information about clayton we can do something

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

information about clayton we can do something

© All Rights Reserved

- Lab 3 Rock Mass Assesment
- 02-Geotechnical Engineering Soil Mechanics
- Chapter 10- WSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual
- Tunnel Face Pressure
- 02_3D Retaining Wall
- NR 320106 Foundation Engineering
- Geo_ppm - Nevada Dot
- Ufc Soil Mechanics
- ce5320
- 517
- Reinforce Earth Retaining Gabian
- Intro MetnumGeo
- Lot1-1 ne prolazi
- Snowden Rocscience Collaboration
- Geotech challenges at UHG and BN.pptx
- Rock Properties.pdf
- investigation.pdf
- 3. Hydodynamic Equation of Flow.pdf
- Aterros Com Drenos-modelo Hiperbolico-Chung Et Al-ASCE-2009
- Manual de Diseño de Cimentaciones de Puentes.pdf

You are on page 1of 9

11-19,

HuangApril 2014

et al.: Force-Equilibrium-Based Finite Displacement Methods Using Circular Failure Surfaces 11

http://dx.doi.org/10.6310/jog.2014.9(1).2

UM-BASED FINITE DISPLACEMENT METHOD AND CIRCULAR

FAILURE SURFACE

Ching-Chuan Huang 1, Horng-Yue Hsieh 2, and Yun-Lung Hsieh 3

ABSTRACT

Conventional methods of slope stability provide a constant value for the safety factor of the slope, without information of

slope displacements and possible variations of safety margins along the potential failure surface. To overcome this shortcoming, a

force-equilibrium-based finite displacement method (FFDM) is proposed. Two well known slice methods for circular failure sur-

faces, namely, the simplified Bishops and Fellenius methods are considered in the proposed procedure. The FFDM takes into

account all limit equilibrium requirements originally adopted in the slice method with additional displacement compatibility func-

tions and hyperbolic shear stress-displacement relationships. The FFDM provides incremental slope displacements induced by

internal or external stress (or safety status) variations. The FFDM also provides local stress-based and displacement-based safety

factors as parts of analytical outputs. A monitored highway slope during a rainstorm is used in a preliminary verification of

FFDM. Results of the comparative study shows that the slope displacements computed using Fellenius approach tend to be over-

conservative, regardless of different considerations on the influence of groundwater pressures, due partially to its less realistic

assumption on the inter-slice forces. The simplified Bishops method provides acceptable analytical slope displacement results

comparable with that measured for the studied slope caused by an elevated groundwater, and is recommended for further applica-

tions.

Key words: Slope stability, slope displacement, rainfall-induced slope displacement, limit equilibrium, slice method, displace-

ment compatibility, hyperbolic soil model.

1. INTRODUCTION yses. To this end, the simplified Bishops and Fellenius slice

methods of slope stability will be used here as examples for the

The problem of slope instability is an everlasting challenge

FFDM formulations. It is noted that the principle and equations

to the societies of geosciences and civil engineering. Various

proposed here are equally effective to other slice methods re-

methods of slope stability using limit equilibrium, finite element,

gardless of their numerical accuracies and shapes of failure sur-

and other methods are frequently reported (Duncan and Wright

face. An example of applying this approach to a generalized slice

2005). Under the framework of limit equilibrium, Fellenius pio-

method has been reported by Huang (2013a, b).

neered the slice method of slope stability in the 1920s (Fellenius

Figure 1 schematically shows a potential failure mass with

1936). Fellenius original method and the updates that followed

ns vertical slices, in which Wi, Ni and Si represent self-weight, the

constituted a major contribution to the practice and development

normal force at the base, and the shear force at the base of slice i,

of geotechnical engineering. (Bishop 1955; Mogenstern and Price

respectively. Forces acting on a typical slice i are shown in Figs.

1965; Janbu 1973; Sarma 1973; Spencer 1973). It is well-known

2(a) and 2(b) for Fellenius and Bishops methods, respectively.

that the groundwater table rise and rainfall infiltration have been

Based on the simplified Bishops method, a safety factor (Fs) for

recognized as major factors that cause slope instability (Lesh-

the slope can be expressed as:

chinsky and Huang 1992; Huang 2013a, b). Current slice meth-

ods of slope stability can provide only limited information re-

garding the rainfall-induced slope instability, i.e., only the

Fs

changes of safety factors caused by the rainfall infiltration or

tan i tan

groundwater table rise, can be obtained as an outcome of anal- Ci (Wi U i cos i ) tan sec i 1

Fs

Manuscript received November 27, 2013; revised February 24, (Wi sin i )

2014; accepted February 27, 2014.

1

Professor (corresponding author), Department of Civil Engineer- (1)

ing, National Cheng Kung University No. 1, University road, Tai-

nan, Taiwan, 70101 (e-mail: samhcc@mail.ncku.edu.tw). where

2

Graduate student, Department of Civil Engineering, National Ci : Cohesive shear resistance at the base of slice i

Cheng Kung University No. 1, University road, Tainan, Taiwan, (c ic Bi sec i)

70101.

