sustainability
Article
Stability Analysis of Pile-Supported Embankments over Soft
Clay Considering Soil Failure between Piles Based on Upper
Bound Theorem
Peng-Yu Li 1 , Hong-Qiang Dou 1, * , Hao Wang 1 , Wen-Feng Nie 2 and Fu-Quan Chen 3
Citation: Li, P.-Y.; Dou, H.-Q.;
Wang, H.; Nie, W.-F.; Chen, F.-Q.
Stability Analysis of Pile-Supported
Embankments over Soft Clay
Considering Soil Failure between
Piles Based on Upper Bound
Theorem. Sustainability 2022, 14,
11652. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su141811652
Academic Editors: Anjui Li
and Lucio Di Matteo
Received: 26 July 2022
Accepted: 12 September 2022
Published: 16 September 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811652
1 Zijin School of Geology and Mining, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350116, China
2 Kunming Survey, Design and Research Institute Co., Ltd. of CREEC, Kunming 650200, China
3 College of Civil Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350116, China
* Correspondence: douhq@fzu.edu.cn
Abstract: Most analytical methods used to analyze the stability of pile-supported embankments are
based on shear and bending failure of piles. However, the centrifuge test and practical engineering
show that rigid pile-supported embankments have a failure mode of soil sliding around piles.
Therefore, the stability analysis method of the pile-supported embankment under the failure mode
of the soil sliding around piles based on the upper bound theorem is given in this study. First, the
failure mechanism is assumed to be a rigid body and slide along two logarithmic spiral surfaces in
the embankment and soft soil. The rate of external work and internal energy dissipation of the failure
mechanism are further obtained, wherein the internal energy dissipation rate of piles is obtained
based on the limit state of soil sliding around piles. Secondly, according to the equation formed by the
upper bound theorem, the optimization model of the safety factor function when the potential slip
surface is passing through different pile rows is obtained. Then, the algorithm of solving the model
is given and the overall safety factor of the pile-supported embankment is obtained. Compared
with other methods, the advantage of this method is that it considers the influence of embankment
soil property and the width perpendicular to the two-dimensional plane on the pile load and the
influence of the soil internal friction angle on the slip surface. Finally, it can be concluded from
parametric analysis that: with the increase of the horizontal distance from piles to the slope toe, the
reinforcement effect of piles first increases and then decreases; with the decrease of the embankment
height and the increase of the soft soil cohesion and internal friction angle, the overall safety factor of
the embankment increases.
Keywords: embankment; slope stability; rigid piles; upper-bound theorem; passive piles
1. Introduction
Many high-filled embankments on soft soil have emerged in recent years with the
rapid development of highway and railway construction. Rigid piles came into being to
reasonably control the stability and deformation of soft soil under high-filled embankments.
Compared with stone columns, rigid piles (e.g., PHC piles and concrete piles) can signifi-
cantly improve the bearing capacity of soft soil foundations and reduce deformation, and
they have strong regional adaptability [1–3]. However, the instability of embankments sup-
ported by foundations reinforced with rigid piles still occurs in practical engineering [4–8].
One of the reasons for that may be unreasonable analytical methods.
Most analytical methods used to analyze the stability of pile-supported embank-
ments are based on shear and bending failure of piles [9–14]. Jellali et al.’s method [11],
Bishop’s modified method [9] and Spencer’s three-part wedge method [13] are the limit
equilibrium method or limit analysis method, respectively, based on shear failure of piles.
Zheng et al. [12,14] put forward the concept of equivalent shear strength for rigid piles,
namely considering the bending failure of rigid piles and converting the bending strength
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 2 of 16

to the corresponding shear strength. Then, the limit equilibrium method is used to eval-
uate the embankment’s stability. However, Terashi et al. [15] found through centrifuge
experiments that when the soil between piles is weak and the distance between the piles
is large, sliding failure of the soft soil around piles occurs. Liu et al. [16] pointed out that
the excavation of the foundation pit after a highway in Guangdong Province was opened
to traffic caused soil sliding between the prestressed pipe piles and significant subsidence
of the road surface. At this point, the strength of a rigid pile is large enough, but the soil
between piles reaches the limit state, and then the soil slides around the piles. Finally,
the embankment collapses overall. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the stability of
pile-supported embankments considering the failure mode of the soil sliding around piles.
On the other hand, the upper bound theorem of limit analysis has been widely used
in slope engineering as a stability calculation method with a simple concept and high
computational efficiency [17–20]. However, it is rarely used to analyze the stability of pile-
supported embankments. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to give a method to evaluate
the stability of pile-supported embankments considering the failure mode of soil sliding
between piles. Firstly, the upper-bound theorem is selected as the overall framework. Next,
when the soil between piles reaches the critical failure state, the load on piles is calculated
based on Ito and Matsui [21]. Then, the rate of internal energy dissipation and external
work of the failure mechanism for the pile-supported embankment are calculated. The
optimization model for safety factor function is established by equating the rate of internal
energy dissipation and external work. Finally, the overall safety factor of the embankment
supported by rigid pile under the failure mode of the soil sliding around piles is obtained
by MATLAB programming.

2. Stability Analysis of Rigid Pile-Supported Embankment

2.1. Rotational Failure Mechanism for Rigid Pile-Supported Embankments
In this paper, the pile-supported, two-dimensional embankment with the horizontal
top surface is taken as the research object, and the rotational mechanism is selected as the
kinematically admissible failure mechanism [22,23]. It is assumed that the potential slip
surface passes through the foundation. Since this paper only considers the soil failure, the
change of the slip surface equation caused by the existence of piles in the soft soil is ignored.
At this point, the potential slip surface can be simplified as two segments of a logarithmic
spiral equation in the embankment and foundation, respectively [24,25]. Figure 1 shows
the rotational failure mechanism of the pile-supported embankment, where A represents
the slope shoulder, B represents the shear inlet of the potential slip surface, C represents
the slope toe, D represents the shear outlet of the potential slip surface, and M represents
the intersection of the potential slip surface and the interface between the embankment fill
_
and the soft soil. The entire mechanism CA BMDC rotates around the center of rotation O
_
at the same angular velocity ω. The slip surface BMD penetrates the entire embankment
fill and passes through part of the rigid piles in the soft soil and cuts out from the slope
toe or its outside. The cohesion, friction angle and the unit weight of the embankment fill
are c1 , ϕ1 , γ1 , respectively, and those of soft soil are c2 , ϕ2 , γ2 , respectively. H represents
the height of the embankment fill, β denotes the slope angle and β0 is ∠ AMD. The soft
foundation is reinforced with rigid piles, where n represents the total number of rigid
pile rows. In order to make the image concise and clear, black circles are used to omit the
painting of part piles in Figure 1. Assuming that the soft soil foundation is deep enough and
piles are long enough, the potential slip surface certainly passes through I row piles, where
i represents the number of pile rows before point M. Pj is defined as the intersection of the
centerline of the j-th row piles and the slip surface, and P0 j (0 ≤ j ≤ i ≤ n) is the vertex of
the centerline of the j-th row piles. θ0 , θm , θ pi , θ pj and θh are angles of the horizontal line
passing point O rotating clockwise to line OB, OM, OPi , OPj and OD, respectively.
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 17

( 0 ≤ j ≤ i ≤ n ) is the vertex of the centerline of the j-th row piles. θ0 , θm , θ pi , θ pj and θ h

Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 are angles of the horizontal line passing point O rotating clockwise to line OB, OM,3 of OP16i,
OPj and OD, respectively.

Figure 1. Rotational
Figure 1. Rotational failure
failure mechanism
mechanism for
for aa pile-supported
pile-supported embankment.
embankment.

