made VII-i,

VII-I)
and of its AG

is denoted
magnitude

as
and

force
with

is assumed factor as shown AIf& for the _ is

to act horizonA plot 5, plate factor being are reis

of safety. in figure zero. This surface wedges

versus
the required trial the

the trial
factor

of safety, at which forces

to determine is that Various to determine

of safety

to balance locations minimum for

sliding

analyzed.
quired

of the active safety selecting in plate be modified factor.

and passive

3.
are

Basic
illustrative

Criteria.
earth forces only resulting

Criteria are and from this

the direction VII-2. where

of the

active these

and criteria

passive

illustrated should

However, differential or from shown

foundation a variable VII-2 center conimperwill a thin occur weak of

settlement subsoQ

consolidation desirable.

of soft The criteria will

layers

profile only
where

makes the The

in plate the

apply
the

maximum location such

settlement of the critical

occur sliding

beneath planes

embankment.

is often

trolledby
vious near Iayer a. of core, the has

weak
and bottom been

zones,
must

as a foundation by trial. In the

layer

and/or

an inclined sliding follow,

be determined layer.

In general, that

of a weak assumed. Earth

discussions

Active is Iies slope shown

Forces. tabulation materials the

(4)

A general
in figure or includes value of the

rule

for

selecting When

the the

direction sliding or reby can a

EA

in the

1 of plate a portion of CIA. sliding EA

VII-2.

surface verse trial

in cohesive (plate m-21, using

of the must

crest

maximum values When VII-2

be determined trial, BA within

force

polygons
equal

various

As a first plane

be assumed

to 45O + (4b/2).

is located

EM

1110-2-1902
Append& 1 April VII 1970 of the ..

thin slidin

inclined plane. (2) The

core,

the

slope

of the

core

will

generally

govern

the angle

maximum using active wedge the

value conjugate

of

EA stress

and

corresponding illustrated

value

of

eA

can VI,.l-3

be

determined when tire (fig. earth cient sumed (3) plate (a) the active l(b), force KA angle

procedure

in plate

sliding is under

surface the slope,

is in cohesionless (c) EA forces acts are the

materials, parallel not to the

(b) the outer

enslope

plate may from

VII-2), also earth

and

(d) seepage

present. pressure of +D friction. materials depend

The

active coeffi-

be computed pressure earth wedge

by obtaining 14 tables using force as the

earth

the value angle of wall

and

the as-

of the the

active active

When V-U-2),

is composed sliding

of different surfaces in preliminary miscellaneous can

(fig. shear

l(c),

the angles soils

of the active involved.

on the

strengths dams other and

of the for

However, channels, sliding For structures, sliding surface final

design

analyses and

for

design the each critical which

of levees, active

embankments, to be inclined and for

structures, for

be assumed analyses

at desoil value

45O + +/2 sign zone of E of more through

material. earth the active

design 9A surface

of dams within the

should passes of the l(c)

be varied until resultant and force the

each

maximum active total

is found. To determine A the wedge must be subdivided force rection accordance of the plane at each of the boundary resultant the are

the magnitude as shown in figure

force, earth The di-

determined forces general necessary rule E

as shown

by the

polygon.

with ac

and E A ire assumed Al EA2 given in plate VU-2. Other trial analyses to determine the

to be in locations lowest factor

in all

of safety. b. block passes cause the terial Central passes through of changing block (or Block. through a single normal should shear more (1) Where than one but (e.g. the failure plane or where shear a composite its component previously beneath the the failure central plane is used be-

material a different using

material stress be broken

strength S and parts for the

R envelope), based active on mawedge.

central type

up into

strength)

as described

VII- 3

WI)

EM 1110-2-1902 AppenGx VII 1 April 1970 Resultant sumed and latter E forces acting on boundaries at any more the value between intermediate assumed on the these between subblocks the inclination With can be asof this E A

to be inclined P assumption, but are

conveniently normal stress

to be horizontal. failure plane is equal

to the

overburden (2) face The

stress. case should also be considered different cohesionless this partially may stresses, be true. by computing the two materials (1) case along offer failure where materials material). surface other; shear under at which may this a horizontal (for failure sura clay a case, sliding because than effective switch at which the in the normal occurs is slidclay the

parallels overlying shear

a boundary

between

example, In such

stratum lowest partially ing under stresses can easily in the low

or underlying along and layer normal may

resistance material

be when occurs

in one

in the less whereas The point

cohesionless effective the reverse

resistance high this

be determined envelopes Passive for Earth

the normal intersect. When the

stress

strength C. of the sliding direction

Forces.

passive 2(a), within The

wedge plate the

is near VII-2,

the

toe

embankment, is assumed of Ep from boundary

as in the to occur is assumed the active between the wedge toe lowest

shown a weak

in figure plane

in which the will usually of re2(a).

foundation, wedge trial block

to be horizontal. wedge the by a central passive wedge

passive and central

be separated the vertical

block, and

locations are

quired Where boundary the from

to determine the
passive

factor

of safety, in cohesionless (wedge E P can

as illustrated material A in fig. be determined 2(a),

in figure and

is located

the vertical VII-2)) or

is at the passive equation

of the soil

embankment

plate graphically

resultant the

resistance

Ep in which

= 1/2

y h2Kp

1 t sin KP = 1 - sin

+D $D

3c(l)

