0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

1 Ansichten14 SeitenOct 28, 2020

© © All Rights Reserved

0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

1 Ansichten14 SeitenSie sind auf Seite 1von 14

Engineering Geology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enggeo

strength nonlinearity under water drawdown

⁎

Jing-Shu Xu , Xiao-Li Yang

School of Civil Engineering, Central South University, No. 68, South Shao-shan Street, Tian-xin District, Changsha City, Hu'nan Province 410075, People's Republic of

China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In slope stability analyses, the soil has been frequently considered dry or saturated, whereas the soil is in fact

Slope stability unsaturated in many cases. Owing to the existence of matric suction, the strength properties of unsaturated soils

Unsaturated soils are greatly diﬀerent from dry or saturated soil, and thereby leading to diverse stability conditions of the slope.

Matric suction Based on the kinematical approach of limit analysis, in this study, a three-dimensional (3D) stability analysis was

Strength nonlinearity

conducted for slopes in unsaturated soils. The eﬀects of matric suction distribution patterns, the nonlinearity of

Water level drawdown

the strength under soil-water characteristic curves and the water drawdown were investigated to explore the

shear strength and stability of a slope in unsaturated soil. It was found that, when the matric suction is uniformly

distributed, the stability factors of the slope increase linearly along with the matric suction. In addition, when

the matric suction increases linearly with the depth, the enhancing eﬀect of the matric suction on the slope

stability intensiﬁes as the variation magnitude of the matric suction increases, especially for a gentle slope with a

narrower width. For nonlinear patterns, diﬀerent soil-water characteristic curve (SWCC) models will lead to

diverse shear strengths and stability conditions of the slope. The water drawdown has signiﬁcant eﬀects on the

functions of the matric suction as well as slope stability.

1. Introduction soils.

Many methods can be used to investigate the 3D stability of a slope,

A slope stability analysis, which is an important and classical issue introducing the rigorous limit equilibrium method (RLE), the discrete

in geotechnical engineering, has been mostly performed under two- element method (DEM), the general particle dynamics numerical

dimensional (2D) plane strain conditions under the assumption that the method, the discontinuous deformation analysis (DDA) method and the

soils is dry or saturated. However, soil is in fact generally unsaturated in limit analysis method.

nature (Hoyos et al., 2015; Oh and Lu, 2015). In addition, a slope With regard to the rigorous limit equilibrium method for a 3D slope

stability assessment is typically a three-dimensional (3D) problem, and stability analysis, which takes the inter-column forces into account, the

a number of studies have shown that 2D failure modes will lead to RLE method was established by Zhou and Cheng (2013) based on the

conservative estimations of the slope stability (Michalowski and three-axial-direction force equilibrium conditions and three direction

Drescher, 2009). Owing to the existence of matric suction, the strength moment equilibrium conditions around the three coordinate axes. The

behavior and properties of unsaturated soils diﬀer greatly from dry or relationship between the width of a sliding body and the safety factor as

saturated soil, leading to diverse slope stability conditions. Thus, in well as the value of the safety factor itself, were determined. The pre-

many cases, it is inappropriate to ignore the unsaturation of soils and sented method was proved to be valid through a practical application.

simply treat it as dry or saturated. The pore water pressures and water Zhou and Cheng (2014) investigated the stability of a 3D slope sub-

drawdown are decisive factors on the slope stability, and when the jected to seismic forces when applying a combination of the RLE and

matric suction, in particular is taken into account, the water level the pseudo-dynamic method. A new limit equilibrium method to ana-

drawdown directly inﬂuences the slope stability, and more importantly, lyze the stability and displacement of three-dimensional creeping slopes

changes the acting zone and magnitude of the matric suction inside the was proposed by Zhou and Cheng (2015).

slope. It is of both theoretical and practical signiﬁcance to investigate For the discrete element method, Assefa et al. (2017) analyzed a

the stability of 3D slopes subjected to a water drawdown in unsaturated deep-seated slope movement in a complex rock formation. The DEM

⁎

Corresponding author.

E-mail addresses: csushdxjs@csu.edu.cn (J.-S. Xu), yangxl@csu.edu.cn (X.-L. Yang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.02.010

Received 8 August 2017; Received in revised form 5 January 2018; Accepted 10 February 2018

0013-7952/ © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

approach was adopted to simulate the slope as a complex blocky et al. (2016a,b), and the eﬀects of the matric suction distribution pat-

structure deﬁned by bedding planes, inclined and sub-vertical joints. terns on the objectives were illustrated. Tarantino and Mountassir

Diﬀerent hypotheses regarding the geometry of the slip surface, com- (2013) investigated the stability of geotechnical structures in un-

patible with ﬁeld evidences, are discussed. Camones et al. (2013) in- saturated soils, adopting an accessible approach for a hydraulic and

vestigated the step-path failure mechanism in fractured rock masses strength behavior estimation of unsaturated soils.

using the discrete element method (DEM). Crack propagation and It should be noted that investigations into the slope stability of a

coalescence were simulated in biaxial and triaxial laboratory tests, and slope, regardless of under 2D or 3D conditions, have been mainly

simple examples of this mechanism were modeled for a better under- conducted in dry or saturated soil, even though soil is commonly un-

standing of the failure mechanism. Salmi et al. (2016) analyzed the saturated in nature (Fredlund et al., 1978; Lu and Likos, 2004), and

impacts of underground mining on the stability of a slope using nu- only a few investigation into the stability of 3D unsaturated slopes have

merical modeling based on a coalmining induced landslide at Nattai been applied. Matric suction, which exists in unsaturated soils, makes

North, Australia, as a typical case study. Discontinuous numerical the physical properties and behavior of unsaturated soils greatly dif-

modeling was employed to analyze the mechanisms of the ground ferent from those of dry or saturated soils, resulting in diﬀerent stability

movements leading to landslide. The role of geological and geo- conditions of various slopes. As a consequence, the question, which has

technical factors on the slope stability were discussed. both theoretical and practical importance, is how to estimate the 3D

Regarding the general particle dynamics numerical method, Zhou stability of a slope in various unsaturated soil under diﬀerent matric

et al. (2015) proposed the general particle dynamics approach (GPD3D) suction distributions and pore water levels. In this regard, based on the

to simulate the failure process (initiation, growth, and coalescence of kinematical approach of limit analysis theorem, a 3D stability analysis

cracks macro-failures) of a slope. of a slope subjected to water level drawdown in unsaturated soils was

The discontinuous deformation analysis method (DDA) was pre- conducted in this study. External work rates by soil weight, pore water

sented by Jing (1998) to investigate the deformations of geometrically pressure and matric suction as well as the internal energy dissipation

complex blocks in rock mechanics and engineering geology. The ad- were calculated, and expressions of the critical heights of a slope were

vantages and shortcomings of DDA were illuminated, and the solutions then derived using an energy equilibrium equation. The eﬀects of ma-

by DDA were compared with the explicit distinct element method and tric suction distributions, soil shear strength nonlinearity under diverse

the ﬁnite element method. SWCC models and water level drawdown on the slope stability were

The limit analysis method, the approach adopted in this study is investigated after optimization, and some numerical solutions were

eﬀective and has been widely used to investigate the stability problems presented.

of foundations, tunnels (Li and Yang, 2018; Yang and Zhang, 2018),

slopes (Yang and Li, 2018) and other geotechnical structures. Slope 2. Upper bound theorem

analyzed using the limit analysis method can be divided into two parts

based on the standard of dimensionality, i.e., (1) a 2D stability analysis The limit analysis method assumes that the soil deforms plastically

and (2) a stability analysis under 3D conditions. In terms of a 2D sta- according to the normality rule. The present method also states that the

bility analysis, considering the seismic forces, Qin and Chian (2017) internal energy dissipations are no less than the work rates by external

analyzed the stability of a two-stage slope in layered soil, proposed a forces (Pan and Dias, 2017; Yang and Yao, 2018), namely

closed-form solution to the kinematic stability of a slope, and in-

vestigated the inﬂuences of the soil weight and cohesion, soil non- ∫V σ ∗ij ε ∗̇ ij dV ≥ ∫S Ti vi dS + ∫V Xi vi∗dV (1)

homogeneity, and external factors such as seismic forces on the slope

stability. Through a numerical analysis approach, Gischig et al. (2015) where εij̇∗ is the strain rate; σij∗ is the stress rate tensor, S and V are the

conducted a rock slope stability analysis to demonstrate the roles of boundary and volume of a failure block, respectively; Ti is the surcharge

ampliﬁcation in enhancing the co-seismic slope deformation. load on boundary; Xi is the body force in volume V; and vi is the velocity

For a slope stability analysis under 3D conditions, Michalowski and along the potential sliding surface.