When
When the the soil
soil is is aa perfectly
perfectly rigid-plastic
rigid-plastic material material and and obeys
obeys thethe associated
associated flow
flow rule
rule
and
and the Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion, the upper bound. theorem of the limit analysis
the Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion, the upper bound theorem of the limit analysis
can
can bebeexpressed
expressedas:as:the thelimit
limitloadloadcalculated
calculated by equalizing
by equalizing W ex rate
W ex (the (theofrate
external work),
of external
and
work),Dt and
(the rate Dt of internal
(the rate of energy
internaldissipation)
energy dissipation) is not less is than thethan
not less true the
limit load
true [26,27].
limit load
When upper bound theorem is used to find FS
[26,27]. When the upper bound theorem is used to find FS (the overall safety factor ofpile-
the (the overall safety factor of the the
supported
pile-supported embankment),
embankment), it is necessary
it is necessary to convert to convert the slope
the slopefromfromthe initial statestate
the initial to theto
limit equilibrium state by the strength reduction method. Then, the equation for FSi (the
the limit equilibrium state by the strength reduction method. Then, the equation for FSi
safety factor of the embankment slope when the potential slip surface passes through i row
(the safety factor of the embankment . slope when the potential slip surface passes through
i row piles) is obtained by equating W exDt and
piles) is obtained by equating W ex and . After Dtthat,
. Afteranthat,
optimization with FSwith
model model
an optimization i as
the objective function to find min FS i (the minimum
FSi as the objective function to find min FSi (the minimum FSi) can be established. Finally, FS i ) can be established. Finally, the
process concludes by comparing min FSi to get FS.
the process concludes by comparing min FSi to get FS.
When the potential slip surface passes through i row piles, the reduced parameters are
When the potential slip surface passes through i row piles, the reduced parameters
as follows:
are as follows: c
c0 1 = 1



 FS i
 0

cc21

′ =

  2

 c c=1
FSii

 FS
(1)
tan tan
0 c ′== c2 ϕ1
 ϕ
 2
1


 FSFS i i
  0 (1)


 tan
tan ϕφ21
tan
  tan
ϕ 2φ= 1′ =
 FS
FSii
0 0 0 0  tan φ2 friction angle of the embankment
where c 1 , c 2 , ϕ 1 and ϕ 2 are the cohesion tan φ and internal
2′ =
fill and soft soil in the limit equilibrium state, respectively. FSi
Equations of failure surface in the embankment and soft soil are represented by r1 (θ )
where
and r2 (θc)1′,,respectively.
c 2′ , φ 1′ and φ 2′ are the cohesion and internal friction angle of the embankment
− θ0 ) tan ϕ0 1
 
fill and soft soil in the limit equilibrium r1 (θ ) = r0 exp state, (θrespectively. (2)
Equations of failure surface r2 (θ )in=the
rmembankment
exp (θ − θm )and
 0 soil are represented by r1 θ
tan ϕsoft2

() (3)
and r2r0θ
where ( )
, rm, ,respectively.
rh , and r pj are the length of OB, OM, OD, and OPj in Figure 1, respectively.

rm = r0 exp (θm − θ0 ) tan ϕ0 1

 
( ) ( )
(4)
r1 θ = r0 exp  θ −θ0 tan φ1′  (2)
rh = rm exp (θh − θm ) tan ϕ0 2
 
(5)
r pj = rm exp θ pj − θm tan ϕ0 2


(6)
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 4 of 16

According to the geometric relationship:

H r
= sin θh h − sin θ0 (7)
r0 r0

L sin(θh − θ0 ) sin(θh + β0 ) H
= − (8)
r0 sin θh sin θh sin β0 r0
rh sin θh = rm sin θm (9)
r pj cos θ pj − rh cos θh − xG − x pj = 0 (10)
where xG is length of CD; x pj is the reinforcement position of the j-th row piles, denoted
by CP0 j .
sin( β − β0 )
xG = H (11)
sin β sin β0

2.2. Calculation of Rate of External Work

As shown in Figure 1, direct integration of the rate of external work due to the
_
soil weight in the region A BMDCA is very complicated. A simpler alternative is first
. . . . .
to find W 0 1 , W 00 1 , W 2 , W 3 and W 4 (the rates of work due to the soil weight in regions
_ _
O BMO,O MDO, OABO, OADO and ACDA, respectively) [28]. The rate of external work
_ . .
for the region A BMDCA is then found by the simple algebraic summation W 0 1 + W 00 1 −
. . . . .
W 2 − W 3 − W 4 . The calculation of W 00 1 can be converted into the summation of W 00 11 and
. _
W 00 12 (the rate of external work for regions MDM and OMDO, respectively). In order to
simplify the calculation, the existence of piles in soft soil is ignored when calculating the
rate of internal energy dissipation or external work due to soil weight and soil cohesion. At
_
this point, only the gravity of soft soil works in the region MDM. After the simplification
.
mentioned above, the calculation of W G (the rate of external work done by the soil weight
_
in the region A BMDCA) is shown as Equations (12)–(19).
. . . . . . . .
W ex = W 0 1 + W 00 1 − W 2 − W 3 − W 4 = γ1 r0 3 ω f 1 0 − f 2 − f 3 − f 4 + W 00 11 + W 00 12 (12)

. 1
W 00 12 = γ rm rh sin(θh − θm )[rm cos θm − rh cos(π − θh )]ω (13)
6 1
.
. W 00 12
00 3 00
W 11 = γ2 r0 ω f 1 − γ2 (14)
γ1
(3 tan ϕ0 1 cos θm + sin θm ) exp[3(θm − θ0 ) tan ϕ0 1 ] − (3 tan ϕ0 1 cos θ0 + sin θ0 )
f1 0 = (15)
3 1 + 9 tan2 ϕ0 1

 {(3 tan ϕ0 2 cos θh + sin θh ) exp[3(θh − θm ) tan ϕ0 2 ] − (3 tan ϕ0 2 cos θm + sin θm )}

f 1 00 = exp 3(θm − θ0 ) tan ϕ0 1 (16)

3 1 + 9 tan2 ϕ0 2

 
1L L
f2 = 2 cos θ0 − sin θ0 (17)
6 r0 r0
  
1 rh L L rh
f3 = sin(θh − θ0 ) − sin θh cos θ0 − + cos θh (18)
6 r0 r0 r0 r0
 2
sin( β − β0 )
 
H L 1H 0


f4 = cos θ0 − − cot β + cot β (19)
r0 2 sin β sin β0 r0 3 r0
If the slip surface passes through the slope toe, f 4 = 0 and β0 = β. When the traffic
. .
load above the embankment is not considered, W ex = W G .
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 5 of 16

2.3. Calculation of Rate of Internal Energy Dissipation

2.3.1. The Rate of Internal Energy Dissipation along Potential Surfaces of
Velocity Discontinuity
_
The rate of internal energy dissipation along the discontinuity surface BMD can
be divided into two parts since there are differences in shear properties between the
embankment and soft soil.

r1 (θ )dθ c1 r0 2 ω 
Z θm
c0 1 V1 cos ϕ0 1 exp 2(θm − θ0 ) tan ϕ0 1 − 1
 
De = = (20)
θ0 cos ϕ0 1 2 tan ϕ1

r2 (θ )dθ c r 2ω
Z θ
h
c0 2 V2 cos ϕ0 2 = 2 0 exp 2(θm − θ0 ) tan ϕ0 1 exp 2(θh − θm ) tan ϕ0 2 − 1 (21)
   
Ds = 0
θm cos ϕ 2 2 tan ϕ2

where De and Ds are the energy dissipation rate along the slip surface of embankment fill
and soft clay, respectively, and V 1 and V 2 are the velocity equations at any point along
the slip surface of the upper embankment and soft clay, respectively. Their values are the
product of ω with r1 (θ ) and r2 (θ ), respectively.

