yy

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

146686881 Analisis de Estabilidad de Taludes Mediante Mecanica de Fractura

yy

© All Rights Reserved

- Tension Crack
- Planar Failure
- Multi Storey Frames With Side Sway
- 5 - slope stability changes due to wildfire
- 20071220154649!SLOPEW_EngineeringBook
- FEM
- Chapter5 Slope Defl Method
- John Ngaya Mukabi,PhD Full CV 23NOV09
- Strata Slope Brochure
- Ppr2013.316alr
- Vilhena Palace and Underlying Bastions (Mdina, Malta)
- 07-ReliabilityAnalysis201108
- Tutorial 17 Rapid Drawdown
- Measurement of Effective Stress Shear Strength of Rock
- Chapter 2 When is a Rock Engineering Design Acceptable
- Pressuremeter Testing
- SoilWorks_2013_v2.1_ReleaseNote
- slope journal
- FHWA-RD-89-043
- Chapter 3 (Slope Deflection)

You are on page 1of 8

Ecological Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoleng

investigation of mechanical effects

Nomessi Kuma Kokutse a , André Guy Tranquille Temgoua a,∗ , Zanin Kavazović b

a

INRS, Centre Eau Terre Environnement, 490 Rue de la Couronne, Québec, QC, G1 K 9A9, Canada

b

Khalifa University of Science, Technology and Research, Department of Applied Mathematics and Sciences, UAE

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper is dedicated to numerical analysis of the inﬂuence of vegetation on slope’s stability using the

Received 31 August 2015 calculation of the safety factor of different slopes by a classical shear reduction method with the software

Received in revised form 30 October 2015 PLAXIS in 2D. The soil is modelled as an elastic perfectly plastic material. The shear strength of the soil is

Accepted 9 November 2015

also modelled using the Mohr–Coulomb criterion. Slope stability is inﬂuenced by vegetation mechanical

Available online 22 November 2015

parameters: plant’s root matrix system and surcharge due to presence of trees. Based on 2D ﬁnite element

method, this paper investigates the combined effects of different rectilinear slope geometries, soil types

Keywords:

and vegetation mechanical parameters on the slope’s factor of safety. The effects of the roots are modelled

Soil reinforcement

Root cohesion

by increasing the soil cohesion following a classical Wu model. The additional cohesion depends on the

2D model vegetation type and on the depth from soil surface. The analysis examined reinforcement effects of the

Factor of safety roots’ systems of four idealised types of vegetation growing on three different types of soil composing

Vegetation the slope. The case study was performed on different slope conﬁgurations where slope’s height and angle

were allowed to vary signiﬁcantly. Two key parameters of the root matrix system had been considered

for the ﬁnite element analysis: additional cohesion due to the presence of roots and depth of the root

matrix. Moreover, inﬂuence of geometrical parameters, height and angle of the slope, on the stability of

different slope conﬁgurations had been analysed by computing slope’s factor of safety. Parametric studies

were performed to assess the variation of the factor of safety of a slope in case of different geometrical

conﬁgurations combined with several types of vegetation coverage. Results showed that the slope angle

had the greatest impact on variation of factor of safety. Additional cohesion is regarded as the second most

important parameter inﬂuencing the factor of safety. These two parameters combined play an important

role in shallow failures of slopes and signiﬁcantly affect stability of a slope regardless of a soil type

composing the slope. Results of the current study can help practitioners determine if a slope is at risk by

the lack of additional roots cohesion combined with different types of soil and young vegetation. Hence,

the proposed method helps evaluate slope’s vulnerability and could be efﬁciently used as management

or informative tool for ecological engineers and forest conservative practitioners.

© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

lated decrease of apparent cohesion in soil to the loss of roots

Vegetation growing on a slope has traditionally been consid- (Rienstenberg, 1987; Operstein and Frydman, 2000; Van Beek et al.,

ered to have a minor effect on a slope stability. However, in some 2005). Slope stability can be affected by the local soil characteristics

cases, this assumption is not appropriated. Effects of precipitation (Charlafti, 2014) and root traits can change depending on ontogeny

events and deforestation on the slope stability in mountainous and climate (Stokes et al., 2009). In Philippines, widespread defor-

regions are causing concerns in many parts of the world (DeGraff, estation was recognised to be responsible for the catastrophic and

1989). Swanston (1974) as well as Burroughs and Thomas (1977) ‘extraordinary’ landslides which brought tremendous damage and

found that landslides occurrence and slope stability problems killed more than 1600 people in November 2004 (Gaillard et al.,

increase signiﬁcantly ﬁrst years after timber harvesting activities 2006). In 2001, timber harvesting in the mountainous regions of

Togo caused landslides during storm events and killed 3 peo-

ple (Kokutse, 2003). It has been demonstrated that after a storm,

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 4189147835. groundwater ﬂow in shallow layers is not always interconnected

E-mail address: andretemgoua@gmail.com (A.G.T. Temgoua). with the water table during landslides (Hungr et al., 2001; Caine,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.11.005

0925-8574/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153 147

and Sidle, 1995; Genet et al., 2007; Kokutse, 2008). In a particular

case of trees, the tree’s weight is recognised to be one of tree’s

mechanical parameters. Its effect on slope’s stability has been

analysed in the framework of a non-exhaustive list of publications

(Dhakal and Sidle, 2002; Kokutse, 2003, 2008; Pretzsch, 2010).

Vegetation growing on a slope could be of different types: grass,

shrubs, trees or a combination of any two types or all three types

of vegetation. Among the mechanical parameters of vegetation,

mechanical stabilisation due to presence of roots and surcharge

from the weight of trees (Nilaweera and Nutalaya, 1999) are the

ones that are considered most of the time.

The aim of the present study is to quantify effect of the slope’s

geometry as well as mechanical parameters of four idealised types

of vegetation on the stability (factor of safety) of a slope. Hence,

stability of different rectilinear slopes (three different types of soil

were considered) was analysed using 2D ﬁnite element calculations

implemented in PLAXIS code. In addition, a simple sensitivity anal-

Fig. 1. Slope model and the geometrical parameters considered for the simulations.

ysis was performed to assess the sensitivity of the factor of safety of

Brief description of the slope angle ˛:

• ˛ + = 90o . a slope to variations of vegetation. Moreover, mechanical parame-

• When ˛ is small, then the slope is mild. ters for different type of soil involved in the slope stratigraphy were

• When ˛ is large, then the slope is sharp. also analysed.

• A = Slope base length.

• B = Slope length.

Slope base length and Slope length are both variable and function of H and ˛.