Drescher (2009) proposed a 3D rotational failure mechanism of a slope

with a spiral conic shape in accordance with the normality rule, and 3. Shear strength of unsaturated soils

derived the expression of critical height of a 3D slope based on the limit

analysis method, and investigated the inﬂuences of the 3D geometry Equations for the estimation of unsaturated soils shear strength can

characteristics and soil strength on the slope stability. Lim et al. (2016) be classiﬁed into two categories, i.e., linear equations (Fredlund et al.,

presented sets of stability charts of a slope in purely cohesive clay using 1978; Zhang et al., 2016a,b) and nonlinear equations (Bao et al., 1998;

the ﬁnite element limit analysis method. Fredlund et al., 1996; Vanapalli et al., 1996; Khalili and Khabbaz, 1998;

With regard to investigations on unsaturated soil, Fredlund et al. Vilar, 2006). In this study, both linear and nonlinear equations were

(1978) proposed an extended expression of the Mohr-Coulomb failure adopted to demonstrate the eﬀects of matric suction on the stability of a

criterion to take into account the eﬀects of matric suction on the shear 3D unsaturated slope.

strength of various types of soil. Thereafter, Bao et al. (1998), Fredlund

et al. (1996), Khalili and Khabbaz (1998), Vanapalli et al. (1996), and

Vilar (2006) also proposed expressions to estimate functions of the 3.1. Linear conditions

matric suction on the shear strength of unsaturated soils. Zhang et al.

(2014) performed a stability analysis of 2D slopes in unsaturated soil For the linear conditions, the uniformly distributed condition of the

considering the strength of the nonlinearity aiming at diverse soil types matric suction and its linearly increased conditions, along with depth,

based on the soil-water characteristic curve (SWCC, i.e., permeability were adopted in this study, as shown in Fig. 1.

function), investigated the eﬀects of soils strength nonlinearity on the

slope stability, and proposed relevant recommendations for practical 3.1.1. Uniﬁed shear strength

use. Houston et al. (2008) performed a series of unsaturated soil triaxial The equation for the shear strength estimation of unsaturated soils

tests to investigate the strength properties and shear-induced volume proposed by Fredlund et al. (1978) in the form of the Mohr-Coulomb

change behavior of unsaturated soil, as well as the feasibility of un- failure criterion is the most representative function and was adopted in

saturated soil property estimation functions. Based on the moment this study to describe the shear strength of unsaturated soils under a

equilibrium method, an investigation into the critical embedment depth linear condition in which the matric suction is uniformly distributed, as

for a rigid retaining wall in unsaturated soils was conducted by Zhang shown in Fig. 1(a)

103

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

O O Table 1

ua-uw ua-uw Soil cohesion c(ua−uw) due to matric suction summarized by Zhang et al. (2014).

equation

Fredlund et al. (1996) c(ua−uw) = (ua − uw)Θdκ tan φ′

1 where Θd = θw/θs, κ is a ﬁtting parameter.

Vanapalli et al. (1996)

c(ua − uw ) = (ua − uw ) ⎡tan φ′

⎣

( θ w − θr

θs − θr ) ⎤⎦

or

Depth, z Depth, z

c(ua − uw ) = (ua − uw ) ⎡tan φ′

⎣

( S − Sr

100 − Sr ) ⎤⎦

Vilar (2006) c(ua − uw ) =

(ua − uw )

(a) (b) a + b (ua − uw )

1 1

where a = ,b=

Fig. 1. Distributions of matric suction in unsaturated soils: (a) uniform distribution of tan φ′ (cult − c′)

matric suction with depth; and (b) linearly increased distribution of matric suction with 1 a

or b = −

(cm − c′) ψm

depth.

Khalili and Khabbaz (1998) c(ua−uw) = (ua − uw)[λ′] tan φ′

where [λ′]=1.0 when (ua − uw) ≤ AEV

τ = c′ + (σ − ua) tan φ′ + (ua − u w ) tan φb (2) [λ′] = ( ua − uw −0.55

) when (ua − uw) > AEV

AEV

′

where c is the eﬀective cohesion intercept, φ is the eﬀective internal ′ Bao et al. (1998) c(ua−uw) = (ua − uw)[ζ] tan φ′

where [ζ] = 1.0 when (ua − uw) ≤ AEV

friction angle, ua − uw is the matric suction among which ua and uw are log (ua − uw )r − log (ua − uw )

[ζ ] =

the pore-air pressure and pore-water pressure, respectively; σ − ua is log (ua − uw )r − log (AEV )

the net normal stress on the failure plane, and φb is the suction angle, when AEV < (ua − uw) < ψr

[ζ] = 0, when (ua − uw) ≥ ψr

which is commonly 15° based on a number of datasets available from

the 1970s.

The shear strength of unsaturated soils shown in Eq. (2) can be between shear strengths and matric suctions are nonlinear, as de-

transformed into the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion formation as termined through by subsequent tests on unsaturated soils. Fig. 2 shows

τ = c + (σ − ua) tan φ′ (3) the relationships between the shear strength and matric suction for a

′

typical unsaturated soil and the SWCC, which was drawn based on a

where c = c + (ua − uw) tan φ . b

signiﬁcant amount of experiment data. As shown in Fig. 2(a) and from

Zhang et al. (2014), soil shows saturated behaviors when the matric

3.1.2. Linearly increased matric suction with depth suction is less than the air-entry value (AEV). Afterward, the shear

According to Zhang et al. (2016a,b), another linear estimation used strengths begins to increase once the matric suction exceeds the AEV

to describe the values of the matric suction was developed from within the nonlinear zone, and in the residual zone, the envelopes of

Fredlund et al. (1978), as shown in Fig. 3(b), which states that the plastic clay and soil then become generally horizontal, whereas the

matric suction is linear increased with depth from the water table. This envelope of a cohesion-less material (sands) shows a leveling oﬀ along

expression was also adopted in the present study to demonstrate the with the matric suction, indicating that the shear strength of the sand

eﬀects of the matric suction on the slope stability in a more compre- tends to decrease along with the matric suction.

hensive manner. The matric suction (ua − uw)z at depth z with regard to With regard to the nonlinearity of the shear strength of unsaturated

the linearly increased distribution is soil, a number of equations have been proposed to demonstrate the

(ua − u w )z = ρz (4) nonlinear relationships between shear strength and the matric suction

(Bao et al., 1998; Khalili and Khabbaz, 1998; Fredlund et al., 1978,

where ρ is the magnitude of linearly distributed matric suction and z is 1996; Vanapalli et al., 1996 and Vilar, 2006), as shown in Table 1.

the vertical distance between the water table level and the calculation Detailed explanations on these equations can also be found in Zhang

point. et al. (2014).

Where θw and θs in Table 1 are the volumetric water content and

3.2. Shear strength nonlinearity of unsaturated soils saturated volumetric water content, respectively; θr is the residual vo-

lumetric water content; S is the degree of saturation; Sr is the residual

The shear strength of unsaturated soils was initially considered to degree of saturation; cult is the ultimate un-drained shear strength of an

have a linear function with the matric suction, as presented by Fredlund air-dried soil sample; AEV is the air-entry value of the soil and ψr is the

et al. (1978). However, it was later found that the relationships residual suction.

100

Degree of saturation/%

Shear strength

Boundary

φb=φ' 80 effect zone

Plastic clays

Cohesionless 40 Transition

soils (Sands) effect zone

φb=φ'

20 Residual zone

Matric suction (ua-uw)/kPa Matric suction/kPa (Logarithm scale)

Fig. 2. Redrawing of the relationship between unsaturated soils and SWCC: (a) strength envelope of typical unsaturated soil and (b) SWCC for typical soil.

104

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

SWCC parameters by Fredlund and Xing (1994).

r ′ = r0′ e−(θ − θ0) tan φ ′ (6)

SWCC θs af(kPa) nf mr ψr AEV θr κ cult(kPa)

The distance from point O to cone axis rm and the radius of the circle

1 0.4 1 2 1 10 0.5 0.081 1.0 11.4

of a cone cross-section R, are

2 0.4 10 2 1 100 5 0.080 1.8 13.7

3 0.4 100 2 1 1000 50 0.078 2.2 28.4 r + r′

4 0.4 1000 2 1 10,000 500 0.073 2.5 107.3 rm = = r0 f1

2 (7)

r − r′

An investigation by Zhang et al. (2014) found that diﬀerent soil R= = r0 f2

2 (8)

types show various strength envelopes under nonlinear estimations

equations. In this regard, in accordance with Zhang et al. (2014), four where f1 and f2 are as given in the Appendix A.

types of soil were selected for this study to investigate the nonlinear

functions of the matric suction on the stability of the slopes in un- 5. Calculations and optimization

saturated soil, as listed in Table 2, where No. 1 indicates sandy soil, No.

2 denotes ﬁne-grained soil (silt), No. 3 is clay and No. 4 is extremely 5.1. Internal energy dissipation

ﬁne-grained soil.

