J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241 e-mail: jms@imde.ac.cn http://jms.imde.ac.

cn
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-5041-z

Dynamic response of a slope reinforced by double-row anti-

sliding piles and pre-stressed anchor cables

FAN Gang1* http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0080-0289; e-mail: fangang@scu.edu.cn

ZHANG Jian-jing2 http://orcid.org/ 0000-0003-1944-2354; e-mail: jianzhang1102@126.com

QI Shun-chao1 http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6481-4933; e-mail: shunchaoqi@scu.edu.cn

WU Jin-biao2 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5151-4402; e-mail: jinbiao.wu@uon.edu.au

*Corresponding author

1 College of Water Resource and Hydropower, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China
2 School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China

Citation: Fan G, Zhang JJ, Qi SC, et al. (2019) Dynamic response of a slope reinforced by double-row anti-sliding piles
and pre-stressed anchor cables. Journal of Mountain Science 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-5041-z

© Science Press, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, CAS and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract: Large-scale shaking table tests were
conducted to study the dynamic response of a slope
reinforced by double-row anti-sliding piles and pre-
stressed anchor cables. The test results show that the
reinforcement suppressed the acceleration
amplification effectively. The axial force time histories
are decomposed into a baseline part and a vibration
part in this study. The baseline part of axial force well
revealed the seismic slope stability, the peak vibration
values of axial force of the anchor cables changed
significantly in different area of the slope under
seismic excitations. The peak lateral earth pressure
acting on the back of the anti-sliding pile located at
the slope toe was much larger than that acting on the
back of the anti-sliding pile located at the slope waist.
The test results indicate an obvious load sharing ratio
difference between these two anti-slide piles, the load
sharing ratio between the two anti-sliding piles
located at the slope toe and the slope waist varied
mainly in a range of 2 - 5. The anti-slide pile at the
slope waist suppressed the horizontal displacement of
the slope surface.
Keywords: Slope stability; Anti-sliding pile; Anchor
Received: 23 May 2018
1st Revision: 20 June 2018
2nd Revision: 26 November 2018
Accepted: 24 December 2018
cable; Seismic design; Shaking table test; Earthquake
Introduction
Anti-sliding piles and pre-stressed anchor
cables are common retaining structures for slope
reinforcement and have been widely used around
the world. In recent decades, many researchers
paid attention to the dynamic performances of
retaining structures (Anastasopoulos et al. 2010;
Bisch and Coin 2007; Haeri et al. 2012; Taga et al.
2015; Lestuzzi and Bachmann 2007; Qu et al.
2016a, b; Zhang et al. 2016). The performances of
reinforced soil-retaining walls during earthquakes
have also been studied widely since several
conventional soil-retaining walls were seriously
damaged during earthquakes (Hong et al. 2005;
Indrajit et al. 2015; Krishna and Latha 2007;
Sakaguchi 1996). Nowadays, more and more
complex retaining structures are used for slope
reinforcement. However, most of current studies
mainly focus on the seismic response of single
retaining structures, very few studies have been
performed on the seismic response of complex

226

retaining structures, especially the combination of
double-row anti-sliding piles and pre-stressed
anchor cables, which are usually used to reinforce
large scale landslides. Ye et al. (2012) performed
several shaking table tests to study the seismic
response of a slope reinforced by single-row anti-
sliding piles and pre-stressed anchor cables. In
practice, when the residual sliding force of a slope
becomes so large that single-row anti-sliding piles
and pre-stressed anchor cables cannot maintain
the slope stability, then double-row anti-sliding
piles and pre-stressed anchor cables will be a
means to maintain the slope stability. However, the
study on the slope reinforced simultaneously by
double-row anti-sliding piles and pre-stressed
anchor cables is rare, the seismic response of
double-row anti-sliding piles and pre-stressed
anchor cables is not well understood.
After the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake and the
2008 Wenchuan earthquake, seismic failures of
retaining structures were highlighted and the
causes of seismic failures were identified. The
analysis results implied that the lack of seismic
design consideration or inappropriate seismic
design consideration could be a major cause of the
seismic failure of retaining structures (Fang et al.
2003; Ling et al. 2001; Zhang et al. 2012). However,
in the current stage of knowledge, the rationality of
current seismic design methods for complex
retaining systems including double-row anti-
sliding piles and pre-stressed anchor cables
remains unclear. To improve the current seismic
design methods and gain a better insight into the
seismic behaviors of double-row anti-sliding piles
and pre-stressed anchor cables under the
earthquake loads, a large number of experimental
and numerical tests must be available (Guler and
Enunlu 2009; Lee et al. 2015).
Shaking table test is one way to directly reveal
the seismic response and failure mechanism of
structures. Clough and Pirtz (1956) performed the
first well-documented shaking table study on
seismic slope stability, henceforth the shaking table
test has continued to be widely used to study the
seismic response of various types of structures
(Branco et al. 2016; Huang et al. 2013; Joseph et al.
2005; Li et al. 2006; Lin and Wang 2006; Lin et al.
2015; Ling et al. 2005; Yang et al. 2016; Zhuang et
al. 2016). Although some limitations and
disadvantages exist in the shaking table test, the
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241
existing studies show that the results of shaking
table test are acceptable.
This study presents a series of large-scale
shaking table tests to reveal the dynamic response
of a slope, which is reinforced by double-row anti-
sliding piles and pre-stressed anchor cables. The
seismic response of double-row anti-sliding piles
and pre-stressed anchor cables is analyzed
adequately, and some meaningful conclusions are
drawn based on the test results.
1 Engineering Background
The prototype slope is located in Sichuan
Province, China. The sliding bed is formed in intact
shale, the sliding mass mainly consists of strong
weathered shale and alluvial deposit, and the
potential sliding zones consist of silty clay. Two slip
surfaces were inferred from in-situ investigations.
The prototype slope is shown in Appendix 1. The
distance between the prototype slope and the
Longmenshan fault, which triggered the 12 May
2008 Wenchuan earthquake (ML 7.9) in western
China, is approximately 50 km. The distance
between the slope and the epicenter of the
Wenchuan earthquake is about 200 km. Locations
of the prototype slope and the earthquake events
occurred between 2013 and 2017 in the
Longmenshan fault area are illustrated in
Appendix 2. Considering the importance of the
slope, the impact of the earthquake on the slope
stability cannot be ignored. The stability analyses
results show that the safety factor of prototype
slope under static condition is 1.03 and under
pseudo-static condition is 0.90 with peak ground
acceleration (PGA) 0.15 g and horizontal
earthquake influence coefficient kh = 0.24.
According to calculations, the residual sliding force
of the slope when subjected to earthquake
excitations is extremely large, a single row of anti-
sliding piles or pre-stressed anchor cables cannot
resist the residual sliding force of the slope
separately, hence the slope is designed to be
reinforced by both double-row anti-sliding piles
and pre-stressed anchor cables.
2 Shaking Table Tests
2.1 Shaking table device
227
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241

