HOSTED BY Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434
www.elsevier.com/locate/sandf

Hydro-mechanical reinforcements of live poles to slope stability

Viroon Kamchoom a, Anthony K. Leung b,⇑
a
King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Bangkok 10520, Thailand
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong

Received 7 September 2017; received in revised form 27 May 2018; accepted 9 August 2018
Available online 5 October 2018

Abstract

Soil bioengineering using live poles is an environmentally friendly technique for shallow slope stabilisation. However, it remains
unclear in this technique whether the hydrological effects of pole transpiration are significant to slope stabilisation, compared to mechan-
ical reinforcement by structural poles and their fibrous roots. The aims of this study were to investigate the hydro-mechanical reinforce-
ment effects of live poles and to evaluate their effectiveness for shallow slope stabilisation, giving due consideration to the different pole
growth stages. Finite-element seepage-stability models were developed and validated against centrifuge model tests that investigated the
rainfall-induced instability of a 45-degree clayey sand slope subjected to intense rainfall. The short-term stability right after the instal-
lation of the poles is critical because only structural poles, i.e., without fibrous root reinforcement or water uptake, are insufficient for
reinforcement, even those as long as 2 m. Due to the absence of pole transpiration, positive pore water pressure of up to 10 kPa was built
up near the slope toe, causing the significant mobilisation of shear strain and consequentially slope failure. In longer term, during which
fibrous roots developed and provided additional mechanical reinforcement (via root cohesion) and transpiration-induced suction, no
slope failure occurred due to the considerable amount of suction that was retained within the pole zone. It was mainly the pole transpi-
ration before the rainfall, i.e., antecedent drying, that retained the suction, rather than the transpiration that took place during the
rainfall.
Ó 2018 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.
This is an open access article under CC BY-NC-ND license. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Keywords: Live poles; Reinforcement; Transpiration; Suction; Slope stability

1. Introduction et al., 2017b, 2018). Pole transpiration induces matric suc-

Stem cuttings, also known as live poles, have been used
as an environmentally friendly bioengineering solution for
shallow slope stabilisation, i.e., within 1–2 m (Wu et al.,
2014; Boldrin et al., 2017a; Liang et al., 2017). While poles
and fibrous roots developing in later growth stages can
provide mechanical reinforcement to soil, there are increas-
ing concerns as to the effects of pole transpiration on slope
stability (Simon and Collison, 2002; Kamchoom et al.,
2014; Ng et al., 2016a, 2017; Leung et al., 2017; Boldrin
Peer review under responsibility of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ceanthony@ust.hk (A.K. Leung).
tion (hereafter referred to as suction). Transpiration-
induced suction can reduce soil hydraulic conductivity,
and hence, rainfall infiltration (Ng and Leung, 2012; Ng
et al., 2013, 2016b; Leung et al., 2015, 2018), and can
increase the shear strength of soil, both favourable to slope
stability. Indeed, the field data and analyses reported by
Simon and Collison (2002) and Wu et al. (2014) showed
that the hydrological effects of plants can play a predomi-
nant role in slope stability compared to the mechanical
effects. The centrifuge tests recently conducted by Ng
et al. (2017) showed that pole-supported slopes were able
to preserve a considerable amount of transpiration-
induced suction. Ng et al. (2016a) and Leung et al. (2017)
also conducted centrifuge tests using the artificial roots

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2018.08.003
0038-0806/Ó 2018 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.
This is an open access article under CC BY-NC-ND license. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
1424 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434
developed by Ng et al. (2014) and Kamchoom et al. (2015).
They showed that both the root geometry and the slope
gradient can substantially affect the amount of suction
retained. All these centrifuge tests considered extreme con-
ditions where large and constant transpiration-induced
suction took place. However, it is well-known that suction
induced by transpiration depends strongly on the weather
conditions prior to and during a rainfall event. Applying
a large and constant suction even during a rainfall would
undermine the contribution of the mechanical pole rein-
forcement. This mechanical reinforcement might be much
more significant than the hydrological effects when transpi-
ration is not favourable.
The degree of stabilisation provided by live poles also
depends strongly on their growth stages. After installation,
the poles at the initial stage behave like a structural element
providing temporary slope stabilisation through mechani-
cal reinforcement (Wu et al., 2014). When roots develop
at later stages, the fine roots can form a composite with
the surrounding soil and provide additional reinforcement
(Operstein and Frydman, 2000; Boldrin et al., 2017a; Liang
et al., 2017). Although it is tempting to include the benefi-
cial effects of transpiration-induced suction when calculat-
ing slope stability, an incorrect estimation would lead to
slope instability at the initial stage when the poles are too
young to provide any transpiration effects. It is important,
therefore, to understand the hydrology and the stability of
slopes with poles not only at the initial stage, but also after
root establishment at later stages.
The objective of this study was to examine the effective-
ness of using live poles for slope stabilisation. Different fac-
tors that could potentially affect the pole-induced changes
in slope hydrology and stability were considered, with the
aim of providing new insights into the applications of the
soil bioengineering technique. These factors include pole
geometry (i.e., length and spacing), pole mechanical rein-
forcement (structural pole versus fibrous roots due to dif-
ferent growth periods) and pole hydrological
reinforcement (transpiration-induced suction prior to
and/or during a rainfall). A numerical modelling method
was chosen for the investigation because it can flexibly cou-
ple or decouple each individual factor, and hence, enable
the study of their relative and combined contributions to
slope stability. The capability of the numerical model was
examined and verified by comparing the prediction results
with a comprehensive set of centrifuge model test data.
2. Overview of centrifuge model tests
2.1. Test setup and preparation
Two centrifuge tests were conducted to validate the
numerical model used in this study. They were performed
at 15g (where g is the Earth’s gravity) using the geotechni-
cal beam centrifuge (4.2 m in radius and 400 g-ton in
capacity) at the Hong Kong University of Science and
Technology. The first test (Ng et al. 2016a), denoted as
CT, was performed to study rainfall-induced slope stability
when both mechanical pole reinforcement and transpira-
tion were considered. The second test, a new test, denoted
as CN, was performed under test conditions identical to
those of CT, but considered only mechanical pole rein-
forcement. The detailed test programme was reported by
Ng et al. (2016a). Only the key test conditions relevant to
the numerical modelling are given below.
Identical slope geometry (Fig. 1) was adopted for both
tests. Each slope had a height (H) of 6.4 m (prototype
scale) and a gradient of 45°. Unless otherwise stated, the
dimensions shown in each figure and the corresponding
discussion are expressed in prototype scale. Completely
decomposed granite (CDG), categorised as clayey sand
(CL) according to ASTM (2011, D2487-11), was com-
pacted by moist tamping at a dry density of 1777 kg/m3
and a moisture content (by mass) of 15%. The effective
cohesion (c0 ) and critical-state friction angle (/0 ) of the
CDG were zero and 37.4°, respectively. The drying and
wetting soil water retention curves (SWRCs) of the CDG,
measured by a pressure-plate apparatus, are shown in
Fig. 2(a). Each SWRC was fitted by van Genuchten
(1980)’s equation and used to predict the soil hydraulic
conductivity function (SHCF) (Fig. 2(b)). Table 1 sum-
marises the relevant soil properties.
The bottom and side boundaries of each model slope
were impermeable. The water table was not controlled in
either test. The crest and the slope surface were exposed
for evaporation and rainfall infiltration. Before testing,
the average relative humidity recorded at various locations
of each slope was 75%. To minimise any suction induced by
evaporation during centrifuge spinning, a wind cover was
placed over the model box. According to Penman’s equa-
tion (Penman 1948), the potential evaporation in the model
box was 0.31 mm/day (or 0.013 mm/h).
To simultaneously model pole transpiration and rein-
forcement in the centrifuge, the artificial pole developed
Rainfall intensity = 70mm/hr 15-g
Artificial pole
Aluminum
Nozzle
cap
H1 Vacuum
CA
delivery panel
L = 0.75
ext=0.09
H = 6.4
P1H2 int=0.06
P2
P3 Runoff
collection frame
(Clayey sand,
Relative compaction = 95%)
450
1.50
2.70 P4 H3
6.39 P5 4.11
Pore pressure transducer (P) Humidity sensor (H)
Fig. 1. Elevation view of centrifuge model package and instrumentation.
Notes: all dimensions are in meters and in prototype scale; /ext and /int
are the external and internal diameters of each artificial root, respectively.
 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434 1425