In Table 2, af is the inﬂection point of the shear strength envelope, The internal energy dissipations D0−B−3D of sections θ0 − θB and

as shown in Fig. 2(b), which equals 1, 10, 100, and 1000 for SWCC Nos. DB−h−3D of section θB − θh of the rotational body can be written as

1 through 4; nf is the slope of the SWCC at the inﬂection point; mf is a follows according to the limit analysis method:

ﬁtting parameter related to residual water content, and κ is a ﬁtting θB α1∗

parameter equals to 1.0, 1.8, 2.2, and 2.5, respectively.

D0 − B − 3D = 2ω ∫θ ∫0

0

cR (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

DB − h − 3D = 2ω ∫θ ∫0

B

cR (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

The 3D rotational failure mechanism of a slope in unsaturated soils = ωc′r03 g4 + ωρ tan φbr04 (g5 − g6) (10)

is illustrated in Fig. 3. The present failure mechanism of the slope has

an angle of β with a slope height of H. Log-spiral curves AC and A'C', are where ω is the angular velocity, α1∗ = arccos

(d1/R), arccos (d2/α2∗ =

the boundaries of the conic rotating around center O, among which AC R), d1 = r0f3, and d2 = r0f4. In addition, g1 through g6 are given in the

is the failure surface of the slope. The toe point C of the slope is as- Appendix A.

sumed to be located at the water level. The shape of the failure me- The sum of the internal energy dissipation of rotational body is

chanism is only related to three independent variables, i.e., θ0 and θh, D3D = D0 − B − 3D + DB − h − 3D (11)

which are the origination and termination rotating angles, respectively,

and the independent ratio, r'0/r0. Investigations show that the stability The internal energy dissipation of the insertion block is

factors are also related to the slope width, and as a result, an insertion θh r

block of width b is inserted into the conic, as shown in Fig. 3(b). When

Dinsert = b ∫θ 0

cv cos φ

cosφ

dθ = ωc′r03 g7 + ωρ tan φbr04 g8

(12)

b → ∞, the 3D failure mechanism degenerates to a 2D plane strain one

The total internal energy dissipation rate Dint can be expressed as

and consequently, the 3D solutions become very close to the 2D results.

It should be noted that in the failure mechanism shown in Fig. 3, the Dint = D3D + Dinsert = ωc′r03 (g1 + g4 + g7)

water table is assumed to locate at the slope toe. The assumption is

+ ωρ tan φbr04 (g2 + g3 + g5 + g6 + g8) (13)

adopted in this section for that the pore water level presented in

Fig. 3(a) is classical and representative and had also been adopted by where g1 to g8 are given in the Appendix A.

many other investigators (Eid 2014; Gao et al., 2014; Michalowski and

Nadukuru, 2013; Viratjandr and Michalowski, 2006). With regard to 5.2. Work rate by soil weight

these reasons, it is assumed in this section that the water table is located

at the slope toe. Besides, a stability analysis of a 3D slope with diﬀerent Velocity v of a point in the rotational failure block shown in Fig. 2(a)

pore-water tables is also conducted in this study. is

As shown in Fig. 2(a), OA = r0 and O'A' = r'0. The expressions of the

discontinuity curves AC and A'C', are v = ω (rm + y ) (14)

O

(a) (b)

θ0

θB

2φ

θ

A'

θh

C' b B

A

x

B

ρ

R

α1 *

rh

v H

y

d1

x

R

Insertion

*

β

α2

C d2

block

y

Fig. 3. 3D failure mechanism of slope in unsaturated soils: (a) rotational failure mechanism, and (b) failure mechanism with plant insert.

105

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

Table 3 c′ (g1 + g4 + g7 )

Slope stability factors of a 3D unsaturated slope (γ = 20 kN/m3, β = 60°, B/H = 5.0,

H= [e (θh − θ0) tan φ ′ sin θh

γ (g9 + g10) − ρ tan φb (g2 + g5 + g8 − g3 − g6 )

c' = 10 kPa and φ′ = 34°).

− sin θ0] (22)

Soil types SWCC models Matric suction/kPa

For the conditions that the matric suction is nonlinear distributed

0 20 40 80 100 120 following the equations in Table 1,

No. 1 1 21.08 25.37 27.71 31.59 33.31 34.93 c (g1 + g4 + g7 )

2 21.08 21.08 21.08 21.08 21.08 21.08

H= [e (θh − θ0) tan φ ′ sin θh − sin θ0]

γ (g9 + g10 ) (23)

3 21.08 23.76 23.89 23.96 23.97 23.98

′

4 21.08 24.82 26.19 28.06 28.80 29.46 where c = c + c(ua−uw).

5 21.08 21.08 21.08 21.08 21.08 21.08

To make the failure mechanism geometrically meaningful, neces-

No. 2 1 21.08 29.68 28.77 28.71 28.91 29.13

2 21.08 32.27 30.25 24.36 21.08 21.08 sary constraints are derived from the geometry relationships in Fig. 3,

3 21.08 27.20 27.94 28.38 28.48 28.54 as listed in Eq. (24). Based on this, the minimum upper bound solutions

4 21.08 34.35 39.21 45.84 48.46 50.80 of the stability factor Ns = γHc/c′ can be obtained through optimization.

5 21.08 36.36 38.48 29.56 21.08 21.08

No. 3 1 21.08 48.46 70.79 93.87 96.81 96.56

⎧ 0 < θ0 < θB < θh < π

2 21.08 48.92 73.76 108.88 119.29 126.05 0 < r0′/ r0 < 1

3 21.08 37.49 44.15 50.01 51.56 52.69 ⎨

4 21.08 49.52 77.96 108.93 118.21 126.50 ⎩ 0 < (b + Bmax′ )/ H < B / H (24)

5 21.08 49.52 77.96 117.0 130.38 141.86

No. 4 1 21.08 49.48 77.76 133.69 161.23 188.41

2 21.08 49.50 77.86 134.28 162.28 190.09 6. Numerical solutions and parameter analysis

3 21.08 46.06 65.62 94.26 105.07 114.24

4 21.08 49.52 77.96 134.85 163.29 191.73

In this section, some numerical solutions of safety factors corre-

5 21.08 49.52 77.96 134.85 163.29 191.73

sponding to diﬀerent soil types and SWCC models were presented.

Thereafter, a parameter analysis carried out to investigate the eﬀects of

The inﬁnitesimal work rate element is the 3D slope geometry characteristics, the matric suction distributions

and the shear strength nonlinearity on the 3D slope stability in un-

dw = γv cos θdV = γv cos θdxdy (rm + y ) dθ (15) saturated soil is described.

The work rate by the soil weight of the rotational body shown in

6.1. Numerical solutions

Fig. 3(a) is then obtained as follows:

Wγ − 3D = 2ωγ ⎡ ∫θ ∫0 ∫d (rm + y )2 cos θdxdydθ γ = 20 kN/m3, B/H = 5.0, c′ = 10kPa, and φ′ = 34° for diﬀerent SWCC

⎣ 0 1

θh x2∗ y∗

models. In the row listing SWCC models, 1 indicates the Fredlund et al.'s

+ ∫θ ∫0 ∫d (rm + y )2 cos θdxdydθ⎤

(16)

(1978) model, 2 is Vanapalli et al.'s (1996) model, 3 is Vilar's (2006)

B 2 ⎦ model, 4 is Khalili and Khabbaz's (1998) model, and 5 is Bao et al.'s

where y∗ = R2 − x 2 and x1∗ = R2 − di2 (i = 1, 2), according to the (1998) model, as listed in Table 1. The stability factors can be easily

geometric relationships of the failure mechanism. obtained for practical use.

Angle θB can be obtained based on the trigonometric relations,

6.2. Comparison

sin θ0

θB = arctan

cos θ0 − ζ (17) A numerical simulation is conducted in this section to investigate

the validity of the solutions in this study, as follows: According to the

sin (θh − θ0) e (θh − θ0 ) tanφ ′ sin θh − sin θ0 deﬁnition of the stability factor Ns, the safety factor of the slope under

ζ= − sin(θh + β ) the corresponding stability factor should be equal to 1.0. In this regard,

sin θh sin θh sinβ (18)

the ﬁnite diﬀerence software FLAC3D is used to calculate the safety

Eq. (16) can be brieﬂy written as factor. Taking the 3D slope with the stability factor of 21.08 in the ﬁrst

row and the ﬁrst column in Table 3 for example. With regard to the

Wγ − 3D = γωr04 g9 (19) slope, the unit weight γ = 20 kN/m3, the slope angle β = 60°, the ratio

B/H = 5.0 and the internal friction angle φ′ = 34°. The height of the

For the insertion block, the work rate of the soil weight can be c′N 10kPa × 21.08

slope can be obtained as Hc = γ s = 20 kN / m3 = 10.54 m and the co-

brieﬂy written as

hesions of the slopes corresponding to Table 3 can be calculated from

Wγ − insert = γωr04 g10 (20) the equations in Table 1, as listed in Table 4.