The shaking table facility at the Nuclear Power the similarity ratios of all parameters of this test
Institute of China (NPIC) was used. The shaking model are obtained and given in Table 1. The
table allows input of three components of derivation of the similarity ratios can be obtained
earthquake records and independent control. The in our previous work (Fan et al. 2016b).
table has 6 degrees of freedom, including 3 degrees
of translation and 3 degrees of rotation. The 2.3 Test model and reinforcement layout
shaking table is of dimensions of 6 m by 6 m, and
can handle a maximum load of 600 kN. The The test model was constructed and tested in a
maximum acceleration at full load is 1 g rigid box container bolted to the shaking table, as
horizontally and 0.8 g vertically. The maximum shown in Appendix 3. The test model was
unloaded acceleration is 3 g horizontally and 2.6 g constructed layer by layer, and the thickness of
vertically. The maximum displacements in the each layer was 20 cm. The model was constructed
horizontal and vertical directions are ±150 mm and using the controlled-volume compaction according
±100 mm, respectively, with a loading frequency to the desired density, i.e., according to the model
range of 0.1 - 80 Hz. density and thickness of each layer, simulation
materials of a certain quality would be placed into
2.2 Dimensional analysis and similarity the model box and tamped to a thickness of 20 cm.
Resonant column tests were performed to obtain
The constraints of the shaking table limit the the curves of shear modulus (G) vs. shear strain (γ)
weight of the tested model. In order to simulate a and damping ratio (D) vs. shear strain (γ) (Figure 1)
higher slope, a scaled model was utilized in this test. of the sliding bed, here, Gmax is the maximum shear
In order to evaluate the results obtained from the modulus. Direct shear tests were performed to
model test and link the respective full size obtain cohesion (c) and internal friction angle (φ).
prototype, scaling laws were used. The physical Uniaxial compression tests were performed to
dimension L, density ρ and acceleration a were determine elasticity modulus (E) and Poisson’s
selected as the controlling parameters in this test. ratio (μ). The material parameters of the test model
Taking account of the capacity of the shaking table, are listed in Table 2. Here the friction angles and
a CL=100 scale factor was selected for this cohesions of the materials presented in Table 2 are
experiment, resulting in a total height of the model undrained shear strength of the test model, which
slope of 200 cm. The similarity ratios for density ρ are more meaningful in a short-duration shaking
and acceleration a were both 1. Totally fourteen table test. It is worth mentioning that
parameters were taken into account in this test. cyclic/dynamic soil behaviour under undrained
According to the Buckingham π theorem (1914), conditions can be described in terms of effective
stress, using constitutive models
Table 1 Similarity ratios of the test model, here physical dimension L, capable to predict the excess pore water
density ρ and acceleration a are the controlling parameters
pressure induced by the earthquake and
No. Parameters Dimensions Similarity ratio no distinction is made in soil mechanics
1 Physical dimension (L) [L] CL=100 between undrained and drained values
2 Density (ρ) [M][L]-3 Cρ=1
of effective cohesion c′ and angle of
3 Acceleration (a) [L][T]-2 Ca=1
shearing resistance φ′.
4 Elasticity modulus (E) [M][L]-1[T]-2 CE=100
The materials in the potential
5 Stress (σ) [M][L]-1[T]-2 Cσ=CL=100
6 Strain (ε) 1 Cε=1
sliding zone were obtained from the
7 Force (F) [M][L][T]-2 CF=CL3=1000000 prototype slope and remodeled for the
8 Velocity (v) [L][T]-1 Cv=CL1/2=10 test model. In the construction
9 Time (t) [T] Ct=CL1/2=10 procedure of the potential sliding zone,
10 Displacement (u) [L] Cu=CL=100 the simulation material was layered in
11 Angular displacement (θ) 1 Cθ=1 the potential sliding zone in the model
12 Frequency (ω) [T]-1 Cω=CL-1/2=0.1 slope, after the model slope was
13 Damping ratio (λ) 1 Cλ=1 completed, the simulation material was
14 Internal friction angle (φ) 1 Cφ=1 saturated using the pipes preinstalled at

228
 J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241

Table 2 Material parameters for the shaking table test model

Density Elastic modulus Friction Cohesion
Material Poisson’s ratio μ
ρ (g/cm3) E (MPa) angle (°) c (MPa)
Slide bed (M1) 2.5 9.8 40 6 0.25
Rock base 2.7 10.1 42 7.4 0.25
Slide mass (M2) 1.95 0.4 15 5.5 0.30
Potential sliding zone 1.8 0.012 12 0.75 0.25
Anti-sliding pile 2.7 301 0.20
Elastic material
Anchorage segment 2.5 290 0.20

1.0 10 1.0 20

0.8 8 0.8 16

Damping ratio D (%)

Damping ratio D (%)
0.6 Damping ratio (%) 6 0.6 Damping ratio (%) 12

G/Gmax
G/Gmax

G/Gmax G/Gmax
0.4 4 0.4 8

0.2 2 0.2 4

0.0 0 0.0 0
0.000001 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.000001 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01
(a) Shear strain γ (b) Shear strain γ
Figure 1 Relationships between the ratio of shear modulus G to maximum shear modulus Gmax (G/ Gmax) and shear
strain γ, and between damping ratio D and shear strain γ of the material in sliding bed.

the rear of the model slope. The pore water
pressure regime was neglected in this shaking table
test. After the model slope was completed, the
double-row anti-sliding piles and pre-stressed
anchor cables were applied to reinforce the model
slope. The double-row anti-sliding piles were
installed at the slope toe and the middle of the
slope, respectively. The anti-sliding piles were
inserted into the model slope through reserved
holes. The anti-sliding piles were made of concrete.
The parameters of the anti-sliding piles are
presented in Table 2. The anti-sliding piles were
considered to be rigid piles and the bending
deformations of anti-sliding piles were ignored in
these shaking table tests. In this paper, the anti-
sliding piles located at the middle of the slope are
labeled as pile A and the anti-sliding piles located
at the slope toe are labeled as pile B, as shown in
Figure 2. Pile A is 20 cm in height and has a section
of 2 cm by 3 cm and pile B is 16 cm in height and
has a section of 2 cm by 3 cm.
It is worth pointing out that due to the
limitation of model size, it is difficult to install too
many rows of pre-stressed anchor cables in the
mode slope. In this shaking table test, the adjacent
six rows of pre-stressed anchor cables were merged
to be one row, consequently the number of rows of
pre-stressed anchor cables reduced to seven. Three
rows of pre-stressed anchor cables were installed
above pile A and numbered with 1#, 2#, 3#. The
remaining four rows were installed between pile A
and pile B, and numbered with 4#, 5#, 6#, 7#, as
shown in Figure 2.
During the construction of the model slope,
the construction holes for the pre-stressed anchor
cables were reserved using PVC pipes. The
diameter of the PVC pipes was 8 cm. After the
model slope was completed, the prefabricated
anchor cables were put into the reserved
construction holes, then the PVC pipes pulled and
the reserved construction holes filled with
homogeneous sand. The depth of filled sand was
determined by the designed length of anchorage
segment of the anchor cable. In this test, the length
of anchorage segment was 8 cm. The diameter of
the pre-stressed anchor cable was 2 cm and the
material of the cable was steel. The angle of the
pre-stressed anchor cable was set to 20°. The filled
sand in the reserved construction holes was
manually compacted for a certain times and the
number of compaction was determined by the
previous compaction test in the laboratory, which

