Stability of bench terraces retained by

dry-stone walls

Abstract
Can you please by reorganize your docs in one scientific-style doc (stability + problem parameters,
design, hydrology.. whatever). Then one chapter for each main topic (from the objectives above),
with subsection as needed (2.1 , 2.2...) Please start the section with the REFs. Guidelines for .. were
presented by REF, as summarized below. Use proper citations inside the text. Put all refs in one
section at the end. Authors, year, title, source, doi/weblink. Add a caption, with ref (source), for all
figs. Use appendices if needed. At this stage, we don’t need more info, but please re-organize what
you have in a logic and scientific manner.

Page | 1
Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................3
2. Stability of bench terraces .............................................................................................................4
2.1 Failures modes and stability models.........................................................................................4
2.2 Slope stability models ..............................................................................................................4
2.3 Retaining wall stability models ................................................................................................5
2.4 Dry-stone retaining walls .........................................................................................................5
2.5 Dry-stone retaining wall modeling using the Distinct Element Method ..................................6
2.6 Mapping for simplified shear failure model .............................................................................6
3. Impact of hydrologic process on bench terrace stability ............................................................7
4. Construction of bench terraces in Cyprus ...................................................................................8
4.1 Traditional Construction...........................................................................................................8
4.2 Modern Construction................................................................................................................9
References .............................................................................................................................................10
Appendix 1: Types of Bench Terraces ................................................................................................13
Appendix 2: Parameters controlling the stability of dry-stone walls ..............................................14
Appendix 3: Practical design and construction guidelines ...............................................................15

Page | 2
1. Introduction
Terrace construction is one of the most widespread anthropogenic landscape interventions. The extent
of this intervention is more obvious in mountainous areas, where large hillslopes are terraced for
agricultural purposes (Tarolli, et al., 2014).

Terraces are important for creating new fields suitable for agricultural production. Terraces provide
level and accessible land for agriculture and reduce water and soil loss (Chuxiong, et al., 2021). Apart
from their practical importance, terraces are also part of a country’s cultural heritage and in recent
years, terrace conservation for the purpose is preserving cultural landscapes is gaining popularity
(Kladnik, et al., 2017).

Traditionally, terraces construction didn’t involve machinery and the overall movement of earth
material was smaller. Nowadays, hillslope terraces are constructed using heavy machinery, moving
larger volumes of earth material to create wider terraces and larger fields suitable for mechanized
agriculture (Ramos, et al., 2007).

The main challenges associated with bench terraces are:

1. The management of abandoned terraces. Terrace abandonment has become common over the last
decades (Chuxiong, et al., 2021). At abandoned terraced hillslopes, the spatial pattern of
hydrological connectivity changes resulting in concentrated runoff and increased soil erosion and
degradation (Koulouri & Giourga, 2007). In certain areas, this has significant a negative impact.
2. The construction of new terraces in a controlled and sustainable manner. Constructing new bench
terraces in a controlled and sustainable manner is crucial for maximizing their effectiveness
(Ramos, et al., 2007), minimizing the associated capital and operational costs, and reducing the
negative environmental impacts from the intervention.

The objectives of this report are:

1. To summarise the models and methods used for assessing the stability of bench terraces.
2. To summarize the effects of hydrologic processes (infiltration and runoff) on the stability of bench
terraces.
3. To identify the various types of bench terraces found in Cyprus and the approaches used for the
construction of those terraces
4. To propose approaches that can be used for designing terraced hillslopes

Page | 3
2. Stability of bench terraces
2.1 Failures modes and stability models
Terraces often fail due to improper design and construction or insufficient maintenance (Tarolli,
2018). The stability of the terraces depends on the proper design of the riser and the provision of
suitable drainage.

The models for evaluating the stability of the risers can be classified into two groups:
• Slope stability models. Those models are used when there is no retaining wall (Case 1, Appendix
1). The raiser consists of a slope that needs to have a certain inclination to be stable. Typically, the
smaller the slope the less the probability of failure (Budhu, 1999).
• Retaining wall stability models. Those models are used when there is a retaining wall (see
Appendix 1). The models assess the resistance of the wall to the lateral earth pressures. The riser
(terrace) fails only when the wall fails (Budhu, 1999). The stability, strength, and deformation of
the wall are modeled to assess the stability of the terrace.

The situation of a riser that has a drystone retaining wall at its lower part and a sloping backfill at its
upper part, from a design point of view is not special because (1) the sloping backfill is designed using
a slope stability model (2) the drystone wall is designed assuming a retaining wall with surcharge load.
Parameters such as the vegetation on the slope etc can affect the design but still, the two checks are
independent (slope check, wall check)

2.2 Slope stability models

The slope fails along a sliding surface (minimum shear resistance surface, slip surface, failure surface,
etc.). The sliding surface can be approximated as a plane, circular surface, or other shape.