2.3.2. The Rate of Internal Energy Dissipation Provided by Rigid Piles

Ito and Matsui [21] proposed a theoretical analysis method for the ultimate passive
load on single row piles in a plastic state where the soil satisfies the Mohr–Coulomb yield
criterion, and it is widely used in the stability analysis of slopes reinforced with stabilizing
piles [29–32]. The failure mode of the soil sliding around piles of the pile-supported
embankment is similar to that of the slope reinforced with stabilizing piles, so the ultimate
passive load on the pile in the foundation can be further obtained based on the derivation
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER
of ItoREVIEW
et al. [21]. Assuming that the layout of piles is a rectangle (as shown in Figure 2a),6 of 17
where l (l = x pj+1 − x pj ) represents the distance between adjacent row piles, D1 represents
the longitudinal spacing of piles, D2 represents the longitudinal net spacing of piles, and d
represents the diameter
d represents of circular
the diameter piles. Figure
of circular piles.2b is the 2b
Figure limit plastic
is the limitstate diagram
plastic state of the
diagram of
soil around piles.
the soil around piles.

(a) (b)

FigureFigure 2. (a) Layout

2. (a) Layout of (b)
of piles; piles; (b) plastic
Limit Limit plastic state diagram
state diagram of the of
soilthe soil around
around piles. piles.

It is assumed that: when

It is assumed the soil
that: when thelayer deforms,
soil layer two surfaces
deforms, slide slide
two surfaces alongalong A0 E0 BA0 0 E0 B0
lines lines
0 E0 B0 , where lines E B and E0 B0 make an angle α = π/4 + p/2 with x-axis;
and Aand 0 0A0′ 0E0′ B0′ , where lines 0 E0 0B0 and 0 E0′0B0′ make an angle α = π / 4 + p / 2 with x-axis; the
0 E0 A0 just around the piles, in which
the soil layer
soil becomes
layer becomes plastic onlyonly
plastic in A
in soil 0 E0 BA00BE00B
soil 0B0 0′ E0′0A0′ just around the piles, in which
Mohr–Coulomb’s
Mohr–Coulomb’s yield criterion is applied and thelayer
yield criterion is applied and the soil soil is in aisplane-strain
layer condition
in a plane-strain condition
in theindepth direction, even if frictional forces act on surfaces A E B and A 0 E0 B0 .
the depth direction, even if frictional forces act on surfaces 0 0 A 0 0 A0′0E0′ B0′ .
0 0 E0 B0 and
BasedBased
on theon above
the assumptions
above assumptions and derivations illustrated
and derivations by Ito and
illustrated byMatsui
Ito and[21], this [21],
Matsui
paperthis
expresses q j (the
paper expresses distribution of the ultimate horizontal load of longitudinal
qj (the distribution of the ultimate horizontal load of longitudinal adjacent
piles of the j-th row above the slip surface) when the unit weight of embankment fill and
adjacent piles of the j-th row above the slip surface) when the unit weight of embankment
soft clay are different. When the physical–mechanical parameters of the soil between piles
fill and soft clay are different. When the physical–mechanical parameters of the soil be-
D1 and D2 are given, qj can be expressed as a linear distribution function related to zj , where
tween piles D1 and D2 are given, qj can be expressed as a linear distribution function re-
lated to zj, where zj is the vertical distance between the calculation point of the j-th row
piles and the surface of the soft soil.

q j = b + k2 z j + k1 hj (22)
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 6 of 16

zj is the vertical distance between the calculation point of the j-th row piles and the surface
of the soft soil.
q j = b + k2 z j + k1 h j (22)
where hj is the vertical distance between the top of the j-th row piles and the embankment
slope. hj , k1 , k2 and b can be expressed as:

H
(
x pj tan β, 0 ≤ x pj < tan β
hj = H (23)
H, x pj ≥ tan β

ϕ20
  h  i  
  exp D1 − D2 N tan ϕ0 tan π +  
1 D2 ϕ2 2 8 4
 
+ 
 
tan ϕ20 + Nϕ2 Nϕ2 tan ϕ20

 ( Nϕ −1) 
−2N 1/2 tan ϕ0 − 1
 
D1 2 /2
b= c20 D1 −
 
D2
ϕ2 2
2 tan ϕ20 +2Nϕ1/2 + Nϕ−1/2 (24)

 


 2 2 

Nϕ1/2 tan ϕ20 + Nϕ2 −1
 
2
2 tan ϕ20 +2Nϕ1/2 + Nϕ2 −1/2
 
c20 D1 2
− 2D2 Nϕ−21/2
Nϕ1/2 tan ϕ20 + Nϕ2 −1
2
 
 1/2 0
D1 ( Nϕ2 tan ϕ 2 + Nϕ2 −1) D1 − D2 ϕ0
    
γ1  π
k1 = D1 exp Nϕ2 tan ϕ0 2 tan + 2 − D2 (25)
Nϕ1  D2 D2 8 4 
 
 1/2 0
D1 ( Nϕ2 tan ϕ 2 + Nϕ2 −1) D1 − D2 ϕ0
    
γ2  π
k2 = D1 exp Nϕ2 tan ϕ0 2 tan + 2 − D2 (26)
Nϕ2  D2 D2 8 4 

ϕ0
  
π
Nϕ = tan2 + ( ϕ0 = ϕ0 1 , ϕ0 2 (27)
4 2
Furthermore, q j (the distribution of two-dimensional ultimate horizontal load of the
j-th row piles above the slip surface) is given by (as shown as Figure 1):
qj
qj = (28)
D1

The horizontal ultimate ant-slide force provided by the j-th row piles Fpj can be
expressed as:
1 (2b + 2k1 · h j + k2 L pj ) L pj
Fpj = (q j1 + q j2 ) · L pj = (29)
2 2D1
where q j1 is the horizontal load at the top of the j-th row piles; q j2 is the horizontal load at
the intersection of the j-th row piles and the potential slip surface and L pj is the length of
the j-th row piles above the slip surface. It can be obtained as follows:

L pj = r pj sin θ pj − rh sin θh (30)

According to Ausilio et al. [33], Dpj (the rate of energy dissipation provided by the j-th
row piles) is equal to the rate of internal energy dissipation generated by Fpj , deducting
the energy dissipation generated by the moment. Then, Dp (the rate of internal energy
dissipation of i row piles passed by the slip surface) can be expressed as:

i i
Dp = ∑ D pj = ∑ ( Fpj r pj sin θ pj ω − mL pj Fpj ω ) (31)
j =1 j =1

The coefficient m depends on the distribution of the horizontal limit passive load
acting on piles, and its value characterizes the distance from the point of the resultant force
of the load to the intersection of piles and the slip surface. Based on Equation (22), the
effective earth pressure distribution on the side of piles obtained in this paper is trapezoidal,
so 1/3 < m < 1/2. Here m is taken as 7/20, and the error caused by the value of m is
minimal and can be ignored [33].
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 7 of 16

In summary, Dt can be calculated as:

Dt = De + Ds + D p (32)

2.4. Establishment of the Function of min FSi

Based on the upper-bound theorem of limit analysis, it can be known that the internal
and external power of the failure mechanism is equal, and both are functions of FSi , namely:
.
W ex ( FSi ) = Dt ( FSi ) (33)