2. Material and methods

1980). Most of the time, hydraulic conductivity decreases with the slope under effects of several types of vegetation coverage,

depth and lateral ﬂow proceeds downslope especially for clayey various slope geometries and soil types. Roots’ systems of differ-

soil (Corominas and Moya, 1999). These discoveries have lent con- ent types of vegetation were modelled as additional cohesion in

siderable impetus to the quantiﬁcation of inﬂuence of vegetation Mohr–Coulomb’s law. Weight of trees was also taken into account

in slope stability assessments. and was applied as a uniform surcharge on the slope. In this study,

Research on the effects of plants’ roots on slope stability has we considered two families of parameters that inﬂuence the sta-

widely expanded in the last 30 years. Inﬂuence that grass, shrubs bility of a slope: parameters related to the slope geometry as well

and trees may have on slope stability is more and more recognised. as mechanical parameters of a slope related to both different vege-

Vegetation–slope interactions are complex and this has hampered tation coverage and depth of their respective root matrix systems.

the efforts to quantify them in stability analysis (Riestenberg and Hence, height of a slope and its angle were retained as slope geom-

Sovonick-Dunford, 1983). Several studies have been carried out in etry parameters whereas additional cohesion due to presence of

different parts of the world by geotechnical engineers, foresters, roots and depth of a root zone were regarded as vegetation mechan-

hydrologists and other professionals in order to understand how ical parameters.

plants can improve slope stability. For instance, Genet et al. (2005,

2007) correlated root tensile resistance of different species grow- 2.1. Description of slope geometry and root reinforcement model

ing on slopes to roots cellulose content. Cano et al. (2002) analysed

the effects of local topoclimate on cut slope restoration success by 2.1.1. Slope geometry

herbaceous plants. By carrying out laboratory shear tests on soil A scheme of 2D slope geometry is deﬁned using two param-

samples reinforced by roots, Operstein and Frydman (2000) have eters: height H of a slope and angle ˛ of a slope (Fig. 1). The

quantiﬁed the additional strength in chalky and clayey soils due to slope was assumed rectilinear. In this study, simulations were per-

the presence of roots of some plant species. Other comprehensive formed using several values of slope height H ranging from 5 m

and illustrative results may be found in Wu (1995, 1988). Although to 20 m (H = 5 m, 10 m, 15 m, and 20 m). Furthermore, we exam-

experimental work and ﬁeld observations have shown that plant ined the inﬂuence of different angles ˛ of a slope ranging from 11◦

roots may increase soil shear strength, the need of quantiﬁcation to 45◦ (˛ = 11◦ , 14◦ , 19◦ , 22◦ , 27◦ , 34◦ , and 45◦ ). Hence, for each

of the reinforcement mechanism lead researchers to build mech- scenario (different value of H or ˛), a different domain with appro-

anistic models (Terzaghi, 1950; Wu et al., 1979; Gray and Ohashi, priate dimensions was built as illustrated in Fig. 1. This domain

1983; Wu et al., 1988). was meshed using an adaptive triangular mesh available in PLAXIS.

In spite of the fact that numerous investigations have been Therefore, during simulations for each scenario, the density of

carried out to understand vegetation–slope interactions, unfor- materials was kept constant.

tunately, few consideration is given to them for geotechnical

engineering applications, such as design and stability analysis of 2.2. Root reinforcement model: additional cohesion

rooted embankments. In the literature, most studies related to

slope stability purposes are focusing either on different ways to Wu et al. (1979) considered contribution of roots in the shear

assess slope stability (Grifﬁth and Lane, 1999; Baudin et al., 2000; resistance of a soil layer as additional cohesion of the soil. They

Xie et al., 2004; Kokutse et al., 2006), either on slope stabilisation proposed to express increase in the soil shear strength, CR , due to

using mechanical mechanisms such as pins (Sommers et al., 2000). roots by the following relationship:

It is known that roots provide reinforcement effect to soil through

CR = tR (cos tan ˚ + sin ) (1)

their tensile resistance and frictional properties (Wu et al., 1979;

Waldron, 1977). Different types of root reinforcement models where, tR is the average tensile strength of roots per unit area of

have been built to better understand slope soil reinforcement soil, is the angle of shear rotation and ˚’ is the soil friction angle.

148 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153

Fig. 2. Values of root additional cohesion (CR ) considered to simulate presence of vegetation roots in various soil layers. For each type of vegetation, additional cohesion was

deﬁned as a piecewise function whose value remained constant in a given sub-layer of the soil. The model expressing variation of CR as a function of depth (ZR ) is based on

two main principles: (1) roots could extend beyond the maximum depth of the root zone and larger distance from the stem and (2) roots’ density decreased from the soil

surface to the maximum depth of the root zone.

Table 1

Mechanical properties of different types of soil considered for the simulations.

−3

Dry density d [kN m ] 16 17 17

Young modulus E [kPa] 10,000 13,000 11,500

Poisson ratio [dimensionless] 0.35 0.3 0.25

Shear modulus G [kPa] 3704 5000 4600

Internal angle of friction [◦ ] 20 30 25

Cohesion C [kPa] 2 0.001 2

soil matrix (Wu et al., 1979).

In the current study, we consider ﬁve different types of veg-

etation coverage: none (soil with no vegetation), grass (turf

vegetation), shrubs, young forest and mature forest. To be more Fig. 3. Schema of the slope. Slope with soil sub-layers (7 top layers formed the

realistic, we furthermore consider additional cohesion as a func- rooted zone) considered for the simulation of roots system’s additional cohesion.

tion of soil depth measured from the surface (Fig. 2). Hence, another The vegetation surcharge is considered as a uniformly distributed force W. Boundary

conditions are indicated by the green symbols. (For interpretation of the references

vegetation-dependant parameter was introduced in our study: the

to color in this ﬁgure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

depth of a root zone, denoted by ZR . As a consequence, different

respective values of additional cohesion (as a function of ZR ) were

obtained for each vegetation coverage to appropriately simulate indicating failure (soil slide) (Grifﬁth and Lane, 1999; Dawson et al.,

the presence of roots in different soil layers composing the slope 2000).

(Fig. 2).