Figure 1:Illustration of a slip surface as assumed when using limit equilibrium models.

The main parameter controlling the stability of the slopes is the shear resistance of the earth material.
If shear resistance is sufficient to resist the loading, then the slope is stable (Budhu, 1999). Load
resistance factor design (LRFD) is typically applied as the method for determining the reliability of the
design. This is the main approach used by many design codes including Eurocode 7 (EN 1997, n.d.).

Page | 4
In certain types of slope designs, the use of Eurocode 7 is obligatory by the relevant legislation e.g. for
excavation and embankment slopes in highways (ΚΔΠ528, 2011).

The model for assessing stability is chosen on a fit-for-purpose basis. Commonly used are:
• Limit equilibrium methods, For example, the infinite slope method, Fellenius Method, Bishop’s
Method, Janbu’s Method, etc. (Pourkhosravani, 2011) (Duncan, 1996)
• Stress-strain models implemented in finite element codes. (Pourkhosravani, 2011)

Similar principles and models apply to slopes formed into rock. However, the definition of slip planes
and rock parameters are more complicated in the case of rock slopes (Doug & Andrea, 2015)
(Azarafza, et al., 2021). Pantelides (Pantelidis, 2009) reviews some of the available rock classification
systems used for rock slope stability assessments.

2.3 Retaining wall stability models

In the case of nearly vertical risers reinforced by drystone walls, the stability of the riser is increased
by the drystone retaining wall. In such cases, for the slope to fail the retaining wall needs to fail
(Budhu, 1999).

There are two categories of retaining walls:

• Rigid (gravity retaining walls). Relying on the weight of the wall to resist the lateral earth
pressures. The failure modes for rigid walls are: Translation, Rotation, Bearing Capacity, deep-
seated failure, and seepage. Rigid body analysis is applied
• Flexible. Bending of the wall takes place and a bending moment is developed, transferring the
earth pressures to the foundation. The failure modes for flexible retaining walls are: Yield (shear,
moment), Translation, and Bearing Capacity. Yield design theory is applied to both the soil
material and the structure (Euler-Bernoulli or Timoshenko beam theory)

The main concept when evaluating the stability of retaining walls is the concept of lateral earth
pressures. The classical methods for estimating lateral earth pressures are the Coulomb earth pressure
theory, and the Rankine theory (Yadav, et al., 2018). Newer research works, such for example the
work of Pail and Salgado (Paik & Salgado, 2003) elaborate more on the topic of lateral earth pressures
and present more accurate concepts.

2.4 Dry-stone retaining walls

Dry-stone retaining walls are a very special case of retaining walls. Notably because:
• They can neither be classified as rigid walls nor as flexible walls. They are not rigid as they rarely
react as rigid bodies (translation, rotation, and bearing capacity failures without the deformation of
the wall are almost impossible). They are not flexible as their deformation is far from linear. That
is mainly due to the discontinuities between stone blocks and to a lesser extent due to the inherent
lack of elasticity of the stone as material.
• The interface of the wall with the soil is not smooth/regular. This violates the assumption of
smooth walls used in many lateral earth pressure theories.
• They exhibit additional failure modes (bulging, bursting, and toppling) which cannot be modeled
using rigid body analysis or yield theory (Powrie, 2002).

Page | 5
• Part of the backfill can be bedrock, thus changing the distribution of lateral earth pressures and
forcing failure along the interface between bedrock and soil.

Given the above, the established stability models for retaining wall stability, both the rigid wall and
the flexible wall models, have intrinsic deficiencies when it comes to modeling dry-stone retaining
walls.

2.5 Dry-stone retaining wall modeling using the Distinct Element Method
A review of common methods for modeling dry-stone retaining walls can be found in (Le, 2014). The
Distinct Element Method (DEM) is the state-of-the-art approach for the modeling of dry-stone walls
(Colas, 2008). The concept of distinct elements is ideal for modeling discontinuous materials, and as
such, dry-stone retaining walls which in most cases can neither modeled as rigid nor as flexible.

The Distinct Element Method can be used to simulate the behavior of individual stone blocks and their
interactions with each other. The method considers the mechanical properties of each stone (size,
shape, material properties) as well as the interlocking and interface (friction, dumping, elasticity)
behavior between adjacent stones.