229
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241
Figure 2 Layout of instrumentation and closeup views of the anti-sliding pile and pre-stressed anchor cable.
was based on the designed pulling resistance of the
pre-stressed anchor cables. The compaction on the
sand around the anchor cables ensured that the
anchor cables would not be pulled out in the
shaking table test. The prestress of the anchor
cable was applied by rotating the nut on the screw,
which was fixed on the lattice beam. The applied
prestress was strictly controlled by axial force
monitoring. In reference to the similarity ratio, the
target value of applied prestress was determined by
the designed value of prototype pre-stressed
anchor cable, i.e. 30 N for every pre-stressed
anchor cable. It should be pointed out that in this
shaking table test, the homogeneous sand was
utilized to fill the space between the anchor cables
and the surrounding soil, it does not seem to match
the in-situ field situation. In fact, the contact
between the pre-stressed anchor cable and the
surrounding soil is strictly controlled by applied
prestress. In practice, the prestress in the anchor
cable is of specific physical significance and is
230
identical to the in-site field situation in this test. To
attenuate the wave reflection from the steel box
during the shaking, the expanded polystyrene
boards with a thickness of 10 cm were placed
between the test model and the steel container
(Bathurst et al. 2007).
2.4 Instrumentation layout
A total of 20 three-dimensional accelerometers
were installed inside the model slope and at the
model slope surface to measure the horizontal and
vertical accelerations. The horizontal and vertical
accelerations of the shaking table were also
measured. The sensitivity of the three-dimensional
accelerometer was 173.46 mv/g in the horizontal
direction and 192.08 mv/g in the vertical direction.
The displacements of the slope surface were
measured using ten 30 cm range laser
displacement meters, which were installed at
different locations throughout the slope height. The

sensitivity of the laser displacement meter was
33.33 mv/mm. The axial force in each pre-stressed
anchor cable was measured by the axial force
sensor, which was installed at the tension segment
of the pre-stressed anchor cable. The output
sensitivity of the axial force sensor was 1.5 mv/v.
The seismic earth pressure acting on the back of
anti-sliding piles was measured using earth
pressure cells. A total of ten earth pressure cells
were utilized in this test, five of which were
installed at different elevations on pile B and
numbered with 1# - 5#; another five were installed
on pile A and numbered with 6# - 10#. The
measuring range of the earth pressure cell was 0 -
0.8 MPa. The diameter of the earth pressure cell
was 1.2 cm, which is about one half of the width of
the anti-sliding pile (2 cm), and the thickness of the
earth pressure cell was 0.8 cm, which is about one
fourth of the thickness of the anti-sliding pile (3
(a)
(b)
Figure 3 Illustration of the model slope and the retaining structures: (a) the plan view of the model slope in which
the model width, as well as the piles and anchors spacing are indicated, (b) pre-stressed anchor cable, and (c) the
prefabricated anti-sliding pile.
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241
cm). Hence the inlaying of the earth pressure cells
into the piles would not affect the property of the
piles. Homogeneous sand was utilized to fill the
space around the earth pressure cells in order to
ensure that the earth pressure cells were in full-
contact with the surrounding soil. All the
aforementioned test instrumentations were new
and used for the first time. Calibration for the
instrumentations was conducted before the
shaking table test. The pre-stressed anchor cables
and the layout of earth pressure cell on the anti-
sliding pile are illustrated in Figure 2.
It should be pointed out that there were totally
three lines of anti-sliding piles and pre-stressed
anchor cables in the model slope, as shown in
Figure 3. In order to attenuate the boundary effect
on the test results, all the earth pressure cells and
axial force sensors were installed on the middle
column of anti-sliding piles and pre-stressed
(c)
231
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241

1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
Acceleration (g)

Acceleration (g)
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
-0.2 -0.2
-0.4 -0.4
-0.6 -0.6
-0.8 -0.8
-1.0 -1.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
(a) (b)
Time (s) Time (s)
Figure 4 Scaled input earthquake motions: (a) the horizontal Qingping earthquake motion and (b) the vertical
Qingping earthquake motion.

Table 3 Seismic properties of the scaled seismic inputs

Arias Intensity Mean Period Predominant Period Duration of Strong Motion Phase
Seismic input
IA Tm Tp TD
Horizontal motion 1.531 m/s 1.56 s 0.20 s 3.198 s
Vertical motion 1.734 m/s 1.19 s 0.20 s 2.913 s

anchor cables, all the accelerometers and laser damage accumulation due to sequential shaking
displacement meters were also installed in the affects the stability of the model slope, and stress
horizontal middle section. dilatancy plays a crucial role in defining the soil
shear strength at low stress levels. However, the
2.5 Shaking sequence existing studies imply that the limitation of shaking
table test does not affect the regularity of analysis
The motions recorded at the Qingping station results and the test results are acceptable
in the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake were applied to (Anastasopoulos et al. 2010; Bisch and Coin 2007).
the test model. The Wenchuan earthquake The shaking table test started with exciting the
represented a significant case history of model slope with a 0.05 g white noise wave with a
devastating damage (Dai et al. 2011; Yin et al. flat Fourier spectrum in all frequencies to obtain
2009). The scaled and compressed horizontal and the initial dynamic characteristics of the slope
vertical input motions are plotted in Figure 4. The model. Based on the responding signals of the
seismic properties of the scaled seismic inputs are model slope under the white noise excitation,
listed in Table 3, including the Arias intensity IA, transfer functions of the model slope were obtained.
the mean period Tm, the predominant period Tp The transfer functions of X direction excitation,
and the duration of the strong motion phase TD. calculated from accelerometers A2 and A10 in the
The motions were applied to the model slope from model slope, are plotted in Figure 5. The average
the bottom of the model slope in two directions, dominant frequency is regarded as the
namely the tendency direction of model slope and fundamental resonance frequency of the slope
the vertical direction. Input motions were scaled to model at the first stage of the test. The resonance
0.15 g, 0.33 g, 0.50 g, 0.70 g and 0.90 g, Table 4 Loading sequence for the shaking table test
respectively. The applied shaking sequence is listed No. Input motion Amplitude (g)
in Table 4. It is important to note that some 1 White noise 0.05
limitations exist in the shaking table tests, although 2 Qingping wave 0.15
3 Qingping wave 0.33
the shaking table test has been widely adopted 4 Qingping wave 0.50
around the world. For instance, the rigid model box 5 Qingping wave 0.70
restricts the deformation of the test model, the 6 Qingping wave 0.90

232
 J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241

6 earthquake motions are totally different from the

Imaginary part of transfer function

(4.61,5.17) A2 natural frequency of the model slope.