Thereafter the numerical model of the 3D slope corresponding to

The total work rate by soil weight can be expressed as the stability factor in the ﬁrst row and the ﬁrst column in Table 3 is

established and the safety factor of the slope is then calculated in virtue

Wγ = Wγ − 3D + Wγ − insert = γωr04 (g9 + g10) (21) of FLAC3D, as shown in Fig. 4.

It is found from the Fig. 4 that the slope has the safety factor of

where g9 and g10 are as given in the Appendix A.

1.092, which is a slightly > 1.0. This is reasonable for that the stability

factors in Table 3 are the upper bound solutions. In such a way, the

5.3. Slope height and optimization solutions in this study can be proved valid.

Equating the external work rates to internal energy dissipation, the 6.3. Parameter analysis under uniform suction

height of a 3D slope in unsaturated soils can be written as follows.

For the condition that the matric suction is linearly distributed The eﬀects of uniformly distributed matric suction on 3D slope

along with the depth, stability are illustrated herein. Fig. 5(a) and (b) show the stability

106

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

Cohesions corresponding to the stability factors in Table 3.

A parameter analysis is described in this part to analyze the eﬀects

SWCC Cohesion corresponding to the stability factors in Table 3/kPa

models of the linearly increased matric suction on the slope stability. Fig. 6(a)

0 20 40 80 100 120 and (b) are the stability factors along with B/H under a variation in

magnitude ρ for β = 60° and 75°, respectively. Fig. 6(c) and (d) illus-

No. 1 1 10.0 12.03 13.15 14.98 15.80 16.57

trate the variation rules of the stability factors along with ρ under dif-

2 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0

3 10.0 11.27 11.33 11.37 11.37 11.38 ferent ratios B/H and slope angles β, respectively.

4 10.0 11.77 12.42 13.31 13.66 13.97 It is shown in Fig. 6(a) and (b) that, as expected, the stability factors

5 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 increase with the variation in magnitude ρ of the matric suction. In

No. 2 1 10.0 14.08 13.65 13.57 13.71 13.82 addition, an interesting phenomenon takes place in that the point of the

2 10.0 15.30 14.35 13.01 10.0 10.0

smallest curvature radius of Ns along with the ratio B/H moves forward

3 10.0 12.90 13.25 13.39 13.51 13.54

4 10.0 16.29 18.60 20.32 22.98 24.10 from B/H = 1.1 for ρ = 0 to B/H = 1.8 for ρ = 10.0, meaning that

5 10.0 17.25 18.25 16.90 10.0 10.0 magnitude ρ will inﬂuence the 3D eﬀect of an unsaturated slope in

No. 3 1 10.0 22.98 33.58 40.69 45.92 45.80 addition to the stability of a 3D slope. Fig. 6(c) and (d) indicate that, the

2 10.0 23.20 35.0 44.53 56.58 59.79

changes in rules of Ns along with magnitude ρ are strongly inﬂuenced

3 10.0 17.78 20.94 22.65 24.46 24.99

4 10.0 23.49 36.98 46.61 56.07 60.0 by the slope angle and ratio B/H. The increasing trends in the stability

5 10.0 23.49 36.98 48.0 61.84 67.29 factors along with ρ become increasingly gentle, and even horizontal,

No. 4 1 10.0 23.47 36.88 50.21 76.48 89.37 with regard to the condition of B/H = 5.0 and β = 90°, indicating that

2 10.0 23.48 36.93 50.34 76.97 90.17 the inﬂuence of the linear increased pattern of matric suction on the

3 10.0 21.85 31.12 38.58 49.84 54.19

slope stability is much more signiﬁcant on gentle slopes (β ≤ 45°) with

4 10.0 23.49 36.98 50.47 77.45 90.94

5 10.0 23.49 36.98 50.47 77.45 90.94 a narrower width, compared with steep 2D slopes.

factors along with the ratio B/H under diﬀerent matric suction values of

0, 25 and 50 kPa for β = 60° and β = 75°, respectively. Fig. 5(c) and (d) The eﬀects of shear strength nonlinearity on slope stability are de-

demonstrate the stability factors versus the matric suction under dif- monstrated in Fig. 7, with regard to the soil types in Table 2 and the

ferent ratios B/H and slope angles β, respectively. nonlinear strength estimation functions in Table 1. Fig. 7(a) through (d)

Fig. 5(a) and (b) show that the stability factors decrease sharply are illustrations of stability factors of a slope as a function of the matric

within B/H ≤ 1.5, the variation rules of which then become gentle and suction in (a) sandy soil, (b) ﬁne-grained soil, (c) clay, and (d) ex-

eventually barely change for B/H ≥ 10.0. It is clear that the matric tremely ﬁne-grained soils, respectively. In Fig. 7, at β = 60° and B/

suction (ua − uw) has a positive eﬀect on the slope stability. For the H = 5.0, eﬀective cohesion and internal frictional angle are selected as

conditions of β = 60°, φ = 15°, φb = 15°, and B/H = 3.0, the stability c' = 10 kPa and φ' = 34°.

factor increases by 44.67% and 89.34% as the matric suction increases From Fig. 7, it is clear that the soil types and shear strength esti-

from 0 to 25 and 50 kPa, respectively. Fig. 5(a) and (b) also show that mation equations can both inﬂuence the values of the stability factors of

the existence of the matric suction has little inﬂuence on the eﬀects of the slopes in unsaturated soil. More speciﬁcally, for sandy soil, as

the ratio B/H on the slope stability, and that the varying patterns of shown in Fig. 7(a), the stability factors are lower than those under the

stability factors under (ua − uw) = 25 kPa and (ua − uw) = 50 kPa in commonly adopted φb = 15°. The curves of the stability factors ob-

unsaturated soils and the rules by Michalowski and Drescher (2009) are tained by Vanapalli et al. (1996) and Bao et al. (1998) are horizontal

the same. From Fig. 5(c) and (d), it is clear that the stability factors and overlapped, meaning that sandy soil shows saturated behaviors

increase linearly along with the matric suction, and that the variations under these two models, but nonlinear functions under the other three

in slope angle β results in little change in the impact of the matric models within (ua − uw) ≤ 40 kPa, and then degenerates into a linear

suction on the stability factors of a slope. It can also be seen from form. The diﬀerences in the stability factors obtained under the models

Fig. 4(c) that, under the condition of B/H = 10.0, solutions under a 3D are limited, and the eﬀects of the matric suction on the stability analysis

failure mechanism are in good agreement with the 2D solutions, of soil with a small AEV (AEV = 0.5 kPa) can be ignored, which is in

meaning that 3D solutions will degenerate into 2D solutions once the accordance with the results by Zhang et al. (2014).

ratio B/H exceeds 10.0. As for the ﬁne-grained soil, the curves under Bao et al.'s (1998)

model and Vanapalli et al.'s (1996) model show similar trends in that

107

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

50 40

Present solution

(a) Present solution

Solution by Michalowski and Drescher , 2009 (b)

40 Solution by Michalowski and Drescher, 2009

30

β=60°, φ'=15°, φb=15° β=75°, φ'=15°, φb=15°

ua-uw=0 ua-uw=0

30

25kPa 25kPa

Ns

Ns

50kPa 20

50kPa

20

10

10

0 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

B/H B/H

80 80

60 60

Ns

Ns

40 40

1.5 3.0 10.0

B/H=0.6 β=30°

1.0

20 20 45°

60°

75°

90°

2D solutions

0 0

0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100

ua-uw/(kPa) ua-uw/(kPa)

60 60

Present solution (a) Present solution (b)

Solution by Michalowski and Drescher , 2009 Solution by Michalowski and Drescher , 2009

Ns

Ns

ρ= 0 ρ= 0

4.0 6.0

2.0 6.0

2.0 4.0

20 20

10.0

10.0

-1

ρ/(kPa·m ) ρ/(kPa·m-1)

0 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

B/H B/H

60 100

(d) B/H=5.0, φ'=15°, φb=15°

75

40

Ns

Ns

50

1.5 3.0 10.0

B/H=0.6

20 75° 90°

25 β=30°

1.0

45°

60°

0 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

ρ/(kPa·m-1) ρ/(kPa·m-1)

Fig. 6. Slope stability based on change in magnitude of matric suction in unsaturated soil.