50 by Ng et al. (2014) and Kamchoom et al. (2015) was

(a) Drying
45 Measured SWRC
(Ho, 2007)
installed (see the pole arrangement in Fig. 1). The pole
Wetting
40 Drying Fitted SWRC (Van
was made of a porous material, cellulose acetate (CA) that
Volumetric water content (%)

35
Wetting Genuchten, 1980)
has a high air-entry value (AEV) of about 100 kPa. The CA
30
was connected to a vacuum system to simulate the effects of
transpiration-induced suction in the centrifuge. The pole
25
length (L) was 0.75 m, which is within the typical range
20
found in the field, i.e., 0.5–2 m (Barker, 1999; Wu et al.,
15 2014). The CA has an elastic modulus (E) of 83 MPa and
10 ultimate tensile strength (rt) of 31 MPa, i.e., within 10–
5 40 MPa of the willow pole reported in the literature
0 (Nilaweera and Nutalaya, 1999; Gray and Barker, 2004).
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 These mechanical properties provide axial and flexural
rigidity, i.e., 2.9  102 kPa m2 and 2.2  101 kPa m4,
Matric suction (kPa)

1.E-06 respectively, similar to those of a willow pole with an E

ks = 1x107 m/s (falling head test)
Drying of about 100 MPa (Stokes and Mattheck, 1996) and a
Hydraulic conductivity (m/s)

1.E-08
(b) Wetting diameter of 0.07 m. The diameter considered here was
within the range of 0.04–0.1 m reported by Barker (1999).
1.E-10
The interface friction angle at the interface of the soil
1.E-12 and the artificial pole was 34°, which is close to the range
van
Genuchten's Drying Wetting of 35.7°–43.8° for a soil-pole interface (Bischetti et al.,
parameters
1.E-14 2010). Relevant scaling factors and the properties of the
artificial pole are summarised in Kamchoom et al. (2014)
1.E-16 kPa ]
n [-] and Ng et al. (2016a).
1.E-18
m [-] Each model slope was instrumented with five pore pres-
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 sure transducers (PPTs; Druck PDCR-81; denoted as P in
Matric suction (kPa)
Fig. 1) to monitor the responses of both positive and neg-
Fig. 2. (a) Soil water retention curves (SWRCs) and (b) predicted soil ative pore water pressure (PWP). Any changes in the PWP
hydraulic conductivity function (SHCF) of the CDG. ks is hydraulic profiles along the pole length were captured by P1, P2 and
conductivity at 0.01 kPa along drying path. P3 at the middle of each slope, while the other two, P4 and

Table 1
Summary of soil properties and input parameters for numerical modelling (after Ng et al. (2016a)).
Parameter Value Unit Reference
3
Index properties Bulk unit weight (ct) 20 kN/m Ho (2007)
Specific gravity (Gs) 2.59 –
Maximum dry density 1890 kg/m3 Standard Proctor compaction
Target dry density 1777 tests (BSI (1990) BS1377-2)
Optimum moisture content 15.1 %
Sand content (4.760 mm) 56.8 Sieve analysis (ASTM (2009) D6913-04(2009)e1)
Fines content (0.074 mm) 43.2
Mechanical properties Effective cohesion (c0 ) 0 kPa Hossain and Yin (2010)
Critical-state friction angle (/0cr ) 37.4 degree
Dilation angle (w) 5 degree
Young’s modulus (E) 35 MPa Zhou (2008)
Poisson’s ratio (m) 0.26 –
Hydraulic properties Saturated hydraulic conductivity (ks) 1  107 m/s Falling-head test (ASTM (2010) D5084-10)
along drying path
ks along wetting path 1  1010 m/s Estimated via non-hysteretic hydraulic
conductivity-volumetric water content
relationship
Air-entry value (AEV) 1 kPa Ho (2007)
Saturated water content (hs) See Fig. 2 % SWRC measured by Ho (2007) and
Residual water content (hr) then fitted by van Genuchten (1980)
Fitting parameters for van Genuchten (1980) a kPa1
n –
m
1426 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434

P5, were installed near the base of each slope to monitor
any changes in the groundwater level. Humidity sensors
(Honeywell, HIH-4000) were placed near the crest, middle
and toe of each model slope to measure the relative humid-
ity of the air. In addition, radiant energy released from
light-emitting diode (LED) lamps, mounted inside the
model box, was measured by quantum sensors (LI-COR
Radiation Measurement Instruments, Lincoln, Nebr.) at
the slope surface. Hence, the potential evaporation during
each test could be quantified.
2.2. Test procedures
Each centrifuge test consisted of five stages. The first
stage (Stage A) was to spin the model until the centrifugal
acceleration reached 15g (Stage B). In the second stage, the
acceleration of 15g was maintained until any change in
PWP was less than 1 kPa, i.e., the accuracy of each PPT
(Stage C). This allowed the soil mass to consolidate and
dissipate any excess PWP that was generated during the
stage with the rising g level. Hence, any changes in the
PWP in subsequent stages were due to the effects of the
transpiration and rainfall. The third stage was to simulate
the effects of transpiration by applying a vacuum pressure
of 95 kPa to all the artificial poles in Test CT. In contrast,
no vacuum was applied to any of the poles in Test CN.
This stage was stopped when all the PPTs showed changes
in PWP of less than 1 kPa (Stage D). Subsequently, rainfall
with a constant intensity of 70 mm/h was applied for 8 h
(prototype). Surface runoff was measured by a collection
frame located near the slope toe (Fig. 1). After testing, each
model slope was spun down to 1 g (Stage E). To identify
the slope deformation mechanism, the slope displacement
field was captured using high-speed, high-resolution cam-
eras. The displacement field was interpreted by the particle
image velocimetry (PIV) technique coupled with a close-
range photogrammetry correction (White et al., 2003).
3. Numerical modelling
3.1. Analysis plan
In total, 39 numerical analyses were carried out. The
analysis plan and details of each run are summarised in
Table 2. Two analyses, denoted as N and T (see the mean-
ing of ID in Table 2), were conducted to validate the
numerical models by back-analysing the observed slope
hydrology and stability from Tests CN and CT, respec-
tively. The validated models were then used for subsequent
parametric studies. A series of analyses (NM, TM, NL and
TL) that considered poles of moderate and long lengths,
i.e., 1.4 and 2 m, was carried out. The corresponding pole
spacing/pole length ratios were 1.2 and 0.8. These analyses
were done to investigate whether longer poles would yield
any different relative contribution of the mechanical and
hydrological reinforcements, as compared to shorter poles,
i.e., 0.75 m considered in the two centrifuge tests.
Another series of analyses (TN and R) was carried out
to explore whether pole transpiration before or during
rainfall is more important to the amount of suction
retained after rainfall. Analysis TN is a repetition of T,
but no transpiration was simulated during the rainfall. This
represents a worse-case scenario when pole transpiration is
suppressed by a high level of relative air humidity during
rainfall or due to leaf shading for deciduous species. Anal-
ysis R is also a repetition of T, but in this case the rainfall
intensity and duration were much smaller (20 mm/h) and
longer (28 h), respectively. The purpose here was to study
to what extent the pole transpiration could contribute to
the suction retained under a much less intense rainfall