2.4. Mechanical properties of soil

2.3. Finite element model and stability analysis Mechanical behaviour of soil was assumed to be of elasto-plastic

nature with Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion. Three soil types were

In the current study, a 2D slope geometry was considered (Fig. 1) considered for the simulations: clay, sand and silty-sand. Their

and its mesh consisted of triangular elements. Input data of the mechanical properties are presented in Table 1.

model were derived from Kokutse (2003), Pretzsch et al. (2014),

Pretzsch (2010) and Pretzsch et al. (2002). Hence, a basic statis- 2.5. Root additional cohesion

tical analysis of collected data related to roots’ distribution was

performed. Thus, only the data that satisﬁed a conﬁdence interval Four active vegetation types were considered in this study. The

of 95% were used as input data for the current model. The 2D dis- inﬂuence of their respective root systems was modelled by using

placement ﬁeld was discretised by a quadratic P2 ﬁnite element appropriate corresponding values of additional cohesion CR dis-

(6-noded triangular elements). A ﬁnite element code for soil and tributed through different soil layers as a function of depth ZR of the

rock analysis called PLAXIS was used for meshing, mechanical cal- root zone of the slope (Fig. 2). In order to incorporate root’s addi-

culations and stability analysis. A new stability analysis method tional cohesion and its variation with depth in the numerical model,

was implemented in PLAXIS software. This new stability analysis a layer of 2 m in depth was considered and divided into 7 sub-layers

method consisted of successively reducing soil shearing resistance (0–0.25 m, 0.25–0.5 m, 0.5–0.75 m, 0.75–1 m, 1–1.50 m, 1.5–2 m,

parameters (cohesion, internal angle of friction) while keeping the and 2 m–bedrock) as illustrated in Fig. 3. Thereafter, soil cohesion

gravity load constant. In this study, the quantity “factor of safety” in each layer was modiﬁed accordingly by adding assumed corre-

was the parameter which corresponds to a large jump in a nodal sponding values of root additional cohesion CR . This process was

displacement computed at a given node close to the soil surface respectively applied for each of the four different vegetation types.

N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153 149

They were applied in order to simulate soil stability as well as sur-

roundings. Boundary conditions consisted of applying kinematic

conditions on lateral and underside edges of the slope (Fig. 3).

Underside edge was blocked, i.e., neither horizontal nor vertical

displacement was allowed (Fig. 3). On lateral edges, only horizontal

displacements were blocked whereas vertical displacements were

allowed. Moreover, boundaries were placed far enough to avoid

their inﬂuence on the results.

Fig. 4. Relative increase of the factor of safety (FS) of the slope due to roots additional

2.7. Loads cohesion. Results represent the mean value of the factor of safety increase (expressed

in %) together with the standard deviation bars. For each type of vegetation coverage

considered in the study, the mean and the standard deviation were computed by

A constant gravity load was applied in order to generate geo- aggregating the results obtained for all slope angles, heights and soil types.

static stress. Apart from the gravity load, a surcharge W due to

the presence of trees was also modelled by using a uniformly dis-

of FS was estimated in the case of young forest whereas an increase

tributed force which was applied on slope’s surface (Fig. 3). The

of 18.7% of FS was associated to mature forest (Fig. 4).

values of W that we considered were 0 for bare soil, grass and

shrubs, whereas the value of 600 Pa was associated with young

trees and mature forest. The value of 600 Pa corresponds to the 3.2. Effects of slope geometry parameters on the factor of safety of

mean value of the pressure exerted on the soil by a plantation the reinforced soil

of 350 trees/ha of maritime pine. In this paper loads values were

derived from O’Loughlin (1974), Beinsteiner (1981), Nilaweera and Regardless of soil type (clay, sand and silty-sand) and slope’s

Nutalaya (1999) and Medicus (2009). height H, regression analysis showed that there was an increase of

the factor of safety probably due to the presence of roots. This can

be seen on Fig. 5 where all vegetation types and all types of soil

2.8. Factor of safety

were aggregated whereas, for each value of the angle, the results

corresponding to different values of the slope heights H are pre-

The factor of safety (FS) was determined based on strength

sented. Indeed, Fig. 5 presents mean values of FSR (factor of safety

reduction technique which consists to decrease the shear strength

inﬂuenced by the presence of roots) as a function of the slope angle

of the soil matrix until failure occurs (Matsui and San, 1992;

˛ for different slope heights H. An improvement of the slope’s sta-

Dawson et al., 2000; Rocscience Inc., 2001). With this method, the

bility, with decreasing slope angle ˛, is easily perceptible (Fig. 5).

criterion to identify failure in the soil matrix is the big jump in the

Mild or moderate slope (smaller inclination) is more stable than

nodal displacement at a chosen point close to the slope’s surface.

a sharp (peaked) slope. So, as suggested by the results in Fig. 5, a

This procedure is implemented in PLAXIS software and was auto-

mild slope angle ˛ improves stability of a slope (Kokutse, 2003;

matically applied to analyse slopes stability in the present study1 .

Chok et al., 2004; Kokutse et al., 2006).

2.9. Parametric analysis 3.3. Threshold of the slope angle for the effectiveness of root

reinforcement

The parametric analysis of ﬁve parameters (one at a time) was

considered, namely: height H of a slope, angle ˛ of a slope, roots’ Diagrams of mean values of the factor of safety (slope with addi-

additional cohesion in the ﬁrst (CR1 ) and the second (CR2 ) top sub- tional cohesion) presented in Fig. 6 clearly suggest a non linear

layers (0–0.25 m and 0.25–0.50 m, respectively; see Fig. 3), and relationship between the factor of safety FSR and the slope angle

surcharge W due to the presence of trees. ˛. This behaviour is very similar to the one observed on Fig. 5. One

3. Results

as a function of different types of vegetation

additional root cohesion (CR ) and depth of the root zone (ZR ) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 4 clearly shows that the factor of safety (FS) of the slope

exhibited a signiﬁcant increase from the slope covered by grass veg-

etation to the forested slope. Indeed, the stability of a non reinforced

slope is signiﬁcantly improved when plants’ root additional cohe-

sion was taken into account. For grass (ZR = 0.25 m, CR1 = 2 kPa) and

shrubs (ZR = 1 m, CR1 = 2 kPa and CR2 = 1 kPa) (see Fig. 2) for instance,

FS increased respectively by 7.1% and 13.6% (Fig. 4). The increase

appeared to be more signiﬁcant with a deeper root zone and higher

Fig. 5. Mean values of FSR as function of slope angle for various slope heights H.

apparent or additional root cohesion. Hence, an increase of 17.1% Mean values of FSR (factor of safety inﬂuenced by the presence of roots) decreased

signiﬁcantly with increasing slope angle ˛ for all vegetation types and all heights H of

the slope. Note that the data for all vegetation types and all types of soil were aggre-

gated whereas, for each value of the angle, we present the results corresponding to

1

www.planis.nl. different values of the slope heights H.

150 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153

Fig. 6. Mean values of FSR as function of slope angle for various types of soil.