5
A10
4
3 Test Results
(4.84,3.50)
3
3.1 Acceleration amplification
2
The slope will have an obvious nonlinear
1
response under the strong earthquake (Lin et al.
0 2013; Liu et al. 2014). With such a model test with
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 proper consideration of similitude laws, the
Frequency (Hz) acceleration amplification behavior of a prototype
Figure 5 Transfer functions based on white noise slope can be studied in the laboratory (Lin and
waveform excitation at the first stage of the test. Wang 2006). In order to study the acceleration
amplification factor of the slope reinforced by
1.0
double-row anti-sliding piles and pre-stress anchor
cables, the acceleration amplification factors of the
0.8 reinforced slope under the 0.15 g and 0.33 g
Top of pile A
Relative height, h/H

seismic excitations are computed and shown in

0.6 Figure 6. Here the acceleration amplification factor
is defined as the ratio of measured peak
0.4 acceleration at slope surface to the peak base
acceleration of referential accelerometer numbered
0.2 35, which was installed at the slope toe, as plotted
0.15g-Horizontal
in Figure 2. The peak accelerations are obtained by
0.15g-Vertical
0.0 taking the maximum absolute values of the
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 measured accelerations in the time domain. Before
(a) Amplification factor computing the acceleration amplification factor,
1.0 the signals measured by the accelerometers are
baseline corrected and band-pass filtered.
0.8 Figure 6 shows that the slope mass below pile
A has smaller acceleration amplification, while the
Top of pile A
Relative height, h/H

slope mass above pile A has significant acceleration

0.6
amplification. This illustrates that the existence of
pile A weakens the acceleration amplification of the
0.4
slope effectively. The increase rate of the
amplification factor in the area between pile A and
0.2 0.33g-Horizontal 1# pre-stressed anchor cable (i.e. relative height
0.33g-Vertical 0.47 - 0.73) is smaller than that in the area above
0.0 1# pre-stressed anchor cable (i.e. relative height
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6
0.73 - 1.00). Since the slope mass above 1# pre-
(b) Amplification factor
stressed anchor cable is not reinforced by any
Figure 6 Horizontal and vertical acceleration retaining structure, the acceleration amplification
amplification factors at the slope surface: (a) under the
in this area increases rapidly along the slope height.
0.15 g Qingping earthquake motion, (b) under the 0.33
g Qingping earthquake motion. According to the above analysis, the anti-sliding
piles and pre-stressed anchor cables weaken the
frequency of the model slope for the X direction slope acceleration amplification effectively. The
excitation is 4.68 Hz. Thus, no resonance will occur acceleration amplification factor of the slope
because the dominant frequencies of the input surface in the unreinforced area increases rapidly

233
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241

with increasing slope height.
The spatial variability of instantaneous
acceleration in the slope is meaningful for
understanding the observed trends in this shaking
table test. Occurrence times of horizontal peak
ground acceleration measured by accelerometers
located at slope surface under 0.15 g and 0.33 g
Qingping earthquake motion are plotted in Figure
7. It indicates an obvious spatial variability of
instantaneous acceleration, especially in the slope
area with relative height less than 0.28. Figure 7
shows that the differences of time corresponding to
the horizontal peak ground acceleration between
the slope toe and the slope crest are 0.211 s and
0.087 s for 0.15 g and 0.33 g excitations,
respectively, which corresponds to 2.11 s and 0.87 s
respectively for the prototype slope considering the
similarity ratio of time Ct = 10.
3.2 Axial force in the pre-stressed anchor cables
The axial force time histories of 1# - 7# pre-
1.0
0.15 g
0.8 0.33 g
Relative height
stressed anchor cables under the excitation of the
0.7 g Qingping earthquake motion are plotted in
Appendix 4. It is notable that the curves of axial
force time histories are similar to the curves of the
input acceleration time histories, as shown in
Figure 4. The measured axial force time history of
the pre-stressed anchor cable contains a baseline
part and a vibration part, which can be
decomposed from the axial force time history using
a Sliding Average Method (Fan et al. 2016a; Wang
2006). A decomposition case is shown in Appendix
5. The baseline part shows a holistic change trend
of the axial force under seismic excitations, which
represents the prestress loss in the anchor cables,
as shown in Appendix 5(b). The vibration part
represents the seismic response of the axial force
under seismic excitations, which characterizes the
dynamic change of axial force and vibrates around
the zero line, as shown in Appendix 5(c). In this
paper, in order to well reveal the seismic responses
of the pre-stressed anchor cables, the baseline part
and the vibration part of axial force time histories
are analyzed separately.
3.2.1 Analysis of baseline part
The initial and residual prestress values of the
baseline parts of pre-stressed anchor cables before

0.6 and after each excitation are presented in Table 5.

As aforementioned, 30 N prestress was applied on
0.4 each anchor cables before the shaking table test.
Table 5 implies that since the first excitation, i.e.
the 0.05 g white nose excitation, prestress
0.2
dissipation occurs in some anchor cables. However,
it is difficult to restore the original pre-stress in the
0.0 anchor cable in the process of large scale shaking
2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8
Occurrence times of peak value (s) table test due to the security restrictions. The
original values of the baseline parts are different to
Figure 7 Occurrence times of horizontal peak ground
acceleration measured by accelerometers located at each other, and it is meaningless to compare the
slope surface under the Qingping earthquake motion absolute change amplitude (Vi - Vr) of each baseline
with different amplitudes. part, where Vi is the initial value of the baseline
Table 5 Initial and residual prestress values of the baseline parts of pre-stressed anchor cables before and after each
excitation (unit: N)
No. of 0.15 g 0.33 g 0.50 g 0.70 g 0.90 g
anchor Initial Residual Initial Residual Initial Residual Initial Residual Initial Residual
cable value Vi value Vr value Vi value Vr value Vi value Vr value Vi value Vr value Vi value Vr
1# 29.7 29.3 31.5 31.9 31.0 32.4 26.5 24.6 19.1 17.8
2# 24.1 22.4 23.1 23.2 22.1 23.9 22.1 18.8 19.1 16.0
3# 22.3 19.9 20.6 20.5 20.7 20.7 20.5 18.6 18.7 15.9
4# 22.6 21.0 19.5 19.1 20.9 23.3 20.8 18.3 19.0 17.5
5# 13.4 13.2 11.2 10.1 12.6 13.4 15.7 14.9 16.7 15.5
6# 19.0 18.6 18.3 18.2 18.5 19.2 19.3 18.5 18.1 17.7
7# 21.0 18.7 15.6 15.4 18.8 19.1 23.9 21.7 21.5 20.9