Table 2
Summary of centrifuge tests and numerical analyses (all dimensions are in prototype scale).
ID Pole properties
Pole length (L; m) Soil-fibrous root composite Pole pressure (kPa)
Thickness (T; m) Cohesion (Cr; kPa)
Centrifuge
CN 0.75 N/A N/A N/A
CT 95
Numerical back analysis
N 0.75 0, 0.87 or 1.73 0, 2 or 20 N/A
T 95
Parametric study
NM 1.4 0, 0.87 or 1.73 0, 2 or 20 N/A
TM 95
NL 2 N/A
TL 95
TN 0.75 N/A N/A 95
R 95
E N/A
Acronyms:
C: centrifuge; T: transpiration; N: no transpiration; TN: no transpiration during rainfall; M: medium pole; L: long pole;
R: rainfall; E: evaporation.
 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434 1427

(a more favourable condition for highlighting any effects of (Geo-Slope Int., 2009a). The governing equation adopted
pole transpiration). For fair comparison, the total rainfall in the package is Richard’s equation, which satisfies mass
volume is identical in all four analyses, namely, T, N, TN conservation and Darcy’s law:
and R. If pole transpiration before a rainfall is indeed more    
@ @h @ @h @uw
significant than that during a rainfall, it might be argued k ðhÞ þ k ð hÞ ¼ mv ð1Þ
that a bare slope subjected to a prolonged dry condition @x @x @y @y @t
would have an equivalent hydrological behaviour to a where h is the total head [m], k(h) is SHCF, mv is the slope of
pole-supported slope when subjected to an identical rainfall an SWRC [m2s/kg] and uw is PWP [kPa]. It should be noted
event. To highlight the importance of the poles, one more that Eq. (1) assumes that the soil is rigid, meaning that
analysis, E, was conducted by considering a bare slope that changes in the PWP would not induce any changes in the
is subjected to evaporation of 5 mm/day (0.2 mm/h), i.e., a soil volume. For suction less than 40 kPa, i.e., the maximum
high range of PE observed in Hong Kong (Leung and Ng, value found in the two centrifuge tests, the densely com-
2013), before a rainfall. pacted CDG tested in this study has been identified as
Following the seepage analysis, stability analyses were exhibiting negligible volume changes (Chiu and Ng, 2012).
performed for N, T, NM, TM, NL and TL. These stability Fig. 3(a) shows the finite element mesh used in all the seep-
analyses were conducted to study how the growth of age analyses. For the purpose of back-analyses, the slope
fibrous roots from each pole would affect slope stability, geometry, pole arrangement and boundary conditions in
in addition to the structural pole reinforcement and pole all the numerical models were identical to the prototype
water uptake. The root growth was parametrised by two scale of the centrifuge tests. In order to solve Eq. (1), the
idealised variables, namely, root zone extension (T) and SWRC and SHCF shown in Fig. 2 were needed. In an
root cohesion (Cr). Root zone extension is defined as the attempt to consider the effects of hydraulic hysteresis, the
region extending from the centre of each pole, where drying SWRC and SHCF were used for all simulations of
fibrous roots form a composite with the surrounding soil. pole transpiration before the rainfall (Stages C to D), while
This parameter is normalised by pole spacing (i.e., T/S). the wetting SWRC and SHCF were used for the simulation
Three growth stages were considered, with T/S being equal of the rainfall event (Stages D to E). It should be noted that
to 0 right after installation, 0.5 at the intermediate stage the hydraulic conductivity (k) along the drying path, at a
and 1 when the roots were fully developed and covered suction value of 0.01 kPa, was obtained from the laboratory
the entire pole zone. The other parameter, root cohesion, measurements of falling-head tests on fully saturated soil
was employed to quantify the mechanical interaction samples. On the other hand, k along the wetting path, at
between the soil and the fibrous roots. At each T/S, three a suction value of 0.01 kPa, was estimated via the relation-
values for Cr were considered, ranging from 2 to 20 kPa ship of k and the volumetric water content (VWC). It has
and based on some direct shear test results obtained from been widely accepted that the k–VWC relationship of a soil
the field and the laboratory (Waldron, 1977; Operstein is generally non-hysteretic (Fredlund & Rahardjo, 1993; Ng
and Frydman, 2000). and Leung, 2012). Hence, at the VWC of 30%, which is the
value at 0.01 kPa along the wetting path (see Fig. 2(a)), k
3.2. Transient seepage analysis can be estimated at 1  1010 m/s.
Each artificial pole (see inset in Fig. 3(a)) was modelled
Two-dimensional (2-D) transient seepage analyses were by creating a material that had an AEV of 100 kPa and
carried out using a finite element package, SEEP/W saturated hydraulic conductivity of 2  106 m/s. In order