Several researchers have used the Distinct Element Method for the modeling of dry-stone retaining
walls all of which evaluate the approach as adequate. Oetomo et al (Oetomo, et al., 2016) used a fully
discrete approach (both the wall and the backfill were modeled as discrete elements) to model dry-
stone retaining walls. Quezada (Quezada, 2016) used DEM and scaled model. Santa-Cruz et al (Santa-
Cruz, et al., 2021) used YadeDEM code (YadeDEM, n.d.) to model out-of-plane failure of dry-stone
walls. Walker et al (Walker, et al., 2007) used the distinct element code UDEC by ITASCA (UDEC,
n.d.) to simulate the bulging failure of drystone retaining walls. Savalle (Savalle, 2022) modeled
drystone structures using 3DEC code by ITASCA. Harkness et al. (Harkness, et al., 2000) modeled
Burgoyne’s field experiments using UDEC code (DEM, ITASCA code). All the above studies
evaluated the distinct element method as adequate for simulating dry-stone walls

A few open-source codes are available for applying the Distinct Element Method for geotechnical
applications. LIGGGHTS® which is an Open-Source DEM Particle Simulation Software
(CFDEM®project, n.d.), YadeDEM is specifically designed for geomechanics, ESyS-Particle (ESyS-
Particle, n.d.) is also focused on geotechnical applications, GranOO (GranOO, n.d.), and
KratosMultiphysics are more generic.

2.6 Mapping for simplified shear failure model

As the Distinct Element Method (DEM ) is too complex for practical applications (Colas, 2008),
simplified models have been proposed for investigating common dry-stone wall failure modes by
assuming a slip plane through a wall with a certain friction angle (Savalle, et al., 2023). Such a model
is simpler to apply than the distinct element method provided that the reliable evaluation of the friction
angle through the wall is available. Nevertheless, such a simplified model may not be proper for
modeling bulging and similar types of failures.

Page | 6
 Figure 2: Model assuming a slip plane through a wall with a certain friction angle (ω)

Bench terraces result in reduced runoff and increased infiltration into the soil. Typically, this has the
dual benefit of controlling soil erosion and holding water into the soil which is beneficial for
agricultural purposes.

3. Impact of hydrologic process on bench terrace stability

Bench terraces result in reduced runoff and increased infiltration into the soil. Typically, this has the
dual benefit of controlling soil erosion and holding water into the soil which is beneficial for
agricultural purposes (Preti, et al., 2017). However, under certain conditions that favored gully
erosion, the saturation of the soil is rendering the terraces susceptible to gully erosion (Wen, et al.,
2021). Gully erosion refers to the process where runoff channels are formed into the soil from a
concentrated flow of water.

Gully erosion can occur at bench terraces typically due to:

• Improper terraces design, not providing adequate drainage (proper slopes to guide surface runoff
into well-sized channels and safely direct and dispose off the field). Improper design can lead to
concentrated flow that initiates gully erosion.
• Inadequate maintenance: When bench terraces are not maintained, even proper drainage
eventually deteriorates and flow paths changed, and eventually gully erosion is initiated.
• Damaged slopes of dry-stone retaining walls: Unrepairing damaged terraces are areas where gully
erosion can occur.
• Intense rainfall events: If the intensity of rainfall exceeds the design capacity of the terraces,
gullies can form as the excess water flows over or bypasses the terraces.

To understand the impact of terracing on gully erosion Wen et al (Wen, et al., 2021)investigated the
cause and timing of their triggering of gullies in terraced landscapes. Their results showed that several
gullies developed after terracing. Improper terrace design caused runoff concentration along terraces
and ridges, which resulted in gully creation. The same processes are responsible for the persistent
gully activity after abandonment and vegetation recovery.

Page | 7
To prevent gully erosion on bench terraces, the following measures can be taken:
• Proper design and construction. Especially proper drainage design, through proper bench slopes,
ditches, diversion channels, proper design to exclude runoff from areas outside the field.
• Regular maintenance: Mainly repairing damaged terraces and ensuring proper water flow.
• Conservation practices such as planting vegetation on the slopes of bench terraces with sloped
risers, help to stabilize the soil and reduce the impact of rainfall on erosion.

4. Construction of bench terraces in Cyprus

4.1 Traditional Construction
Bench terraces with dry-stone walls retaining walls are very common in Cyprus. Most of the terraces
were built manually decades ago when heavy earthmoving equipment was not widely available. It
seems that there were two construction approaches:

(1) A strip of topsoil was removed, to find a hard foundation layer. On that layer, dry-stone walls were
built using blocks of stones extracted from the field or nearby locations. Then, the area behind the wall
was made flat or less steep, by manually digging and moving the soil toward the wall or by successive
tillage cycles that gradually moved soil towards the wall and made the field less steep.