Evidently, when the physical–mechanical parameters of the soil and the geometric
parameters of the embankment are given, FSi can be expressed as an implicit function of
the independent variables θ0 , θh , β0 , denoted as FSi (θ0 , θh , β0 ). According to the positional
relationship between the potential slip surface and rigid piles in the failure mechanism
shown in Figure 1, the following cases can be divided when solving min FSi :
Case 1: when 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, the slip surface passes through i row piles but not i + 1
row piles, and then the geometric relationship is as follows:

xG + x pi < rm cos θm − rh cos θh < xG + x pi+1 (34)

Therefore, when the potential slip surface of the embankment slope passes through i
row piles, the optimizing model with FSi as the objective function is:

min FSi = minFSi (θ0 , θh , β0 ) (35)



 0 < θ0 < π2

0 < θh < π





θ < θm < θ < . . . < θ < θ < θ

0 pi p2 p1 h
st. 0 < β
(36)


 0 < β

 rm cos θm − rh cos θh > xG + x pi




rm cos θm − rh cos θh < xG + x pi+1


i
Case 2: when i = 0, in Equation (32), ∑ D pj = 0. According to the geometric relationship:
j =1

rm cos θm − rh cos θh < xG + x p1 (37)

The optimizing model with FS0 as the objective function is:

min FS0 = minFS0 (θ0 , θh , β0 ) (38)

 π

 0 < θ0 < 2




 0 < θh < π
st. θ0 < θ m < θ h (39)
β0

0< <β





rm cos θm − rh cos θh < xG + x p1


Case 3: when i = n, the corresponding geometric relationship is:

rm cos θm − rh cos θh > xG + x pn (40)

At this point, the potential slip surface of the embankment slope passes through n row
piles, and the optimizing model with FSn as the objective function is:

min FSn = minFSn (θ0 , θh , β0 ) (41)

Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 8 of 16

Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW π 9 of 17



 0 < θ0 < 2




 0 < θh < π
st. θ0 < θm < θ pi < . . . < θ p2 < θ p1 < θh (42)
Furthermore, FS can be expressed as:
0 < β0 < β





{
r cos θ − r cos θ > xG + x pn
}

FSm= minm minhFSi ( ih = 0, 1, ..., n ) (43)
Furthermore, FS can be expressed as:

FS = min{minFSi (i = 0, 1, . . . , n)} (43)

2.5. Solution for FS
The calculation
2.5. Solution for FS of the model is done with the help of MATLAB programming. The
mainTheidea of solvingof
calculation FStheis as follows:
model is donefirstly,
with input the geometric
the help of MATLAB andprogramming.
mechanical param-
The
eters of the pile-supported embankment. Secondly,
main idea of solving FS is as follows: firstly, input the geometric and mechanical when i, input parameters and inde-
pa-
pendent variables
rameters ( θ0 , θh , β′ ) are
of the pile-supported known, i + 2 Secondly,
embankment. equations when can bei,combined, and i + 2and
input parameters de-
0 ) are known, i + 2 equations can be combined, and i + 2
pendent variables (FSi, θ0m , hθj ( j = 1, 2, ..., i) ) can be solved by using the function ‘vpa-
independent variables (θ , θ , β
dependent variablesThen,
solve’ in MATLAB. (FSi , θmin
m , θ jFS ( ji (= . . ,αi)))iscan
i =1,0, 2,1, ...., be solved
obtained by αusing
where is an the function
integer large
‘vpasolve’ in MATLAB. Then, minFSi (i = 0, 1, . . . , α) is obtained where α is an integer
enough
large that that
enough min minFSi increases
FSi increases monotonically
monotonically when when i >i α> .α.Finally,
Finally, FS min{{minFS
FS ==min min FSi}}
i
= 0, 1, ...,
((ii= ...α , )α.)The
. Theflowchart
flowchartfor forsolving
solvingFS FSisisshown
shownininFigure
Figure3.3.

Figure3.
Figure 3. The
The flow
flow chart
chartfor
forsolving
solvingFS.
FS.

3. Case Study
3.1. Case 1
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 9 of 16

Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17

3. Case Study
3.1. Case 1
Li
Li etetal.
al.[34]
[34]used
usedthe limit
the analysis
limit method
analysis method to analyze the stability
to analyze of theofslope
the stability rein-
the slope
forced with single-row stabilizing piles and the optimal reinforcement
reinforced with single-row stabilizing piles and the optimal reinforcement position of piles. position of piles.
The
The internal
internal energy
energy dissipation
dissipation raterate of
of piles
piles is
is derived
derived based
based onon Ito
Ito and
and Matsui
Matsui [21],
[21], which
which
is
is the same as
the same as the
thecalculation
calculationofofthe theinternal
internalenergy
energy dissipation
dissipation raterate of piles
of piles considering
considering the
the failure mode of soil sliding around piles in this paper. At this point,
failure mode of soil sliding around piles in this paper. At this point, the stability analysis ofthe stability anal-
ysis of single-row
single-row stabilizing
stabilizing piles
piles can be can be regarded
regarded as a special
as a special case ofcase
the of the stability
stability analysis
analysis of the
of the pile-supported embankment under the failure mode of soil
pile-supported embankment under the failure mode of soil sliding around piles. Therefore, sliding around piles.
Therefore, the effectiveness
the effectiveness of the proposedof themethod
proposed canmethod can be
be verified byverified
comparing by comparing
the results ofthecase
re-
sults of case by
1 calculated 1 calculated
the method by in
thethis
method
paperinandthisreference
paper and reference
[34]. [34]. Theof
The parameters parameters
case 1 are
of
as case 1 areHas
follows: = follows:
13.7 m; cH 1 ==c13.7 m; c1kPa;
2 = 23.94 = c2 =ϕ23.94 = 10◦φ; 1γ1==φγ22 == 19.63
1 = ϕ2kPa; 10°; γkN/m 3 ==
1 = γ2 ; β 30◦ ;
19.63
D1 = 32.25
kN/m ; β =m30and°; D d1 == 1.35
2.25 m.m and d = 1.35 m .
Figure 4 shows the variation
Figure 4 shows the variation of FS and
of FS and thethe pile
pile length
length above
above the the most
most dangerous
dangerous slipslip
surfacewith
surface with ξξ (ξ( ξis the dimensionless
is the dimensionlessparameter
parameterofofthe thepile
pilereinforcement
reinforcement position, and
position, and
ξ = x p1 tan β/H) obtained by the method in this paper and Li et al. [34]. It can be concluded
ξ = xp1 tan β H ) obtained by the method in this paper and Li et al. [34]. It can be con-
that the result obtained by the method of this paper and Li et al. [34] are basically consistent,
cluded that thethe
which verifies result obtained
rationality ofbythethe method
method of this
in this paper and Li et al. [34] are basically
paper.
consistent, which verifies the rationality of the method in this paper.

(a) ( b)
Figure 4. Comparison between the results of Li et al.[34]’s method and the method in this paper:
Figure 4. Comparison between the results of Li et al. [34]’s method and the method in this paper:
(a) Diagram of the variation of FS with ξ ; (b) Diagram of the variation of the pile length above
(a) Diagram of the variation of FS with ξ; (b) Diagram of the variation of the pile length above the
the most dangerous slip surface with ξ .
most dangerous slip surface with ξ.