2D pole Beam element

T T
2.70 2.70
pressure head
CA Constant

(a) (b)
L

L
H = 5.26

S = 1.73 S = 1.73
H = 5.26

ext=31.6 x 10-3 EA=2.9 x102 kPa*m2

x 10-3 EI=2.2x10-1 kPa*m4
Initial water table int=1.6

(waypoint C)
45o 45o
No flow

4.11 4.11
3.05

No flow

1.50
1.50

0.88

P4 No flow P5

13.2 13.2

Fig. 3. Finite element meshes of pole-supported slope for (a) seepage and (b) stability analyses (all dimensions are in meters and in prototype scale).
1428 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434
to model the three-dimensional (3D) water uptake process
by each artificial pole in a two-dimensional (2D) model, a
similar approach to that proposed by Indraratna and
Redana (2000) was adopted. The internal diameter of CA
was adjusted so that the total water volume flow in this
2D model would be equal to that in the 3D circular struc-
ture. A constant pressure head was applied along the inter-
nal boundary of each artificial pole when simulating any
effects of transpiration. Although a constant vacuum pres-
sure of 95 kPa (9.5 m pressure head) was applied in all the
centrifuge tests, the pressure head applied in each pole in
the numerical model was corrected by the difference in ele-
vation head between each pole and the water level main-
tained in the suction-controlled system, i.e., at the
elevation of the slope crest.
3.3. Slope stability analysis
The factor of safety (FOS) of each model slope was cal-
culated by the strength reduction method (SRM) (Dawson
et al., 1999; Griffiths and Lane, 1999) using another finite
element package, SIGMA/W (Geo-Slope Int., 2009b).
The principle of the SRM is to apply a factor that would
continuously reduce the soil shear strength parameters
until the slope could not maintain its equilibrium. That fac-
tor is equal to the FOS.
Identical slope geometry to SEEP/W was adopted for
the stability calculation using SIGMA/W (Fig. 3(b)). The
CDG was modelled as a perfectly plastic material that
obeys the modified extended Mohr-Coulomb failure crite-
rion (Vanapalli et al., 1996):
ss ¼ c0 þ ðrn  ua Þtan/cr 0
  
hw  hr 0
þ ð ua  uw Þ tan/cr ð2Þ
hs  hr
where ss is the shear strength of the soil [kPa], c0 is the effec-
tive cohesion [kPa], which is equal to zero for the tested
CDG, rn is the normal stress on a slip surface [kPa], ua is
the pore air pressure (considered to be atmospheric, i.e.,
zero) [kPa], /cr 0 is the critical-state friction angle [degree],
which is equal to 37.4°, uw is the PWP [kPa], hw is the vol-
umetric water content (VWC) [m3 m3], hs is the VWC at
saturation [m3 m3] and hr is the VWC at the residual state
[m3 m3]. All input parameters are summarised in Table 1.
Each artificial pole was modelled as a beam element to
capture both the elastic axial and bending responses. The
interface element surrounding each pole was modelled by
a perfectly plastic model, following the Coulomb’s friction
law. To consider the effects of fibrous roots on slope stabil-
ity, an area of soil-root composite was created around the
pole according to the T/L considered. This extended zone
has similar mechanical properties to those of the CDG,
except that c0 was replaced by Cr for the range of 2–
20 kPa. This is a common modelling approach for fibrous
root reinforcement (Jotisankasa and Taworn, 2016; Liang
and Knappett, 2017). In each stability analysis, the PWP
field computed at Stages C, D and E from SEEP/W were
inputted into SIGMA/W for determining the minimum
factor of safety (FOSmin). A reduction factor was applied
to the shear strength parameters (Cr and /cr 0 ) such that
each pole and its fibrous roots would interact with the sur-
rounding soil and mobilise their strength to balance the
loss of slope stability. The plastic strain accumulation in
each slope would eventually lead to slope instability. The
FOSmin is referred to as the strength reduction factor that
arrives at the non-equilibrium condition of the slope.
3.4. Analysis procedures
Each seepage analysis consisted of three stages. The first
stage was a steady-state analysis, where a ground water
table was specified based on the data from P4 and P5 so
that the initial PWP distribution (Stage C) would be close
to the measurements made by P1, P2 and P3. The second
stage (Stages C to D) was to simulate the pole transpiration
before the rainfall; thus, this stage applies to analyses T,
TM, TL, TN and R only. In all these cases, the corrected
pressure head was applied in each pole. In this stage, sur-
face evaporation was modelled simultaneously by applying
a constant negative flux of 0.31 mm/day (as observed in the
centrifuge) on the bare region of the slope crest and the
slope face. On the contrary, for analysis E, where the pole
transpiration was not simulated, the entire bare surface was
specified with a constant negative flux of 5 mm/day. The
last stage of the analysis (Stages D to E) was to simulate
the rainfall event by imposing the infiltration rate and
duration (given later) at both the slope crest and the slope
face. For analyses T, TM, TL and R, the pole transpiration
was still simulated during the rainfall, whereas for TN, it
was not. After performing each transient seepage analysis,
the computed PWP responses (i.e., from N, T, NM, TM,
NL and TL) were then subsequently inputted to SIGMA/
W for the slope stability calculation.
4. Observed slope hydrology under effects of pole
transpiration
4.1. Before rainfall
Comparisons of the measured distributions of PWP
along depth before (Stage B) and after (Stage C) transpira-
tion for both tests are given in Fig. 4. Before transpiration,
the PWP profiles between the two tests were similar, both
being distributed hydrostatically. When transpiration was
ignored (Fig. 4(a)), there was a slight reduction in the
PWP at 0.3 m due to surface evaporation. On the contrary,
when transpiration was considered (Fig. 4(b)), the PWP at
depths of 0.3 and 0.6 m decreased substantially, by almost
10 kPa, whereas the PWP at a deeper depth, of 1.2 m,
showed much less of a reduction. This is because the artifi-
cial pole induced the same amount of vacuum along the
pole length of 0.75 m, so the PWP at depths of both 0.3
and 0.6 m were the most affected. In general, reasonably
 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434 1429

Pore water pressure (kPa) Pore water pressure (kPa)

-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 200
0.0 0.0
Root
Pole
Pole Root
Pole
Pole
0.5 depth
length 0.5 depth
length

1.0 1.0

1.5 1.5

Depth (m)
Depth (m)

Computed Measured
Before tran
2.0 2.0 After tran

2.5 2.5 Before tran

(a) CN / N (b) CT / T After tran
3.0 3.0

Fig. 4. Effects of poles on measured and computed PWP profiles before rainfall for slopes (a) without considering transpiration (Test CN and Analysis N)
and (b) considering transpiration (Test CT and Analysis T). Note: tran in the legend denotes transpiration.