VII-4

EM 1110-2-1902
Appendix 1 April When of value zones, (2) shown same outer various less plane of 8p and 8 P of the vertical must E BP P boundary for is not each at the toe trial the factor of the embankment, until trial a minimum several 3a(3) soil VII 1970 ---

values

be assumed is obtained. should

of safety wedge

When and

passive

includes

be varied

the criteria to occur the inclination

in paragraph along the of ground Ep Ep from

applies. as t-o be the to the for

Where in figure as that slope. trial the of

sliding 2(b), E

is assumed plate VII-2,

surface

is assumed acts force material parallel

The factors

If a central block is present, A is determined magnitude of Ep of safety. is stronger the (fig. and P criteria cases 8 When the embankment the

polygons

is cohesionsliding an angle acts VII-.3)

foundation

than toe

embankment, embankment VII-2). stress each trial In this

a passive and make case, Ep (plate

is assumed with the

to intersect horizontal outer slope

of the plate

2(c), the and

parallel may

to the be used

conjugate Ep for and

procedure factor for following

to determine of the design

of safety. handling water

(3) forces

Examples fur various

above are 1.t

procedures in the

described The shell

paragraphs. stability cohesive of an core is

4.

End

of Construction--Case composed by the central should core and

end-of-construction and impervious examples presented. at the text. and or strata end Unit end for

embankment influenced with both

of a granular location. inclined

Accordingly, cores to those are

embankments and shear as S shear materials soils. foundation The when In beR

weights

strengths discussed strengths and Q

correspond

expected main

of construction, analysis,

in paragraphs are strengths may used for are be used will it may R .

9 and

Ila

of the

In the

free-draining used for for

embankment core clay

foundation

impervious thin complete to use analyses

foundation in the

strengths consolidation some tween of the

relatively

be essentially be necessary Additional as discussed

at the a design should

of construction. intermediate during

cases, Q and

strength

be made VIII.

construction

embankment,

in Appendix

Case

designations

are

described

in paragraph VII5

11 of the

main

text.

EM IliO-2-i902 Appendix VII 1 April 1970 a. is equal flanking infinite (2) than the Embankment to or greater with than Central the core, F.S. where = 8 the Core. (I) Where the foundation embankment be estimated V. that This is weaker condition into i an is seto various BA factor EA stress VII-4. Because the of the is using strength shell the

strength the safety

of a cohesionless factor can

a narrow slope For shell,

central

equation conditions the factor VII-4.

, as discussed foundation must contains

in Appendix a layer

of safety The block,

be found failure

by trial. mass

illustrated active lected trial active to the

in plate wedge, for

assumed and

is divided A trial point

a central end

a passive of active force for since EA

wedge. wedges and the trial

the upper of safety. plane

of a series The earth

corresponding inclination safety force

factors sliding conjugate

can

be determined procedure, slope. OA is

each the earth

according to for

stress outer and Ep

is assumed procedure The

be parallel determining of the face earth of the

to the KA force passive Kp

A simplified shown in figure

conjugate 2 of plate

direction sur-

is assumed in the

to be horizontal. example 2. is horizontal, The

the upper passive of the

wedge is that given the active

pressure passive are

coefficient force contained mined (3) central


polygon

given in this

in figure figure.

computation several Ep types and E

Ep

is also within

When wedges,

of material A can

or passive

be deter-

from Using block does of safety

force

diagrams. above for EA and Ep, a force polygon VII-4. trial the trial for the The fac-

the values can not

be constructed close by the as shown is and zero force

as shown AEH.

in figure A plot 4, plate polygon should plane a force of

3 of plate AEH

versus

tors

is used AE active When H

in figure and the force

VII-4,

to obtain Other to find through

factor IO-

of safety cations safety EA ure

when of the fat tor .

closes.

passive

wedges of the active

be used passes polygon

the

minimum

a portion by trial

the core, in fig-

is determined l(c), b. plate VII-2.

by constructing

as shown

Embankment normally

with

Inclined

Core. in the VII-6

(1) lower

The

failure core

surface material.

for

this While

condition.will 4b(l)

be located

strength

EM

iiio-2-1902
Appendix J April VII 1970 befaces, boundis as failureVII-5. toe of The .:,

the

zone

of minimum

strength takes place

is probably at a slower assumed force the shell, shell.

near rate to lie

the

middle than

of the core, at the outer

cause the ary

consolidation surface the largest

here along

failure where

is normally driving than

the downstream foundation of the trial

is obtained. the lower This shown case

If the portion

strong surface (2) the

as or stronger will be entirely

in the

is illustrated 1, plate outer toe

in plate VII5, the

In the

embankment is assumed base of the

section

in figure with and the the stress as shown sliding

passive

wedge of the

to coincide passive the wedge

of the

dam. earth

inclination force cussed for Ep

magnitude assumption, in figure plane the lower

of the

are

determined

from

conjugate and the trial

as dis2, plate VII-5,

in paragraph safety the

3c of this factor of 1.5.

appendix When

a trial

of the trial

active surshear In in downunder low minis

wedge face

is along plane should so that shown gravel stresses, resistance filter point and

boundary be located

of two in the

embankment material active shear Q

zones, having earth strength strength higher the

sliding

developed is obtained.

strength the case

the

maximum VII-5,

resultant the than S the

force

in plate filter but

of the material of the loads; of the A method Several of the polygon core therefore sliding

stream normal imum in the break (A, the each

is less the

shear under

reverse when portion in figure selected,

is true the

is obtained the lower

upper

portion core. VII-5.

surface the

is in the 1 of plate and

of locating trial

is illustrated C in fig. 1) are

locations wedge to at the gravel of vector

B, and right trial

the weight A force shear the

active

of each location Q used

location using

is determined. the of the developed core and example S

is constructed material; of the intersection the A these and E

strength

of each S strength The with

developed filter the are friction

strength in the for

developed in plate

case the

of the developed and is drawn

VII-5. A(S) is drawn F

vector for each

strength curve the two

is located points.

polygon, curve

a smooth through of the in the

through of the (point EA

A similar vectors. shear

intersections curves locates of EA

the

FA(Q)

The strengths

intersection result

point

where 1). 4b(2)

two

same VII-7

value

D in fig.