3.2.
3.2. Case
Case 22
Zheng
Zheng et et al.
al. [35] established
established a simplified embankment embankment model model basedbased onon the working
working
condition
condition of of aa high-speed
high-speed railway
railway embankment
embankment over over aa soft
soft foundation
foundation reinforced
reinforced byby rigid
rigid
piles. The
piles. Themodelmodelparameters
parametersare areasasfollows:
follows: HH = 5=m; β ==33.7°
5 m; 33.7◦; ; qtt (the
(the traffic
traffic load of the
the
embankment) is 15 kPa; c and ϕ are 15 kPa and 28 ◦ , respectively; c and ϕ are 7.5 kPa
embankment) is 15 kPa; c1 1and φ1 1 are 15 kPa and 28°, respectively; c2 2and φ22 are 7.5 kPa
and 5◦ , respectively; since γ1 and γ2 are not given in reference [35], γ1 and γ2 are taken as
and 5°, respectively;
18 kN/m 3 and 16 kN/m since γ1 and γ2d =are
3 , respectively; 0.5not
m; lgiven
= 3 m;in n isreference
large enough; [35], xγ1 =and γ m;
3( j −21)are
pj
taken
D1 = 3as m 18 andkN/m
3
D2 = 2.5 andm.16 kN/m
3 , respectively; d = 0.5 m; l = 3 m; n is large enough;
. . .
xpj = In − 1)case,
3( jthis m ; Din1 =addition
3 m andtoDW 2 = 2.5 m.
G , W ex also includes W q (the rate of external work caused
by qtIn). Itthis
cancase,
be expressed
in addition as [33]:
to W G , W  ex also includes W  q (the rate of external work
caused by qt ). It can be expressed . as [33]:
 
L
W q = qt Lω r0 cos θ0 − (44)
2
  L
Wq = qt Lω  r0 cos θ0 −  (44)
Figure 5 presents FS of the rigid pile-supported  2
embankment under different qt and
shear capacity of piles for three analytical methods. It can be seen that when qt is constant,
Figure 5 presents FS of the rigid pile-supported embankment under different qt and
shear capacity of piles for three analytical methods. It can be seen that when qt is constant,
FS obtained by the method in this paper and Zheng et al. [35] is much smaller than that
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 10 of 16

Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

FS obtained by the method in this paper and Zheng et al. [35] is much smaller than that
obtained by the composite shear strength method. When the shear strength of piles is low,
obtained by the composite shear strength method. When the shear strength of piles is low,
shear failure of piles is more prone to occur, so it is more accurate to use the composite
shear failure of piles is more prone to occur, so it is more accurate to use the composite
shear strength method to evaluate the stability of embankments at this point. When the
shear strength method to evaluate the stability of embankments at this point. When the
shear
shear strength
strength of piles is
of piles is high,
high,soilsoilsliding
slidingisismore
moreproneprone to to occur,
occur, so so
thethe method
method in this
in this
paper is more accurate at this point. When q
paper is more accurate at this point. When qt t is constant, FS obtained by the methodin
is constant, FS obtained by the method inthis
paper
this paperis slightly smaller
is slightly smallerthanthanthatthatof Zheng
of Zheng et et
al.al.
[35],
[35],andandthe theerror
errormay
maycome
come from from the
following five points:
the following five points:
1.1. The
The assumption
assumption error erroron onthe
theunitunitweight
weightofofthe thesoft
soft soil
soil andand embankment.
embankment. SinceSince
reference [35] does not give the unit weight of soft soil and
reference [35] does not give the unit weight of soft soil and embankment, this paper as- embankment, this paper assumes
the
sumes valuesthe of the two.
values of the two.
2.2. This
This paper considers
paper considers the impact of
the impact of the
the soil
soil property
propertyfor forembankments
embankmentson oncalculat-
calculating
qing
j , but Zheng et al. [35] does not consider
q j , but Zheng et al. [35] does not consider it. it.
3.3. Both
Boththe themethod
method in in this
this paper
paper andandZheng Zheng
et al.et [35]al.take
[35]the take the two-dimensional
two-dimensional em-
embankment
bankment as the as research
the research object.object.
At thisAt thisthe
point, point,
width theperpendicular
width perpendicular to the two-
to the two-dimen-
dimensional
sional plane isplane 1, butisthe1,width
but the of qwidth of qj in the
j in the direction
direction perpendicular
perpendicular to the two-
to the two-dimensional
dimensional D 1 have to divide q
plane is D1. Therefore, we have to divide qj by D1 to solve Dpj. However, Zheng et al.However,
plane is . Therefore, we j by D 1 to solve D pj . [35]’s
Zheng
method etdoes
al. [35]’s methodthe
not consider does not consider
width of qj in thethe of qj in the direction
width perpendicular
direction perpendicular
to the two-dimen-
tosional
the two-dimensional
plane, so it leads to plane, so itresult.
a larger leads to a larger result.
4.4. The method in this paper
The method in this paper and Zheng and Zhengetetal.al. [35]’s
[35]’s method
method areare based
based on on
the theupperupper
bound theorem
bound theorem method and the limit equilibrium method,
and the limit equilibrium method, respectively. respectively.
5.5. The slip
slip surface
surfaceofofthe themethod
method in in
thisthis paper
paper is divided
is divided into into two sections
two sections relatedrelated
to
tothe theinternal
internal friction
friction angle
angle of of
thethe embankment
embankment andand softsoftsoil, soil, respectively.
respectively. By By contrast,
contrast,
Zheng
Zheng et et al.
al. [35]’s
[35]’s method
method only onlyassumes
assumesthat thatthe
theslip
slip surface
surface is arc-shaped
is arc-shaped andanddoes does
not not
consider the
consider the effect of the the internal
internalfriction
frictionangle
angleforforthethe embankment
embankment andand
softsoft
soilsoilon slip
on slip
surfacemorphology.
surface morphology.

Figure5.5. Comparison
Figure Comparison on
on the
the results
results of
of the
the three
three methods:
methods:(a)
(a)Different
Differentqqt;t(b)
; (b)Different
Differentshear ca-capacity
shear
pacity of piles.
of piles.