108

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

50 80

(a) Sandy soils (b) A fine-grained soils (silt)

b

φ =φ'=34°

φb=φ'=34° φb=15°

40 b

60

Ns φ =15°

Ns

30 40

20 20

af=1, nf=2, mf=1, ψr=10kPa, κ=1.0, cult=11.4kPa

af=10, nf=2, mf=1, ψr=100kPa, κ=1.8, cult=13.7 kPa

10 0

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

(ua-uw)/kPa (ua-uw)/kPa

140 160

(c) Clays (d) Extremely fine-grained soils

120

φb=φ'=34° 120

100

φb=φ'=34°

80

φb=15°

Ns

Ns

80

φb=15°

60

40

40

af=1000, nf=2, mf=1, ψr=10000kPa,

20

af=100, nf=2, mf=1, ψr=1000kPa, κ=2.2, cult=28.4 kPa κ=2.5, cult=107.3kPa

0 0

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

(ua-uw)/kPa (ua-uw)/kPa

Fredlund et al., (1996) Vanapalli et al., (1996)

Vilar, (2006) Khalili and Khabbaz, (1998)

Bao et al., (1998) φb=15°

φb=φ'=34°

the stability factors increase within (ua − uw) ≤ 40 kPa, and then de- 7.1. Pore-water pressure in limit analysis

crease nonlinearly for 40 kPa ≤ (ua − uw) ≤ 100 kPa, ﬁnally reaching a

constant value. The stability factors obtained under Fredlund et al.'s In virtue of the limit analysis method, the presence of water inside a

(1996) model and Vilar's (2006) model are very close to each other, slope requires two additional terms of work rates, i.e., Wu′, the work

where those under Khalili and Khabbaz's (1998) model are the largest. rate by pore-water pressure on the volumetric deformation of the soil

The nonlinearity of the stability factors along with the matric suction and Wu′′, the work rate by the water pressures on the boundaries of the

becomes distinct and non-negligible for ﬁne-grained soil. slope (Gao et al., 2014; Michalowski and Nadukuru, 2013; Viratjandr

With regard to clays, the curves of the stability factors approach the and Michalowski, 2006), as follows

line φb = φ′ = 34° within the range (ua − uw) ≤ 60 kPa, after which the

increasing trend decreases. For the special Vilar's (2006) model, the Wu = Wu′ + Wu′ ′ = − (∫ uε ̇ dV + ∫ un v dS )

V

∗

ii u

S

i i u

(25)

stability factors increase slowly when (ua − uw) ≤ 40 kPa, and then

become constantly gradual along with the matric suction when where u = ruγh is the pore-water pressure, ru is the pore water coeﬃ-

(ua − uw) ≥ 60 kPa. It can be concluded that clays can be treated as cient and h is the vertical distance between the pore-water table and a

soils with linear functions of matric suction φb = φ′ = 34° with smaller point on the failure surface of the slope, Vu is the volume of soil under

matric suctions. When it comes to extremely ﬁne-grained soil, the sta- the pore-water table and Su is the slope surface under water table. For a

bility factor curves become linear, and the stability factors are in good case with no submerged condition or other boundary loads, the work

agreement with those under φb = φ′ = 34°. rate by water pressure on the boundaries of the slope is equal to 0, and

the work rate by pore-water pressure can be expressed as

7. Stability analysis of slope under water drawdown Wu = Wu′ = − ∫V uεii̇∗ dVu (26)

may change when an inner pore water level drawdown takes place. In 7.2. Failure mechanism of a slope subjected to water drawdown

addition, the acting zone of the matric suction is also related to the

water level. Furthermore, the water table shown in Fig. 3(a) is a special Fig. 8 is the illustration of the failure mechanism of a 3D slope in

case, it is worth investigating the stability of a slope subjected to a unsaturated soil subjected to water drawdown. In Fig. 8, the pore water

water drawdown in unsaturated soil. level is represented as Lw, which is in agreement with the condition

shown in Fig. 3(a). It is assumed that the soil under the water table is

completely saturated, and thus the matric suction can be taken into

109

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

O θB α1∗

D3D = 2ω ∫θ ∫0 c′R (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

θ0

0

θB

θh α1∗

+ 2ω ∫θ ∫0 c′R (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

θF

θE

B

θh

θB α1∗

r0 + 2ω ∫θ ∫0 0

(ua − u w ) tan φbR (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

θF α2∗

B A + 2ω ∫θ ∫0 B

(ua − u w ) tan φbR (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

(30)

L w /H

7.3.2. Linearly increased matric suction

rh D If θF < θB, then

F H θF α1∗

z1

D3D = 2ω ∫θ ∫0

0

cR (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

z2 θB α1∗

β E

+ 2ω ∫θ ∫0 F

c′R (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

θh α2∗

C + 2ω ∫θ ∫0 B

c′R (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

(31)

Fig. 8. Illustration of water level drawdown inside a slope in unsaturated soils.

Otherwise, if θF ≥ θB, then

θB α1∗

account within the range of θ0 − θF, and in particular Lw = 1.0 in- D3D = 2ω ∫θ ∫0

0

cR (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

dicates that the slope is completely submerged and there is no matric θF α2∗

suctions inside. In addition, it should be noted here that when the water + 2ω ∫θ ∫0 B

cR (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

table is lower than the slope toe, a water level change can only change θh α2∗

the acting range of the matric suction, while when the water table is + 2ω ∫θ ∫0 F

c′R (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

(32)

higher than the slope toe, the variation of water table can both change

the acting range of the matric suction and the work rate by pore-water θF r θh α2∗ r

pressure inside the slope. Therefore, only the conditions that the water

Dinsert = b ∫θ 0

cv cos φ

cos φ

dθ + b ∫θ ∫0

F

c′v cos φ

cos φ

dθ

table is equal or higher than the slope toe is considered in this section. (33)

In accordance with the studies by Viratjandr and Michalowski

(2006) and Gao et al. (2014), in this study, the pore water table is

assumed uniform throughout the slope, and an instantaneous draining 7.3.3. Work rates by pore-water pressure

process is taken place and during which the water table remains vertical If θF < θB, then

within a portion of the slope, as shown in Fig. 8. The assumption of an θB α1∗

instantaneous drawdown will lead to overestimation estimations of the Wu − 3D = 2ωγw tan φ ⎡

⎣

∫θ ∫0 F

h1 − 1 (rm + R cos α )2 dθdxRdα

hydraulic gradients, and it is acceptable for practical calculations. θE α2∗

Consequently, according to the studies by (Michalowski and Nadukuru, + ∫θ ∫0 B

h1 − 2 (rm + R cos α )2 dθdxRdα

2013; Saada et al., 2012), the pore water pressures inside a slope can be θh α2∗

treated as an external force, taking into account the energy limit + ∫θ ∫0 E

h2 (rm + R cos α )2 dθdxRdα⎤

⎦ (34)

equilibrium equation.

In virtue of the water drawdown illustration in Fig. 8, the work rate Otherwise, if θLW21 ≥ θB then

by pore-water pressures and variations of the integration bounds for

θE α2∗

matric suction calculations can be calculated: According to the geo- Wu − 3D = 2ωγw tan φ ⎡

⎣

∫θ ∫0 F

h1 − 2 (rm + R cos α )2 dθdxRdα

metrical relationships shown in Fig. 8, z1, the vertical distance from the

θh α2∗

water level to the failure surface of the slope, and z2, the vertical dis- + ∫θ ∫0 E

h2 (rm + R cos α )2 dθdxRdα⎤

⎦ (35)

tance from slope surface to the failure surface of the slope, can be

written as z1 ( R2 − x 2 − d1 ) z1 ( R2 − x 2 − d2 )

where h1 − 1 = R − d1

, h1 − 2 = R − d2

and h2 =

z1 = rsinθ − r0 sin θ0 − L w / H (27) z2 ( R2 − x 2 − d2 )

.

R − d2

The work rate by pore water pressure on the insertion block can be

z2 = rsinθ − rh sin θh + (rcosθ − rh cos θh) tan β (28) written as

H

tanφ {∫ θE z1

θF r 0

exp[2(θ − θ0 ) tan φ]dθ + ∫

θh z2

θE r 0 }

exp[2(θ − θ0 ) tan φ]dθ .