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VII 1 April 1970 From drawn plate which which wedge forces plotted balance (3) shell, 5. this point, a line parallel to the (dashed point would in the are S line strength from sliding gravel force point friction vector A(S) E in fig. right left of of F is 1 of

to the VIIthe 5).

sliding This

surface locates

D to point to the and to the for

E on the lie in the The

surface, filter

plane

of sliding would occur block

sliding and

core.

polygcns

the

active The block are to

central

shown the

in figures force in figure

3 and 4, respectively. for the the shown than central factor

AEH versus forces If the the Sudden trial

required trial for

to close safety factors

polygons 5, where is

of safety

the

sliding has surface

surfaces a lower will

analyzed shear

to be 1.62. the embankment

foundation failure

strength the

pass

through

foundation. unit weights, shear analyses method, materials the

Drawdown--Cases and design assumptions Ilb are

II and III.

Appropriate in sudden text.

strengths, are active in the a. erally narrow weak described and shell

to be used of the influenced main

drawdown

in paragraph passive are forces semipervious. with

In the wedge forces when

by seepage

Embankment critical central layer for

Central

Core. having

(1)

Sudden

drawdown shell

is not

genand a

embankments and this

free-draining not The be analyzed safety

materials

core,

case

need

unless

a relatively

is present shell

in the materials

foundation. can V. shell

factor using the

of free-draining infinite analyses slope are of low as

cohesionless method required permeability. the shell, the

be approximated However, is composed detailed

described when the

in Appendix upstream foundation portion layer, semipervious wedge, is net

Stability

of sands layer that surface

or gravels is not will

If the horizontal

contains of the as illustrated shells.

a thin trial

as strong pass for

sliding in figure The and

through an is di-

the weaker embankment vided the into shell

foundation having a passive material flow

1, plate failure

VII-6, mass

potential an active

a central

block, it may

wedge. to construct trial and

Because a

semipervious, the

be necessary forces. the central Various

drawdown of the

to evaluate between

seepage and VII8

locations various

boundaries

the wedges

block

EM 1110-2-1902
Appendix 1 April inclinations (2; wedge of the In the and active and shown passive in plate sliding planes the must be assumed. between the passive the VII 1970 .,

example block E

VII-6,

boundary toe of the

central for

is assumed

to be at the

embankment; location

computations with (3) planes of the mate for BA = 33.5 The

are shown directly below figure 1. A trial P deg is assumed for the active sliding plane, of the R or S shear the envelopes along in plate for the for active a trial the strengths normal shown trial along stress the at the trial

use

sliding point approxi-

is established composite effective shear normal

by comparing strength stresses

inflection the

in figure

2 with

failure

planes.

The

procedure

doing (4)

this The

is demonstrated force polygons 3 of plate are factor tried

VII-6.
wedge factor and for the central of 1.3. block Various of the are AEH trial reare of safety is obtained. VII-6 locations of the equation of 1.28; for

shown safety versus locations quired

in figure factors trial

Vu-6
until

a balance is shown passive

of forces in figure

A plot for

of safety and

4 of plate Other trial

of the

active

wedges. factor

to determine portion given for flow

the minimum of the outer

of safety. slope, in a factor ranges slope, of the

A check using the

lower for the hor-

(1 on 3.5) izontal factor flow safety safety bankment riprap ation b. clined flow

embankment V, results l-on-3 to the slope outer

in Appendix the upper parallel the

of safety from 1.07

of safety to 1.17 for

horizontal factor of of em-

with

an average slope has

of 1.12. for sudden and on the in the

Therefore, drawdown

surface

outer

a low through

factor the of

as compared If there

to a failure

surface

the weak outer

foundation. the weight

is an appreciable should be taken

thickness into

slope,

of riprap

consider-

analysis. with Inclined Core. along (1) The sliding surface between portion However, in the the core core inand is

Embankment core is assumed shell

to be located the forces with that the the shear prior sliding core

the boundary of this

the upstream not increased also core,

because

strength

of the stability

by seepage be checked assuming

to drawdown. surface the

should of the

a.t the downstream sliding surface is fully

boundary

along

VII- 9

5b(l)

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VII 1 April 1970 consolidated When sists inciding The EP ure with pool the under foundation and toe of the the weight is stronger a passive of the base using critical wedge each trial top of overlying than wedge, the material embankment, with the toe and
by seepage forces.

the of the

failure passive I, the plate

mass wedge VII-7.

conco-

of an active with the

embankment of the the passive

as shown wedge stress each trial

in figure BP and

inclination are 3. the level

passive

force in fig-

determined The most

conjugate for

assunlption factor and thus

as shown of safety the critical to intersect the active pool

condition completely factor

is obtained lowered the and level will be

passive for slope wedges. or below higher

submerged, of safety should boundary estimated pool level,

be located between actual the pool

upstream passive is above slightly (2) force (wA1 rock stream moist. sure, The and uA force weight (3) sented for the the case (4) will

at the If the the

of the vertical of the lowered the critical force

location critical for

drawdown factor level. VIIfill 7), the and

of safety

than

that

lowered EA weight pool level. changes increment gain (fig.