3

Graduate student, Department of Civil Engineering, National Ui : Uplifting force acting at the base of slice i

Cheng Kung University No. 1, University road, Tainan, Taiwan, (ui iui Bi sec i)

70101.

12 Journal of GeoEngineering, Vol. 9, No. 1, April 2014

Fellenius method can be improved by using the concept of

buoyant weight of soils (Whitman and Bailey 1967). In this case,

the Fs can be expressed as:

Fs

(Ci Wi cos i tan ) (3)

(Wi sin i )

where

Wi : Buoyant weight of slice i

2. DERIVATION OF FORCE-EQUILIBRIUM-

Bi BASED FINITE DISPLACEMENT METHOD

Fig. 1 A potential failure mass confined by a circular failure In the Bishops method, the effective normal force N i can

surface be expressed based on the force equilibrium in the direction of

gravity (i.e., FV 0) and the assumption of Xi Xi1Xi 0,

as schematically shown in Fig. 2(b) (Bishop 1955):

rived based on the principle of the force equilibrium normal to

the slice base (i.e., FN 0) and the assumption that the resultant

inter-slice forces are parallel to the slice base (as schematically

shown in Fig. 2(a)):

N i Wi cos i U i (5)

(a) Fellenius method (b) Bishops method

It is empirically known that taking into account the effect of

Fig. 2 Forces acting on a typical slice i up-lifting force Ui as shown in Eq. (5) may generate overly con-

servative results. To this end, Baily and Whitmann (1967) sug-

gested that N i can be derived using the concept of buoyant

i : Slice number (i = 1, 2, , ns) weight:

Wi : Self-weight of slice i

i : Inclination angle of slice base i Ni Wi cos i (6)

c : Cohsion intercept of soil

: Internal friction angle of soil In the proposed FFDM, a local stress-based safety factor FSi

ui : Porewater pressure acting at slice base i is defined according to the Mohr-Coulombs failure criterion.

i, Bi : The length of base and the width, respectively, Note that the local FSi is different from the averaged (or con-

for slice i. stant) value of Fs used in conventional limit equilibrium methods

Note that in Eq. (1), a differential term of vertical inter-slice such as those shown in Eqs. (1) ~ (3).

force, Xi ( Xi Xi1; Xi, Xi1: Vertical inter-slice forces acting

on the left and right sides, respectively, of slice i) is ignored (or fi S fi Ci N i tan

Xi 0 is assumed). FSi (7)

i Si Si

In the Fellenius method, the force equilibrium in the direc-

tion normal to the slice base (FN 0) does not take into account

the influence of inter-slice forces. This method is based on the S fi fi i Ci N i tan (8)

implicit assumption that the resultant inter-slice force acts paral-

lel to the slice base. Fs is expressed as: Si i i (9)

Fs (2)

(Wi sin i ) fi, i : Ultimate shear strength, and shear stress, respec-

tively, for slice i.

It is well-known that values of Fs obtained from Eq. (2) are Sfi, Si : Ultimate shear resistance and shear force, respec-

conservative compared with those obtained from rigorous slice tively, for slice i

methods, because of the less realistic assumptions regarding the FSi : Local force-based safety factor

inter-slice forces (Whitman and Bailey 1967; Leshchinsky and As is shown in Fig. 3, the shear stress (i) vs. shear dis-

Huang et al.: Force-Equilibrium-Based Finite Displacement Methods Using Circular Failure Surfaces 13

placement (i) relationship is represented by a hyperbolic curve Based on the definitions of local safety factors in Eq. (7), Eq.

which constitutes the mechanical foundation of the proposed (15) can be re-written as:

method:

a b i

i FSi (18)

i (10) i

a b i

A displacement diagram (Atkinson 1981) that satisfies dis-

where placement compatibility as schematically shown in Figs. 4(a) and

4(b) can be introduced:

1

a (11)

kinitial cos(1 2 )

2 1 (19)

Rf cos(2 2 )

b (12)

fi where

: Dilatancy angle of soils

n

n

kinitial K G i (13) The displacement of slice i can be related to the vertical dis-

Pa placement at the top of slice 1 (o) using the following equation:

N i cos(1 2 ) o cos(1 2 )

ni (14) i 1 (20)

Bi sec i cos(2 i ) sin(1 ) cos(2 i )

where Equation (20) can be expressed as:

kinitial : Initial shear stiffness

K, n : Material constants i o f (i ) (21)

Rf : Failure ratio where

ni : Normal stress acting at the base of slice i

1 cos(1 2 )

Pa : Atmospheric pressure ( 101.3 kPa) f ( i ) (22)

sin(1 ) cos(2 i )