As in Fig. 5, mean values of FSR decreased with increasing slope angle ˛. For each

value of the angle of the slope, we present the results corresponding to different

types of soil. In each case, data corresponding to all vegetation types (grass, shrubs, Fig. 8. Relative increase of slope’s factor of safety (FSR ) as a function of slope angle.

young forest and mature forest) and slope heights were aggregated. For each value of slope angle ˛, a mean value of the results for all heights is presented

for each soil type while considering trees (young and mature vegetation) surcharge.

Table 2 Table 3

Threshold values (˛lim ) of the slope angle. ˛lim is the slope angle up to which rein- Inﬂuence of the main vegetation parameters affecting the slope’s safety factor.

forcement effects of roots were efﬁcient. For each type of soil, the results represent Data in the column of “soil type” represent the increase (in %) of the safety factor

mean values (and standard deviation) for the angles and the corresponding values of FS. Results represent mean values aggregated for different vegetation types, slope

the safety factor. These mean values were aggregated for different vegetation types angles and heights.

and heights.

Parameters Soil type

Soil type ˛lim [◦ ] FSR

Clay (%) Sand (%) Silty-sand (%)

Clay 29.9 ± 1.29 1.12 ± 0.07

CR1 14 13 13

Sand 41.03 ± 2.17 1.27 ± 0.09

CR2 6 7 4

Silty-sand 31.5 ± 2.43 1.19 ± 0.07

W −1 1 −1

cohesion (FSR ) and the factor of safety due to the combined effects

of additional cohesion and vegetation surcharge (FSRW ), relative

increase ε of the factor of safety FSR was calculated and found to

be very low (|ε| < 1%) (see Fig. 8). Thus, surcharge should have a

minor inﬂuence on the stability. Despite that evidence, the sign

(positive or negative) of relative increase ε pointed up that one of

the important aspects of the effects of the pressure exerted on the

slope by trees was the variation of the sign of ε (Fig. 8). Indeed,

one would naturally expect the presence of the trees to be bene-

ﬁcial to the stability of the slope. However, we observed that the

sign of the relative increase of the factor of safety was positive for

Fig. 7. Mean values of FSR as a function of slope heights for different slope angles.All

the slope angles ˛ ranging from 11◦ until the slope angle reached a

vegetation types (grass, shrubs, young forest and mature forest) and types of soil

were aggregated whereas, for each value of H, we present the results corresponding critical value ˛0 , which depended on the type of soil. For instance,

to different slope angles. ˛0 ∈ [18◦ , 22◦ ] for clay, ˛0 ∈ [27◦ , 34◦ ] for sand and ˛0 ∈ [22◦ , 27◦ ]

for silty-sand (Fig. 8). As the slope angle ˛ exceeded ˛0 , the sign of

ε became negative and remained negative for the higher values of

˛. Therefore, each soil type has a critical value ˛0 of the slope angle

after which the presence of the trees (because of the trees’ sur-

can also see that there is a threshold ˛lim for the slope angle ˛:

charge weight) becomes adverse to stability of the slope. Another

when ˛ > ˛lim , the factor of safety is smaller than 1 (FSR < 1). In

interesting observation was made when the mean values of the crit-

other words, the reinforcing effect of plants’ roots was sufﬁcient

ical slope angle ˛0 were computed (angle from which the sign of ε

to ensure stability (FSR > 1) of the slope when ˛ < ˛lim . The thresh-

changed). Indeed, for each type of soil, that value was very similar

old appeared to depend on the soil type (Table 2). Moreover, the

to the value of soil angle of internal friction (Fig. 8 and Table 1).

limit value of the slope angle for clay was relatively higher than

those for sandy and silty-sand soils (Table 2). Clay seems to require

milder slopes. 3.5. Parametric analysis

When all types of vegetation were considered together, regres-

sion analysis showed that, contrarily to the angle, relationship On the basis of the factor of safety obtained from the ﬁnite ele-

between of the factor of safety FSR and slope’s height H was linear ment calculations, parametric studies were carried out and showed

(Fig. 7). A negative slope of the regression lines (−0.02) put forward that variation of FS was mainly depended on the slope angle ˛,

that an increase of height would decreased the factor of safety. the slope height H and additional cohesions in the ﬁrst two lay-

Therefore, increase of height is expected to have a destabilising ers of the soil. For geometrical parameters, increase of height H

effect on the slope. induced instability of the slope (coefﬁcient Ai < 0 for H in Table 3).

N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153 151

Nevertheless, a decrease in the slope angle ˛ led to a signiﬁcant showed that hillslope was stable up to a certain value of the angle

increase of the factor of safety FS. (Fig. 5). Using a curve ﬁtting, we established a parabolic relation-

Table 3 illustrates the effect of an increase of 1% of vegetation ship (FSR = 0.0023˛2 − 0.174˛ + 3.83) between the factor of safety

parameters (additional cohesion and surcharge due to trees) on the and the slope angle with a strong correlation (R2 = 0.93). Results

factor of safety of a slope. It was observed that, among the vegeta- presented in Fig. 5 suggest that the hillslope stability is strongly

tion parameters, the root additional cohesion in all soil layers lead inﬂuenced by the slope angle. On the other hand, Fig. 7 shows that

to the largest increase in factor of safety. Moreover, among the val- the relationship between the slope height H and the factor of safety

ues of additional cohesion in the two top layers, the ﬁrst one (CR1 ) is linear (FSR = −0.02H + b) with a strong correlation (R2 = 0.91). One

was the most inﬂuential with, on average, around 13% increase can notice (Fig. 7) that the growth rate is negative and low (−0.02).

in terms of stability improvement, whereas CR2 contributed for Hence, for all slope angles, the safety factor slightly decreased as

5.6% average increase in stability (Table 3). The third mechanical the slope height increased. Moreover, values of the constant terms

parameter related to the vegetation in this study was a surcharge of b were different for each value of the slope angle ˛: b = 1.6 for 27◦ ,

trees, W. It appeared to be the less inﬂuential vegetation parameter b = 1.78 for 22◦ , b = 2.21 for 19◦ , b = 2.6 for 14◦ and b = 3.14 for 11◦ .

with a contribution of 1% (in absolute terms) towards the stability Therefore, height had a minor adverse effect on the stability of the

(Table 3). Nevertheless, its sign (positive for sandy soil and nega- hillslope. Thus, the slope angle ˛ appeared to be the most important

tive for the others) indicated that its inﬂuence on the factor of safety geometrical parameter.

was in fact dependent on soil type (Table 3 and Fig. 8). Inﬂuence of An important observation (Fig. 6) related to the slope angle ˛

trees surcharge could have adverse effect on the stability of a slope is the threshold ˛lim (around 40◦ for sand, and 30◦ for clay and

in the case of clay and silty-sand soil. In summary, a decrease in the silty-sand; see Table 2) up to which the stability of a hillslope

slope angle ˛ and the slope height H led to an increase of the fac- could be signiﬁcantly improved (˛ < ˛lim ) by plants’ roots system.

