Professional Documents
Culture Documents
13 Were all the papers listed in the References cited in the [x] [] []
text?
14 Are all the figures and tables cited in the text? [x] [] []
15 Are the references complete? [] [x] [x]
16 Is the quality of figures, photos etc acceptable? [] [x] [x]
2
17 Are all the symbols used properly defined and consistent [] [x] [x]
with the international practice?
Paper Evaluation:
[ ] Accepted as submitted
[ ] Accepted after minor corrections indicated below in this review form.
[x] Extensive revision is required and resubmission encouraged as:
[x] Article [ ] Technical Note [ ] Case History
[ ] Rejected (Please present the reasons for rejection below).
The article presents a very interesting comparison between experimental data from an
instrumented colluvium slope and results from slope stability analyses carried out using both
finite element and limit equilibrium methods. The subject of this article is certainly of interest to
the Soils and Rocks reader. However, (a) the literature review of the submitted article is
somewhat outdated; (b) the text is poorly written; and (c) some figures are poorly drawn. The
Authors are therefore encouraged to improve the text as well the presentation of some figures
and then resubmit the article to Soils and Rocks.
(a) The authors performed slope stability analyses using advanced finite element
software packages. However, some input data for these analyses, such as elastic soil
parameters and initial soil stresses were evaluated using simple correlations (Jaky, 1944;
Lopes et al., 1994) instead of determined using more advanced laboratory and in-situ
experimental techniques (such as stress-path controlled triaxial tests with local-strain
measurement or pressuremeter tests). The Authors must therefore discuss the
implications of using these simple correlations on the accuracy of their finite element
analyses.
3
(b) The description given by the Authors of the capabilities of each finite element
software package (Sigma/W; Phase2) appears to be too short. For instance, the
information given in the text suggests that the finite element analyses performed by the
Authors with Phase2 was capable of modeling, in the same analysis, the post-peak
progressive failure behavior associated with the reduction of shear strength from peak
value to residual value along the slip surface [see Potts and Zdravkovic (2001)] but
further explanation is not presented in the text. The Authors are therefore requested to
explain in more detail the fundamental assumptions and techniques which were adopted
to carry out their numerical analyses.
Question 6: (a) The Authors must include a few paragraphs in their text acknowledging and
explaining the main contributions of more recent published work [a few examples are listed
below] on the use of finite element methods in slope stability analyses of soil slopes; (b) The
Authors must explain the definition of factor of safety adopted for the different types of slope
stability analyses presented in the submitted article; (b) The Authors must outline (preferably
using a table) the main advantages and disadvantages of using limit equilibrium methods and
finite element methods for determining the factor of safety in slope stability analyses, including
their experience with the colluvium slope.
Cheng, Y.M.; Lansivaara, T.; Wei, W.B. Two-dimensional slope stability analysis by
limit equilibrium and strength reduction methods. Computers and Geotechnics, 34:137–
150.
Chowdhury, R.; Flentje, P.; Bhattacharya, G. (2010). Geotechnical Slope Analysis.
Taylor & Francis, London.
Potts, D.M.; Zdravkovic, L. (2001). Finite Element Analysis in Geotechnical
Engineering – Application. Thomas Telford, London.
Zheng, H.; Tham, L.G.; D. Liu (2006). On two definitions of the factor of safety
commonly used in the finite element slope stability analysis. Computers and
Geotechnics, 33:188–195.
Zheng, H.; Liu, D.F.; Li, C.G. (2005). Slope stability analysis based on elasto-plastic
finite element method. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng, 64:1871–1888.
Question 7: (a) A few relevant keywords are missing in the submitted article, such as “slope
stability” or “stability analysis”; (b) The keyword “creeping” should be replaced by “soil creep”
or “slope creep”.
4
Question 8: The submitted article has been written in somewhat poor English. A careful review
of the whole text is clearly required.
Question 12: The following papers are cited in the text but are not included in the List of
References: Davis (2004); Lacerda (1997).
Question 15: (a) Some references are written in Portuguese in the Reference List; (b) The style
of presentation of the references is not uniform in the Reference List; (c) More recent published
work on the use of finite element methods in slope stability analyses of soil slopes must be
reviewed in the text and therefore included in the List of References.
Question 16: (a) Some legends in Figures 2 to 10 have font sizes which are too small; (b)
Figures 15 to 18 must be completely redrawn, as both the linework and internal legends look
somewhat blurred in these figures.