G : Reference stiffness ( 101.3 kPa/m)

Normalizing Eq. (10) using fi: Substitute Eq. (21) into Eq. (18),

a b o f ( i )

i i FSi (23)

(15) o f ( i )

f i a b i

fi

a a fi (16)

kinitial

b b fi R f (17)

for soils (b) Displacement diagram

14 Journal of GeoEngineering, Vol. 9, No. 1, April 2014

Based on the principle of moment equilibrium at the center 4. INCREMENTS OF SLOPE DISPLACEMENT

of circle, i.e., Mo 0: AND COMPUTER FLOW CHART

(Wi sin i ) (24) internal condition changes (e.g., loading, water table, and

FSi

porewater pressure variations), two values of i (or 0), namely,

Substitute Eq. (23) into Eq. (24), a close-form solution of o pre-rainfall slope displacement ( ia ) and post-rainfall slope

can be expressed as: displacement ( bi ) , should be calculated, and the increment of

displacement for slice i, induced by the rainfall event is schemat-

o

(Wi sin i ) (25)

ically shown in Fig. 5, and is defined as:

f ( i )

[Ci N tan ] i bi ia (31)

a b o f ( i )

In Eq. (25), various values of N expressed by Eqs. (4) and Figure 5 shows one of the possible stress paths for a soil

(5) (or Eq. 6) can be used to compute 0 for simplified Bishops element on the potential failure surface subjected to a rainfall-

and Fellenius methods, respectively. It can be seen that Eq. (25) induced groundwater table rise. In this case, the shear stress on

is basically a reversed expression of Eqs. (1) and (2), with known the element is largely remain unchanged because the porewater-

pressure-independent character of shear stresses (or deviatoric

displacement-related parameters a, b, f (i), and the un-

stresses), and the increase of soil self-weight of soil from a moist

known o. It is also noted that the unknown o appears at both

condition to a saturated one is usually small. On the other hand,

sides of the equation, indicating that an iterative procedure is

the effective normal pressure (n) on the potential failure surface

required in calculating values of o. This situation is similar to

is reduced due to the increase of porewater pressure. Therefore,

that used for deriving the safety factor using the simplified Bish-

an incremental displacement responding to the decrease of n

ops method (Bishop 1955) which also requires iterative calcula-

occurs, as shown in Fig. 5. A summary of unknowns and equa-

tions for the safety factor of the slope. A criterion of = 1 is

tions in the proposed FFDM is shown in Table 1 which also in-

used here to detect the convergence of 0:

dicates that the proposed method is in a static determinate condi-

tion. A computer program was coded in Visual Basic Express

( o ) new ( o )old 2010 (Microsoft 2010) for computing slope displacements in-

(26)

( o ) new duced by external and/or internal factor changes. The flow chart

is shown in Fig. 6.

3. LOCAL DISPLACEMENT-BASED SAFETY

FACTORS 5. CASE STUDY

The displacement at failure (f) can be obtained by using The studied slope was located in the southwest foothills of

Taiwan. The slope was a part of highway No. 18, which winds

FSi 1.0 in Eq. (18):

through an area prone to landslides. Landslides cause property

losses and traffic problems in this area during the rainy seasons.

a b f Therefore, this area has been closely monitored and studied

FSi 1.0 (27)

f (Chang et al. 2005). Figure 7 shows the studied slope with loca-

tions of inclinometer measurements, groundwater tables and

sliding surface (Energy and Resources Research Laboratory of

Re-arrange the above equation to obtain f: Industrial Technology Research Institute, ERRL 1999). The ob-

served slip surface is fitted by an arc with a radius of 1543m and

a

f (28) a rotation center at (X, Y) = (49.7m, 1569.5m), which are also

1 b shown in the figure. Underground water table observations were

A displacement-based safety factor, FDi can be defined as: conducted in a borehole adjacent to the slope during a rainstorm.

According to inclinometer measurements, the slope displacement

f during typhoon Herb in 1995 was 30mm in the downward direc-

FDi (29)

i tion (ERRL 1999). Site exploration and inclinometer measure-

ments revealed that the sliding slope mass consists of colluviums

a and rock fragments. The slip surface at inclinometer 04-4 is

FDi (30) about 90 m-deep from the ground surface and is located at highly

o f (i ) (1 b)

weathered rock strata. Therefore, undisturbed sampling and test-

The hyperbolic stress-displacement relationship used in the ing at this depth is difficult. Possible values of for the matrix

present study can be easily modified for special cases, e.g., line- materials were estimated in the range of 25 ~ 30 and a cohesion

arly elastic pre-peak with a post-peak (residual) strength or hy- intercept c = 40kPa, according to the back-analysis result report-

perbolic pre-peak with post-peak strength. These issues are be- ed by ERRL (1999). Figure 8 shows changes in conventional

yond the scope of the present study. safety factors (Fs) for the studied slope caused by the elevated