good agreements in the PWP profiles were found between on the slope face boundary in SEEP/W for simulating the
the measurements and the simulations. This suggests that rainfall event. For the analyses without considering pole
the numerical model and the modelling methods were able transpiration before the rainfall (N, NM and NL), the infil-
to capture the physical modelling of the effects of pole tran- tration curve followed that measured by Test CN where
spiration well. transpiration was absent. On the contrary, for the analyses
that modelled the pole transpiration and soil evaporation
before the rainfall (T, TM, TL, TN, R and E), the infiltra-
4.2. Infiltration rate during rainfall
tion curve followed that measured by Test CT. In analysis
R, the rainfall intensity in this particular case was smaller
Fig. 5 shows the variations in the water infiltration rate
(20 mm/h) than in the other cases (70 mm/h). Therefore,
during the rainfall (Stages C to D). The measured infiltra-
the infiltration curve obtained from Test CT was also used,
tion rates decreased exponentially for the cases without
but it was capped at the maximum infiltration rate of
(Test CN) and with (Test CT) transpiration, gradually
20 mm/h because the applied rainfall intensity was within
approaching the ks of the CDG (i.e., 1  107 m/s). How-
the infiltration capacity of the soil. As a result, a constant
ever, the former had substantially higher infiltration rates
infiltration rate of 20 mm/h was maintained during the first
than the latter, despite the same slope geometry and rainfall
1.5 h of rainfall, beyond which the infiltration curve hit and
conditions. The difference was the largest (almost 50%) at
followed the measured curve and continued for 28 h.
the beginning of the rainfall event, and it decreased as the
rainfall continued. This is likely to have been caused by
the significant reduction in the PWP due to the transpiration 4.3. Pore-water pressure during rainfall
before the rainfall (Fig. 4(b)), hence causing the substantial
reduction in both the soil hydraulic conductivity (Fig. 2(b)) Fig. 6 shows the PWP profiles during the rainfall for the
and the infiltration rate during the subsequent rainfall. two cases. There was an almost uniform increase in the
To facilitate the numerical seepage back-analysis (N and PWP in the top 1.5 m of depth after 2 h of rainfall for
T), each infiltration curve was best-fitted and then imposed the case without considering transpiration (Fig. 6(a)). This
80
is in contrast to the PWP responses observed in the case
Rainfall intensity =70 mm/h with transpiration (Fig. 6(b)), where only the PWP at the
Measured

70 CN shallowest depth of 0.3 m showed the most significant

CT increase. Increases in PWP were found at deeper depths,
60
Infiltration rate (mm/h)

N, NM, NL but the amount of increase was less significant. At the

Imposed

50 T, TN, TM, TL, E end of the rainfall, no suction was retained in the case with-
40 R out transpiration (Fig. 6(a)). Instead, a significant built up
30 of positive PWP (up to 10 kPa at depths of 1–1.5 m)
Rainfall intensity =20 mm/h resulted, leading to an almost hydrostatic PWP distribu-
20
tion. When the effects of transpiration were considered
10 (Fig. 6(b)), the increase in PWP was much less than that
ks CDG
0 in the case without transpiration. Some suction (up to
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 kPa) was retained within the pole length, while only a
Elapsed time (h)
slight positive PWP of about 1 kPa was built up at a depth
Fig. 5. Measured variations in infiltration rate with time and fitted lines of 1.2 m. The numerical simulations show consistent results
used for seepage analyses. with the centrifuge measurements. The comparison made
1430 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434

Pore water pressure (kPa) Pore water pressure (kPa)

-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
0.0 0.0
Root
Pole
Pole Root
Pole
Pole
0.5 depth
length 0.5 depth
length

1.0 1.0
Before rainfall

Measured
1.5 1.5 After 2 hr
After 8 hr
2.0 2.0

Depth (m)

Depth (m)
Before rainfall

Computed
2.5 2.5 After 2 hr

(a) CN / N (b) CT / T After 8 hr

3.0 3.0

Fig. 6. Measured and computed PWP profiles during rainfall for slopes supported by poles (a) without considering transpiration (Test CN and Analysis
N) and (b) considering transpiration (Test CT and Analysis T).

between the two centrifuge tests, as validated by the numer-
ical simulation, highlights the important role of pole tran-
spiration in slope hydrology.
4.4. Relationship between PWP and slope stabilisation
Fig. 7 shows the computed PWP, mobilised shear strain
contour and observed slope displacement after 8 h of rain-
fall for slopes with and without considering transpiration.
As shown in Fig. 7(a), no suction was retained around
the poles when transpiration was ignored. There was a
building up of positive PWP of up to 10 kPa near the slope
toe. The corresponding shear strain contour (Fig. 7(b))
shows that there was substantial mobilisation of plastic
shear strain of up to 200% which localised near the slope
toe. This indicates the potential formation of a slip plane
in that region and is consistent with the PIV results
(Fig. 7(c)) obtained after 8 h of rainfall in the centrifuge.
There were some rotations of the displacement vectors,
suggesting that slope failure had taken place after the rain-
fall. The strain accumulation thus led to a significant drop
in the FOSmin to less than 1.0. The measurements and sim-
ulations suggest that if the CDG slope were to be upgraded
by live poles, the initial stage of pole installation would rep-
resent a critical moment, if such an intense rainfall took
place, because the mechanical structural pole reinforce-
ment alone was not sufficient to provide stabilisation.
When pole transpiration was considered (Fig. 7(d)),
there was a zone of suction retained around each pole,
especially for those near the upper part of the slope. Due
to the retained suction, less mobilisation of shear strain
(less than 35%) resulted near the slope toe (Fig. 7(e)). An
interesting observation is that when pole transpiration
was considered, the slip plane (where shear strain was
mobilised mostly) largely cut below the pole zone, whereas
the slip plane for the case without transpiration cut
through the two bottom poles (comparison shown in
Fig. 7(b) and (e)). The image taken from centrifuge Test

Pore-water pressure Factor of safety (FOS) Displacement field

200
0

0.1 m
Shear strain (%)
Mech only
(CN, N)