7.3.1. Uniformly distributed matric suction The stability factors Ns = γHc/c′ for a 3D slope under uniformly

If θF < θB, then distributed and linear increased condition can be obtained with respect

θB α1∗

to the parameters θ0, θh, r′0/r0, and b/B following the restraint condi-

D3D = 2ω ∫θ ∫0

0

c′R (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ tions in Eq. (24) and 0 ≤ Lw ≤ 1.0, as follows:

θh α1∗ For a linearly increased condition,

+ 2ω ∫θ ∫0 c′R (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

B Ns = minf (θ0 , θh , r0′/ r0, b/ H | c′, φ′, φb , γ , B, β , ρ) (37)

θF α1∗

+ 2ω ∫θ ∫0 0

(ua − u w ) tan φbR (rm + R cos α )2dαdθ

(29) For the nonlinearly distributed conditions,

Otherwise, if θF ≥ θB, then Ns = minf (θ0 , θh , r0′/ r0, b/ H | c′, φ′, φb , γ , B, β , (ua − u w ) ) (38)

110

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

Stability factors of slope subjected to water drawdown (γ = 20kN/m3, β = 60°, φ′ = 34°, for conditions of higher matric suctions and suction angles under a

B/H = 5.0, and ua − uw = 140 kPa).

lower pore water level. This makes sense because the greater the matric

SWCC Models Water level suction and suction angle are, the stronger the enhancing impacts of the

matric suction on the slope stability will be. A drawdown of the water

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 level indicates a decrease in the pore water pressure acting zone

(θF − θh) and an increase in the acting zone of the matric suction

No. 1 1 6.99 9.30 13.20 19.94 28.77 41.49

2 6.99 8.62 11.14 14.83 18.93 26.08 (θ0 − θF), as shown in Fig. 8, which is beneﬁcial to the slope stability

3 6.99 8.75 11.53 15.79 20.79 28.99 and enhancing eﬀects of the matric suction on this stability.

4 6.99 9.02 12.34 17.81 24.67 35.06

5 6.99 8.62 11.14 14.83 18.93 26.08

No. 2 1 6.99 8.99 12.25 17.58 24.23 34.37

8.3. Parameter analysis under linear suction with depth

2 6.99 8.62 11.14 14.83 18.93 26.08

3 6.99 8.95 12.14 17.32 23.73 33.59 When the matric suction is linearly increased with the depth, as

4 6.99 10.04 15.40 25.40 39.27 57.93 shown in Fig. 10, the eﬀects of the water level drawdown on the sta-

5 6.99 8.62 11.14 14.83 18.94 26.08

bility factors are similar to those under uniformly distributed condi-

No. 3 1 6.99 11.77 20.97 39.23 65.87 99.60

2 6.99 13.19 25.72 51.01 88.54 135.10 tions. A decrease in the water level expands the acing zone (θ0 − θF) of

3 6.99 10.06 15.48 25.6 39.66 58.55 the matric suction and consequently its magnitude, resulting in a

4 6.99 13.35 26.25 52.33 91.09 139.10 greater impacts of the matric suctions on the slope stability and better

5 6.99 14.05 28.61 58.19 102.36 156.74 stability conditions. In addition, it is also clear that an increase in the

No. 4 1 6.99 16.42 37.09 79.24 142.86 220.17

2 6.99 16.50 37.43 80.09 144.48 222.70

matric suction angle φb will accelerate the eﬀects of the matric suction

3 6.99 12.87 24.65 48.36 83.44 127.12 on the slope stability.

4 6.99 16.57 37.76 80.90 146.05 225.17

5 6.99 16.57 37.76 80.90 146.05 225.17

8.4. Parameter analysis under shear strength nonlinearity

8. Numerical results and parameter analysis The stability of slopes under diﬀerent SWCC models and soil types

are described herein. Fig. 11 illustrates the stability factors of a slope

In this section, some numerical solutions of safety factors of the along with the matric suction under diverse pore water levels. Fig. 12

slope subjected to water drawdown were presented. Thereafter, the shows the rules of the stability factors as a function of the pore water

eﬀects of matric suction distributions of a 3D unsaturated slope sub- level under diﬀerent SWCC models.

jected to a water level drawdown are demonstrated: First, the linear Fig. 11 shows that the variations in water level will not change the

distributions, i.e., the uniform and linear increased distributions will be eﬀects of the shear strength equations on the stability factors as a

dealt with, followed by the nonlinear functions under diﬀerent SWCC function of the matric suction. However, it should be noted that when

models. the water level is relatively high (Lw is low, as illustrated in Fig. 8), the

variation in the stability factors is limited and the trends are gentle.

This is due to the fact that when the water table inside a slope increases,

8.1. Numerical solutions a saturated soil area expands, and the acting zone of matric suction

inside the slope shrinks, thereby reducing the eﬀects of the matric

Table 5 shows the stability factors Ns of a 3D unsaturated slope of suction on slope stability. With a constant decrease in the water level,

diﬀerent pore water levels with respect to γ = 20 kN/m3, β = 60°, B/ the acting zone of matric suction continues to increase, and the eﬀect of

H = 5.0, c' = 10 kPa and φ′ = 34° under diﬀerent SWCC models. the matric suction on the slope stability becomes more signiﬁcant.

Fig. 12 shows an illustration of the stability factors corresponding to

8.2. Parameter analysis under uniform suction diverse SWCC models of a slope along with a water level drawdown. In

Fig. 11, c' = 10 kPa, φ′ = 34° and ua − uw = 140 kPa.

The eﬀects of the uniformly distributed matric suction of a slope Fig. 12 shows the variation trends of the stability factors of four

under a water level drawdown are illustrated herein. Fig. 9(a) and (b) classes of soils along with water level Lw under diﬀerent SWCC models.

show the stability factors as a function of the pore water level Lw under It is clear that the stability factors of an unsaturated slope are directly

matric suction and the eﬀective suction angle φb, respectively. related to the water level, and simultaneously, the SWCC models and

It can be clearly seen in Fig. 9(a) and (b) that the water level suction angle. The variation trends of the stability factors along with the

30 25

(a) b

β=60°, B/H=5.0, φ =15°, φ =15°

b

β=60°, B/H=5.0, φ'=25°, φb=20°

(b)

25 ua-uw=30kPa

ua-uw=100 20

20

Ns

Ns

40 15

60

15 20

6°

0 8°

10

10 10°

ua-uw/(kPa) 14°

5 5

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Lw Lw

Fig. 9. Eﬀects of water drawdown on slope stability under uniformly distributed pattern of matric suction.

111

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

30 80

b

(b) β=45°, B/H=5.0, φ'=25°, ρ=5.0

25 (a) β=45°, B/H=5.0, φ'=15°, φ =15° φb=20°

ρ=10.0 60 16°

8.0 14°

20

Ns

Ns

6.0 40 10°

15 6°

0

20

10

2.0

4.0

ρ/(kPa/m)

5 0

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Lw Lw

Fig. 10. Eﬀects of water drawdown on slope stability under linearly increased pattern of matric suction.

40 60

(a) Sandy soils (b) A fine-grained soils (silt)

30

Lw=1.0 Lw=1.0

40

Ns

Ns

20

Lw=0.6

20

10 Lw=0.4

Lw=0.4 Lw=0.6

0 0

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

(ua-uw)/kPa (ua-uw)/kPa

150 120

(c) Clays (d) Extremely fine-grained soils

120

90

90

Lw=1.0

Ns

Ns

60

Lw=1.0

60

30

30

0 0

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

(ua-uw)/kPa (ua-uw)/kPa

Fredlund et al., (1996) Vanapalli et al., (1996)

Vilar, (2006) Khalili and Khabbaz, (1998)

Bao et al., (1998) Totally saturated (Lw=0)

Fig. 11. Eﬀects of matric suction nonlinearity on stability of slope subjected to water drawdown.

water level are aggravated as Lw increases, which is due to the increase for a slope of a lower water level (higher Lw), whose stability factors are

in the acting zone of the matric suction. For sandy and ﬁne-grained soils far above those under φb = 15°, meaning that the average value of

with af smaller than 10 kPa and AEV smaller than 5 kPa, the stability φb = 15° yields conservative estimations on the slope stability for clay

factors are lower than those obtained under the average value suction and extremely ﬁne-grained soil. Furthermore, the variation in magni-

angle of φb = 15°, and the eﬀects of the matric suction on the slope tudes of the stability factors along with water level Lw can be predicted

stability are not crucial and can be ignored for conditions under high to increase as the matric suction (ua − uw) increases.

water levels (Lw ≤ 0.5). At the same time, stability factors obtained

under Vanapalli et al.'s (1996) model, Bao et al.'s (1998) model and the

curve under (ua − uw) = 0 overlap, indicating that these two models 9. Case study

are non-eﬀective for sandy soil, which is in accordance with Fig. 7. As

for clays and extremely ﬁne-grained soil, the matric suction plays a As reported by Rahardjo et al. (2001) and Travis et al. (2010), a

dominant role in the stability of an unsaturated soils slope, particularly number of failures were triggered by rainfall in February 1995 at the

Nanyang Technological University (NTU) campus in Jurong, Western

112

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

40 40

(b) A fine-grained soils (silt)

(a) Sandy soils

30 b

φ =φ' =34° 30 φb=φ' =34°

φb=15° φb=15°

Ns

Ns

20 20

10 10

af=1, nf=2, mf=1, ψr=10kPa, κ=1.0, cult=11.4kPa af=10, nf=2, mf=1, ψr=100kPa, κ=1.8, cult=13.7 kPa

0 0

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Lw Lw

120 160

(d) Extremely fine-grained soils

(c) Clays

100 b

φ =φ'=34° af=1000, nf=2, mf=1, ψr=10000kPa,

af=100, nf=2, mf=1, 120

κ=2.5, cult=107.3kPa

80 ψr=1000kPa, κ=2.2,

cult=28.4 kPa

φb=φ'=34°

Ns

Ns

60 80

40 φb=15°

b

φ =15° 40

20

0 0

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Lw Lw

Fredlund et al., (1996) Vanapalli et al., (1996)

Vilar, (2006) Khalili and Khabbaz, (1998)

Bao et al., (1998) φb=15°

φb=φ'

Table 6

Parameters for NTU failure number 4.

