DISCUSSIONS

On the retrogression of landslides in sensitive muddy sediments:' Discussion

W. J. EDEN
Geotechrrical Section, Division of B~tilditzgResearch, Narional Research Co~rrzcilof Canrtda,
Otmwa, Onr., Canada K I A OR6
Received April 5, 1978
Accepted May 2, 1978

Can. Geotech. J., 15,451-453 (1978)

Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 01/04/15

The writer was surprised to find himself credited
with the "concept of retrogressive rotational slips"
and would like to disqualify himself from any sug-
gestion that he originated it. This 'concept' is based
on observations of the landsliding process and was
documented in 1846 by Collin (1956). In the
description of the Saint-Jean-Vianney landslide,
Tavenas et al. ( 1971 ) report on several eyewitness
accounts including that of a bus driver who escaped
For personal use only.
through the rear door of his bus. His description
of events clearly leaves the impression of sequential
slips. A similar impression was gained from eye-
witness reports of the Nicolet landslide in 1955
(Fig. 1 ). From a study of air photographs taken
before and after this landslide, Crawford and Eden
(1963) were able to trace the sequence of retro-
gression.
In 1973 a spectacular earthflow occurred near

LLGLND:
+ BYYBOL FOR DORIM88

FIG. 1. Plan map of Nicolet landslide, November 1955.

'Paper by M. A. Carson. 1977. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 14, pp. 582-602.

 CAN. GEOTECH. J. VOL. 15, 1978
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 01/04/15

FIG.2. Overall view of Chelsea earthflow.

For personal use only.

FIG.3. Upper end of Chelsea earthflow.

Chelsea, P.Q., during the construction of a high-
way rock fill. The failure of the underlying clay
caused extensive liquefaction, with the fluid clay
flowing down a stream course and becoming im-
pounded against a road fill and railway fill down-
stream. Figure 2 is an overall view of the failure.
The rock fill is located on the right-hand side of
the figure and the impounded fluid clay is visible
on the left. Figure 3 is a view of the upper end of
the failure and shows that sections of the rock fill
failed sequentially and movement involved both
rotation and translation. It appears that the succes-
sive slips were carried along by the flow of fluid
clay and were left stranded in a random fashion.
At the South Nation River landslide, a considerable
volume of clay flowed out of the landslide and
down the course of the river (Eden et al. 1971).
Figure 4 is a view of the downstream end of the
flow and shows that trees have been carried along
for a distance of nearly 1 km. The upright position
of the trees can be attributed to the self-righting
characteristics of the trees with the heavy mass of
soil confined by the root system.
These four landslides all resulted in very differ-
 DISCUSSIONS
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 01/04/15
For personal use only.
FIG. 4. Downstream view of debris from South Nation
River landslide.
ent patterns in the resultant spoil. At Saint-Jean-
Vianney, the soil involved was almost all sensitive
clay. Practically all the material involved liquefied
and flowed down a stream course and was de-
posited in the Saguenay River. At Nicolet, the soil
profile consisted of a fine sand horizon over
moderately sensitive clay. Here the spoil was de-
453
posited in the river near the foot of the slope. At
Chelsea, an extremely sensitive clay was involved
which completely liquefied. Sections of the rock
fill were stranded in a haphazard fashion as they
sunk through the fluid clay. At the South Nation
landslide, there was a surface sand cap and layer
of brown silty clay overlying the critical layer of
sensitive clay. The top two layers were left stranded
in the crater, some being transported considerable
distances. Because of the thickness and strength of
the top two strata, sections have remained more or
less intact.
It is evident that no one model can explain the
surface pattern left by the landslide. The pattern
is dependent on the original soil profile, the thick-
ness and strength characteristics of the critical
layer, and the topographic detail of the landslide
area. The writer fails to understand why there
should be a link between the mechanism of the
landslide and the resultant morphology. Studies of
the surface pattern left by landslides can be com-
pared to the dilemma faced by a traffic policeman
attempting to determine the sequence of events in a
multi-vehicle collision on an icy freeway without
the benefit of any eyewitnesses.
COLLIN,A. 1956. Landslides in clay. Trcznslated by W. R.
Schriever. University of Toronto Press, Downsview, Ont.
CRAWFORD, C. B., and EDEN,W. J. 1963. Nicolet landslide of
November 1955, Quebec, Canada. Engineering Geology Case
Histories, No. 4, pp. 45-50.
EDEN,W. J., FLETCHER,E. B., and MITCHELL,R. J . 1971.
South Nation River landslide, 16 May 1971. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, 8, pp. 44G451.
TAVENAS, F., CHAGNON, J.-Y., and LA ROCHELLE, P. 1971. The
Saint-Jean-Vianney landslide: observations and eyewitness
accounts. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 8, pp. 463-478.