10
0 FOS = 0.54
10
20
(a)
(b) (c)
30
Mech + Hydro

10
FOS = 1.17
(CT, T)

0
7.89

10 (d)
20
30 (e) (f)
13.2
Fig. 7. (a, d) Computed PWP, (b, e) mobilised shear strain contours and (c, f) observed displacement field after 8 h of rainfall of slopes supported by short
poles with and without considering pole transpiration. All dimensions are in meters and in prototype scale.
 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434
CT (Fig. 7(f)) also shows that the displacement vectors
within the pole zone were predominantly parallel to the
slope and that no large displacement was identified near
the slope toe. The FOSmin in this case was higher than
1.0, meaning that the slope did not fail after the rainfall like
the one which was consistently found in the centrifuge
(Fig. 7(f)). The measured and simulated results show that
the presence of even a small amount of suction, retained
due to transpiration, could increase the slope stability sig-
nificantly, i.e., from unsafe to safe, and that the FOSmin
would be almost doubled.
5. Discussion
5.1. Importance of pole transpiration during rainfall
The two centrifuge tests have shown that the amount of
retained suction has an important implication to slope
hydrology and stability. Although it is known that retained
suction is attributable to pole transpiration that took place
before and during a rainfall, it is not certain at which
moment the transpiration effects on suction are more
prominent. Fig. 8 compares the PWP responses simulated
by analysis T (transpiration took place both before and
during the rainfall) and analysis TN (transpiration took
place only before the rainfall). The initial suction profiles
before the rainfall were identical, as expected, because the
same transpiration condition was applied. After 8 h of
rainfall, the PWP profiles between the two cases were sim-
ilar, although the profile for analysis T showed slightly
higher suction of about 2 kPa. This implies that for the
given soil condition and the rainfall pattern considered
here, pole transpiration during the rainfall may be ignored.
Of course, the significance of pole transpiration during a
rainfall also primarily depends on the intensity and the
duration of the rainfall event. The lower the intensity and
the longer the duration, the more significance and the more
favourable the pole transpiration may be. Analysis R, also
depicted in Fig. 8, considers a case where pole transpiration
took place both before and during a rainfall event, but with
Pore water pressure (kPa)
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
Pole length
0.0
Depth
(m)
0.5
1.0
1.5
rainfall
T, TN, R
Before
E
2.0 T case (N), because in both analyses, no pole transpiration
After
8 hr
TN
2.5 E corresponding to analysis NL are shown in Fig. 10(a)
R (after 28 h)
3.0
Fig. 8. Effects of different antecedent drying conditions on computed
PWP profiles before and after rainfall.
1431
much less intensity (20 mm/h) and a longer duration (28 h),
compared to the rainfall pattern considered in the cen-
trifuge tests. It can be seen that after 28 h of rainfall, the
retained suction was still fairly similar to that in the previ-
ous analyses (T and TN), although the suction at shallow
depths was slightly higher by no more than 2 kPa. This fur-
ther suggests that it is mainly the pole transpiration before
a rainfall that affects the suction regime of the slope much
more prominently, and not very much during the rainfall
when transpiration can be practically ignored.
If the antecedent drying effects before a rainfall are more
important to the suction regime, it could be argued that a
similar antecedent condition might be achieved by subject-
ing a bare slope to a prolonged evaporation, without the
need for any poles. Analysis E, shown in Fig. 8, considers
this condition. As expected, before a rainfall, a large
amount of suction was induced by surface evaporation,
even more than that induced by pole transpiration. How-
ever, the region where the large amount of suction was
induced was localised at a shallow depth, i.e., not deeper
than 0.5 m, below which the PWP follows the initial hydro-
static condition. After the rainfall, no suction was retained
and some positive PWP was built up, approaching the
hydrostatic value. This highlights the importance of the role
of live poles in slope hydrology. The poles could induce a
much deeper influence zone of suction. Although the
amount of suction induced was not as high as that found
in the bare slope case, at very shallow depths where slope
stability is normally not of concern, it is mainly the distribu-
tion of suction that affects the hydrology, in addition to the
magnitude. The antecedent drying effects due to plant tran-
spiration on retained suction have been similarly observed
in real vegetated soils/slopes (Pollen-Bankhead et al.,
2010; Smethurst et al., 2015; Ng et al., 2016b; Ni et al.,
2016). All these field and laboratory studies found that
when higher suction is induced by plant transpiration
before a rainfall, higher suction is retained after the rainfall.
5.2. Relative contribution of mechanical and hydrological
effects on slope stability
A practical engineering concern for the application of
the bioengineering technique may be to determine any
optimal/cost-effective pole length for slope stabilisation,
especially when coupled hydro-mechanical reinforcement
and the growth of fibrous roots were taken into account.
Simulation results from analysis NL, that considered
longer poles of 2 m (i.e., L/H = 0.31), are shown in
Fig. 9. Not surprisingly, the PWP responses before and
after the rainfall were identical to those of the short-pole
was simulated. The PWP contour and strain mobilisation
and (b), respectively. Although the poles were longer in
NL, the distribution of the shear strain mobilisation
contour was comparable to that of the short-pole case
(see Fig. 7(b)). As expected, longer poles, or higher L/H,
1432 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434

Pore water pressure (kPa) 3.5

-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 Mech only (T/S = 0, Cr = 0 kPa)
Mech only (T/S = 0.5, Cr = 2 kPa)
0.0 3.0

Short pole

Long pole
Mech only (T/S = 1, Cr = 2 kPa)

Depth
Mech only (T/S = 0.5, Cr = 20 kPa)

(m)
0.5 2.5 Mech only (T/S = 1, Cr = 20 kPa)

Factor of safety
1.0 2.0

rainfall
Before
1.5 N, NL
1.5
T
2.0 TL Safety margin
N, NL 1.0

After
8 hr
2.5 T
TL 0.5
3.0
0.0
Fig. 9. Coupled effects of pole length and transpiration on computed 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
PWP profiles before and after rainfall. Pole length / Slope height (L/H)
provided more reinforcement, and hence, an increase in (a)
slope stability in terms of the FOSmin up to 60% (Fig. 11
3.5
(a)). However, the slope reinforced by the longer poles
was still deemed unsafe (i.e., FOS < 1.0). When the 3.0
mechanical reinforcement provided by fibrous roots grown
from each pole was considered, as long as the Cr was low, 2.5
the FOSmin increased only marginally, regardless of the
Factor of safety

width of the root extension (in terms of T/S) considered, 2.0

and the slopes were all unsafe. As can be seen in Fig. 11
1.5 Safety
(a), the effects of fibrous roots became more prominent
when higher Cr was considered. For a given L/H, the margin
1.0 Mech+Hydro (T/S = 0, Cr = 0 kPa)
FOSmin increased by up to 140% when the fibrous roots Mech+Hydro (T/S = 0.5, Cr = 2 kPa)
were widely distributed (i.e., T/S = 1) and strong (i.e., 0.5 Mech+Hydro (T/S = 1, Cr = 2 kPa)
Mech+Hydro (T/S = 0.5, Cr = 20 kPa)
Cr = 20), bringing the slopes to above the safety level. Mech+Hydro (T/S = 1, Cr = 20 kPa)
When considering transpiration in the long-pole case 0.0
(TL), the antecedent drying effects by pole transpiration 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
were much more prominent (Fig. 9), as compared to the Pole length / Slope height (L/H)
short-pole case (T). The amount of suction induced in the (b)
long-pole case was much higher, by up to 20 kPa, while Fig. 11. Computed FOS of pole-supported slopes considering (a)
the depth of the influence zone was much deeper, namely, mechanical-only reinforcement and (b) coupled hydro-mechanical
down to a depth of approximately 2.5 m. As a result, reinforcement.
higher suction was retained (by up to 8 kPa) after being
subjected to the identical intense rainfall of 8 h. It is clear
from the corresponding PWP contour, shown in Fig. 10
Pore-water pressure Factor of safety (FOS) (c), that the suction zone around the poles was much larger,
meaning that greater soil volume was affected by the pole
200
0

Shear strain (%)

transpiration. This ‘‘pushed” the region of shear strain
Mech only

10
FOS = 0.88
localisation and mobilisation to deeper depths compared
(NL)

0
10
to the short-pole case (Figs. 7(e) and 10(d)). Hence, the
20
(a) increase in the FOSmin, due to the hydro-mechanical rein-
30
(b) forcement by the longer pole (150%), was greater (120%)
than that by the shorter pole (Fig. 11(b)). When pole tran-
spiration was considered, the slopes were able to maintain
Mech + Hydro

10
0 FOS = 2.23 their stability even without the need to mobilise any
(TL)
7.89

mechanical strength through fibrous roots.