In evaluating FA and is based WA2) and shell filter above

the active on the

4, plate rock

frictional

submerged

of the leve 1 and During

filter of the the upto prescore. the moist

b e 1ow the maximum (WA3) the low that cause pressure weights need Figure above pool this any this level added immediate force

the moist sudden

weight

fill

drawdown, submerged pore in the

in weight of weight of shear

from

It is assumed but induced submerged This force does not

induces

strength

pore

created

by the in the

difference polygon as can of UA

between in figure be seen and of E the

is represented not be explicitly that contribute EA for the

force

4 by the in

computed, resultant a major various trial

from change

polygon. of the Curves in figure sliding

4 shows kips) and VII-7. analyzed

shell of

(492 Ep

portion factors

A of safety Ep equal

are and

preEA in

5, plate surface

A condition exists for

of equality a factor

between

of safety

to 1.23

illustrated. If the shell is stronger and full than the foundation, should 10 the passive sliding If high plane

be in the

foundation

drawdown VII-

be considered.

5b(4)

EM

illoAppendix 1 April

2-.1902
VLI 1970 .L

tailwater downskream

conditions toe Pool, for

will sudden

exist

during

spillway should IV.

operations, be made+ A static

a check

of the

drawdown Slope--Case slope because

6.

Partial

Upstream

reservoir in weight a pool and

reduces resistance

the

stability of the

of the upstream passive wedge pool due

of reduction In many this cases,

to buoyancy. is critical; and main

elevation must this

above be deterare de-

conservation mined scribed a. that by trial.

elevation Basic

critical

elevation for

assumptions Ilc with of the Central

shear

strengths

case

in paragraph Embankment

text. The appendix, embankment strength stress. (1) A stability foundation in figure analysis is shown 1 of the earth in figure each trial for in plate. force 2. The E As P in an of the procedure except at the core used that trial is similar to

Core.

discussed line Either magnitude

in paragraph is assumed the S or of the RtS 2

4a of this within the

a horizontal level of the depending

saturation pool. on the b.

shear

is used,

effective Inclined
core

normal Core.

Embankment with 8. The of the factor

with an inclined embankment passive of safety case, with for

embankment plate VII-

on a strong is 8 shown

section plane

inclination for the a trial sudden

sliding

of 1.5 are the the most

and the passive P determined as shown critical wedge factor condition completely of safety for

drawdown is obtained pool level

factor and to the thus

of safety the lowered

passive trial

submerged, should be located

each

intersect active pool and

the upstream passive and

slope

at the Submerged

top

of the vertical weights are

boundary used below

between the partial

wedges. moist unit to the

elevation (2)

weights right

above. of.figure 1, plate W-I-8, trial illustrate failure a simpliplanes envelopes for are

Computations for use

fied

procedure

determining shown (3) ure

on the computing normal stresses R + S strengths. Composite of S or 2

strength

in figure The value VII-g.

3. of E A is determined comparison 5, indicates of that VIIfrom EA the 11 a force and factor Ep pal:-gon versus of safety as shown trial for factor the sliding in figof

4, plate shown

The

safety,

in figure

EM IliO-2-1902 Appendix VII 1 April 1970 surfaces (4) at the check core cal analyzed This case is 1.51. also of the be analyzed core with The the assuming pool level the active sliding plane to

should face critical under

downstream for a more

at several assume

locations that to the the criti-

condition. the overlying

analyses weights

should

is consolidated pool (5) elevation. If the

corresponding

foundation foundation, in a manner with of the

is weaker and the

than passive to that Storage below

the

shell,

the

passive

sliding

plane using a

will central 7.

be in the block

resistance shown Poolthe

is determined in plate -Case VII-6. V. line Steady

similar Maximum soil mass

Steady

Seepage the weight

seepage

reduces uplift,

saturation is reduced.

by hydrostatic same time,

and

thus forces

frictional of the

shearing reservoir direction. Iid Central

resistance pool act

At the against the

the water core are in the

horizontally criteria text. (1) If the and

impervious to use

downstream in paragraph with the

Basic of the Core. rests need main

shear

strength

discussed a.

Embankment slopes of the and

core

is narrow only material slope

with the stais coof the

steep bility

embankment shell

on a strong

foundation, If the surface as shell

downstream and and free the

be examined. sliding

hesionless outer shell,

draining, factor

the of safety

critical can

is the

be expressed +

F.S. where b = cotangent + = angle Where critical trial. shell shell cores sliding Where material, just above are of the downstream friction foundations may strength pass

= b tan

embankment of the are shell

slope

of internal wide surfaces or

material than zones is less the and shell, must that the most by

weaker these

through

be found of the in the

the

shear

of the

foundation sliding within

than

the the

weakest foundation,

horizontal slightly

surface the

may

be either layer,

foundation

or at the

VII-12

EM

iiiO-2-.I902 Appendix VII 1 April 1970 and and the shown strength shear central shear in .... . .

bottom strengths. block strength figure should (2) is not E Al

of the

foundation

layer, is given intermediate change.

depending in plate

upon VII-9.

the The

normal active

loads wedge where are RtS 7

An example divided parameters 2, and be used Since into

are

sections

at boundaries strength diagrams the S or

Composite to determine

computations are the given. active

where

wedge the

portion maximum

Al

, located value of the

in the active

cohesionless resultant based

shell, force

entirelymust

submerged,

be determined of from F Al

graphically for each

(fig. trial

3, plate factor

VII-9) of safety. However, example, that

on the weight of varies a value of the of active eA1 only

and direction WAl can be determined slightly 65 deg wedge above The values spectively, (3) assumed varied trial from b. critical dation. down a. are Steady The for the trial for

Values 0 Al and

plate

VII-11 of safety

or by trial. used in the

factors all trial

is used

factors

of safety. is completely

When

portion (or chart

in cohesionless the seepage line)

material EAl

submerged using is shown are shown the

completely in plate 1, and 4 and VII-12. the 5, re-

can

be computed forces and EP

determination of EA (for

of the BA2 VII-9. of

hydrostatic = 50 deg)

in figure in figures

of plate magnitude

EA

for

each

trial active EA.

safety wedge A plot

factor eA2 of EA

varies which and

with must EP

the be versus

inclination to obtain the

of the base maximum is shown for the

of the value of

factors figure

of safety 6 that BA2

in figure lowest

6, plate factor

VII-9.