Huang et al.: Force-Equilibrium-Based Finite Displacement Methods Using Circular Failure Surfaces 15

reduction of normal stress

conditions

Number of Number of

Unknown Equation

unknowns equations

FN 0; Eq. (5)

Ni ns ns

FV 0; Eq. (4)

Si ns Mo 0; Eq. (24) 1

Mohr-Coulombs failure

criterion and definition of

FSi

FSi ns Ci N i tan ns

Si ;

FSi

Eq. (7)

Fig. 6 FFDM computer flow chart (program DISP-SLICE)

f

FDi ns FDi ; Eq. (30) ns

i

groundwater table based on Eqs. (1), (2), and (3). For both Bish- Stress-displacement

ops and Fellenius methods, reductions in Fs of about 0.05 ~ i

ns-1 relationships (i vs. i); ns

(i = 2 ~ ns)

0.06 are obtained for an internal friction angle () between 25 Eq. (10)

and 30, and a cohesion intercept c = 40kPa for above-water- Displacement

table zone in the pre-rainfall case. Note that conventional lim- compatibility

o 1 ns-1

it-equilibrium- based slope stability analyses cannot provide in- i = o f (i); Eq. (21)

formation beyond this point, and a reduction in Fs of 0.05 ~ 0.06 i 2---ns)

provides limited information about the influence of the ground-

5 ns 5 ns

water table (or the effect of rainfall) on the performance of the

slope.

16 Journal of GeoEngineering, Vol. 9, No. 1, April 2014

Although undisturbed sampling and large-scale direct shear Table 2 Comparisons of calculated horizontal slope displace-

tests were not performed for the studied slope, large-scale direct ment at X 784m for the studied slope (Wu-Wan-Chai

shear tests performed for various soils (Huang 2013(a), (b)) gen- slope) based on various slice methods (c 40kPa for

erally suggest the applicability of the hyperbolic shear stress- pre-rainfall; c 0 for post-rainfall, and 25, K 80,

n 0.1, Rf 0.8, 0 , 12.5 for pre- and post-rainfall

displacement relationships with model parameters, K in the

conditions)

ranges of 50 and 300; n in the range of 0.1 and 0.3; Rf in the

range of 0.7 and 0.9. For a comparative purpose, c = 40kPa, = = 0 = 12.5

25, K = 80, n = 0.1, and Rf = 0.8 are used in the following anal-

yses according to the results of parametric study performed by Simplified Bishop; Eq. (1) 0.029m 0.029m

Huang 2013(a); 2013(b). Table 2 shows a comparison of calcu-

Fellenius; Eq. (2) 0.013m 0.011m

lated slope displacement at X 784m where inclinometer 04-4

was installed. Calculating the slope displacements shown in Ta- Fellenius; Eq. (3) 0.011m 0.010m

ble 2 involves the following three steps: (1) calculating the verti-

cal displacement at the crest of the potential failure surface, 0

(using Eq. 25) for the pre-rainfall and the post-rainfall conditions;

(2) calculating displacements at the targeted location of failure

surface (X = 784 m in this study) for pre-rainfall and post-rainfall

conditions (namely, ia and bi ) using displacement compati-

bility function (Eq. 21); (3) calculating incremental slope dis-

placement at the targeted location, induced by the rising of

groundwater table, using Eq. (31). It can be seen that simplified

Bishops limit-equilibrium approach (Eq. 1) renders slope dis-

placement value (0.029m) comparable with the measured value

of 0.032m. However, this is not the case for the Fellenius limit-

equilibrium approach (Eqs. 2 and 3) which generates smaller

displacements than the others, despite their different considera-

tions for the effect of porewater pressure.

Figure 9(a) compares local stress- and displacement-based

(a) = 0

safety factors (FSi and FDi) for the case c 40kPa, 25, K

80, n 0.1, and Rf 0.8. Based on the conventional constant-

safety factor concept, values of Fs using simplified Bishops

method, using c = 40kPa; = 25 for pre-rainfall, and c = 0;

= 25 for post-rainfall conditions, are 1.12 and 1.06, respec-

tively, as shown in Fig. 8. The use of c = 0kPa in the analyses for

the post-rainfall condition is based on a well-known phenomenon

of rainfall infiltration which penetrates from the slope surface

down toward the existing groundwater table via the so-called

wetting front propagation, leading to a near-saturated (or c = 0)

condition of the slope. Distributions of FSi and FDi for the

pre-rainfall case reveal that a major part of the potential failure

surface are associated with FSi 1 (or FDi 1). Only small por-

tions of the potential sliding mass (close to the toe and the crest

of potential failure mass) were associated with FSi 1.0 (or FDi

1.0) conditions. In the case of post-rainfall, the slope experi-

enced substantial drops in FSi and FDi, for a major portion of the (b) = 12.5

failure surface. It can be seen that part of the slices experience

FSi 1.0, indicating that ultimate failure conditions have been Fig. 9 Local stress-based and displacement-based safety factors

reached at these locations. This observation is consistent with using FFDM with Bishops limit equilibrium approach

observations that tension cracks developed around the crest of

sliding mass (Ching and Fredlund 1983; ERRL 1999), and is also

consistent with the progressive failure mechanism proposed by It is important to note that the use of displacement-based safety

