See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/322086313

Stability Assessment and Designing of Jointed Rock Slope Using Finite

Element Method

Conference Paper · December 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 239

5 authors, including:

Naveen Reddy Kallam Manash JYOTI Bora

Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati
2 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS 1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Amalesh Jana A. Murali Krishna

Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati
15 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS 122 PUBLICATIONS 452 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Rock Slope Stability and Engineering View project

Rock Engineering View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Naveen Reddy Kallam on 27 December 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Indian Geotechnical Conference 2017 GeoNEst
14-16 December 2017, IIT Guwahati, India

Stability Assessment and Designing of Jointed Rock Slope Using Finite Element
Method
Kallam Naveen Reddy
Manash Jyoti Bora
Amalesh Jana
Sreedeep S
A Murali Krishna
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati – 781039
E-mail: naveen2016@iitg.ernet.in, manashjyoti@iitg.ernet.in, janaaamalesh@gmail.com, srees@iitg.ernet.in, amurali@iitg.ernet.in

ABSTRACT: The stability analysis of rock slopes has been a challenging task because of the presence of discontinuities
in various forms which result in different types of slope failures. Discontinuities are the weakest zone in the rock mass.
Failure mechanism of rock slope mainly depends on the characteristics of discontinuities. Discontinuities in the form of
joints, bedding planes and faults create anisotropy in the rock mass. Stability assessment of rock slope is very much
essential for suitable mitigation measurements. In this study, stability of a vulnerable rock slope is checked and a
parametric study has been carried out using finite element method (FEM) based shear strength reduction technique to
determine the effect of bolt parameters on the factor of safety of slope as well as the tension mobilized in the bolts in
order to provide the effective design of bolt for the slope.
Keywords: Rock slope; Finite element method; Shear strength reduction; End Anchorage Bolt
1. Introduction formulated by Goodman et al. 1968, which connects two
Failure mechanism of rock slope is very intricate intact rock element. Shear and normal stiffness of the
phenomenon and mainly depends on the characteristics of
discontinuities. Discontinuities in the form of joints,
bedding planes and faults create stress anisotropy in the
rock mass. Rock slope fails in one or more combination
of failure mechanisms, like circular failure, plane failure,
wedge failure, toppling failure and buckling failure.
Stability assessment of rock slope is very much essential
for suitable mitigation measures. The stability of a
vulnerable rock slope is increased by using various
stabilizing techniques. Rock bolting is one of the most
common techniques used to stabilize the slope (Tiwari Fig. 1 Numerical model of jointed rock slope
and Latha 2016). To obtain the best results by rock bolt
installation, bolt diameter, bolt length, bolt orientation, Table-1 Properties of Rock, Joints and Bolts (Singh et al.
tensile strength and spacing of the bolt should be more 2014)
accurate. In this paper, stability of a vulnerable jointed
rock slopes is analyzed in PHASE2 (Rocscience 2016) Material Properties
which is a finite element based program and a parametric Rock Unit Weight = 0.0274 MN/m3
study has been carried out by varying bolt parameters to Poisson's Ratio = 0.3
determine the effect on the stability of the rock slope. Young's Modulus = 2840 MPa
Based on the study effective solution has been proposed UCS = 28 MPa
for the vulnerable rock slope.
GSI = 30
2. Problem description and Slope geometry mi = 7
The properties of the rock mass for the current study are Degree of disturbance =1
taken from the existing vulnerable rock slopes in Dip/dip direction (of Joint Set 1)
Rudraprayag district, Uttarakhand, India (Singh et al. Joints = 36°/215
2014). The rock type considered for the study is Dip/dip direction (of Joint Set 2)
characterized by Phyllite. The rock slope possess two set = 360/135
of parallel joints oriented in different dip direction. The Spacing = 1 m
geometry of the slope is shown in the Fig. 1. Properties of Normal Stiffness = 2552 MPa/m
rock mass, joint and bolts are shown in Table-1.
Shear Stiffness = 255.2 MPa/m
3. Methodology Tensile Strength = 0 MPa
Numerical model (Fig. 1) of the rock slope is developed Cohesion = 0.004 MPa
in an elasto-plastic finite element analysis program, Friction Angle = 25°
PHASE2 (Rocscience). Joints are introduced in between Bolts Diameter = varying
intact rock as negligible thickness interface element E (MPa) = 200000
Tensile Capacity = varying
1
Stability Assessment and Designing of Jointed Rock Slope Using Finite Element Method