tor of safety. Concurrently, the presence of vegetation root systems Indeed, Fig. 6 suggests that plants’ roots could not systematically

(accompanied by an increase in additional cohesion of the soil) had improve the slope stability. Hence, for some steep slope conﬁgu-

in general a beneﬁcial effect and improved stability. rations (˛ > ˛lim ), the factor of safety remained lower than 1 for all

A more detailed sensitivity study on the inﬂuence of different soil types regardless of the type of vegetation coverage. Alterna-

vegetation parameters on the factor of safety will be conducted and tively, when the slope angle is lower than a threshold (˛ < ˛lim ),

presented in a subsequent publication. the stability of a slope is greatly improved (FS > 1), especially for

low values of ˛ (Fig. 6). Furthermore, when FS is above 1, one can

observe, for each value of the slope angle in Fig. 6, non negligible

4. Discussion

differences in the FS values related to different soil types. In cases

in which the slope angle ˛ is greater than the threshold, one could

4.1. Global analysis of variation of the factor of safety

think about alternative means to ensure the hillslope stability, both

by mechanical mechanisms (geotextiles and nails) and adequate

A global analysis of variation of the factor of safety showed its

vegetation roots system. Another way to improve stability could

relative increase (Fig. 4) due to the presence of roots in the soil.

be to reduce declivity of the hillslope until threshold value could

For the same geometric conﬁguration, hillslopes that were initially

be eventually reached before using ecoengineering techniques for

unsafe (FS < 1) without roots in soil, became safe (FS > 1) mainly

slope reinforcement.

due to roots reinforcement effects. The ﬁnite element analysis of

a non-reinforced hillslopes showed that the failure mechanism is

a shallow planar one (planar failure). This mechanism of failure is

4.3. Trees’ weight and slope stability: role of soil internal angle of

prevented when a slope is uniformly reinforced by plants’ roots.

friction

As apparent root cohesion and depth of the root zone increase, the

critical slip surface shifts deeper below the ground surface. In the

During simulations, forest (young and mature trees) vege-

case where critical slip surface is beyond the extent of the root zone,

tation’s surcharge was modelled with a low value of pressure

increase of the root density for additional cohesion of soil does not

(0.6 kPa). This value was measured in situ on a slope populated

seem to be helpful for the stability of the hillslope as the factor of

by young trees. As the results presented in Fig. 8 suggest, effects

safety does not increase signiﬁcantly. Since the critical slip surface

of the vegetation’s surcharge on the factor of safety seemed to

was not intercepted by roots (case of deep-seated slip surfaces),

be negligible (relative increase in absolute value |ε| ≤ 1%). This

increase of the root system for additional cohesion did not lead

could be mainly explained by the consideration of the total normal

automatically to an increase of the factor of safety. For some slopes

stress (pressure exerted by a column of soil above this point) at a

whose critical slip surfaces are crossed by root systems, the ﬁnite

given point of the discretised domain which increased very slightly

element analysis showed that an insufﬁcient increase of additional

because of the additional pressure. Nevertheless, analysis of rela-

root cohesion (grass for instance) could not prevent slope from any

tive increase’s sign brought out a major remark: inﬂuence of trees’

failure. Similar failure mechanisms could be observed for nailed

surcharge could in some cases be advantageous yet, in other cases,

reinforced slopes in geotechnical engineering applications. There-

adverse to the stability of a hillslope (Fig. 8). This result agreed with

fore, in order to ensure an improvement of stability of a slope using

the assumptions of Greenway (1987) and the work of Dhakal and

vegetation, not only apparent cohesion should be adequate, but

Sidle (2002). Furthermore, Fig. 8 reveals that the adverse impact

also root system must extend beyond the critical slip surface. Sim-

of vegetation’s surcharge on slope’s stability depends on the type

ilar results were found by Kokutse (2003), Chok et al. (2004) and

of soil composing the slope as well as slope’s angle. It should be

Kokutse et al. (2006).

noticed that beneﬁcial aspect of surcharge induced by trees on the

hillslope stability depended only on two parameters: slope angle

4.2. Inﬂuence of slope’s geometry on the stability of the reinforced ˛ and soil internal angle of friction ˚. We found that the sur-

hillslope charge was adverse to slope stability when slope’s angle ˛ was

greater than internal angle of friction ˚ (Fig. 8 and Table 1). This

Analysis showed that geometry parameters (angle and height could be explained by the increase of normal stress, a component

of a slope) had a signiﬁcant inﬂuence on the factor of safety of shear stress in Mohr–Coulomb’s failure criterion (Godwin and

(Fig. 5 and Fig. 7). For the slope angle ˛, increase of its value Spoor, 1977).

152 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153

Despite relatively low inﬂuence of trees’ surcharge, some quali- were modelled as additional cohesion of the soil and were dis-

tative guidelines could nevertheless be proposed regarding suitable tributed over a depth of a root zone for each vegetation coverage

woody species choices as well as the number of trees to be planted type. Weight of trees was also taken into account and was applied as

per unit surface hectare in the perspective of reforestation of unsta- a uniform surcharge on the slope. Stability of the slope was analysed

ble hillslopes: by computing slope’s factor of safety in the case of each type of veg-

etation coverage on different slope conﬁgurations (various slope

• If the slope angle ˛ is lower than soil internal angle of friction angles and heights). Results showed that the slope angle had the

˚, mature forest surcharge could be beneﬁcial for stability of the greatest impact on variation of factor of safety. Additional cohesion

slope. In this case, the chosen wood species is not expected to is regarded as the second most important parameter inﬂuencing the

have any destabilizing mechanical effects on the slope. factor of safety. These two parameters combined play an important

• In all other cases, wood species should be chosen in such a role in shallow failures of slopes and signiﬁcantly affect stability of

way that the plantation density has negligible effects on initi- a slope. On the basis of this numerical study, some major aspects

ation of failure surface. Results on this aspect of vegetation and should be noticed and general guidelines could be outlined:

slope interactions should be considered with caution since more

numerical and in situ investigations should be conducted. It is • Among vegetation mechanical parameters, root additional cohe-

important to notify the scarcity of such studies in the literature. sion is the most predominant parameter.

Only few authors, such as Wu (1995), expressed points of view • Additional cohesion in the ﬁrst soil layer is more important for

on this aspect of slope–vegetation interactions. These observa- stability improvement than additional cohesion in the second

tions are in accordance with our ﬁndings stipulating that mature layer.

trees’ surcharge could, in very speciﬁc conditions of a slope angle, • Mature trees surcharge can be beneﬁcial to the slope stability

be beneﬁcial to the stability of a slope and adverse to it in other when the slope angle is lower than soil internal angle of friction.

conditions. Otherwise, the surcharge is adverse to the stability of a slope.