4.4.Analysis
Analysis of
of Parameters
Parameters
Inorder
In order to
to measure
measure the
thecontribution
contributionofofpiles
pilesmore
moreintuitively at different
intuitively locations
at different to to
locations
FS, the parameter R j is defined as:
FS, the parameter R is defined as:
j
FS( j ) − FS( j − 1)
Rj =FS( j) − FS( j − 1) (45)
Rj = FS − FS(0) (45)
FS − FS(0)
 Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 11 of 16
where: FS( j ) signifies FS if only the first j row piles in n row piles are used to reinforce
the embankment,
where: and FS
FS( j ) signifies FS(0) is FS the
if only underfirstthe natural
j row pilescondition
in n rowwithout
piles arereinforcement.
used to reinforceThe
larger
where:
the R j (signifies
FS j) signifies
embankment, the greater
and FS(0)
FS iseffect
if only FS the offirst
under the
thej-th
rowrow
j natural piles
piles inon
conditionn the
row overall stability.
piles reinforcement.
without are used to reinforce
The
The parameters
the embankment, and of FScase
(0) is2 FS areunder
taken as thean example
natural to explore
condition the influence
without of critical
reinforcement. The
larger R j signifies the greater effect of the j-th row piles on the overall stability.
parameters
larger Rj signifies , and
(H, c2the φ2 ) on
greater Rj and
effect of FS
thei. j-th row piles on the overall stability.
The parameters of case 2 are taken as an example to explore the influence of critical
The parameters
Figure 6a displaysof case
FSi 2whenare taken
H takes as an example
different to explore
values, and the theslip
influence
surfaceof critical
passes
parameters (H, c2 , and φ2 ) on Rj and FSi.
parameters (H, c2 ,pile
through various androws.
ϕ2 ) on AsRij increases,
and FSi . FSi first decreases and then increases when H is
Figure 6a displays FSi when H takes different values, and the slip surface passes
FigureWhen
constant. 6a displays FS when
i is constant, H takes
FSi and different
FS decrease withvalues, and theinslip
the increase surface passes
H. Additionally,
through various pile rows. iAs i increases, FSi first decreases and then increases when H is
when H = 5 m, FS = FS = 1.356; when H = 7 m, FS = FS
through various pile rows. As i increases, FSi first decreases and then increases
3 4 = 1.210 and when H = 9 m, FSwhen
= FS4 H
constant. When i is constant, FSi and FS decrease with the increase in H. Additionally,
= 1.145. Figure 6b presents R when H takes different values.
is constant. When i is constant, FSi and FS decrease with the increase in H. Additionally,
j When H is constant, Rj first
when H = 5 m, FS = FS3 = 1.356; when H = 7 m, FS = FS4 = 1.210 and when H = 9 m, FS = FS4
increases
when H = 5and m,then
FS =decreases
FS3 = 1.356; with the
when increase
H = 7ofm, j, and
FS = R3FS
is maximum,
= 1.210 and meaning
whenthatH =the 9 m,
= 1.145. Figure 6b presents Rj when H takes different values.4When H is constant, Rj first
third-row
FSincreases
= FS4 = and piles contribute
1.145. Figure 6b the most to
presents R j the
when stability
H of the
takes embankment.
different values. As H increases,
When H is R1
constant,
then decreases with the increase of j, and R3 is maximum, meaning that the
and R2 decreaseand
Rthird-row
j first increases
while R4 increases.
then decreases Furthermore, whenof H j,= and
5 m, Rpiles after the third row
piles contribute the most towith the increase
the stability of the embankment. 3 is maximum, meaning
As H increases, R1
do the
that not contribute
third-row to FS; when
piles contribute H=7m the ormost
9 m, piles
to theafter the fourth
stability of row
the do not contribute
embankment. As H
and R2 decrease while R4 increases. Furthermore, when H = 5 m, piles after the third row
to FS. R1 and R2 decrease while R4 increases. Furthermore, when H = 5 m, piles after
increases,
do not contribute to FS; when H = 7 m or 9 m, piles after the fourth row do not contribute
the FS. row do not contribute to FS; when H = 7 m or 9 m, piles after the fourth row do
to third
0.6
2.2
H=5 m
not contribute to FS. H=5 m
H=7 m H=7 m
0.6
2.2
H=9mm H=9mm
H=5
2.0 H=5
H=7 m H=7 m
0.4 H=9 m
2.0 H=9 m
1.8
0.4
1.8
FSi

1.6
Rj

0.2
FSi

1.6
Rj

1.4 0.2

1.4
1.2 0.0

1.2 0.0
1.0
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
j
1.0 i
1 2 (a)
3 4 5
1 2 (b)
3 4 5
j
i
Figure
(a) 6. (a) FSi for different values of H; (b) Rj for different values
(b) of H.

Figure 6. (a) FSi for different values of H; (b) Rj for different values of H.
Figure
Figure 6. (a) FS7i for
shows FSi for
different different
values of H;values c2 and φ2 values
of different
(b) Rj for . As i increases,
of H. FSi first decreases
and Figure
then increases
showswhen and φ2 values
forc2different are certain. Regardless iof the valueFSof c2 and φ2 , FS
Figure 77shows FSii for
FS different valuesof andφ2ϕ.2As
ofcc22and . As increases,
i increases, i first
FS decreases
i first decreases
is always equal to FS 3. When i is constant, FSi and FS increase with the increase in c2 and
φ22 are
and
and thenincreases
then increases when
when cc22 and
and ϕ arecertain.
certain. Regardless
Regardless ofofthe
thevalue
valueofofc2c2andandφϕ2 2, ,FS
FS is
φ2 .
always equal to FS . When i is constant, FS FS c
is always equal to3FS3. When i is constant, FS i i and FS increase with the increase in2c2 andϕ2 .
and increase with the increase in and
φ2 .
c2=10 kPa 2.4
ϕ2=5°
2.2 c2=15 kPa
ϕ2=10°
cc2=10
2=20kPa
kPa 2.4
2.2 ϕϕ2=5°
c2=15 kPa 2=15°
2.2
ϕ2=10°
2.0 c2=20 kPa 2.2
2.0 ϕ2=15°

2.0
FSi

2.0
FSi

1.8
1.8
FSi

FSi

1.8
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.4 1.4
1.2
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
i i
1.4 (a) 1.2 (b)
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
i i
Figure
Figure (a)7. (a) FSi for different values of c2; (b) FSi for different values
7. (a) FS for different values of c ; (b) FS for different(b) valuesofofφϕ2 . .
i 2 i 2
Figure 7. (a) FSi for different values of c2; (b) FSi for different values of φ2 .
Figure 8 present Rj for different values of c2 and ϕ2 . When c2 and ϕ2 are constant,
Rj first increases and then decreases with the increase in j. R1 and R2 decrease while R3
increases with the rise in c2 and ϕ2 . Piles after the third row do not contribute to the overall
stability of the embankment.

Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652
Figure 8 present Rj for different values of c2 and φ2 . When c2 and φ2 are constant,
Rj first increases and then decreases with the increase in j. R1 and R2 decrease while R3
increases with the rise in c2 and φ2 . Piles after the third row do not contribute to the overall
12 of 16
stability of the embankment.

0.8
0.6 ϕ2=5°
c2=10 kPa
ϕ2=10°
c2=15 kPa
c2=20 kPa 0.6 ϕ2=15°

0.4

0.4

Rj
Rj

0.2
0.2

0.0 0.0

1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
j j
(a) (b)

Figure 8. (a) Rj for different values of c2; (b) Rj for different values of φ2 .
Figure 8. (a) Rj for different values of c2 ; (b) Rj for different values of ϕ2 .