234

part and Vr is the residual value of the baseline part.
Hence the change percentage of the axial force is
analyzed in this study. The change percentage P
can be given by P=(Vi - Vr)/Vi. A positive change
percentage corresponds to a decrease of axial force
and a prestress loss, while a negative change
percentage corresponds to an increase of axial
force. The change percentages of the baseline parts
are calculated and shown in Figure 8. In this paper,
the relative height (h/H) is defined as the ratio of
the height of any monitoring point (h, measured
from the slope toe) to the total height of the model
slope (H).
It can be seen from Figure 8 that all the axial
forces of seven pre-stressed anchor cables decrease
when subjected to the 0.15 g Qingping earthquake
motion, which indicates that the prestress
dissipation occurs on the pre-stressed anchor
cables. When the excitation amplitude reaches 0.33
g, the axial forces of 1# and 2# pre-stressed anchor
cables increase. Meanwhile, the other five anchor
cables, i.e. 3# - 7#, suffer further prestress
dissipation. When the excitation amplitude reaches
0.50 g, the axial forces of all seven pre-stressed
anchor cables increase. The axial forces increased
duo to that the pre-stressed anchor cables begin to
resist the slope deformation when the excitation
amplitude reaches 0.50 g. However, when the
excitation amplitude reaches 0.70 g and 0.90 g, the
axial forces of all seven pre-stressed anchor cables
decrease, indicating a new round of prestress
dissipation the loss of initial mechanical balance
between the slope mass and the pre-stressed
anchor cables.
To sum up, because of the self-stabilizing
0.7
Top of
0.6 pile A
Relative height, h/H
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.15g 0.33g 0.50g
0.0
-15 -10 -5 0 5
Change percentage of baseline part (%)
Figure 8 Change percentages of the baseline parts of all pre-stressed
anchor cables under the excitations of the Qingping earthquake
motion with different amplitudes, here h is measured from the slope
toe and H is the total height of the model slope.
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241
ability of the slope, the pre-stressed anchor cables
do not work under initial slight excitation, e.g. 0.15
g seismic excitation. Meanwhile, the pre-stressed
anchor cables suffer slight prestress dissipation due
to the seismic disturbance to the pre-stressed
anchor cable system. However, when the seismic
excitation becomes strong enough to result in a
downward sliding trend for the whole slope, all the
pre-stressed anchor cables begin to resist the slope
deformation, which leads to the increased axial
forces of all pre-stressed anchor cables, then a new
mechanical balance is achieved in the reinforced
slope. After that, if the reinforced slope is subjected
to a larger seismic excitation than the previous one,
the axial force of pre-stressed anchor cables will
suffer a further prestress dissipation. The above
analysis shows that the change percentage of the
baseline part is a good reflection of the developing
process of seismic slope stability. In practice, the
seismic stability of the reinforced slope can be
identified by analyzing the change percentage of
the baseline part of the axial force.
3.2.2 Analysis of vibration part
In practice, the vibration part, which
characterizes the seismic response of the axial force
under seismic excitation, is more meaningful than
the baseline part. The peak values of the vibration
parts of the seven pre-stressed anchor cables under
the Qingping earthquake motion are shown in
Figure 9.
As shown in Figure 9, with regard to 1# - 3#
anchor cables, which were located above pile A, the
peak vibration value of 2# pre-stressed anchor
cable is the maximum. The values of the peak
vibration value of 2# anchor cable
1# divided by 1# anchor cable (i.e. 2#/1#)
2# and divided by 3# pre-stressed anchor
3# cable (i.e. 2#/3#) are calculated and
4# plotted in Figure 10. It can be observed
5#
in Figure 10 that the values increase
6# first with increasing excitation
7# amplitude before the excitation
amplitude reaches 0.50 g, and then
0.70g 0.90g
decrease with increasing excitation
10 15 20
amplitude after the excitation amplitude
becomes larger than 0.50 g. When the
excitation is less than 0.50 g, the 2#
pre-stressed anchor cable suffers much
stronger seismic response than 1# and
235
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241

0.7 1# #3 anchor cables. However, the seismic

0.6 2# response differences between #2 and #1,
#2 and #3 decrease significantly when
Relative height, h/H

0.5 3#
subjected to 0.70 g and 0.90 g seismic
0.4 4#
Top of pile A motions.
0.3 5# With regard to the 4# - 7# pre-
6# stressed anchor cables, which were
0.2
7#
located between pile A and pile B, the
0.1
0.15g 0.33g 0.50g 0.70g 0.90g peak vibration values of 4# - 6# pre-
0.0 stressed anchor cables decrease with
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Peak value of vibration part (N) decreasing slope height, while the peak
Figure 9 Peak values of the vibration part under the excitations of vibration value of 7# pre-stressed anchor
the Qingping earthquake motion. cable increases abruptly when compared
with 6# pre-stressed anchor cable. By
2.8 analyzing the peak vibration values of 3# and 4#
Normalized peak vibration value

2#/1# pre-stressed anchor cables near pile A, it can be

2.6
2#/3# found that the peak vibration value of 3# pre-
2.4 stressed anchor cable is slightly smaller than that
2.2 of 4#, it can be explained by the existence of pile A.
2.0 The above analysis suggests that the peak vibration
1.8 values of the pre-stressed anchor cables change
1.6 significantly along the slope height. The peak
vibration values of 2# and 7# pre-stressed anchor
1.4
cables are the maximum in the area above pile A
1.2
and the area between pile A and pile B, respectively.
1.0 It is worth mentioning that the magnitude of input
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 seismic motion which triggers the sliding on the
Input amplitude (g) slip surface in the model slope should be identified.
Figure 10 Values of the peak vibration values of 2# For seismic inputs lower than the one triggering
anchor cable divided by those of 1# anchor cable (i.e. the sliding, the measured anchor stresses could be
2#/1#), and 3# anchor cable (i.e. 2#/3#) under the
excitations of the Qingping earthquake motion (Fan et
attributed to not-uniform accelerations within the
al. 2016a). slope, that is to asynchronous motion effects.
Conversely, seismic inputs higher than the one
2.8 triggering the slide could be interpreted
Occurrence time of peak value (s)

considering also the slope movements relative to

2.6 firm soil.
The occurrence times of the peak vibration
2.4
values with different amplitude are shown in
2.2 Figure 11. It shows that all the anchor cables get
their peak vibration values almost at the same time
2.0 under each seismic excitation. With increasing
input amplitude, the occurrence time of peak
1.8 0.15g 0.33g 0.50g vibration value becomes shorter and shorter. The
0.70g 0.90g occurrence times of peak vibration values are in the
1.6
range of 2.0 - 2.7 s. In reference to Figure 4, the
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
No. of pre-stressed anchor cable strong shaking periods of the input Qingping
earthquake motions are mainly between 1.87 s and
Figure 11 Occurrence times of peak vibration values of
all seven pre-stressed anchor cables under the Qingping 2.66 s in the horizontal direction, and 1.90 s and
earthquake motion with different amplitudes (Fan et al. 2.90 s in the vertical direction, respectively. It can
2016a). be seen that the occurrence times of peak vibration