γs 19.6 kN/m3

c' 2.0 kPa

φ' 26.0 deg

φb 13.0 deg

γw 9.8 kN/m3

γd 16.1 kN/m3

θr 13.0 %

θs 35.5 %

Singapore. Among the failures, the Slip number 4 was used by Travis

et al. (2010) to investigate the eﬀects of matric suction on the stability

of the slope in unsaturated clay.

The Slip number 4 had a slope angle of 45°, a width of 7.8 m, a

length of 7 m and a depth of 1 m. With regard to the strength of the

Fig. 13. NTU Slip Number 4 safety factor versus the water table.

unsaturated clay, the failed slope had a saturated unit weight γs of

19.6 kN/m3, a dry unit weight γd of 16.1 kN/m3, and a saturated water

content θs of 35.5%. The eﬀective internal friction angle φ′, the suction To investigate the stability of the slope in unsaturated clay, based on

angle φb, and the cohesion c' were 26°, 13° and 2 kPa respectively, the limit analysis method, four types of calculation models i.e., the liner

found by strength testing. The parameters are as given as in Table 6. increased model, the Fredlund et al.'s (1996) model, and the Vilar's

According to the investigation by Travis et al. (2010), the water (2006) model, are adopted in this section to investigate the eﬀect of the

table inner the Slip number 4 changed rapidly from 5 m to < 1 m owing matric suction on slope stability.

to the storm, resulting in the variation change of the stability status of Fig. 13 shows the safety factors of the Slip number 4 under the di-

the slope. The safety factors of the slope both with and without the verse models versus the storm progression. As investigated by Travis

consideration of the matric suction were calculated under the quasi- et al. (2010), it is clear in Fig. 13 that the slope failed (Fdry/sat = 0.68)

unsteady model by Travis et al. (2010), as shown in Fig. 13. even before the storm under the dry/saturated model. However, when

113

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

the matric suction was taken into consideration, the slope kept a steady (2) When the matric suction is uniformly distributed, an increase in the

state at the beginning of the storm, and then reduced sharply to about matric suction provides stability factors with linear increasing rules.

0.5. When the matric suction linearly increases with depth, the im-

With regard to the models adopted in this study, in accordance with proving eﬀects of the matric suction on the slope stability increase

the investigations by Travis et al. (2010), this study reveals that the as the magnitude of the matric suction variation increases, parti-

matric suction has favorable eﬀects on slope stability. When the water cularly for gentle slopes with a narrower width.

table rises to about 3.5 m, the safety factors of the slope reduce to 1.0, (3) With regard to nonlinear conditions, diﬀerent SWCC models will

representing the limit state of failure. Thereafter, the safety factors of yield diverse shear strength envelopes and striking diﬀerences in

the slope continue to decrease during the storm and eventually reach to the stability factor solutions for diﬀerent soil types. The average

about 0.5. All of the models indicate a high probability of failure, and value of the suction angle φb = 15° is not reasonable to all types of

the matric suction should be considered in practical engineering for a soil. For sandy soil with lower AEV values, the inﬂuences of the

more precise prediction of the slope stability condition. It is worth matric suction can be ignored within(ua − uw) ≤ 40 kPa; for ex-

noting that, even if the most of the safety factors in Fig. 13 are < 1.0, tremely ﬁne-grained soil with a high AEV values, the eﬀects of the

these safety factors are still meaningful and necessary for landslide matric suction on the slope stability can be seen as linear functions

dynamics and risk analysis, as explained by Travis et al. (2010). of φ′ = φb, and for ﬁne-grained soils and clay, the inﬂuences of the

matric suction corresponding to diﬀerent estimation equations on

10. Conclusions the slope stability are diverse and tremendous, and the functions of

the matric suction on the stability of an unsaturated slope should be

In this study, the limit analysis method was employed to investigate seriously considered.

the stability of 3D slopes in unsaturated soils considering diﬀerent (4) The water level drawdown inside a slope signiﬁcantly inﬂuences

matric suction distributions, strength nonlinearity, and water draw- the intensity of the matric suction on the slope stability because the

down. By introducing diﬀerent matric suction distribution patterns, the acting zone of the matric suction inside a slope is directly related to

work rates and internal energy dissipations of 3D slopes were calcu- such a drawdown. When the high water table nears the slope crest,

lated, and the critical heights were derived using the energy equili- the eﬀects of the matric suction on the slope stability are negligible.

brium equation. The eﬀects of the matric suction distributions, shear As the water level decreases during the water drawdown process,

strength nonlinearity and water drawdown on the slope stability were the eﬀects of the matric suction on the slope stability become more

investigated. Some numerical solutions were presented for con- remarkable.

venience. The following conclusions from this study can be made:

bility of 3D unsaturated slopes in that the stability factors experi-

ence a rapid decrease along with B/H within B/H ≤ 1.5, after The preparation of this paper has received ﬁnancial supports from

which the variation rules become smooth and eventually show little Innovation Foundation for Postgraduate of Central South University,

change. When B/H ≥ 10.0, the solutions can be treated as 2D plane China (2015zzts061), and National Natural Science Foundation

strain solutions. (51378510). The ﬁnancial supports are greatly appreciated.

Appendix A

1 ⎡ (θ − θ0) tan φ ′ r′

f1 = e + 0 e−(θ − θ0) tan φ ′⎤

2⎢⎣ r0 ⎥

⎦

1 ⎡ (θ − θ0) tan φ ′ r′

f2 = e − 0 e−(θ − θ0) tan φ ′⎤

2⎣⎢ r0 ⎥

⎦

sin θ0 1 r′ sin θ0

f3 = − ⎡e (θ − θ0) tan φ ′ + 0 e−(θ − θ0) tan φ ′⎤ = − f1

sin θ 2⎢⎣ r0 ⎥

⎦ sin θ

f4 = − ⎡e (θ − θ0) tan φ ′ + 0 e−(θ − θ0) tan φ ′⎤ = − f1

sin θB sin(θ + β1 ) 2⎣⎢ r0 ⎥

⎦ sin θB sin(θ + β1 )

1

f5 = [(3 tan φ′ cos θh + sin θh ) e3(θh − θ0) tan φ ′ − (3 tan φ′ cos θ0 + sin θ0)]

3(1 + 9tan2 φ′)

1 L⎛ L

f6 = 2 cos θ0 − ⎞ sin θ0

⎜ ⎟

6 r0 ⎝ r0 ⎠

⎡f ⎛f 2 + 1 f 2 ⎞ arccos(f / f ) + f ⎛2f + 1 f ⎞ f 2 − f 2 ⎤ dθ

θB

g1 = 2 ∫θ 2 1

2 2⎠ 3 2 2 1

2 3⎠ 2 3

0 ⎣ ⎝ ⎝ ⎦

θB 1 1

g2 = 2 ∫θ f7 ⎡f2 ⎛f12 + f22 ⎞ arccos(f3 / f2 ) + f2 ⎛2f1 + f3 ⎞ f22 − f32 ⎤ dθ

2 ⎠ 2 ⎠

0 ⎣ ⎝ ⎝ ⎦

114

J.-S. Xu, X.-L. Yang Engineering Geology 237 (2018) 102–115

⎡f f 3 arccos(f / f ) + f ⎛f 2 + f f + 2 f 2 + 1 f 2 ⎞ f 2 − f 2 ⎤ sinθdθ

θB

g3 = 2 ∫θ 1 2 3 2 2 1

⎝

1 3

3 2 3 3⎠ 2 3

0 ⎣ ⎦

⎡f ⎛f 2 + 1 f 2 ⎞ arccos(f / f ) + f ⎛2f + 1 f ⎞ f 2 − f 2 ⎤ dθ

θh

g4 = 2 ∫θ 2 1

2 2⎠ 4 2 2 1

2 4⎠ 2 4

B ⎣ ⎝ ⎝ ⎦

θh 1 1

g5 = 2 ∫θ f7 ⎡f2 ⎛f12 + f22 ⎞ arccos(f4 / f2 ) + f2 ⎛2f1 + f4 ⎞ f22 − f42 ⎤ dθ

2 ⎠ 2 ⎠

B ⎣ ⎝ ⎝ ⎦

θh

g6 = 2 ∫θ 1 2 4 2 2 1

⎝

1 4

3 2 3 4⎠ 2 4

B ⎣ ⎦

g7 = [e sin θh − sin θ0 ] ∫θ e 2(θ − θ0) tan φ ′⎞⎟ ⎤ dθ

H 0 ⎥

⎠⎦

g8 = [e sin θh − sin θ0 ] ∫θ f8 e 2(θ − θ0) tan φ ′⎟⎞ ⎤ dθ

H 0 ⎥

⎠⎦

4 2 2

θB ⎡ ⎛f f2f2⎞ ⎛ f2 − f3 ⎞

g9 = 2 ∫θ ⎢ (f22 f3 /8 − f33 /4 − 2f1 f32 /3 − f3 f12 /2 + 2f1 f22 /3) f22 − f32 + ⎜ 2 + 1 2 ⎟ arcsin ⎜