It should is 60 deg. seepage core

be noted

of safety The steady

Embankment for

with

Inclined with either cases

Cores. an inclined at the for end such

case

is not foundraw-

an embankment existing the critical with

upstream

on a strong or sudden

Conditions usually Seepage of steady pool in the

of construction a design. VI. This

Surcharge has to the takes

Pool--Case been established

case

applies pool level,

after the

a condition reservoir change

seepage rises pattern

at a given level, of the and short

quickly seepage

surcharge place VII-13

pool because

no appreciable duration at the

EM iliO-2-1902 Appendix VII 1 April higher narrow used in the charge that the for two pool portion storage 1970 level. central this This analysis The identical in is especially procedure to those Case VI wedge applicable of analysis given the for to rock-fill and Case shear dams strength having criteria difference the surof

cores. case are

V; the only from the unit

analyses is added of the pool is given seepage

is that to the

horizontal force polygon

thrust and

active upstream submerged

weight pool and

pervious

zone instead

between

the

surcharge AA example

becomes in plate example As

of moist. pool

of this applied to

analysis the steady

VII-10 shown

where

a surcharge VII-9. iif

has

been

in plate

9.

Earthquake. that the

discussed imparts of the sliding

in paragraph an additional potential soil mass on the line, In the for in the the failure W

of the horizontal mass. times the unit does not

main

text, force

it is asFh acting

sumed in the

earthquake of sliding of the W

direction weight The

This

force

is equal coeffi-

to the total cient moist water forces the 4,. unit above are

seismic weight include

weight above

is based the saturation slope.

saturated but wedge

below

and of

weight the

the weight

embankment individually and included

analysis, wedge, force the

horizontal passive

seismic wedge, and

computed block,

active

central

respective

polygons.

VII-

14

EM

iiiO-2-i9b2 Appendix 1 April

VU 1970

0.3 I I

0.4 I

0.5 I

0.6

0.7 I

0.6 J

OS J

1.0 I

i-

20

26 &,,

30 DECREES

36

40

4s

6, = &, t ARC=

4TAN

40

t 8, [TAN

14,

+ B, + CDT

4,1)+
(196Zl.4

FRDM

TABLE

A-73,

JUYIKIS

EARTH

PRE6SURE

COEFFICIENT

TABLES

eA VS 4D FOR COHESIONLESS SOIL, COULOMB ACTIVE SLIDIN PLANE E FOR ACTIVE WEDGE BENEATHNEGATlVESLOP1 Plate VIIii

VII-

35

EM

li10-2-1902 1 April 1970

APPENDIX Evaluation

VIII Stability

of Embankment During Construction

1.
fected When

Basic

Considerations. by pore pore water

Embankment water pressures are water

stability induced low, stability

during

construction of fill

is afplaced. is the sta-

primarily induced not

by the weight during measured

pressures If pore are

construction in either

generally embankment bility sary during to:

a problem. or foundation the construction berms temporarily

pressures

high, period

additional should slopes, fill

analyses be made, and

of embankment it may the

be necesof fill drainof

(a) provide or
(c)

or

flatten discontinue

(b) decrease operations. The

rate

placement, age such

Emergency interpretation during design

as electroosmosis pore water pressure

may

also and

be considered. evaluation of stability

measured should design and 2.

construction that

be regarded expectations

as an integral and assumptions

part

of embankment are consistent with

to assure

actual

embankment

foundation Development a. General.

properties. of Pore The the and Water development or in the of drainage Pressure of pore During water Construction. pressures depends during upon the construcsoil conbe

tion

in either

foundation

embankment or consolidation made during

properties struction. compared during b. developed depend

the amount

occurring

during should

Piezometer with construction. Embankment in partially primarily and predicted

observations magnitudes

construction in a general way

to assess

stability

Pore

Water

Pressures. embankment

(1) materials such

Pore

water during

pressures construction density, of core of con-

saturated

on (a) fill

characteristics

as water height,

content, (c) size (e) rate

permeability, or impervious

compressibility, (d) internal of construction pressure

(b) embankment drainage seasons, development VIII -1

sections, (f) number

provisions, and

struction, Factors

(g) climatic

conditions. and means

involved

in pore

in embankments

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VIII 1 April 1970 for estimating construction report fill pore water pressures are 15 and are reviewed briefly is placed above partially in the increased water, discussed below. material, soil air the is comin a recent

Corps (2) following pressed, causes decrease; stresses caused weight and

of Engineers As additional effects thereby additional (c) pore are can

saturated compacted pore

be observed: its volume;