Bjerrum (1967), in the sense that a stress re-distribution along the factors, FDi, seems to be more advantageous than the use of

potential failure surface propagates from the slope toe due to the stress-based FSi, in the sense that the difference in FDi between

removal of the slope toe. In the present study it is shown that a the pre-rainfall and post-rainfall cases is larger than that for FSi.

critical condition occurs at the slope toe because of the combined This allows for a more detailed investigation of the safety status

effects of a high groundwater table and low overburden pressure. of the slope than that based on the FSi distribution. Figure 9(b)

Huang et al.: Force-Equilibrium-Based Finite Displacement Methods Using Circular Failure Surfaces 17

using input conditions identical to those used in Fig. 9(a), except

that 12.5 ( /2) is used for Fig. 9(b). Differences between

Figs. 9(a) and 9(b) can be hardly seen, indicating that input val-

ues of have a negligible influence on the outcomes of FSi and

FDi. As seen in Figs. 9(a) and 9(b), the stress-based safety factors

are with relatively small variations along the entire failure sur-

face. Large variations of the displacement-based safety factors

are caused by the non-linear stress- displacement curve used here,

i.e., when approaching plastic failure states, a small stress in-

crease can lead to a significant displacement response. This can

be deemed as a major advantage of the displacement-based safety

factors used in the proposed method.

Figure 10(a) shows the calculated values of shear displace-

ment (i) and horizontal displacement [i cos(i)] along

the slip surface for the same case shown in Fig. 9(a). Shear dis-

placements at close-to-crest locations are larger than those at

(a) = 0

close-to-toe locations. It can be seen that horizontal shear dis-

placements along the entire slip surface are identical, suggesting

a rigid sliding mass in this case. The case shown in Fig. 10(b)

utilizes input parameters similar to those used for Fig. 10(a), ex-

cept that 12.5 is used in Fig. 10(b). The influence on the

patterns of displacement along the failure surface is significant.

By using a non-zero value of = 12.5, the assumption of a rigid

body becomes invalid, and the pattern of the shear displacement

mimics that of f (i), as shown in Fig. 11. The non-uniform dis-

placement behavior shown in Fig. 10(b) reveals another ad-

vantage of the proposed method, in the sense that various dis-

placement patterns of the sliding mass can be simulated via the

input value of , which dictates the shape of the displacement

compatibility function f (i).

Figure 12(a) shows typical examples of mobilized shear and

effective normal forces along the sliding surface based on identi-

cal soil parameters for Figs. 9(a) and 10(a). Distributions of ni

(b) = 12.5

and i generally show significant internal stress distributions, in

the sense that normal stresses along the failure surface increase as Fig. 10 Shear displacements calculated using FFDM with

the depth of the failure surface increases. This trend is consistent Bishops limit equilibrium approach

with previous studies on the internal stress along the failure sur-

face (Leshchinsky 1990; Leshchinsky and Huang 1992). Increas-

es in ni and i induced by rainfall (or the rises in the water ta-

ble) are highlighted in Fig. 12(b). Reductions in ni , associated

with increases of i along a major part of the sliding surface can

be seen. In Fig. 12(b), a normal stress reduction of about 20 kPa

prevails along the majority of the slip surface. Increases in shear

stress are insignificant for a large portion of the slip surface. At

close-to- toe and close-to-crest locations where the values of FSi

have reached the critical condition ( 1.0), the slope experienced

certain degrees of shear stress reductions, which were caused by

the stress re-distribution mechanism.

Figures 13(a) and 13(b) show stresses and stress increments,

respectively, for the same case presented in Figs. 12(a) and 12(b).

The only difference between Figs. 12 and 13 is the input dilatan-

cy angle (). In this comparison, 0 and /2 12.5 are

used for Figs. 12 and 13, respectively. Comparing Figs. 12 and

13, hardly any difference can be seen, suggesting that input value

of (within the investigated range) has a non-detectable influ- Fig. 11 Variations of f (i) induced by various values of for

ence on the normal and shear stresses distributions (and stress the studied slope

increments) along the failure surface for the investigated slope.