8 2 ⎠ f2 ⎟ cos θdθ

0 ⎢ ⎝

⎣ ⎝ ⎠

4 2 2

θh ⎡ ⎛f f2f2⎞ ⎛ f2 − f 4 ⎞

+2 ∫θ ⎢ (f22 f4 /8 − f43 /4 − 2f1 f42 /3 − f4 f12 /2 + 2f1 f22 /3) f22 − f42 + ⎜ 2 + 1 2 ⎟ arcsin ⎜ ⎟ cos θdθ

⎢ ⎝8 2 ⎠ f2

B

⎣ ⎝ ⎠

b

g10 = (f − f6 − f7 )[e (θh − θ0) tan φ ′ sin θh − sin θ0]

H 5

Pan, Q.J., Dias, D., 2017. Upper-bound analysis on the face stability of a non-circular

tunnel. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 62, 96–102.

Assefa, S., Graziani, A., Lembo-Fazio, A., 2017. A slope movement in a complex rock Qin, C.B., Chian, S.C., 2017. Kinematic stability of a two-stage slope in layered soils. Int.

formation: deformation measurements and DEM modelling. Eng. Geol. 219, 74–91. J. Geomech. 17 (9), 06017006.

Bao, C., Gong, B., Zhan, L., 1998. Properties of unsaturated soils and slope stability of Rahardjo, H., Li, X.W., Toll, D.G., Leong, E.C., 2001. The eﬀect of antecedent rainfall on

expansive soils. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on slope stability. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 19, 371–399.

Unsaturated Soils (UNSAT 98), Beijing. 1, pp. 71–98. Saada, Z., Maghous, S., Garnier, D., 2012. Stability analysis of rock slopes subjected to

Camones, L.A.M., Vargas, E.A., Figueiredo, R.P.D., Velloso, R.Q., 2013. Application of the seepage forces using the modiﬁed Hoek-Brown criterion. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci.

discrete element method for modeling of rock crack propagation and coalescence in 55, 45–54.

the step-path failure mechanism. Eng. Geol. 153, 80–94. Salmi, E.F., Nazem, M., Karakus, M., 2016. Numerical analysis of a large landslide in-

Eid, H.T., 2014. Stability charts for uniform slopes in soils with nonlinear failure envel- duced by coal mining subsidence. Eng. Geol. 217, 141–152.

opes. Eng. Geol. 168, 38–45. Tarantino, A., Mountassir, G.E., 2013. Making unsaturated soil mechanics accessible for

Fredlund, D.G., Xing, A., 1994. Equations for the soil-water characteristic curve. Can. engineers: preliminary hydraulic-mechanical characterisation and stability assess-

Geotech. J. 31 (4), 521–532. ment. Eng. Geol. 165, 89–104.

Fredlund, D.G., Morgenstern, N.R., Widger, R.A., 1978. The shear strength of unsaturated Travis, Q.B., Houston, S.L., Marinho, F.A.M., Schmeeckle, M., 2010. Unsaturated inﬁnite

soils. Can. Geotech. J. 15 (3), 313–321. slope stability considering surface ﬂux conditions. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 136 (7),

Fredlund, D.G., Xing, A., Fredlund, M.D., Barbour, S.L., 1996. The relationship of the 963–974.

unsaturated soil shear strength to the soil water characteristic curve. Can. Geotech. J. Vanapalli, S.K., Fredlund, D.G., Pufahl, D.E., Clifton, A.W., 1996. Model for the prediction

32 (3), 440–448. of shear strength with respect to soil suction. Can. Geotech. J. 33 (3), 379–392.

Gao, Y.F., Zhu, D.S., Zhang, F., Lei, G.H., Qin, H.Y., 2014. Stability analysis of three- Vilar, O.M., 2006. A simpliﬁed procedure to estimate the shear strength envelope of

dimensional slopes under water drawdown conditions. Can. Geotech. J. 51 (6), unsaturated soils. Can. Geotech. J. 43 (10), 1088–1095.

1355–1364. Viratjandr, C., Michalowski, R.L., 2006. Limit analysis of submerged slopes subjected to

Gischig, V.S., Eberhardt, E., Moore, J.R., Hungr, O., 2015. On the seismic response of water drawdown. Can. Geotech. J. 43 (8), 802–814.

deep-seated rock slope instabilities-insights from numerical modeling. Eng. Geol. Yang, X.L., Li, Z.W., 2018. Factor of safety of three-dimensional stepped slope. Int. J.

193, 1–18. Geomech. 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001154.

Houston, S.L., Perez-garcia, N., Houston, W.N., 2008. Shear strength and shear-induced Yang, X.L., Yao, C., 2018. Stability of tunnel roof in nonhomogeneous soils. Int. J.

volume change behavior of unsaturated soils from a triaxial test program. J. Geotech. Geomech. 18 (3), 06018002.

Geoenviron. 134 (11), 1619–1632. Yang, X.L., Zhang, R., 2018. Limit analysis of stability of twin shallow tunnels considering

Hoyos, L.R., Suescún-Florez, E.A., Puppala, A.J., 2015. Stiﬀness of intermediate un- surface settlement. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12205-017-

saturated soil from simultaneous suction-controlled resonant column and bender 1398-8.

element testing. Eng. Geol. 188, 10–28. Zhang, L.L., Fredlund, D.G., Fredlund, M.D., Wilson, G.W., 2014. Modeling the un-

Jing, L., 1998. Formulation of discontinuous deformation analysis (DDA)-an implicit saturated soil zone in slope stability analysis. Can. Geotech. J. 51 (12), 1384–1398.

discrete element model for block systems. Eng. Geol. 49, 371–381. Zhang, C.G., Chen, X.D., Fan, W., 2016a. Critical embedment depth of a rigid retaining

Khalili, N., Khabbaz, M.H., 1998. A unique relationship for χ for the determination of the wall against overturning in unsaturated soils considering intermediate principal

shear strength of unsaturated soils. Géotechnique 48 (5), 681–687. stress and strength nonlinearity. J. Cent. South Univ. 23 (4), 944–954.

Li, T.Z., Yang, X.L., 2018. Reliability analysis of tunnel face in broken soft rocks using Zhang, C.G., Chen, X.D., Fan, W., 2016b. Overturning stability of a rigid retaining wall for

improved response surface method. Int. J. Geomech. 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/ foundation pits in unsaturated soils. Int. J. Geomech. 16 (4), 06015013.

(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001129. Zhou, X.P., Cheng, H., 2013. Analysis of stability of three-dimensional slopes using the

Lim, K., Lyamin, A.V., Cassidy, M.J., Li, A.J., 2016. Three-dimensional slope stability rigorous limit equilibrium method. Eng. Geol. 160, 21–33.

charts for frictional ﬁll materials placed on purely cohesive clay. Int. J. Geomech. 16 Zhou, X.P., Cheng, H., 2014. Stability analysis of three-dimensional seismic landslides

(2), 04015042. using the rigorous limit equilibrium method. Eng. Geol. 174, 87–102.

Lu, N., Likos, W.J., 2004. Unsaturated Soil Mechanics. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Zhou, X.P., Cheng, H., 2015. The long-term stability analysis of 3D creeping slopes using

Michalowski, R.L., Drescher, A., 2009. Three-dimensional stability of slopes and ex- the displacement-based rigorous limit equilibrium method. Eng. Geol. 195, 292–300.

cavations. Géotechnique 59 (10), 839–850. Zhou, X.P., Zhao, Y., Qian, Q.H., 2015. A novel meshless numerical method for modeling

Michalowski, R.L., Nadukuru, S.S., 2013. Three-dimensional limit analysis of slopes with progressive failure processes of slopes. Eng. Geol. 192, 139–153.

pore pressure. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 139 (9), 1604–1610.

Oh, S., Lu, N., 2015. Slope stability analysis under unsaturated conditions: case studies of

115