• Slope angle is the most inﬂuential among all parameters. High

4.4. General comments on effects of parameters on the slope values of the slope angle can sometimes inhibit the positive

stability effects that roots could have on the stability and induce the slope

to remain unstable. This occurs when the slope angle ˛ is greater

Geometry, especially the slope angle, played the most inﬂuen- than the limit value ˛lim for a given type of soil. It could roughly

tial role on stability of a slope. Curve ﬁtted on the simulation results be suggested to use vegetation only when angle ˛ is smaller than

relating the slope stability to the slope angle was parabolic (Fig. 5) 40◦ for sandy soil and 30◦ for clayey or silty-sandy soils. However,

and exhibited signiﬁcant variations of the factor of safety. On the these guidelines must be taken with caution because of some

other hand, the relationship between the slope stability and the idealisation in the 2D model used in this study.

height of a slope (for all slope angles) resulted in linear curves

(Fig. 7) showing minor variations in the slope factor of safety. Thus,

In the current study, as a ﬁrst approach, a landslide problem is

slope angle is identiﬁed as a major parameter inﬂuencing the slope

investigated by idealistic 2D model which is used for ﬁnite ele-

stability. This parameter should thus be well investigated and con-

ment numerical simulations. For a future work, our intent is to

trolled when using plants to improve the slope stability. Beneﬁcial

use a more realistic 3D model to better understand how differ-

inﬂuence of additional cohesion on the factor of safety highlighted

ent parameters eventually interact to improve the stability of a

that plants improved the slope stability (Fig. 4). The current study

slope. It should be possible to pursue this study by building more

is in accordance with previous studies which pointed out, even

efﬁcient reinforced soil model which will incorporate more param-

thought based on different types of experimental or theoretical

eters. Another item that would require additional attention is the

results, the ability of vegetation roots to improve stability of slopes

surcharge due to the presence of trees. At this stage, this parameter

(Abe and Ziemer, 1991; Operstein and Frydman, 2000; Genet et al.,

seems to have a negligible effect probably because of a low value

2007). Moreover, the results presented in our study unveiled the

of pressure used to model both immature and mature forests. In

contribution of the two top (ﬁrst and second) soil layers in the

further studies, it would be suitable to assume greater values for

stability of the slope (Table 3). It was also observed that the most

this component, especially in the case of a mature forest. Ideally,

superﬁcial soil layer had the greatest inﬂuence on the stability of

additional appropriate data should be collected in situ (by mapping

the slope (Table 3). This is mainly due to the fact that landslides

a forest for example or using remote sensing) to have a more real-

were shallow seated ones. Other areas of the slope indicated a low

istic model of surcharge on the slope. These aspects will be tackled

to moderate risk of landslides. This informative result can help eco-

and analysed in a subsequent paper. Coupling the current model

logical engineers and practitioners to provide a vulnerability or risk

with hydrogeological model to consider interconnected physical

map that can also be used as a friendly decision-making tool.

processes where applicable may improve the accuracy of the model.

Despite the inherent limitations of the model, results of the current

5. Conclusion study can help practitioners determine if a slope is at risk by the lack

of additional roots cohesion combined with different types of soil

In this study, we used 2D ﬁnite element method to investigate and young vegetation. Hence, the proposed method helps evaluate

the combined effects of slope geometry (slope’s height and angle of slope’s vulnerability and could be efﬁciently used as management

a slope) and vegetation mechanical parameters (additional cohe- or informative tool for ecological engineers and forest conservative

sion due to presence of roots and the depth of the root matrix practitioners.

system as well as surcharge due to presence of trees) on the slope’s

factor of safety. Our objective was to quantify effects of the slope

geometry and mechanical parameters of vegetation on the stability Acknowledgements

of a slope. Finite element analysis examined stability of different

rectilinear slopes rotating four types of vegetation coverage on The authors wish to kindly acknowledge Dr Neal Harries for

the slopes having various slope angles and heights. Reinforcement assistance during PLAXIS modelling and his useful comments for

effects of the roots’ systems of four types of vegetation coverage FE slope stability analysis.

N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153 153

References (Eds.), Interpraevent 2006, Disaster Mitigation of Debris Flows, Slope Failure and

Landslides. September 25–27, 2006, Niigata, Japan. Universal Academy Press,

Abe, K., Ziemer, R.R., 1991. Effects of tree roots on a shear zone: modelling reinforced Inc., Tokyo, Japan, pp. 561–567 (ISBN 4-946443-98-3).

shear stress. Can. J. Forest Res. 21, 1012–1019. Kokutse, N.K., 2008. Modélisation du Renforcement des Sols et Analyse Numérique

Baudin, C., De Vos, M., Simpson, B., 2000. Some considerations on the use of ﬁnite de L’impact de la Structure des Peuplements Forestiers Sur la Stabilité des Pentes.

element methods in the ultimate state design. In: Proceedings of the Interna- Université Bordeaux 1, pp. 155 (Applications à l’éco-ingénierie, Thèse de doc-

tional Workshop on Limit State Design in Geotechnical Engineering, Melbourne, torat).

p. 16. Matsui, T., San, K.-C., 1992. Finite element slope stability analysis by shear strength

Beinsteiner, H., 1981. Waldbauliche Beurteilung der Waldabbrüche im Osttiroler reduction technique. Soils Found. 32 (1), 59–70.

Katastrophengebiet. Universität für Bodenkultur, Wien, pp. 112 (Dissertation). Medicus, G., 2009. Massenbewegungen und Vegetationsbedeckung. University of

Burroughs, E.R., Thomas, B.R., 1977. Declining Root Strength in Douglas-ﬁr After Innsbruck, Innsbruck, pp. 110 (Diploma–Thesis, unpublished).

Felling as a Factor in Slope Stability. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Res., Ogden, UT, Nilaweera, N.S., Nutalaya, P., 1999. Role of tree roots in slope stabilisation. Bull. Eng.

USA (Paper INT-190). Geol. Environ. 57, 337–342.

Caine, N., 1980. The rainfall intensity–duration control of shallow landslides and O’Loughlin, C.L., 1974. The effects of timber removal on slope stability of forest soils.

debris ﬂows. Geogr. Ann. 62A, 23–27. J. Hydrol. 12, 121–134 (New Zealand).