10 (c)
20
One major engineering implication of the simulation
(d)
30 results is that if a 45-degree CDG slope were to be upgraded
13.2 by the bioengineering technique, the pole length might not
be the most important parameter of which to be concerned.
Fig. 10. (a, c) Computed PWP and (b, d) mobilized shear strain contours
after 8 h of rainfall of slopes supported by long poles with mechanical- Regardless of the length of the poles considered, the support
only reinforcement (NL) and coupled hydro-mechanical reinforcement provided by the poles at the initial stage of pole installation
(TL). All dimensions are in meters and in prototype scale. (i.e., through pole reinforcement alone) is insufficient for
 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434
maintaining slope stability. However, when fibrous roots
developed, even slopes reinforced by short poles were able
to make the slope stable. It is important, therefore, to cou-
ple the technique with other mitigation measures (such as
slope cover) for temporary slope stabilisation, rather than
fully relying on the poles until their fibrous roots are suffi-
ciently developed to provide further mechanical strength
through Cr. It is also revealed that the additional contribu-
tion of transpiration-induced suction to slope stability by
the short and long poles results in a rather similar increase
in the FOSmin, i.e., by 120% and 150%, respectively. In other
words, although increasing the pole length has a prominent
effect on slope hydrology (Fig. 10), it does not bring about a
very significant improvement in slope stability, given the
rather intense rainfall event under consideration here. The
amount of suction retained by the short poles is already
high enough to maintain the slope stability, i.e.,
FOSmin > 1.0 (see Fig. 7(e)).
6. Conclusions
A numerical model was developed in this study that can
be used to determine the hydro-mechanical reinforcement
effects of live poles and to evaluate the effectiveness of this
bioengineering technique to shallow slope stabilisation.
The model was able to capture the mechanical reinforce-
ment of structural poles and fibrous roots as well as the
hydrological reinforcement provided by pole
transpiration-induced suction. Changes in slope hydrology
and stability, due to the pole hydro-mechanical reinforce-
ment, were verified by centrifuge model tests that were con-
cerned with the behaviour of a clayey sand slope subjected
to intense rainfall. Both measurements and simulations
consistently highlighted that pole transpiration-induced
matric suction and its effects on slope stability were not
negligible. The suction retained in the pole zone con-
tributed to an increase in slope stability.
For a 45-degree clayey sand slope, subjected to an
intense rainfall event, short-term stability was shown to
be critical only when structural poles, even as long as
2 m, were present for mechanical reinforcement (when
fibrous roots had yet to develop to provide strength). Since
pole transpiration was absent at this stage, positive pore
water pressure of up to 10 kPa built up near the slope
toe, where significant mobilisation of shear strain was loca-
lised, causing slope failure during the rainfall. For a longer
term, when fibrous roots formed a composite with the
surrounding soil and the composite provided effective
mechanical reinforcement through root cohesion, the slope
stability could be maintained even for poles as short as
0.75 m. Thus, it is crucial not to solely rely on structural
poles for short-term slope stabilisation. It may be desirable
to couple this bioengineering technique with other mitiga-
tion measures for temporary stabilisation.
When pole transpiration was present, no slope failure
occurred. Due to the considerable suction retained within
the pole zone, the shear strain mobilised was relatively
1433
small and localised mainly below the pole zone. The
FOSmin due to pole transpiration was increased by 120%.
Using longer poles to induce higher transpiration-induced
suction did not provide any significant benefit to the
increase in the FOSmin (i.e., by 150%, as compared to
120% for the short poles). Therefore, it is not the pole
length, but the pole transpiration that controls the slope
stabilisation effect of this bioengineering technique.
It is important to reveal that the pole transpiration
before the rainfall, i.e., antecedent drying, was more impor-
tant than that which took place during the rainfall. There
was no significant difference in the amount of suction
retained for the cases with and without considering transpi-
ration during the rainfall. Even under a small-intensity-
long-duration rainfall event, which is a favourable condi-
tion for transpiration to take place, the transpiration-
induced suction during the rainfall was practically negligi-
ble. The antecedent drying effects introduced by pole tran-
spiration, on the contrary, were seen to play a much more
important role in slope hydrology. A suction retained up to
3 kPa only could lower the hydraulic conductivity of clayey
sand by more than 50% during the rainfall. Hence, the
effectiveness of using live poles, either long or short, as a
slope stabilisation technique would be overlooked signifi-
cantly if only the mechanical effects of the poles and the
fibrous root reinforcement were taken into account in a sta-
bility calculation. Of course, caution needs to be taken seri-
ously when attempting to include the beneficial effects of
plant transpiration on slope stability, especially when the
poles are too young to transpire sufficient soil moisture
for inducing an appreciable amount of suction.
Acknowledgements
The first author (VK) acknowledges the Hong Kong -
Scotland Partners of Post-Doctoral Research grant
(S-HKUST601/15) provided by the Research Grants
Council of Hong Kong SAR and the Scottish Government.
The research funding provided by Centre for research
development, testing and technology transfer of Thailand
high-speed train (CRT01/2561), King Mongkut’s Institute
of Technology Ladkrabang (KMITL) is also acknowl-
edged. The second author (AL) would like to acknowledge
the EU Marie Curie Fellowship provided under the Career
Integration Grant for the project ‘‘BioEPIC” and the
research funding provided by the Engineering and Physical
Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) (EP/N03287X/1).
References
ASTM, 2009. Standard test methods for particle-size distribution (grada-
tion) of soils using sieve analysis. ASTM standard D6913-04(2009)e1.
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pa. http://doi.org/10.
1520/D6913-04R09E01.
ASTM, 2010. Standard test methods for measurement of hydraulic
conductivity of saturated porous materials using a flexible wall
permeameter. ASTM standard D4318-10e1. ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, Pa. http://doi.org/10.1520/D5084-10.
1434 V. Kamchoom, A.K. Leung / Soils and Foundations 58 (2018) 1423–1434
ASTM. 2011. Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering
purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). ASTM standard D2487-
11. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pa. http://doi.org/10.
1520/D2487-11.
Barker, D.H., 1999. Live pole stabilisation in the tropics. In: Ground and
Water Bioengineering for Erosion Control and Slope Stabilisation, pp.
301–308.
Bischetti, G.B., Chiaradia, E.A., D’agostino, V., Simonato, T., 2010.
Quantifying the effect of brush layering on slope stability. Ecol. Eng.
36 (3), 258–264.
Boldrin, D., Leung, A.K., Bengough, A.G., 2017a. Root biomechanical
properties during establishment of woody perennials. Ecol. Eng.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2017.05.002.