5.5.Conclusions
Conclusions
InInthis
thispaper,
paper,stability
stabilityanalysis
analysisofofthe therigid
rigidpile-supported
pile-supportedembankment
embankmentconsidering
consideringthe
thesliding
soil soil sliding
around around
piles ispiles is based
based on theon the above
above theorem. theorem.
First, itFirst, it is assumed
is assumed that thethat the
potential
potential
slip surface slip
is surface
composed is composed of two logarithmic
of two logarithmic spiral surfaces
spiral surfaces and the and the failure
failure mech- is
mechanism
a anism is a rigid
rigid body thatbody that rotationally
rotationally slidesthe
slides along alongslipthe slip surface.
surface. Next,Next, the distribution
the distribution of the
of the two-dimensional ultimate horizontal load on piles at different
two-dimensional ultimate horizontal load on piles at different positions is calculated when positions is calcu-
lated
the soilwhen
betweenthe soil between
piles is in a piles
criticalis in a critical
failure failure
state. Then, state.
it is Then, it is necessary
necessary to deriveto and derive
equate
and equate the rate of the external work and internal dissipation
the rate of the external work and internal dissipation of the failure mechanism to construct of the failure mechanism
to optimization
the construct the model optimization modelfactor
of the safety of thefunction.
safety factor
Then,function.
MATLAB Then, MATLAB pro-
programming is used
to solve the overall safety factor of the rigid pile-supported embankment underembank-
gramming is used to solve the overall safety factor of the rigid pile-supported the failure
mentof
mode under the failure
soil sliding aroundmode of soil
piles. sliding
Finally, thearound
following piles. Finally, the
conclusions arefollowing conclu-the
drawn through
sions are drawn through the comparison
comparison with other methods and parameter analysis: with other methods and parameter analysis:
(1) Li et al.[34]’s method can be regarded as a special case of the method in this paper.
(1) Li et al. [34]’s method can be regarded as a special case of the method in this
Compared with the method of Li et al., the advantage of the method in this paper is that
paper. Compared with the method of Li et al., the advantage of the method in this paper
it has a wider application range; that is, the method in this paper can consider the stability
is that it has a wider application range; that is, the method in this paper can consider the
calculation of the slope reinforced with stabilizing piles and the pile-supported embank-
stability calculation of the slope reinforced with stabilizing piles and the pile-supported
ment when the embankment soil and soft soil have different properties.
embankment when the embankment soil and soft soil have different properties.
(2) When the shear strength of piles is low, shear failure of piles is more prone to
(2) When the shear strength of piles is low, shear failure of piles is more prone to occur,
occur, so it is more accurate to use the composite shear strength method to evaluate the
sostability
it is more accurate to use the composite shear strength method to evaluate the stability
of embankments at this point. When the shear strength of piles is high, soil sliding
ofisembankments
more prone toatoccur, this point.
so the When
method theinshear strength
this paper of piles
is more is high,
accurate soil sliding
at this is more
point. Com-
prone to occur, so the method in this paper is more
pared with Zheng et al. [35]’s method, the advantages of this paper are: accurate at this point. Compared with
Zheng1.etThe al. influence
[35]’s method, the advantages of this paper are:
of the embankment soil property on the load acting on piles is con-
1. The influence of the embankment soil property on the load acting on piles is
sidered;
considered;
2. The method in this paper considers the load width on piles perpendicular to the
2. The method
two-dimensional in this paper considers the load width on piles perpendicular to the
plane;
two-dimensional plane;
3. The method in this paper considers the influence of the internal friction angle of
the 3. The methodand
embankment in this paper
soft soil onconsiders
the shape the influence
of the of the internal friction angle of the
slip surface.
embankment
(3) As the and soft soil
number of on the shape
passing of theincreases,
pile rows slip surface.
the minimum safety factor corre-
(3) Asto
sponding thethenumber
potential ofslip
passing
surface pile rows
first increases,
decreases and thenthe minimum
increases. With safety
thefactor
increasecorre-
sponding to the potential slip surface first decreases and then increases. With the increase
of the horizontal distance from piles to the slope toe, the reinforcement effect of piles
first increases and then decreases. With the decrease of the embankment height and the
increase of the soft soil cohesion and internal friction angle, the overall safety factor of the
embankment increases.
However, there are still some shortcomings in this paper: we only consider the failure
of the soil between piles while ignoring other possible failure modes (e.g., bending and
inclined failure); when calculating the distribution of the passive load on rigid piles, the
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 13 of 16

superimposed influence of the horizontal stress generated by the soil between piles is
ignored. These all need to be further studied.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, P.-Y.L., H.-Q.D.; methodology, P.-Y.L., H.W. and F.-Q.C.;
software, P.-Y.L.; validation, H.-Q.D., H.W. and W.-F.N.; formal analysis, P.-Y.L., H.-Q.D. and W.-F.N.;
investigation, H.-Q.D. and W.-F.N.; resources, H.W. and F.-Q.C.; data curation, P.-Y.L. and F.-Q.C.;
writing—original draft preparation, P.-Y.L.; writing—review and editing, P.-Y.L. and H.-Q.D.; visu-
alization, H.-Q.D. and W.-F.N.; supervision, H.W. and W.-F.N.; project administration, W.-F.N. and
F.-Q.C.; funding acquisition, W.-F.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the
manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China No. 42007235
and No. U2005205.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data are available upon request from researchers who meet the eligi-
bility criteria. Kindly contact the corresponding authors privately by e-mail.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.Notation

Notation
A the intersection of the embankment crest and the embankment slope.
A0 , E0 , B0 , B0 0 , E0 0 , A0 0 the points shown as Figure 2.
B the shear inlet of the potential slip surface.
c cohesion of soils.
c1 the cohesion of embankment fill.
c2 the cohesion of soft soil.
c0 1 the cohesion of embankment fill in the limit equilibrium state.
c0 2 the cohesion of soft soil in the limit equilibrium state.
C the slope toe.
d the diameter of piles.
D the shear outlet of the potential slip surface.
D1 represents the longitudinal spacing of piles.
D2 represents the longitudinal net spacing of piles.
De the rate of energy dissipation along the slip surface of embankment fill.
Ds the rate of energy dissipation along the slip surface of soft soil.
Dpj the rate of energy dissipation provided by the j-th row piles.
Dp the rate of internal energy dissipation of i row piles passed by
the slip surface.
Dt the total rate of energy dissipation of the failure mechanism.
FS( j) the overall safety factor FS if only the first j row piles in n row piles
are used to reinforce the embankment.
FS(0) the overall safety factor FS under the natural condition.
FSi the safety factor of the embankment slope when the potential slip surface
passes through i row piles.
FS the overall safety factor of the embankment.
Fpj the horizontal ultimate anti-slide force provided by the j-th row piles.
hj the vertical distance between the top of the j-th row piles and the
embankment slope.
H the height of embankment fill.
i the number of pile rows passed by the potential slip surface.
l the spacing between adjacent row piles.
L pj the length of the j-th row piles above slip surface.
m the coefficient depends on the distribution of the horizontal limit passive
load acting on piles.
min FSi the minimum safety factor of the embankment slope when the potential
slip surface passes through i row piles.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 14 of 16

M the intersection of the potential slip surface and the interface between the
embankment fill and the soft soil.
n the total number of pile rows.
O the center of rotation of the failure mechanism.
Pj the intersection of the centerline of the j-th row piles and the slip surface.
P0 j the vertex of the centerline of the j-th row piles.
qj the distribution of the ultimate horizontal load of the j-th row of
longitudinal adjacent piles above the slip surface.
qj the distribution of two-dimensional ultimate horizontal load of the j-th
row piles above the slip surface.
q j1 the horizontal load at the top of the j-th row piles.
q j2 the horizontal load at the intersection of the j-th row piles and the
potential slip surface.
r1 ( θ ) the equation of failure surface in the embankment and soft soil.
r2 ( θ ) the equation of failure surface in soft soil.
r0 the length of OB.
rm the length of OM.
rh the length of OD.
r pj the length of OPj .
Rj the parameter that measures the contribution of the j-th row piles to the
overall stability of the embankment slope.
V1 the velocity equation of any point along the slip surface of embankments.
V2 the velocity equation of any point along the slip surface of soft clay.
. _
W01 the rate of work due to the soil weight in regions O BMO.
. _
W 00 1 the rates of work due to the soil weight in regions O MDO.
.
W2 the rates of work due to the soil weight in regions OABO.
.
W3 the rates of work due to the soil weight in regions OADO.
.
W4 the rate of work due to the soil weight in regions ACDA.
. _
W ex the rate of external work done by the soil weight in the region A BMDCA.
xG the length of CD.
x pj the reinforcement position of the j − th row piles, denoted by CP0 j .
zj the vertical distance between any point at the centerline of the j-th row
piles above the slip surface and the embankment slope.
ω angular velocity of rotational failure mechanism.
ϕ friction angle of soils.
ϕ1 the friction angle of embankment fill.
ϕ2 the friction angle of soft soil.
γ1 the unit weight of embankment fill.
γ2 the unit weight of soft soil.
β slope angle.
β0 ∠ AMD.
θ0 the angle created by the horizontal line passing point O rotating
clockwise to line OB.
θm the angle created by the horizontal line passing point O rotating
clockwise to line OM.
θ pi the angle created by the horizontal line passing point O rotating
clockwise to line OPi .
θ pj the angle created by the horizontal line passing point O rotating
clockwise to line OPj .
θh the angle created by the horizontal line passing point O rotating
clockwise to line OD.
ϕ0 1 the internal friction angle of embankment fill in the limit equilibrium state.
ϕ0 2 the internal friction angle of soft soil in the limit equilibrium state.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 15 of 16