(a) the air (b) the

reducing solution water

pressure volume

of air pressures

in the pore are

and an additional and (d) intergranular

increased;

increased

by an amount and solution fill is supported water and air that are

corresponding of air partially pressures. in the soil

to the volume pore water. stresses

decrease Thus, in the the soil for

by compression of overlying

by effective

partially and pore

by pore

It is generally and water pressures higher pore than air

assumed, are pore equal, water

simplicity although pressures. pressures conservative. caused shown (3) more

conservatism, air pressures

pore actually

air

somewhat

If drainage estimated The

during construction 16,17 from application procedure saturated with are soil

is ignored, of Boyles for evaluating

and water laws are

and Henrys pore

Brahtz-Hilf a partially 1, together

pressures taking place is

by loading in plate When construction pore Where and the VIII-

without

drainage

an example. slowly, in stages, water or in two may occur or and into invesbetween may

embankments seasons, pressures stability gain

constructed

significant may under

drainage unless

of pore

estimated account. tigated, construction

be too high stage strength into

consolidation conditions

is taken is being

construction from

in shear is taken

consolidation embankment

occurring pore pressures

periods

account,

be estimated from procedures originally developed by the Bureau 17 18 Dissipation of pore pressures and extended by Bishop. mation periods increase ness fill that when no fill is placed stress. decreases the results Bishop in a decrease pointed out that in soil this volume increases

of Recladuring and an the stiff-

in effective soil is (i.e.

of the placement otherwise

the coefficient induced pore

of compressibility) pressures and are lower

and when than are those shown

resumed, have

would

developed.

A procedure VIII-2

an example

2b(3)

EM

iiio-2-1902
Appendix 1 April VIII 1970 with. in .-.-

in plate complete plate (4) large solution, and not air

VIII-2

for

evaluating of pore

pore

pressures between

in partially construction

saturated seasons interval.

soils and

dissipation for rate the partial

pressures

VIII-3 The during and comes

dissipation

of pore of partially when in later The air

pressures saturated is compressed

in this soils and pore

of consolidation loading period, slow

is relatively forced into .

is relatively out

stages

when

pressures is, to the

decrease therefore, coefficient of partially

of solution. assumed. for

coefficient A gas

of consolidation factor* to apply

constant

as is often

of consolidation saturated
C.

to account has been Pore

the

change

in rate

of consolidation

soils Foundation developed

suggested Water

by Gould. Pressures.

19
(1) Excess pore water presthat sig-

sures nificant according

in foundation does following not

soils occur

beneath as the developed

embankments, fill is placed, by Skempton - Au,)]

assuming

consolidation to the

equation,

can be estimated 20

Au = B [Au3 + A(Acri
where which dations the ratio A .and are are B are experimentally in plate saturated pore water VIII-4 and

determined for the failure value of

pore conditions. B can

pressure

coefficients, founso

illustrated assumed

In general, be taken in major as one,

of induced becomes

pressure

to the

increase

principal

stress

A=At(i-A)= Ai

A43 1 A=3 F, 1 The

The lateral can

value

of

should total

correspond stresses,

to the but this to the

field

value

for done.

the value

ratio of

of Au1 of central 2c(i)

to vertical be taken fill

is seldom stress are

as approximately since impervious

equal

imposed

by the weight to the

overlying

materials VIII-3

usually

restricted

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VIII 1 April 1970 part of embankments of excess is illustrated of 1.0. of pore Corps given pressures of Engineers above in shale developed. may observed report. in foundations of earth dams 21 Data presented in it sugunderestimate but suitable recourse such hard foundation alternative must be made pore where pore this water ia, approximation pressures plate is reasonably on the VIII-4, and preconsolidation plate VIII-5, correct. The stress assuming of

dependence the a B (2) is given gest water that soil

by figure

value

A summary in a recent the approach

substantially

pressures have tests and

developed not been

foundations, Consequently, having for

procedures to field The clays 3.

measurements this classed Uses may also

at sites be true shales

materials. overconsolidated

extent that

to which are not

or highly

as clay

in unknown. a. Piezometers stability. are,installed provide the samples large

Installation means soils

and for

of Piezometers. embankment tips

principal of the enough specimens may also

controlling the piezometer

Undisturbed should testing samples depths data be taken of three at other should in stability field

in which

in diameter from

to permit a common

triaxial depth.

compression Additional locations the also piezometric may These be used field soil and

or four elevations

be desirable. extrapolation Piezometer coefficient assumed their under

Piezometer in using

be selected analyses. values

to minimize b. for with the

observations of consolidation. in design with fill

to estimate may

values during

be compared was predicting the were and radial field developed ascon-

values and

if consolidation loading studied Procedures

construction for

sumed, solidation coefficient by Gould drainage.


C.

variation future

as a basis for

loading. for

estimating

of consolidation and were later

one-dimensional for combined

compression vertical

extended

19
Plots pore of induced pressure saturated, as loading pore under the continues pressure increased ratio versus fill fill load can be used where to applied thereafter, for soils load pre-

dicting are

heights. pore air

However, pressure is dissolved;

partially

of induced until all VIII-4 pore

increases

EM

iiio-24902
Appendix I April VIII 1970 ,,.;;

the

additional

pore

water linear

pressure extrapolation for this

approximately of a few relation

equals early prior

the

added

fill observaand

weight.