Boldrin, D., Leung, A.K., Bengough, A.G., 2017b. Correlating hydrome-
chanical properties of vegetated soil with plant functional traits. Plant
Soil. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-017-3211-3.
Boldrin, D., Leung, A.K., Bengough, A.G., 2018. Hydrologic reinforce-
ment induced by contrasting woody species during summer and winter.
Plant Soil. 427 (1), 369–390.
BSI, 1990. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. General
requirements and sample preparation. British standard BS1377-2.
British Standards Institution.
Chiu, C.F., Ng, C.W.W., 2012. Coupled water retention and shrinkage
properties of a compacted silt under isotropic and deviatoric stress
paths. Can. Geotech. J. 49 (8), 928–938.
Dawson, E.M., Roth, W.H., Drescher, A., 1999. Slope stability analysis
by strength reduction. Geotechnique 49 (6), 835–840.
Fredlund, D.G., Rahardjo, H., 1993. Soil Mechanics for Unsaturated
Soils. John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Geo-Slope International Ltd., 2009a. Seepage modeling with SEEP/W
2007. In: An Engineering Methodology, fourth ed.
Geo-Slope International Ltd., 2009b. Stress-deformation modeling with
SIGMA/W 2007. In: An Engineering Methodology, fourth ed.
Gray, D.H., Barker, D., 2004. Root-soil mechanics and interactions. In:
Riparian Vegetation and Fluvial Geomorphology, pp. 113–123.
Griffiths, D.V., Lane, P.A., 1999. Slope stability analysis by finite
elements. Geotechnique 49 (3), 387–403.
Ho, M.Y., 2007. Governing parameters for stress-dependent soil-water
characteristics, conjunctive flow and slope stability. Ph.D. thesis, The
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.
Hossain, M.A., Yin, J.H., 2010. Shear strength and dilative characteristics
of an unsaturated compacted completely decomposed granite soil.
Can. Geotech. J. 47 (10), 1112–1126.
Indraratna, B., Redana, I.W., 2000. Numerical modeling of vertical drains
with smear and well resistance installed in soft clay. Can. Geotech. J.
37 (1), 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1139/t99-115.
Jotisankasa, A., Taworn, D., 2016. Direct shear testing of
clayey sand reinforced with live stake. Geotech. Test. J. 39 (4),
608–623.
Kamchoom, V., Leung, A.K., Ng, C.W.W., 2014. Effects of root geometry
and transpiration on pull-out resistance. Géotechnique Lett. 4 (4),
330–336. https://doi.org/10.1680/geolett.14.00086.
Kamchoom, V., Leung, A.K., Ng, C.W.W., 2015. A new artificial root
system to simulate the effects of transpiration-induced suction and root
reinforcement. In: 15th Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics
and Geotechnical Engineering, Kumamoto University, Fukuoka,
Japan, 9–13 November 2015, pp. 236–240.
Leung, A.K., Ng, C.W.W., 2013. Analysis of groundwater flow and plant
evapotranspiration in a vegetated soil slope. Can. Geotech. J. 50 (12),
1204–1218.
Leung, A.K., Garg, A., Ng, C.W.W., 2015. Effects of plant roots on soil-
water retention and induced suction in vegetated soil. Eng. Geol. 193
(1), 183–197.
Leung, A.K., Kamchoom, V., Ng, C.W.W., 2017. Influences of root–
induced soil suction and root geometry on slope stability: a centrifuge
study. Can. Geotech. J. 54 (3), 291–303. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-
2015-0263.
Leung, A.K., Boldrin, D., Liang, Z., Wu, Z.Y., Kamchoom, V.,
Bengough, A.G., 2018. Plant age effects on soil infiltration rate during
early plant establishment. Geotechnique 68 (7), 646–652.
Liang, T., Bengough, A.G., Knappett, J.A., Muir Wood, D., Loades, K.W.,
Hallett, P.D., Boldrin, D., Leung, A.K., Meijer, G.J., 2017. Scaling of
the reinforcement of soil slopes by living plants in a geotechnical
centrifuge. Ecol. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2017.06.067.
Liang, T., Knappett, J.A., 2017. Centrifuge modelling of the influence of
slope height on the seismic performance of rooted slopes. Géotech-
nique 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.16.P.072.
Ng, C.W.W., Kamchoom, V., Leung, A.K., 2016a. Centrifuge modelling
of the effects of root geometry on transpiration-induced suction and
stability of vegetated slopes. Landslides 13 (5), 1–14. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10346-015-0645-7.
Ng, C.W.W., Leung, A.K., 2012. Measurements of drying and wetting
permeability functions using a new stress-controllable soil column. J.
Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., ASCE 138 (1), 58–65.
Ng, C.W.W., Leung, A.K., Kamchoom, V., Garg, A., 2014. A novel root
system for simulating transpiration-induced soil suction in centrifuge.
Geotech. Test. J. 37 (5), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ20130116.
Ng, C.W.W., Leung, A.K., Woon, K.X., 2013. Effects of soil density on
grass-induced suction distributions in compacted soil subjected to
rainfall. Can. Geotech. J. 51 (3), 311–321.
Ng, C.W.W., Leung, A.K., Yu, R., Kamchoom, V., 2017. Hydrological
effects of live poles on transient seepage in an unsaturated soil slope:
centrifuge and numerical study. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 143 (3).
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001616.
Ng, C.W.W., Ni, J., Leung, A.K., Zhou, C., Wang, Z.J., 2016b. Effects of
planting density on tree growth and induced suction. Geotechnique 66
(9), 711–724.
Ni, J.J., Leung, A.K., Ng, C.W.W., 2016. Investigation of plant growth
and transpiration-induced suction under mixed grass-tree conditions.
Can. Geotech. J. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2016-0226.
Nilaweera, N.S., Nutalaya, P., 1999. Role of tree roots in slope
stabilisation. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 57 (4), 337–342.
Operstein, V., Frydman, S., 2000. The influence of vegetation on soil
strength. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng.-Ground Improvement 4 (2), 81–89.
Penman, H.L., 1948. Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and
grass. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 193 (1032), 120–145.
Pollen-Bankhead, N., Simon, A., 2010. Hydrologic and hydraulic effects
of riparian root networks on streambank stability: is mechanical root-
reinforcement the whole story? Geomorphology 116 (3), 353–362.
Simon, A., Collison, A., 2002. Quantifying the mechanical and hydrologic
effects of riparian vegetation on strembank stability. Earth Surf. Proc.
Land. 27 (5), 527–546.
Smethurst, J., Briggs, K., Powrie, W., Ridley, A., Butcher, D., 2015.
Mechanical and hydrological impacts of tree removal on a clay fill
railway embankment. Géotechnique 65 (11), 869–882.
Stokes, A., Mattheck, C., 1996. Variation of wood strength in tree roots. J.
Exp. Bot. 47 (5), 693–699.
van Genuchten, M.T., 1980. A closed-form equation for predicting the
hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44 (5),
892–898.
Vanapalli, S.K., Fredlund, D.G., Pufahl, D.E., Clifton, A.W., 1996.
Model for the prediction of shear strength with respect to soil suction.
Can. Geotech. J. 33 (3), 379–392.
Waldron, L.J., 1977. The shear resistance of root-permeated homogeneous
and stratified soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 41 (5), 843–849.
White, D.J., Take, W.A., Bolton, M.D., 2003. Soil deformation measure-
ment using particle image velocimetry (PIV) and photogrammetry.
Geotechnique 53 (7), 619–632.
Wu, T., Kokesh, C., Trenner, B., Fox, P., 2014. Use of live poles for
stabilization of a shallow slope failure. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.,
ASCE 140 (10), 05014001.
Zhou, Z.B., 2008. Centrifuge and three-dimensional numerical modelling
of steep CDG slopes reinforced with different sizes of nail heads. Ph.D.
thesis, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.