References
1. Zheng, G.; Yang, X.; Zhou, H.; Chai, J. Numerical modeling of progressive failure of rigid piles under embankment load. Can.
Geotech. J. 2019, 56, 23–34. [CrossRef]
2. Wang, A.; Zhang, D. Lateral Response and Failure Mechanisms of Rigid Piles in Soft Soils Under Geosynthetic-Reinforced
Embankment. Int. J. Civ. Eng. 2020, 18, 169–184. [CrossRef]
3. Han, J. Recent research and development of ground column technologies. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Ground Improv. 2015, 168, 246–264.
[CrossRef]
4. Chai, J.; Shrestha, S.; Hino, T. Failure of an embankment on soil-cement column–improved clay deposit: Investigation and
analysis. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 2019, 145, 5019006. [CrossRef]
5. Han, J.; Oztoprak, S.; Parsons, R.L.; Huang, J. Numerical analysis of foundation columns to support widening of embankments.
Comput. Geotech. 2007, 34, 435–448. [CrossRef]
6. Su, Q.; Huang, J. Deformation and failure modes of composite foundation with sub-embankment plain concrete piles. Sci. Cold
Arid. Reg. 2013, 5, 614.
7. Kitazume, M.; Maruyama, K. External Stability of Group Column Type Deep Mixing Improved Ground Under Embankment
Loading. Soils Found. 2006, 46, 323–340. [CrossRef]
8. Han, J.; Parsons, R.J.; Sheth, A.R.; Huang, J. Factors of safety against deep-seated failure of embankments over deep mixed
columns. In Proceedings of the Deep Mixing 2005 Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, 23–25 May 2005.
9. Bishop, A.W. The use of the slip circle in the stability analysis of slopes. Geotechnique 1955, 5, 7–17. [CrossRef]
10. Kitazume, M.; Maruyama, K. Internal Stability of Group Column Type Deep Mixing Improved Ground Under Embankment
Loading. Soils Found. 2007, 47, 437–455. [CrossRef]
11. Jellali, B.; Bouassida, M.; de Buhan, P. Stability analysis of an embankment resting upon a column-reinforced soil. Int. J. Numer.
Anal. Met. 2011, 35, 1243–1256. [CrossRef]
12. Zheng, G.; Li, L.; Han, J. Stability of embankment on soft subgrade reinforced by rigid inclusions (II): Group piles analysis. Chin.
J. Geotech. Eng. 2010, 32, 1811–1820.
13. Han, J.; Chai, J.; Leshchinsky, D.; Shen, S. Evaluation of deep-seated slope stability of embankments over deep mixed foundations.
Geotech. Spec. Publ. 2004, 124, 945–954.
14. Liu, L. Research on the Stability Analysis of Rigid Pile Supported Embankment. Ph.D. Thesis, Tianjin University, Tianjin,
China, 2010.
15. Terashi, M.; Tanaka, H.; Kitazume, M. Extrusion failure of ground improved by the deep mixing method. In Proceedings of the
7th Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Haifa, Israel, 14–19 August 1983.
16. Liu, J.F.; Zheng, G.; An, G.F. Stability analysis of flow-slide of embankment on rigid-piles composite ground. Geotech. Investig.
Surv. 2013, 6, 17–22.
17. Li, P.; Chen, K.; Wang, F.; Li, Z. An upper-bound analytical model of blow-out for a shallow tunnel in sand considering the partial
failure within the face. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2019, 91, 102989. [CrossRef]
18. Chwała, M. Upper-bound approach based on failure mechanisms in slope stability analysis of spatially variable c-ϕ soils. Comput.
Geotech. 2021, 135, 104170. [CrossRef]
19. Xu, J.; Zhu, D.Y.; Lee, C.F.; Yao, H. The optimal upper-bound solution for factor of safety of slope by linear programming. Nat.
Hazards 2022, 112, 2037–2052. [CrossRef]
20. Wang, X.; Lin, X.; Sun, X. Upper bound limit analysis for 3D slope stability analysis based on rigid block structure. Bull. Eng. Geol.
Environ. 2022, 81, 375. [CrossRef]
21. Ito, T.; Matsui, T. Methods to estimate lateral force acting on stabilizing piles. Soils Found. 1975, 15, 43–59. [CrossRef]
22. Michalowski, R.L. Soil reinforcement for seismic design of geotechnical structures. Comput. Geotech. 1998, 23, 1–17. [CrossRef]
23. Michalowski, R.L. Limit analysis in stability calculations of reinforced soil structures. Geotext Geomembr. 1998, 16, 311–331.
[CrossRef]
24. Stockton, E.; Leshchinsky, B.; Xie, Y.; Olsen, M.J.; Leshchinsky, D. Limit Equilibrium Stability Analysis of Layered Slopes: A
Generalized Approach. Transp. Infrastruct. Geotechnol. 2018, 5, 366–378. [CrossRef]
25. Nian, T.K.; Chen, G.Q.; Luan, M.T.; Yang, Q.; Zheng, D.F. Limit analysis of the stability of slopes reinforced with piles against
landslide in nonhomogeneous and anisotropic soils. Can. Geotech. J. 2008, 45, 1092–1103. [CrossRef]
26. Qin, C.; Chian, S.C. Kinematic analysis of seismic slope stability with a discretisation technique and pseudo-dynamic approach:
A new perspective. Géotechnique 2018, 68, 492–503. [CrossRef]
27. Yang, X.; Xu, J. Three-dimensional stability of two-stage slope in inhomogeneous soils. Int. J. Geomech. 2017, 17, 6016045.
[CrossRef]
28. Chen, W. Limit Analysis and Soil Plasticity; J. Ross Publishing: Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA, 2007.
29. Yang, X.L.; Zhang, S. Stability analysis of 3D cracked slope reinforced with piles. Comput. Geotech. 2020, 122, 103544. [CrossRef]
30. Wang, L.; Sun, D.; Yao, Y.; Wu, L.; Xu, Y. Kinematic limit analysis of three-dimensional unsaturated soil slopes reinforced with a
row of piles. Comput. Geotech. 2020, 120, 103428. [CrossRef]
31. Wang, L.; Sun, D.; Yao, Y.; Tan, Y. Seismic stability of 3D piled unsaturated earth slopes using kinematic limit analysis. Soil Dyn.
Earthq. Eng. 2019, 126, 105821. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11652 16 of 16

32. Nian, T.; Jiang, J.; Wang, F.; Yang, Q.; Luan, M. Seismic stability analysis of slope reinforced with a row of piles. Soil Dyn. Earthq.
Eng. 2016, 84, 83–93. [CrossRef]
33. Ausilio, E.; Conte, E.; Dente, G. Stability analysis of slopes reinforced with piles. Comput. Geotech. 2001, 28, 591–611. [CrossRef]
34. Li, X.; Pei, X.; Gutierrez, M.; He, S. Optimal location of piles in slope stabilization by limit analysis. Acta Geotech. 2012, 7, 253–259.
[CrossRef]
35. Zheng, J.J.; Xie, M.X.; Cao, W.Z.; Zhang, J. Analyzing stability of embankment considering failure mode of soil between piles.
J. Huazhong Univ. Sci. Technol. Nat. Sci. Ed. 2012, 40, 98–102.