18 Journal of GeoEngineering, Vol. 9, No. 1, April 2014

(a) Normal and shear stresses (a) Normal and shear stresses

Fig. 12 Stress distribution on the failure surface for = 0 Fig. 13 Stress distribution on the failure surface for = 12.5

6. DISCUSSIONS within the sliding mass is satisfied (as in the proposed method).

Engineering judgments regarding stability and instabil- This method is not intended to replace widely available FEM

ity of slopes based on conventional limit equilibrium methods methods, and is intended to provide alternative tools to solve

are impractical, in the sense that a stable slope from conventional slope engineering problems with varieties of geological uncer-

point of view may be associated a certain displacement; an un- tainty and unknowns. Because the present method employs a

stable slope from conventional point of view may be associated stress vs. displacement constitutive soil model which differs from

with a limited (or remediable) slope displacement. Rather than the stress vs. strain model used in the FEM, a direct comparison

providing conventional thresholds of slope stability (namely, Fs between these two methods is difficult and is beyond the scope of

1.0), the proposed method provides new thresholds of slope sta- this study. Also note that the soil parameters (c 0 for

bility from both stress and displacement viewpoints. The present post-rainfall; c 40kPa for pre-rainfall, and 25, 0, K

study constitutes the first step of using new local stress- and dis- 80, n 0.1, Rf 0.8 for pre- and post-rainfall cases) used for de-

placement-based slope stability criteria. Also noted that the pre- riving Figs. 9 ~ 12 were back-calculated from the studied slope

sent method is an extension of limit-equilibrium-based slice based on a known potential sliding surface. These parameters are

method, which inherits some characters of conventional slice slightly different from those reported by Huang (2013) for the

methods, e.g., the use of a potential failure surface as a priori. same slope (c 0 for post-rainfall; c 40kPa for pre-rainfall,

One may question the legitimacy of using a pre- existing failure 26, 0, K 90, n 0.2, Rf 0.8) based on rigorous Janbus

surface, instead of a progressively generated failure surface as method (Janbu 1973) and a non-circular failure surface. Due to

commonly seen in the analytical outcome of Finite element the differences in the context of force-equilibrium and shape of

method (FEM). It is noted, however, a progressively generated sliding surface, results of back-analyses were slightly different,

failure surface (as seen in FEM) can be deemed as a part of a yet both sets of soil parameters generate similar values of slope

potential failure surface for which the displacement compatibility displacement of about 0.03 m at the location of X = 784m.

Huang et al.: Force-Equilibrium-Based Finite Displacement Methods Using Circular Failure Surfaces 19

7. CONCLUSIONS Cole, E.R.L. (1967). The behavior of soils in the simple shear ap-

paratus. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Cambridge.

A novel improvement on conventional limit-equilibrium- Duncan, J.M. and Chang, C.-Y. (1970). Nonlinear analysis of stress

based slope stability analysis was achieved here, providing sig- and strain in soils. Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation

nificant information regarding the displacement of the slope sub- Division, ASCE, 96(SM5), 16291653.

jected to internal and/or external environmental changes. The Duncan, J.M., Byrne, P., Wong, K.S., and Mabry, P. (1980). Strength,

proposed force-equilibrium-based finite displacement methods stress-strain and buck modulus parameters for finite element

(FFDM) were formulated based on force and moment equilibri- analyses of stresses and movements in soil masses. Report No.

VCB/GT/80-01, Department of Civil Engineering, University of

um adopted in the simplified Bishops and Fellenius methods, California at Berkeley, August, 77.

incorporating as displacement compatibility requirement and a

Duncan, J.M. and Wright, S.G. (2005). Soil Strength and Slope Sta-

hyperbolic shear stress-displacement soil model. A static deter- bility. Chapter 6: Mechanics of Limit Equilibrium Procedures.

minate condition was attained by introducing displacement com- John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 55102.

patibility functions and hyperbolic shear stress-displacement Energy and Resources Research Laboratory (ERRL) of Industrial

relationships for the slope materials. As a result, local displace- Technology Research Institute (1999). Report on the site ex-

ment-based and stress-based safety factors along the potential ploration for Wu-Wan-Zai landslide area in Chia-Yi County.

failure surface are parts of the analytical solution. Based on the The Fifth Maintenance Office, Directorate General of Highways,

case study of a well-monitored slope during a rainstorm, the ef- Ministry of Transportation and Communications.

fect of a rise in the groundwater table during the rainstorm, ex- Fan, C.C. and Chen, Y.W. (2010). The effect of root architecture on

pressed as an incremental slope displacement, was computed the shearing resistance of root-permeated soils. Ecological En-

using the proposed FFDM. It was shown that the slope displace- gineering, 36, 813826.

ment measured during the rainstorm can be closely simulated Fellenius, W. (1936). Calculation of the stability of earth dams.

using stress vs. displacement relationships relevant to the data Proceedings of 2nd Congress on Large Dams, 4, pp. 445463.

obtained from large-scale direct shear tests (Huang 2013a, b), Fredlund, D.G. and Krahn, J. (1977). Comparison of slope stability

revealing the potential of the present method for further applica- methods of analysis. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 25, pp.