Cano, A., Navia, R., Amezaga, I., Montalva, J., 2002. Local topoclimate effect on short- Operstein, V., Frydman, S., 2000. The inﬂuence of vegetation on soil strength. Ground

term cutslope reclamation success. Ecol. Eng. 18 (2002), 489–498. Improv. 4, 81–89.

Charlafti, M., 2014. Slope stability and vegetation. J. Archit. Eng. Tech. 3 (4), Pretzsch, H., Biber, P., Schütze, G., Uhl, E., Rötzer, Th., 2014. Forest stand growth

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2168-9717.1000134. dynamics in Central Europe have accelerated since 1870’. Nat. Commun. 5, 4967,

Chok, Y.H., Kaggwa, W.S., Jaksa, M.B., Grifﬁths, D.V., 2004. Modelling the effects of http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5967.

vegetation on stability of slopes. In: Proceedings of 9th Australia New Zealand Pretzsch, H., 2010. Forest Dynamics, Growth and Yield: From Measurement to Model.

Conference on Geomechanics, Auckland, pp. 391–397. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 670.

Corominas, J., Moya, J., 1999. Reconstructing recent landslide activity in relation to Pretzsch, H., Biber, P., Dursky, J., 2002. The single tree-based stand simulator SILVA:

rainfall in the Llobregat River basin, Eastern Pyrenees, Spain. Geomorphology construction, application and evaluation. Forest Ecol. Manag. 162 (1), 3–21.

30, 79–93. Rienstenberg, M.M., 1987. Anchoring of Thin Colluvium on Hillslopes by Roots of

Dawson, E.M., Roth, W.H., Dresher, A., 2000. Slope stability analysis by strength Sugar Maple and White Ash. University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH (PhD Dis-

reduction. Géotechnique 49, 835–840. sertation).

DeGraff, J.W., 1989. Landslide activity resulting from the November 1988 storm Riestenberg, M.M., Sovonick-Dunford, S., 1983. The role of woody vegetation on

event in the southern Thailand and associated recovery needs. In: Safeguarding stabilising slopes in the Cincinnati area. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 94, 506–518.

the Future; Restoration and Sustainable Development in the South of Thailand. Rocscience Inc., 2001. Application of the ﬁnite elements methods to slope stability.

National Operation Center, National Economic and Social Development Board Toronto, 35.

of Thailand and USAID (Report). Sommers, L., Loehr, J.E., Bowders, J.J., 2000. Construction methods for slope sta-

Dhakal, A.S., Sidle, R.C., 2002. Long-term modelling of landslides for different forest bilization with recycled plastic pins. In: Proceedings of the Mid-Continent

management practices. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 28, 853–868. Transportation Symposium, pp. 254–258.

Gaillard, J.-C., Liamzon, C.C., Villanueva, J.D., 2007. ‘Natural disaster’ A retrospect into Stokes, A., Atger, C., Bengough, A.G., Fourcaud, T., Sidle, R.C., 2009. Desirable plant

the causes of the late-2004 typhoon disaster in the Eastern Luzon Philippines. root traits for protecting unstable slopes against landslides. Plant Soil 324, 1–30,

Environ. Hazards, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.env-haz. 2006.11.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104-009-0159-y.

Genet, M., Stokes, A., Salin, F., Mickovski, S.B., Fourcaud, T., Dumail, J., van Beek, R., Swanston, D.N., 1974. Slope stability problems associated with timber harvesting

2005. The inﬂuence of cellulose content on tensile strength in tree roots. Plant in mountainous regions of western United States. USDA, Forest Research Paper,

Soil 278, 1–9. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-21, 14.

Genet, M., Kokutse, N.K., Stokes, A., Fourcaud, T., Cai, X., Ji, J., Mickovski, S., 2007. Terzaghi, K., 1950. Mechanism of landslides. In: Engineering Geology (Berkel) Vol-

Root reinforcement in plantation of Cryptomeria japonica D. Don: effect of tree ume. Ed. The Geological Society of America, New York.

age and stand structure on slope stability. Forest Ecol. Manag. (Accepted). Van Beek, L.P.H., Wint, J., Cammeraat, L.H., Edwards, J.P., 2005. Observation and sim-

Godwin, R.J., Spoor, G., 1977. Soil failure with narrow tines. J. Agric. Eng. Res. (77), ulation of root reinforcement on abandoned Mediterranean slopes. Plants Soil

90044, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0021-8634. 278, 55–74.

Gray, D.H., Ohashi, H., 1983. Mechanics of ﬁber reinforcement in sand. J. Geotech. Waldron, L.J., 1977. The shear resistance of root permeated homogeneous and strat-

Eng. 109 (3), 335–351. iﬁed soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 41 (3), 843–849.

Greenway, D.R., 1987. Vegetation and slope stability. In: Anderson, M.G., Richards, Waldron, L.J., Dakessian, S., 1981. Soil reinforcement by roots: calculation of

K.S. (Eds.), Slope Stability. John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 187–230. increased soil shear resistance from roots properties. Soil Sci. 132 (6), 427–435.

Grifﬁth, D.V., Lane, P.A., 1999. Slope stability analysis by ﬁnite elements. Géotech- Wu, T.H., McKinell, W.P., Swanston, D.N., 1979. Strength of tree roots and landslides

nique 49 (3), 387–403. on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. Can. Geotech. J. 16, 19–33.

Hungr, O., Evans, S.G., Bovis, M., Hutchinson, J.N., 2001. Review of the classiﬁcation Wu, T.H., MacOmber, R.M., Erb, R.T., Beal, P.E., 1988. Study of soil root interaction. J.

of landslides of the ﬂow type. Environ. Eng. Geosci. 7 (3), 221–238. Geotech. Eng. 114, 1351–1375.

Kokutse, N.K., 2003. Analyse Numérique de L’effet Mécanique de la Végétation Sur Wu, T.H., 1995. Slope stabilization. In: Morgan, R.P.C., Rickson, R.J. (Eds.), Slope Sta-

la Stabilité des Sols en Pente. Université de Lomé, Togo, pp. 59 (Mémoire de ﬁn bilization and Erosion Control—A Bioengineering Approach. Chapman and Hall,

d’études d’ingénieur civil). University Press, Cambridge, pp. 221–264.

Kokutse, N.K., Fourcaud, T., Kokou, K., Neglo, K., Lac, P., 2006. 3D Numerical modelling Wu, W., Sidle, R.C., 1995. A distributed slope stability model for steep forested

and analysis of the inﬂuence of forest structure on hillslopes stability. In: Marui, hillslopes. Water Resour. Res. 31, 2097–2110.