Therefore, would not

piezometer to saturation

tions would 4. (4) sider such of fill tical toes, in the bridges tifying

account

nonlinear

be unconservative. Evaluation The all items and and of Embankment of embankment evidence including, Stability. stability a. Basic during Considerations. construction to piezometric (b) horizontal with slope beyond indicators, the should pressures, movements (c) vercon-

evaluation relevant

in addition

as (a) movements foundation, horizontal and such

of settlementplates, as those observed

movements horizontal and control cannot

of ground movements vertical towers. be given,

at and

embankment embedded of for will are idenshow

(d) vertical fill, and leading abnormal

of joints movements Although repeated changes

in conduits of foundations specific criteria

(e) horizontal to outlet behavior

observations in behavior stability

if continuing lated such where (2) construction to pore analyses, The

deformations principal consist water and means

or anomolous for assessing analyses There are

occurring. during re-

embankment that are directly

of stability pressures. it may stability described

or indirectly for making

various more

procedures than one

be desirable

to use

procedure procedures ignore surfaces, of stresses imporulti-

embankment use are

is questionable. in the following along values, aspects to actual Strength obtained density

Therefore, paragraphs. potential

several All failure

in current tant mate from tailed b. dure, natural cation factors

such

as nonuniform that are loading, only A: lower and

strain than peak

strengths embankment procedures Method undisturbed moisture of back only

redistribution that make even

similar

the

most

de-

approximations Shear are and

conditions. (1) In this and proceat applineed high be

In Situ samples

Procedure. during construction Q test shear

tested without

content pressure, from have

under in situ zones The VIII5 and

conditions, strength. strata

to determine embankment been measured.

Samples in which

be obtained pore pressures

foundation strength

shear

envelope

should

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VIII 1 April 1970 determined text. soil The zone. from the test results in the should be tested stress apply manner be obtained at a single under only the to the shown in figure 2 of the depths pressure since the main

undisturbed Each the sample

samples should vertical and density

at various confining in situ depth

in each of its

0.8 times natural was

estimated content

condition, at which

water obtained.

sample

(2) design along

Stability for the the trial

analyses construction sliding

are

then

made

that

are .that

similar the

to those

made

in

condition, surface is based described

except on the above. slice

shearing resistances analyses

resistance determined consider the driving forces internal on only

shear These

according the total

to the weight and the of the

procedure of soil shear slices

and water resistance need not

in each along be taken the

in computing surfaces. since

forces the

sliding into

Water they are

sides

account

forces. (3) time height performed stresses consolidation


C.

The

analyses

described samples are the also

above were

apply

onIy

to the

embankment for

at the

the undisturbed of embankment in which at the higher

obtained.

If analyses Q-type 0.8 times

an increased should be

desired, pressures This

additional equal

tests the any

confining fill height. fill

overburden subsequent

is conservative period Pore measured strengths pressures of embankment field evidence for is ignored. Pressures. during the are

since

during B:

the

placement and Design pressures Q shear pore

Method compares implicit

Measured pore water use of

(1) construction construction less stability than

This

prowith condi-

cedure values tion plicitly struction

in the analyses.

design

If measured additional evaluation unless

those during

imconthese

as sumed, is not

required,

other

fails

to support

observations. (2) plies the that The use of Q-type and foundation. can test results pore The pore for construction water water from pressures pressures Q and condition are design developed imin

both

negative and

positive

embankment laboratory

inherent S envelopes

in the

Q-type 4c(2)

tests

be approximated

vm-6

EM iiio-2~1902
Appendix 1 April and plate can plotted VIII-6. be simply close construction As seen from versus total normal stress on the field expectations, assumed critical failure measured provided failure plane, pore as shown water plane in pr.essures VIII 1970 .;;

If such compared to the

a plot with location condition. plate normal

is prepared, design of the

piezometers
for

are
the

installed design (3) cur

VIII-6, stress

negative if design

pore

water

pressures are for

must

oc-

in areas

of low

expectations are unreliable of design are shear such measured strengths

to be realized. measuring negamay portions than be be

However, tive pore

since

conventional satisfactory If high or foundation

piezometers confirmation pore pressures where methods, Q

pressures, to obtain.

expectations in those are A, higher should

impossible of the S shear

embankment strengths, stability

more

detailed during

as method

used (4) sults, with formed imen time

to check In lieu they pore can

construction. pore directly pressures in the This implied laboratory that and are by use of Q test rea be pertest specand often laboof IOW tests

of computing be measured

by performing the ends more analyses be used tests

pressure slowly

measurements. pore Because a tests type field for pressures the test

requires center

so that

at the

of the

are

equalized.

procedures condition stone should so that

complicated are in both pressures not the

consuming, The a will d. tests have

construction

performed. ratory values

same and the

of porous piezometers errors. Swedish is based detailed of each

the

pore

comparable C: This Modified method It requires and bottom

LIethod (1) VI and on the

or

Wedge

Method

Considering

Water

Forces. dixes forces used where not

on procedures analyses slice

described including earth segment have are not been

in Appenand and water should be and

VII. sides

or.wedge

only

where

field

and soils for

laboratory and clay foundation shale sides the

investigations materials embankments and bottom

extensive

embankment

unusual.

It should

generally (2) The can

be used water

or foundations. of each slice or wedge For stable 442)

forces

on the from

segment

be interpolated

piezometer -7

observations.