238249.

tions. Results of a comparative study also reveals that using

Fellenius method of limit equilibrium tends to render conserva- Huang, C.C. (2013a). Developing a new slice method for slope

displacement analyses. Engineering Geology, 157, 3947.

tive values of slope displacements, due partially to its less realis-

Huang, C.C. (2013b). Formulation and verification of force- equi-

tic assumptions on the inter-slice forces. The slope displacement

librium-based finite displacement method (FFDM) for slope

calculated using simplified Bishops approach of limit equilib- stability analysis. Keynote Lecture in the 15th Conference on

rium is comparable with that measured for the studied slope sub- Current Researches in Geotechnical Engineering in Taiwan.

jected to a groundwater table rise. Consequently, the Bishops Yunlin, Taiwan, September 1113.

method of limit equilibrium is suggested for further applications Janbu, N. (1973). Slope Stability Computations, Embankment-Dam

of FFDM in the future. Engineering. Casagrande Volume, John Wiley & Sons, 4786.

Jewell, R.A. and Wroth, C.P. (1987). Direct shear tests on reinforced

sand. Geotechnique, 37(1), 5368.

REFERENCES

Leshchinsky, D. (1990). Slope stability analysis: Generalized ap-

Atkinson, J.H. (1981). Foundations and Slopes: An Introduction to proach. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 116(5), 851867.

Applications of Critical State Soil Mechanics. McGraw-Hill, Leshchnisky, D. and Huang, C.-C. (1992). Generalized slope stabil-

London. ity analysis: Interpretation, modification, and comparison.

Bjerrum, L. (1967). Progressive failure in slopes of overconsolidated Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 118(10), 15591576.

plastic clay and clay shales. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Morgenstern, N.R. and Price, V.E. (1965). The analysis of the sta-

Foundations Division, ASCE, 93, 149. bility of general slip surfaces. Geotechnique, 15, 993.

Bishop, A.W. (1955). The use of the slip circle in the stability anal- Oda, M. (1975). On stress-dilatancy relation of sand in simple shear

ysis of slopes. Geotechnique, 5, 717. test. Soils and Foundations, 18(2), 1729.

Chang, M., Chiu, Y., Lin, S., and Ke, T.-C. (2005). Preliminary study Sarma, S.K. (1973). Stability analysis of embankments and slopes.

on the 2003 slope failure in Woo-Wan-Chai area, Mt. Ali Road, Geotechnique, 23(3), 423433.

Taiwan. Engineering Geology, 80, 93114. Spencer, E. (1973). Thrust line criterion in embankment stability

Ching, R.K.H. and Fredlund, D.G. (1983). Some difficulties associ- analysis. Geotechnique, 23(1), 85100.

ated with the limit equilibrium method of slices. Canadian Ge- Whitman, R.V. and Bailey, W.A. (1967). Use of computers for slope

otechnical Journal, 20, 661672. stability analysis. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Founda-

Clough, G.W. and Duncan, J.M. (1971). Finite element analyses of tion Division, ASCE, 93(SM4), 475497.

retaining wall behavior. Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foun-

dation Division, ASCE, 97(SM12), 16571673.

- Lab 3 Rock Mass AssesmentUploaded byAbhishek Ray
- 02-Geotechnical Engineering Soil MechanicsUploaded bynelsonsainz
- Chapter 10- WSDOT Geotechnical Design ManualUploaded bytryabcdef
- Tunnel Face PressureUploaded byHarsha Gm
- 02_3D Retaining WallUploaded byrazvanfcs
- NR 320106 Foundation EngineeringUploaded bySrinivasa Rao G
- Geo_ppm - Nevada DotUploaded bysteverr
- Ufc Soil MechanicsUploaded byUsman Abdullahi
- ce5320Uploaded byMhykee Na
- 517Uploaded byNabeel AL-Hakeem
- Reinforce Earth Retaining GabianUploaded byPERUNDINGAZRA
- Intro MetnumGeoUploaded byAlbert Wilson Marbun
- Lot1-1 ne prolaziUploaded bydeluja
- Snowden Rocscience CollaborationUploaded byClaudio Lechuga
- Geotech challenges at UHG and BN.pptxUploaded byJohn Latilla
- Rock Properties.pdfUploaded byDidik Yuan
- investigation.pdfUploaded byAnonymous 5exSer
- 3. Hydodynamic Equation of Flow.pdfUploaded byhout rothana
- Aterros Com Drenos-modelo Hiperbolico-Chung Et Al-ASCE-2009Uploaded byviraj
- Manual de Diseño de Cimentaciones de Puentes.pdfUploaded byEdwin Edilberto Suri
- 01_Mine Geotechnics - Supandi - IntroductionUploaded byN Kusuma Wardhana
- Analytical Approach to Design Vegetative Crib WallsUploaded byIndriati Martha Patuti
- Analytical Approach to Design Vegetative Crib Walls.pdfUploaded byIndriati Martha Patuti
- Pipe Material Strength CalculationUploaded bynidhin
- 86Uploaded byteh
- gEO.docxUploaded byAnca Balan
- Recent Study on the Behaviour of CFG Pile, DM (Deep Mixing) Column and Stone Columns Ground Improvement TechnologyUploaded byGRD Journals
- ofr_517.pdfUploaded bydianamorabonilla
- Slope StabilityUploaded bySai Adabala
- Surcharge LoadsUploaded byJavier Andres Martinez Ortega