236

values of all seven pre-stressed anchor cables are in
the strong shaking periods of the input motions.
In this study, the slope mass above pile A is
defined as the upper part of the slope, and the
slope mass between pile A and pile B is defined as
the lower part of the slope. According to Figure 9,
the ratios of the maximum peak vibration values to
the minimum peak vibration values of the pre-
stressed anchor cables located in the upper part (i.e.
1#, 2# and 3#) and the lower part (i.e. 4#, 5#, 6#
and 7#) of the model slope are analyzed, as shown
in Figure 12. The peak ratio in the upper part is
2.625 obtained under 0.50 g Qingping earthquake
motion and the peak ratio in the lower part is 5.128
obtained under 0.15 g Qingping earthquake motion,
indicating that the axial forces of the pre-stressed
anchor cables in different slope areas are
significantly different. The research results imply
that the current seismic design method, in which
the pre-stressed anchor cables are designed to
sustain the same load, is inaccurate. In practice,
the failure of a certain pre-stressed anchor cable
can lead to the failures of the adjacent pre-stressed
anchor cables, and the number of failed pre-
stressed anchor cables will increase continuously
due to the chain reaction. Therefore, the seismic
response differences between the pre-stressed
anchor cables located in different areas should be
fully taken into account in the seismic design.
Specific design considerations should be adopted
in different areas with different geological
conditions to ensure the reliability of the pre-
stressed anchor cables and the stability of the
6 pressure at the location with relative height of
Upper part Lower part
Ratios of peak vibration values
5 the lateral earth pressure acting on the back of pile
4 seismic excitations are similar to that acting on the
3
2 pressure decreases first and then increases along
1 obtained near the relative height of 0.6. The lateral
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Input amplitude (g)
Figure 12 Ratios of the maximum peak vibration
values to the minimum peak vibration values in the
upper part and lower part of the slope under the
Qingping earthquake motions.
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241
reinforced slope. The seismic response differences
between the pre-stressed anchor cables located in
different areas can be explained by ground
acceleration response analysis, accounting for
topography effects (Scott et al. 1997; Stephen et al.
1994) and distance from the bedrock. The
acceleration response difference, as described in
section 3.1, is one of the main reasons for the
seismic response difference between the pre-
stressed anchor cables located in different slope
areas. Some of these aspects (e.g. the topography
effects) are already taken into account in national
and international building codes.
3.3 Lateral earth pressure on the anti-
sliding piles
Totally five earth pressure cells were installed
behind each anti-sliding pile, as plotted in Figure 5.
The 1# - 5# earth pressure cells were installed
behind pile B, and the 6# - 10# earth pressure cells
were installed behind pile A. The lateral earth
pressure acting on the back of anti-sliding pile A
and pile B under the excitations of the Qingping
earthquake motions is shown in Figure 13. It
should be pointed out that the lateral earth
pressure plotted in Figure 13 is the dynamic earth
pressure, the static earth pressure is not included.
It can be observed from Figure 13 that the
lateral earth pressure acting on the back of pile B is
much greater than that of pile A. The lateral earth
pressure acting on the back of pile B increases with
increasing input amplitude. The lateral earth
0.167 and 0.50 is relatively larger. With regard to
A, the distribution curves of the 0.15 g and 0.33 g
back of pile A. However, when the input amplitude
becomes larger than 0.50 g, the lateral earth
the pile height, and the minimum earth pressure is
earth pressure acting on the pile toe is larger than
that acting on the pile top, as shown in Figure 13(b).
1
This phenomenon is possibly caused by the plastic
strain in the surrounding soil near the pile top and
the pile toe under the strong earthquake excitations.
Since the anti-sliding piles are assumed to be rigid,
the lateral earth pressure measured behind the
237
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241

1.0 design (Ling et al. 2005). It should be pointed out

0.15g 0.33g that the model piles are in fact of infinite strength
0.9
0.50g 0.70g and stiffness with respect to the soil in this shaking
0.8
0.90g table test, so that they eventually undergo rigid
Relative height, h/H

0.7
0.6
rotation and/or translation during earthquake
loading. Moreover, instrumented pile B is
0.5
embedded in the rock base, thus behaving nearly as
0.4
a fixed pile, while pile A is characterized by a
0.3
limited length below the slip surface, having less
0.2
restraint to move during the earthquake. This may
0.1
be the reason why the lateral earth pressure
0.0
distribution behind the pile A and pile B is different.
0 4 8 12 16 20
Nowadays, little research has been performed
(a) Earth presure (kPa)
on the seismic response of the double-row anti-
1.0 sliding piles, especially the load sharing ratio of
0.9 each anti-sliding pile remains unknown. The ratios
0.8 between the peak lateral earth pressure acting on
0.7 0.15g 0.33g
Relative height, h/H

the back of pile B and that acting on the back of pile

0.6 0.50g 0.70g A under the Qingping earthquake motions are
0.5 0.90g calculated and plotted in Figure 14. It shows that
0.4 the ratios change mainly in the range of 2 - 5. With
0.3 regard to the 0.15 g and 0.33 g seismic excitations,
0.2 the ratios change in a range of 2.39 - 4.67, implying
0.1 that there is a large difference on the load sharing
0.0 ratios between pile A and pile B, the load sharing
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ratio of Pile B is much larger than that of Pile A.
(b) Earth presure (kPa) The study in this paper shows that the load acting
on the back of pile B is much larger than that of
Figure 13 Lateral earth pressure acting on the back of
(a) anti-sliding pile B and (b) anti-sliding pile A under pile A. According to the Code for Seismic Design of
the excitations of the Qinging earthquake motion. Building of China (2010), the seismic design
intensity of 6, 7, 8 and 9 correspond to the basic
1.0 design acceleration of 0.05 g, 0.10 g, 0.20 g and
0.9 0.40 g, respectively. In reference to the Seismic
0.8 Ground Motion Parameters Zonation Map of China
Relative height, h/H

0.7 (2015), the seismic design intensity scale of most

0.6 areas in China is not larger than 9, the study under
0.5 the 0.15 g and 0.33 g seismic excitations in this
0.4 study has a great practical significance for China,
0.15g
0.3 and also can provide a reference for other countries
0.33g
0.50g and regions in the world.
0.2
0.70g
0.1
0.90g 3.4 Horizontal displacements of slope surface
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Ratio (Pile B / Pile A) The horizontal surface displacements were
Figure 14 Ratios of the peak lateral earth pressure measured by laser displacement meters located at
acting on the back of anti-sliding pile B and the peak different locations throughout the slope height. The
lateral earth pressure acting on the back of anti-sliding horizontal surface displacements at different slope
pile A under the Qingping earthquake motion. height under the Qingping earthquake motions are
piles can be viewed as equivalent to the earth shown in Figure 15. The displacements in Figure 15
pressure used in the traditional pseudo-static are the post-earthquake permanent displacements,

238
 J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241

1.0 surface displacements at upper part of the slope.