Figure 3: Traditional method for bench terrace construction

(2) The first wall was built similarly to the previous approach. Then once the bench was made flat, the
wall for the subsequent terrace was founded on the bench level as shown in Figure 4.

Page | 8
 Figure 4: Traditional method for bench terrace construction

4.2 Modern Construction

Due to the widespread availability of earthmoving equipment and the need for wider and flat benches
suitable for mechanized agriculture, bench terraces are now constructed using dozers and excavators.

Figure 5:Construction of terraces using heavy earthmoving equipment (source: Martinho Martins)

The stone blocks for building dry stone walls are supplied by trucks from various sources. Extend to
include the management of the topsoil, access, irrigation etc. in one more chapter combining the other
report

Page | 9
References
Azarafza, M. et al., 2021. Discontinuous rock slope stability analysis by limit equilibrium approaches–
a review.. International Journal of Digital Earth.

Budhu, M., 1999. Soil Mechanics & Foundations. s.l.:s.n.

CFDEM®project, n.d. LIGGGHTS - DEM code.

Chuxiong, D. et al., 2021. Advantages and disadvantages of terracing: A comprehensive review.

International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 9(3), pp.344-359..

Colas, A. S. M. J. C. &. G. D., 2008. Yield design of dry‐stone masonry retaining structures—
Comparisons with analytical, numerical, and experimental data.. Journal for numerical and analytical
methods in geomechanics.

Doug, S. & Andrea, W., 2015. A critical review of rock slope failure mechanisms: The importance of
structural geology. Journal of Structural Geology.

Ducan, J. M., 1996. State of the art: Limit equilimbrium and finite-element analysis of slopes. Journal
of Geotechnical Engineering.

Duncan, J. M., 1996. State of the Art: Limit Equilibrium and Finite-Element Analysis of Slopes..
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering.

EN 1997, n.d. EN-1997 Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design. s.l.:s.n.

ESyS-Particle, n.d. https://launchpad.net/esys-particle. s.l.:s.n.

Fukumoto, Y. Y. J. S. H. &. M. A., 2014. The effects of block shape on the seismic behavior of dry-
stone masonry retaining walls: A numerical investigation by discrete element modeling. Soils and
Foundations.

GranOO, n.d. [Online]

Available at: https://www.granoo.org/

Harkness, R. M., W. Powrie, X. Z., Brady, K. C. & O'Reilly, M. P., 2000. Numerical modelling of
full-scale tests on drystone masonry retaining walls. Géotechnique.

Kladnik, D., Mateja, Š. H. & Matjaž, G., 2017. Terraced landscapes as protected cultural heritage
sites. Acta geographica Slovenica 57, no. 2.

Koulouri, M. & Giourga, C., 2007. Land abandonment and slope gradient as key factors of soil erosion
in Mediterranean terraced lands.. Catena, 69(3), pp.274-281..

Le, H. H. M. J. C. G. D. &. M. P. F., 2014. A review of methods for modelling drystone retaining
walls. s.l., s.n.

Page | 10
Mundell, C. M. P. H. A. H. J. &. W. P., 2010. Behaviour of drystone retaining structures. Proceedings
of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Structures and Buildings.

Oetomo, J. J., Vincens, E., Dedecker, F. & Morel, J., 2016. Modeling the 2D behavior of dry‐stone
retaining walls by a fully discrete element method. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical
Methods in Geomechanics.

Paik, K. H. & Salgado, R., 2003. Estimation of active earth pressure against rigid retaining walls
considering arching effects. Geotechnique.

Pantelidis, L., 2009. Rock slope stability assessment through rock mass classification systems.
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences.

Pourkhosravani, A. &. K. B., 2011. A Review of Current Methods for Slope Stability Evaluation.
Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering.

Powrie, W. H. R. M. Z. X. &. B. D. I., 2002. Deformation and failure modes of drystone retaining
walls.. Géotechnique.

Preti, F. et al., 2017. Conceptualization of Water Flow Pathways in Agricultural Terraced Landscapes.
Land Degradation & Development, 29(3), 651–662. doi:10.1002/ldr.2764.

Quezada, J.-C. E. V. R. M. a. J.-C. M., 2016. 3D failure of a scale-down dry stone retaining wall: A
DEM modelling. Engineering Structures.

Ramos, M. C., Cots-Folch, R. & Martínez-Casasnovas, J. A., 2007. Sustainability of modern land
terracing for vineyard plantation in a Mediterranean mountain environment–The case of the Priorat
region (NE Spain). Geomorphology.