- code3Uploaded bymastergeo35
- Metry - WiktionaryUploaded bymastergeo35
- 14.333DirectShearWorksheetsUploaded bymdalgamouni
- 10.1.1.485.847Uploaded bymastergeo35
- 29 April 2015 Digimap Data in Arcgis Gm2Uploaded bymastergeo35
- Find the Best Place to Plant Your Eucalyptus TreeUploaded bymastergeo35
- Albert Bayet - WikipediaUploaded bymastergeo35
- 10.1.1.506.1346.pdfUploaded bymastergeo35
- CEG8204 (1)Uploaded bymastergeo35
- Soil Improvement TechniquesUploaded bymastergeo35
- Blyth 1990 Useful MapsUploaded bymastergeo35
- Copy of Oedometer Raw DataUploaded bymastergeo35
- Basic Geotechnical Engineering.pdfUploaded byChidiOkolo
- Pub1459 ReportUploaded bylimvep
- DefinitionsUploaded byAwadhesh Sharma
- fx-83_85GTUploaded byzdnqjmjv
- Romano-British Settlement on Stoke Moor, Rodney Stoke - 1011125_ Historic EnglandUploaded bymastergeo35
- 2016-05-13 P033285-09 Planning StatementUploaded bymastergeo35
- 1 Risk Based Reliability Analysis a Powerful Alternative to the Traditional Reliability Analysis 2007 Risk Based Reliability Analysis and Generic PrinUploaded bymastergeo35
- Artigo de Fisiologia VegetalUploaded byCleberton C. Santos
- 1-s2.0-S0378112715001784-mainUploaded bymastergeo35
- $Hospitalfarm.docUploaded bymastergeo35
- 01 Flood Risk StrategyUploaded bymastergeo35
- Open DocumentUploaded bymastergeo35
- Heag017 Flooding and Historic BuildingsUploaded bymastergeo35
- 336373354-BS-85500-2015.pdfUploaded bymastergeo35
- Manchester PhrasebankUploaded bymastergeo35
- Risk AssessmentUploaded bymastergeo35
- İhsan Ketin - Wikipedia, The Free EncyclopediaUploaded bymastergeo35

- BMW F650GS Riders ManualUploaded byMarius Koch
- Introduction to EnthalpyUploaded byAlan Sheleng
- Fastening PDFUploaded byBrian
- Separator SizingUploaded byMadhankumar Lakshmipathy
- DYNAMICS of U-Tube ManometerUploaded byVijay Prasad
- N61-1491-000-000-TPE331-10TurbopropEngine-broUploaded byDima George
- Basic Oilfield CalculationsUploaded bylaaliauto
- xith_physics_value_base_questions.pdfUploaded byShubh Gupta
- Pip SizingUploaded bySatpal Singh
- Chuck Truing JigUploaded byjsmith3455
- Pipeline HandbookUploaded bydownload
- 05Rotary_Shaft_Seals.pdfUploaded byKhanh Pham Dang
- MEC1405 - Thermodynamics I (2009Uploaded byMaria Cutajar
- The Influence of Granular Vortex Motion on the Volumetric PerformanceUploaded bylarosemaxime
- 7b715cfe4322a0bb38eec92bcb37c521Uploaded byMuhajir Busra
- Sofistik-Flyer en 2013 WwwUploaded byptopic10
- Difference ASME B31.1 and B31Uploaded bySivaraj Naveen
- Gamesa G58 850kwUploaded byසම්පත් චන්ද්රරත්න
- GATE 2017 Question Paper Answer Key Gate AcademyUploaded byHimanshu Narang
- Bms & Hvac SystemUploaded byHirushan Menuka
- AppendixbUploaded bygibfrog
- EasysteelStructuralPropertiesbook(1)Uploaded byEriellynn Liza
- Qualitest Canada BrochureUploaded byBala Singam
- ChevroletUploaded byAnonymous czrvb3h
- 16474_Fluid Mechanics upto MTE.pptUploaded byAshutosh Rai
- SANTA_CLARA_HEALTH_HOOD_DATAUploaded byustgj20001260
- BVU-01 - Buffer tankUploaded byShoukat Ali Shaikh
- Operation & Maintenance Manual 9020Uploaded byveeresh
- 1301-013Uploaded byYang Gul Lee
- Cyclone SeperatorUploaded byHemant Kumar

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.