H., Marutani, T., Watanabe, N., Kawabe, H., Gonda, Y., Kimura, M., Ochiai, H., Xie, M., Esaki, T., Cai, M., 2004. A GIS-based method for locating the critical 3D slip

Ogawa, K., Fiebiger, G., Heumader, J., Rudolf-Miklau, F., Kienholz, H., Mikos, M. surface in a slope. Comput. Geotech. 31 (2004), 267–277.

- Tension CrackUploaded byEduardo Milo Bustamante T
- Planar FailureUploaded byalex_kia
- Multi Storey Frames With Side SwayUploaded bydizer12409
- 5 - slope stability changes due to wildfireUploaded byapi-377095173
- 20071220154649!SLOPEW_EngineeringBookUploaded byrit686
- FEMUploaded byChan Kin Cheung
- Chapter5 Slope Defl MethodUploaded byahmadomar89
- John Ngaya Mukabi,PhD Full CV 23NOV09Uploaded byJohn Ngaya Mukabi
- Strata Slope BrochureUploaded byDiego Flórez
- Ppr2013.316alrUploaded byUnknown
- Vilhena Palace and Underlying Bastions (Mdina, Malta)Uploaded byistructe
- 07-ReliabilityAnalysis201108Uploaded byRoss Zhou
- Tutorial 17 Rapid DrawdownUploaded byJustoArteagaHuaccha
- Measurement of Effective Stress Shear Strength of RockUploaded byNadim527
- Chapter 2 When is a Rock Engineering Design AcceptableUploaded byKarinto Suárez
- Pressuremeter TestingUploaded byEmina Balic
- SoilWorks_2013_v2.1_ReleaseNoteUploaded byStefania Villacidro
- slope journalUploaded byRuBiE_CiViL
- FHWA-RD-89-043Uploaded byJoy Mondal
- Chapter 3 (Slope Deflection)Uploaded byKiran Koraddi
- OmInfluence of Specimen Size in Engineering PracticeUploaded byasadr123
- Acuan Kuliah TranspUploaded byverdanto
- Geotextile-Reinforced-Embarkmentsfinal.pptxUploaded byGG
- (ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000268Uploaded byMorteza
- Allan Block Installation GuideUploaded byRonald Kahora
- Tutorial 28 Seismic Analysis Slide.pdfUploaded byajiboyd
- Takaji Kokusho_ Yoshimichi Tsukamoto_ Mitsutoshi Yoshimine - Performance-based design in earthquake geotechnical engineering - from case history to practice _ pr.pdfUploaded byCarmine Russo
- 5fattah.pdfUploaded byP Allen Samuel Ignatius
- Slope Stability Evaluations by Limit.pdfUploaded byAgus Daud
- 5923629Uploaded byUmairKhalid

- Spencer BkLowUploaded bycarlos cruz
- A Numerical Procedure for the Fictitious Support Pressure in TheUploaded bycarlos cruz
- A numerical procedure for the fictitious support pressure in the.pdfUploaded bycarlos cruz
- Traduccion Hoja 6 Pag(160-164)Uploaded bycarlos cruz
- Traduccion Hoja 6 Pag(160-164)Uploaded bycarlos cruz
- Traduccion Hoja 6 Pag(160-164)Uploaded bycarlos cruz
- Traduccion Hoja 6 Pag(160-164)Uploaded bycarlos cruz
- Traduccion Hoja 6 Pag(160-164)Uploaded bycarlos cruz
- Closure Analysis in Deep TunnelsUploaded bycarlos cruz
- Sensitivity Analysis Applied to Slope Stabilization at FailureUploaded bycarlos cruz
- Experimental Study on the Bolt–Cable Combined Supporting TechnologyUploaded bycarlos cruz
- The Effect of Rock Decompaction on the Interaction of Movement Zones in Underground MiningUploaded bycarlos cruz
- A New Cable Truss Support System for Coal Roadways Affected by Dynamic PressureUploaded bycarlos cruz
- Tunnel Stability Assessment by 3D DDA-key Block AnalysisUploaded bycarlos cruz
- Traduccion Hoja 6 Pag(160-164)Uploaded bycarlos cruz
- Traduccion Hoja 6 Pag(160-164)Uploaded bycarlos cruz
- Traduccion Hoja 6 Pag(160-164)Uploaded bycarlos cruz
- Tra Ducci OnUploaded bycarlos cruz
- RMRUploaded byNaveedgeo
- ffffffffcbbbbfffffffffffffvvvvvvvczczczczczcCxzczUploaded bycarlos cruz

- HGPUploaded byapi-19481102
- Sarton-Historians and Philosophers of ScienceUploaded byjf_90
- Roumiana Tsenkova 2 Water Conference 2013Uploaded byNamkay Tenzyn
- Forage AdfUploaded byFarai Faustos
- Krugman Obstfeld Ch 18Uploaded byMuhammad Rilwan
- Thao's SmileUploaded byPoesía Subcutánea
- LPUploaded bySara U'saf
- Vol. 1, Issue 2 a Haadi PressUploaded byalhadiyah
- The 20 Rakats Taraweeh Prayer is a Sunnah Muakkadah - Those Who Reject It Go Against the Sunnah and the Consensus of the SahabahUploaded byHaris Farooq
- Final Assignment Carlos TorresUploaded byAndres Henao
- Kollicoat IRUploaded byKanjakha Pal
- Fermi FET Technology Seminar ReportUploaded byHemendra Nath Jaiswal
- Radicalism vs. Liberalism: C. Wright Mills' Critique of John Dewey's IdeasUploaded bycamden12
- powerdrivexceed.pdfUploaded byAsad Abid
- intro to storytelling curriculumUploaded byapi-272366365
- Oil and Gas PipelinesUploaded byThina Guru
- Ch6 Programming Basic CompUploaded bysuduku007
- How To Solve The Parallel Programming Crisis - Luis SavaineUploaded byrpmrg
- article_5_24_2013.pdfUploaded byNancy
- Motor m42sp 6nk eUploaded byjmbr81
- MICROPROGAPACIÓN DE AGAVEUploaded byElvaro
- Bedah Jurnal Kelompok (1)Uploaded bynuramaliah
- EXB15004 - IEC61439 - June 2015Uploaded bygkdora574
- Different Body Surface LandmarksUploaded byCharlotte Sunga
- Sinolumi LEDUploaded bycnled
- Overachievers Chapter 11 & 12 ExaminationUploaded byCarter Oselett
- T. Charlston.pdfUploaded byGian Vito Tannoia
- SPE 12895-1984-P.,Griffith- Multiphase Flow in Pipes.pdfUploaded byGustavo Valle
- Compare Iso BamUploaded byMitha Arianti
- 4357_01_que_20070501Uploaded byelsaudi9676

## Much more than documents.

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

Cancel anytime.