interface element governs the displacement of the jointed reverse direction of the driving force. Combined effect of
system. Generalized Hoek–Brown failure criteria are used these two mechanisms increase the FOS of the rock slope
to define material characteristics of intact rock and Mohr- if the bolts are installed at an angle flatter than the normal
Coulomb failure criteria is used to define joints. Finite to the joint.
element based Shear strength reduction (SSR) method has
been used for the analysis of both unreinforced and
reinforced slopes to obtain factor of safety of the rock
slope. The ratio of horizontal to vertical stress in the rock
mass is considered to be 0.5. In this study the intact rock
is discretized using six nodded triangular meshing
element. Fixed boundary condition is assumed at the base
of the model which will restrict displacement in x and y
direction at the base and roller boundary condition is
assigned at the left side and right side of the slope which
will allow movement in the vertical y direction.
4. Stability analysis results of unreinforced slope
Fig. 2 represents sliding failure along critical joint set
where dip angle of the joint is less than the slope face. Fig. 3 SRF vs Bolt diameter
The critical strength reduction factor (SRF) for
unreinforced slope is 1.06 (less than recommended value If the bolts are installed steeper than the normal
1.5), hence the slope is to be stabilized to reduce the to the joint (Fig. 4b), the shear component of the bolt
displacement and to increase the stability. tension (Ts) acts down the joint plane which increases the
total driving force resulting in the reduction of factor of
safety of the rock slope.

(a)

Fig. 2 Critical SRF and displacement contour of

unreinforced slope (b)

5. Design of reinforcements
In the present study, end anchorage bolts are used to
reinforce the slope which is modeled as one dimensional
single deformable element in PHASE2. The effect of bolt
parameters on the strength reduction factor of the slope is
analyzed and the tension mobilized in the bolts is
discussed in the present study.
5.1 Bolt Diameter
Nominal diameters of the bolts are designated as 16, 20,
25 and 32 mm. To obtain the optimum bolt diameter,
different combinations of bolt diameter and bolt length
for a particular bolt angle, tensile capacity and spacing
has been analyzed. For different bolt lengths, maximum
factor of safety of rock slope occurs at 20 mm diameter
for a tensile capacity of 200 kN as shown in Fig. 3.
5.2 Bolt Orientation
The orientation of bolts is varied between 0 0 – 450 with
the horizontal for different bolt length, bolt spacing and
bolt tensile capacity to obtain the optimum bolt
orientation. When the bolts are installed at an angle flatter
than the normal to the joint (Fig. 4a), FOS has been found
to be maximum for this orientation. The normal
component of mobilized tension (T n) neutralizes dilation
and the shear component of mobilized tension (T s) acts in
Fig. 4 Bolts installed at an angle (a) flatter than normal
(b) steeper than normal
To obtain the best bolt orientation, different combinations
of bolt length, bolt spacing and bolt tensile capacity is
used. In the first case, the bolt spacing and the bolt tensile
capacity are kept constant and the bolt length is varied for
bolt orientation from 00-450. Factor of safety of rock
slope increases for bolt orientation from 00-400 and then
decreases after 400 for different bolt length as shown in
Fig. 5a.
In the second case, the bolt length and the bolt tensile
capacity are kept constant and the bolt spacing is varied
for bolt orientation from 00-450. Factor of safety of rock
slope increases for bolt orientation from 0 0-400 and then
decreases after 400 for different bolt spacing as shown in
Fig. 5b.