Santa-Cruz, S. et al., 2021. Out-of-plane analysis of dry-stone walls using a pseudo-static experimental
and numerical approach in scaled-down specimens. Engineering Structures.

Savalle, N. et al., 2023. Static and seismic design of Dry Stone Retaining Walls (DSRWs) following
Eurocode standards. Engineering Structures.

Savalle, N. P. B. L. a. G. M., 2022. Joint Stiffness Influence on the First-Order Seismic Capacity of
Dry-Joint Masonry Structures: Numerical DEM Investigations. Applied Sciences.

Savalle, N. V. E. &. H. S., 2018. Pseudo-static scaled-down experiments on dry stone retaining walls:
Preliminary implications for the seismic design.. Engineering Structures,, pp. 171, 336-347.

Tarolli, P., 2018. Agricultural terraces special issue preface.. Land Degradation & Development,, pp.
29(10), 3544-3548.

Tarolli, P., Preti, F. & Romano, N., 2014. Terraced landscapes: From an old best practice to a potential
hazard for soil degradation due to land abandonment. Anthropocene.

UDEC, n.d. Universal Distinct Element Code. s.l.: https://www.itascacg.com/software/udec.

Page | 11
Walker, P., McCombie, P. & Claxton, M., 2007. Plane strain numerical model for drystone retaining
walls.

Wen, Y. et al., 2021. A case‐study on history and rates of gully erosion in Northeast China.. Land
Degradation & Development, 32(15), 4254–4266. doi:10.1002/ldr.4031 .

Wen, Y. et al., 2021. May agricultural terraces induce gully erosion? A case study from the Black Soil
Region of Northeast China.. Science of The Total Environment, 750, 141715.
doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141.

Yadav, P. A., Padade, A. H. & Dahale, P. P. &. M. V. M., 2018. Analytical and experimental analysis
of retaining wall in static and seismic conditions: A review.. International Journal of Civil
Engineering and Technology.

YadeDEM, n.d. https://yade-dem.org/doc/.

ΚΔΠ528, 2011. [Online]

Available at:
http://www.cylaw.org/KDP/data/2011_1_528.pdf%20Eurocode%207:%20Geotechnical%20design

Page | 12
Appendix 1: Types of Bench Terraces
A bench terrace consists of a nearly flat bench and a riser that can be sloping, nearly vertical or
combination of a sloping part with a nearly vertical part at its base. Figure 1 illustrates these
alternatives. The excavated volume (cut) is used as for the embankment volume (fill) resulting in a
nearly flat bench. Sloping risers are often protected by vegetation whereas vertical risers can be
unprotected if the riser is cut into stable bedrock, or retained by dry-stone walls that support the soil
backfill.

Figure 6: Types of risers encounter in bench terraces: (1) Sloping, (2) Nearly vertical (3)
Combination of a sloping part with a nearly vertical part at its base.

Classification There are various ways to classify terraces. For example:

Criterion Types

Balancing of 1. Balanced, Cut = Fill

1 earthmoving 2. Cut > Fill
3. Fill > Cut (not common)
Bench slope 1. Level
2
2. Inward sloping
3. Outward sloping
3 Riser type 1. Vertical
2. Sloping
Page | 13
 3. Combined (vertical & sloping)
Space between
terraces (strips of land 1. Continues
4 not constituting a riser 2. Non-continues
or bench)
5 construction method 1. Machine constructed.
2. Manually constructed.

Appendix 2: Parameters controlling the stability of dry-stone

walls
The parameters illustrated in Figure 1, have been identified as parameters that affect the resistance of
dry-stone walls. Stone shape (else block shape) was investigated both experimentally and numerically
by Fukumoto et al (Fukumoto, 2014). Slenderness was investigated by Savalle et al (Savalle, 2018).
Void ratio and stone shape were investigated by Mundell et al (Mundell, 2010).

Figure 7: Parameters affect the resistance of dry-stone walls.

The parameters illustrated in Figure 1, have been identified as parameters that affect the load exerted
on the dry-stone retaining walls

Page | 14
Appendix 3: Practical design and construction guidelines
Title: “Soil conservation techniques for hillside farms”, Peace Corps
https://sriwestafrica.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/soil-conservation-for-hillside-farms.pdf

Title: “A Field Guideline on Bench Terrace Design and Construction”

https://nrmdblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/bench-terrace-manual.pdf

Soil and water conservation engineering – Series of lectures:

Lecture 16: Terrace - Introduction
Lecture 17: Bench Terraces
Lecture 18: Problems on Bench Terraces

Page | 15