VIII

EM ii10-2-1902 Appendix VIII 1 April 1970 embankments, corresponding shear, which the soil shearing resistance normal effective stress, normal by the to be near might show should prior stress be taken to start as the R strength

to an effective is equal to the

of undrained of each the


may

on the base analysis. the S When strength

slice

or wedge bankment used. vertical pore lying VII for e. cedure dicted

segment, section

as determined is considered condition that that is do not are

stability failure,

embe or

A near

failure

be defined a decrease the

by measured with stress time

horizontal or by measured by the

movements water fill. pressures The stability Method consists according VIII-i analysis

approaching to that slope

imposed in Appendixes

over-

similar

described under

VI and seepage. This propre-

of the D:

downstream Bureau field

a condition

of steady

Modified --

of Reclamation pore water

Procedure. with 2 of this it should This

of comparing to procedures to -5. one Where of the

pressures

values

discussed this other pore method evaluation pressures.

in paragraph is used, methods.

appendix

and plates mented not

be supplemethod doe5

by at least

consider f. Method

shear-induced E: This Modified method soil

Swedish is generally

or Wedge similar

Method

Considering C, except

F1 that

and the

E3 Stresses. shear resistance tive stresses 23 The tions. (1) ure sion plane tests. A plot at the This phase

to Method

of the at the following of shear start start

is the undrained equal involved: versus is prepared (after corresponds lines on the of

strength

corresponding for field

to effeccondi-

of shear steps strength are

to those

estimated

effective from Taylor)

normal F or that

of shear

stress triaxial point

on the

fail-

compresin the test; versus of un-

is done of a a

by assuming or i? test

any

shearing

to the

start

of another strength to start VIII-7

Next, construct see plate VIII-7. the effective normal stress rfc drained shear, for various values and -8. (2) sponding Assume shear a trial strength value

of undrained failure plane as shown , and such +

shear prior

T1/T3

in plates and

of (01/G3), c

as 2, from

determine VIII-8.

corre-

parameters

plate

4f(2)

VIII - 8

EM

1110-2-1902 Appendix VIII 1 April 1970 polygons pressures for on ..

(3) the the

Assume

trial

safety method, of each shear slice.

factors using slice. and

and field

obtain

closure pore

of force water

mczdified sides (4) and

Swedish bottom

measured

Determine base of each F,/?

stress Plot each for

corresponding in plate

effective VIII-8

normal aI

stress and 03 ,

on the and

as shown slice. each slice

to obtain

compute (5)

3 for a i /u-3

Compare revise 5. value

with

value in Step

assumed i and

in Step repeat Steps

1. 2

If nec-

essary, through

of

assumed

4f(5)

VIII-9

.-

EM

iiiO-2-i902 Appendix VIII 1 April 1970

a.

PORE-PRESSURE COEFFICIENT

COEFFICIENT MEASURED

A VERSUS AT FAILURE,

OVERCONSOLIDATION StRESS INCREASING

RATIO;

1 .o 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.2

od
JI 70 75 DEGREE

so 85 So 95 OF SATURATION.

loo X

b.

PORE-PRESSURE COEFFICIENT B VERSUS DEGREE OF SATURATION; COEFFICIENT MEASURED AT FAILURE, STRESS INCREASING. CURVE APPLIES TO ONE SOIL ONLY, UNDER PARTICULAR CONDITIONS OF TEST

PORE PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS A AND B


Plate VIII-17 VIII-4

EM iiiO-2-1902 AppendixVIU Au = tltAO,+AlAO,


WHEUL

Ar,Jl

(FER SICEYFTOII)

= ~~cur~~ro POREWATERFRZIURC IN MINOR PRINCIPAL STRESS Au, = INCREASE IN MAJOR PRINCIPAL STRESS A01 = INCREASE
Au
l 2 I.0 FCR SATURATED DEPENDENT SOILS ON OVERCOWSOL.IOATIOW RATIO A = FACTOR

THEN

-=A+(1 AOI

AU

-A)-

A@B
Au1

1.0

-T----0,s

Ol -=1 5

0.6

0.7

0.6 a la = o0.8

0.4

0.)

0.2

0.1

I
k 0 0 1

NORAULLY

CmnoLIDAYrD

IQLS

8 RATIO

1P

OCR-OVERCONSOLlOAflON

DEVELOPMENT PORE WATER


Plate VIII-5 VIII-18

OF EXCESS PRESSURES

EM

IiiO-2-1902 Appendix VIII I! 970 I April

EYt3ANKXENT

FILL , /ccs ENVCLOPE

OI
TOTAL NORMAL STRESS-O

PORE

PRESSURES IMPLIED WHEN USED FOR CONSTRUCTION

Q SHEAR STRENGTHS CONDITION DESIGN

ARE

a IS

ENVELOPE

HDWZONTAL

PoRe PRessURC IYPLlQfLr ASSUMED FOR fan DESIW

TOTAL

NORMAL

STRESS

ON FAILURE

PLANE

PORE

PRESSURE VS TOTAL NORMAL 9N FAILURE PLANE

STRESS

DATA FOR ESTIMATINO POR:NPqR:;zyRES

Plate

VIII-~

VIII-

19

EM 1110-2-1902 Appendix VIII 1 April 1970

5 ENVELOPE LINES OF UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH VS rk ,THE EFFECTIVE NORMAL STRESS ON Te FAILURE PLANE PRIOR TO START OF IHORAINED SHEAR DRAINED

NORMAL

STRESS

UNDRA1NE.D SHEAR STRE_NCT_H FOR VARIOUS RATIOS OF 01/cT3 AT START OF SHEAR


Plate VIII7

VIII-20

EM

1110-2-1902. Appendix VILI 1 April 1970

IS VALUE

AT

START

OF

AT

START

OF

EFFECTIVE AT

NORMAL START OF

STRESS UNDRAINED

ON

FAILURE SHEAR

PLANE

if xf,

= EFFECTIVE URE PLANE = EFFECTIVE URE PLANE SHEAR

NORMAL NORMAL AT START

STRESS

ON

FAIL-

STRESS ON FAILOF UNDRAINED

$4$fq
---mm--4 ;,A f ;;f

5 WVELOPE

UNDRAINED SHEAR FOR FIELD STRESS

STRENGTH CONDITIONS
Plate VIII-~

vm-2i
i?u.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1994 - 521.947/81206