2

In the third case, the bolt spacing and bolt length are kept
constant and the bolt tensile capacity is varied for bolt
orientation from 00-450. Factor of safety of rock slope
increases for bolt orientation from 00-400 and then
decreases after 400 for different bolt tensile capacity as
shown in Fig. 5c. From all the three cases, it can be
concluded that the optimum angle of bolt orientation is
400 with respect to the horizontal.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Fig. 5 SRF Vs Bolt Angle a) Bolt Length b) Bolt Spacing
c) Bolt Tensile Capacity
5.3 Bolt Length, Bolt Spacing and Bolt Tensile
Capacity
To obtain the optimum bolt parameters, different
combinations of bolt length, bolt spacing and bolt tensile
capacity is used. In the first case, the bolt orientation and
the bolt tensile capacity are kept constant and the bolt
spacing is varied for different bolt lengths. With the
increase in bolt spacing for a particular bolt length and
bolt tensile capacity, factor of safety decreases as shown
in Fig. 6a. Therefore, it can be concluded that more
number of bolts at closer spacing is better than the less
number of bolts at larger spacing.
3
Indian Geotechnical Conference 2017 GeoNEst
14-16 December 2017, IIT Guwahati, India
In the second case, the bolt orientation and the bolt
spacing are kept constant and the bolt tensile capacity is
varied for different bolt lengths. With the increase in bolt
tensile capacity for a particular bolt length and bolt
spacing, factor of safety increases Fig. 6b. When the
slope is installed with bolt of tensile capacity up to 0.25
MN, the slope remains under-reinforced. If the bolt
tensile capacity is further increased, the slope becomes
over-reinforced and hence the effect of the increased bolt
tensile capacity on slope stability becomes minimal (Fig.
7).
(a)
(b)
Fig. 6 SRF Vs Bolt Length a) Bolt Spacing b) Bolt
Tensile Capacity
Fig. 7 SRF Vs Bolt Tensile Capacity
Based on the above results, the optimum bolt parameters
for the current study are as follows:
Bolt Length = 6 m; Bolt Spacing = 2.5 m; Bolt Tensile
Capacity = 0.2 MN; Bolt Orientation = 400. The Factor of
Safety obtained after stabilization of rock slope is 1.56
which is more than the required value 1.5 and the
displacement response of the rock slope after stabilization
is as shown in Fig. 8.
 Stability Assessment and Designing of Jointed Rock Slope Using Finite Element Method
5.4 Tension Mobilized in Bolts4
Fig. 9 represents the position of bolt that is considered to
obtain the tension mobilized in the bolt along the length
of the slope from top to bottom.
Fig. 8 Displacement Response of Rock Slope
Fig. 9 Bolt Position considered for tension mobilization
The bolt at the middle position mobilize more tension
nearly 70% of the capacity, whereas bolt at the top and
bottom position undergo less tension mobilization of
about 9% and 28% respectively for the desired strength
reduction factor (i.e., 1.56). This is because the maximum
displacement occurs at the middle portion of the slope.
From the Fig. 10, it is observed that the bolt at the middle
portion fails when SRF is greater than 1.56.
Fig. 10 Tension Mobilized in Bolt Vs SRF
5.5 Variation of displacement
Fig. 11 shows the variation of displacement of rock slope
after applying bolts with respect to shear reduction factor.
It is observed that the displacement is increased
marginally up to critical SRF 1.56. The maximum
displacement at critical SRF is obtained as 56 mm.
However, when the SRF exceeds 1.56, there is a sudden
increase in displacement above 100 mm which results in
the end detachment of the bolt in middle portion of the
slope as bolt could not bear the displacement more than
100 mm. Mobilized tension in the bolt has increased with
increase in SRF (Fig. 10) which indicates proper function
of the bolt as expected in the field where bolt force
View publication stats
increases with the displacement of the slope up to critical
SRF.
Fig. 11 Displacement Vs SRF
6. Conclusions
It is necessary to determine the optimum bolt diameter,
bolt orientation, bolt length, bolt tensile capacity and bolt
spacing for effective design of stabilization of rock slope.
 Bolts should be installed at an angle flatter than
the normal to the joint and should not be
installed at normal or greater than normal to the
joint.
 More number of bolts at closer spacing should
be used than less number of bolts at larger
spacing.
 When the slope is installed with bolt of tensile
capacity up to 0.25 MN, the slope remains
under-reinforced. If the bolt tensile capacity is
further increased, the slope becomes over-
reinforced and hence the effect of the increased
bolt tensile capacity on slope stability becomes
minimal with the increased in bolt tensile
capacity.
 Low tensile capacity bolts should be used at
closer spacing for economical design.
Finite element shear strength reduction technique
effectively simulates the performance of the designed
slope subjected to degradation of its strength
parameter and working function of the bolt is also
manifested in this study.
References
Goodman, R., Taylor, R., & Brekke, T. (1968) A model
for mechanics of jointed rock, Journal of the Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Division, 94, pp. 637-659.
Rocscience (2016) Phase2 version 9.020, Finite element
analysis for excavations and slopes. Rocscience Inc.,
Ontario.
Singh, R., Umrao, R. K., & Singh, T. N. (2014). Stability
evaluation of road-cut slopes in the Lesser Himalaya of
Uttarakhand, India: conventional and numerical
approaches. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the
Environment, 73(3), 845-857.
Tiwari, G., & Latha, G. M. (2016). Design of Rock Slope
Reinforcement: An Himalayan Case Study. Rock
Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 49(6), 2075-2097.