0.9 0.15g After the 0.90 g shaking, some cracks were
0.8 0.33g observed in the area near the trailing edge of the
model slope where no reinforcement was applied,
Relative height, h/H

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
Top of
0.3
pile A
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Displacement at slope surface (cm)
Figure 15 Horizontal displacements at the slope
surface under the excitations of the Qingping
earthquake motion.
and the displacements are the absolute values of
each seismic excitation rather than accumulated
values. It can be easily found from Figure 15 that
the horizontal displacements at the top of pile A, i.e.
the horizontal displacements of JG6, are smaller
than those near the top of pile A, i.e. the horizontal
displacements of JG5 and JG7. Figure 15 also
implies that pile A suppresses the increase rate of
horizontal surface displacements along the slope
height, the increase rate of horizontal surface
displacement below pile A is larger than that above
pile A. The above analysis indicates that pile A has
a significant effect on suppressing the horizontal
as is shown in Figure 16, while no obvious cracks
were observed in the reinforced area. It implies
that the reinforcement improves the deformation
resistance ability of the model slope. Figure 16
indicates that the reinforced model slope does not
loss its stability when under 0.9 g excitation, the
stability analyses result with pseudo-static method
shows that the safety factor of the prototype slope
0.8 1.0 1.2
under 0.15 g excitation is just 0.90, implying that
the double-row anti-sliding piles and pre-stressed
anchor cables improve the stability of the slope
significantly.
The intensity of input motion affects the
horizontal displacements of slope surface
significantly. The displacement increases
dramatically with increasing intensity of input
motion. Bray and Rathje (1998) considered the
effects of intensity on earthquake-induced
displacement by normalizing the displacement by
the maximum horizontal equivalent acceleration,
which was the peak inward acceleration of the
average time history from motions at the base,
mid-height and top of the slope.
As mentioned before, the peak vibration values
of 2# and 7# pre-stressed anchor cables are the
largest in the area above pile A and the area

Figure 16 Cracks on the test model after the 0.90 g shaking test: (a) cracks on the model slope surface, (b) sideview
of the cracks.

239
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241
between pile A and pile B, respectively. Figure 15
shows that the measured horizontal surface
displacements at 2# and 7# pre-stressed anchor
cables are the smallest in the area above pile A and
the area between pile A and pile B, respectively. A
large peak vibration value of axial force represents
a good performance of the pre-stressed anchor
cable, and also represents a small slope surface
displacement.
4 Conclusions
Based on the research results in this study,
several conclusions can be drawn:
(1) The anti-sliding piles and pre-stressed
anchor cables weaken the slope acceleration
amplification effectively, the value and the increase
rate of the acceleration amplification coefficient in
the unreinforced area are significantly larger than
those in the reinforced area.
(2) The peak vibration values of 2# and 7#
pre-stressed anchor cables are the maximum in the
area above pile A and the area between pile A and
pile B, respectively, indicating that the anchor
cables in different slope areas bear different loads
and specific design considerations should be
adopted in different slope areas when seismic
References
Anastasopoulos I, Georgarakos T, Georgiannou V, et al. (2010)
Seismic performance of bar-mat reinforced-soil retaining wall:
Shaking table testing versus numerical analysis with modified
kinematic hardening constitutive model. Soil Dynamics and
Earthquake Engineering 30: 1089-1105.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.04.020.
Bathursta RJ, Zarnanib S, Gaskinc A (2007) Shaking table
testing of geofoam seismic buffers. Soil Dynamics and
Earthquake Engineering 27: 324-332.
https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.soildyn.2006.08.003
Bisch P, Coin A (2007) Seismic behaviour of slightly reinforced
concrete walls: experiments and theoretical conclusions.
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 5: 45-65.
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10518-006-9014-1
Branco M, Guerreiro L, Campos CA, et al. (2014) Shaking table
tests of a structure equipped with superelastic dampers.
Journal of Earthquake Engineering 18: 674-695.
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10518-006-9014-1
Bray JD, Rathje ER (1998) Earthquake-induced displacements
of solid-waste landfills. Journal of Geotechnical
Geoenvironment Engineering, 124: 242-253.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE) 1090-0241(1998)124:3(242)
Buckingham E (1914) On physically similar systems:
illustrations of the use of dimensional equations. Physical
Review 4: 345-376. https://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRev.4.345
240
design is conducted.
(3) All the pre-stressed anchor cables suffer
the maximum seismic response almost
simultaneously, the maximum seismic response
period is coincide with the strong shaking periods
of the input motions.
(4) The load sharing ratios of pile located at
toe of the slope is much larger than that of pile
located at middle of the slope, indicating the pile
located at toe of the slope bears much more seismic
load than the pile located at middle of the slope.
(5) Pile located at middle of the slope
suppresses the horizontal displacement response,
including the displacement magnitude and the
increase rate of displacement.
Acknowledgements
This research is financially supported by the
National Key R & D Program of China (No.
2018YFC1508601) and the Fundamental Research
Funds for the Central University (20822041B4038).
Electronic supplementary material:
Supplementary material (Appendixes 1 to 5) is
available in the online version of this article at
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-5041-z
Clough RW, Pirtz D (1956) Earthquake resistance of rock-fill
dams. Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division 2:
1-26.
Dai FC, Xu C, Yao X, et al. (2011) Spatial distribution of
landslides triggered by the 2008 Ms 8.0 Wenchuan
earthquake, China. Journal of Asian Earth Science 40: 883-
895. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jseaes.2010.04.010
Fan G, Zhang JJ, Fu X, et al. (2016a) Axial force of anchor
cables in slope reinforced by double-row anti-slide piles and
pre-stressed anchor cables. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering 38(6): 1095-1103. (In Chinese)
https://doi.org/ 10.11779/CJGE201606017
Fan G, Zhang JJ, Wu JB, et al. (2016b) Dynamic response and
dynamic failure mode of a weak intercalated rock slope using
a shaking table. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 49:
3243-3256. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00603-016-0971-7
Fang YS, Yang YC, Chen TJ (2003) Retaining walls damaged in
the Chi-Chi earthquake. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 40:
1142-1153. https://doi.org/ 10.1139/t03-055
General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and
Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China &
Standardization Administration of People’s Republic of China,
2015. Seismic Ground Motion Parameters Zonation Map of
China (GB 18308–2015), Beijing, China.
Guler E, Enunlu AK (2009) Investigation of dynamic behavior

of geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining structures under
earthquake loads. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 7: 737-
777. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10518-009-9106-9
Haeri SM, Kavand A, Rahmani I, et al. (2012) Response of a
group of piles to liquefaction-induced lateral spreading by
large-scale shake table testing. Soil Dynamics Earthquake
Engineering 38: 25-45.
https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.02.002
Huang RQ, Zhao JJ, Ju NP, et al. (2013) Analysis of an anti-dip
landslide triggered by the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in
China. Natural Hazards 68: 1021-1039.
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11069-013-0671-5
Hong YS, Chen RH, Wu CS, et al. (2005) Shaking table tests and
stability analysis of steep nailed slopes. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal 42: 1264-1279.
https://doi.org/ 10.1139/t05-055
Indrajit C, Jitendra PS (2015) Behavior of gravity type retaining
wall under earthquake load with generalized backfill. Journal
of Earthquake Engineering 19: 563-591.
https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13632469.2014.997900
Joseph W, Raymond BS, Jonathan DB (2005) Shaking table
modeling of seismically induced deformations in slopes.
Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironment Engineering 131:
610-622.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:5(610)
Krishna AM, Latha GM (2007) Seismic response of wrap-faced
reinforced soil-retaining wall models using shaking table tests.
Geosynthetics International 14: 355-365.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2007.11.001
Lee SJ, Yeh TY, Huang HH, et al. (2015) Numerical earthquake
models of the 2013 Nantou, Taiwan, earthquake series:
Characteristics of source rupture processes, strong ground
motions and their tectonic implication. Journal of Asian Earth
Science 111: 365-372.
https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jseaes.2015.06.031
Lestuzzi P, Bachmann H (2007) Displacement ductility and
energy assessment from shaking table tests on RC structural
walls. Engineering Structures 29: 1708-1721.
https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.09.009
Li CS, Lam SSE, Zhang MZ, et al. (2006) Shaking table test of a
1:20 scale high-rise building with a transfer plate system.
Journal of Structural Engineering 132: 1732-1744.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2006)132:11(1732)
Lin ML, Wang KL (2006) Seismic slope behavior in a large-scale
shaking table model test. Engineering Geology 86: 118-133.
https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.02.011
Lin YL, Leng WM, Yang GL, et al. (2015) Seismic response of
embankment slopes with different reinforcing measures in
shaking table tests. Natural Hazards 76: 791-810.
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11069-014-1517-5
Lin YL, Yang GL (2013) Dynamic behavior of railway
embankment slope subjected to seismic excitation. Natural
Hazards 69: 219-235.
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11069-013-0701-3
Ling HI, Leshchinsky D, Chou NNS (2001) Post-earthquake
investigation on several geosynthetic- reinforced soil
retaining walls and slopes during the Ji-Ji earthquake of
Taiwan. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 21: 297-
313. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0267-7261(01)00011-2
Ling H, Yoshiyuki M, Dov L, et al. (2005) Large-scale shaking
table tests on modular-block reinforced soil retaining wall.
J. Mt. Sci. (2019) 16(1): 226-241
Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironment Engineering 131:
465-476.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241 (2005)131:4(465)
Liu HX, Xu Q, Li YR (2014) Effect of lithology and structure on
seismic response of steep slope in a shaking table test. Journal
of Mountain Science 11: 371-383.
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11629-013-2790-6
Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the
People’s Republic of China (2010) Code for Seismic Design of
Building (GB50011–2010), Beijing, China.
Qu HL, Li RF, Zhang JJ, et al. (2016a) A novel approach for
seismic design of anchored sheet pile wall. Tehnički Vjesnik-
Tehnical Gazette 23: 455-463.
https://doi.org/10.17559/TV-20151106090533
Qu HL, Li RF, Hu HG, et al. (2016b) An approach of seismic
design for sheet pile retaining wall based on capacity
spectrum method. Geomechanics Engineering: 309-323.
https://doi.org/ 10.12989/gae.2016.11.2.309
Sakaguchi M (1996) A study of the seismic behavior of
geosynthetic reinforced walls in Japan. Geosynthetic
International 3: 13-30. https://doi.org/ 10.1680/gein.3.0051
Scott AA, Nicholas S, John L, et al. (1997) Topographic effects
on the seismic response of steep slopes. Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America 87(3): 701-709.
https://doi.org/10.1029/96JB03485
Stephen HH, David LC, Kenneth WK (1994) Initial investigation
of site and topographic effects at Robinwood Ridge, California.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 84(5): 1336-
1349.
Taga H, Turkmen S, Kacka N (2015) Assessment of stability
problems at southern engineered slopes along Mersin-Tarsus
Motorway in Turkey. Bulletin of Engineering Geology
Environment 74: 379-391.
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10064-014-0636-2
Wang J (2006) The Application of MTLAB in Processing of
Vibration Signal. China Water and Power Press, Beijing,
China.
Yang G, Yu T, Yang X, et al. (2016) Seismic resistant effects of
composite reinforcement on rockfill dams based on shaking
table tests. Journal Earthquake Engineering 21(6): 1-13.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2016.1190800
Ye HL, Zheng YR, Li AH, et al. (2012) Shaking table test studies
of pre-stressed anchor cable of slope under earthquake.
Chinese Journal Rock Mechanics and Engineering 31: 2847-
2854. (in Chinese)
https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-6915.2012.z1.032
Yin YP, Wang FW, Sun P (2009) Landslide hazards triggered by
the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake, Sichuan, China. Landslides
6: 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-009-0148-5
Zhang JJ, Qu HL, Liao Y, et al. (2012) Seismic damage of earth
structures of road engineering in the 2008 Wenchuan
earthquake. Environmental Earth Science 65: 987-993.
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s12665-011-1519-5
Zhang ZL, Wang T, Wu SR, et al. (2016) Rock toppling failure
mode influenced by local response to earthquakes. Bulletin
Engineering Geology and Environment 75: 1361-1375.
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10064-015-0806-x
Zhuang HY, Chen GX, Hu ZH, et al. (2016) Influence of soil
liquefaction on the seismic response of a subway station in
model tests. Bulletin of Engineering Geology Environment 75:
1169-1182.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-015-0777-y
241