Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

ISSN 2095-2430

ISSN 2095-2449(Online)

CN 10-1023/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-968

2018 Impact Factor: 1.272

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.    2023, Vol. 17 Issue (11) : 1760-1775    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-023-0018-6
Reliability analysis of excavated slopes in undrained clay
Shuang SHU, Bin GE, Yongxin WU, Fei ZHANG()
Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education for Geomechanics and Embankment Engineering, College of Civil and Transportation Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
 Download: PDF(8377 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

A novel approach based on the upper bound theory is proposed to assess the stability of excavated slopes with spatially variable clay in undrained conditions. The proposed random limit analysis is a combination of the deterministic slope stability limit analysis together with random field theory and Monte Carlo simulation. A series of analyses is conducted to verify the potential application of the proposed method and to investigate the effects of the soil undrained shear strength gradient and the spatial correlation length on slope stability. Three groups of potential sliding surfaces are identified and the occurrence probability of each sort of failure mechanism is quantified for various slope ratios. The proposed method is found to be feasible for evaluating slope reliability. The obtained results are helpful in understanding the slope failure mechanism from a quantitative point of view. The paper could provide guidance for slope targeted local reinforcement.

Keywords slope stability      spatial variability      limit analysis      random field      clay     
Corresponding Author(s): Fei ZHANG   
Just Accepted Date: 30 November 2023   Online First Date: 10 January 2024    Issue Date: 24 January 2024
 Cite this article:   
Shuang SHU,Bin GE,Yongxin WU, et al. Reliability analysis of excavated slopes in undrained clay[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(11): 1760-1775.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-023-0018-6
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2023/V17/I11/1760
Fig.1  Definitions of failure modes. (a) TC; (b) DTC; (c) DC.
Fig.2  Discrete failure mechanism of a slope.
Fig.3  Slope sketch considered.
Fig.4  Deterministic sliding surfaces for different Rs: (a) Rs = 1:3; (b) Rs = 1:2; (c) Rs = 1:1.
Fig.5  Results of MC simulation for the case of Rs = 1:2, k = 1 kPa/m, and l = 10 m: (a) convergence of mean and standard deviation of FS; (b) histogram of FS.
Fig.6  Effect of l on βS for different Rs: (a) Rs = 1:3; (b) Rs = 1:2; (c) Rs = 1:1.
Fig.7  Effect of k on βS for different Rs: (a) Rs = 1:3; (b) Rs = 1:2; (c) Rs = 1:1.
Fig.8  Random sliding surfaces for Rs = 1:1 with (a) k = 0, l = 10 m; (b) k = 0, l = 30 m; (c) k = 3 kPa/m, l = 10 m; (d) k = 3 kPa/m, l = 30 m.
l (m)k (kPa/m)Rs = 1:1Rs = 1:2Rs = 1:3l (m)k (kPa/m)Rs = 1:1Rs = 1:2Rs = 1:3
μ LσLμ LσLμ LσLμ LσLμ LσLμ LσL
50.013.56.314.65.914.75.9250.014.06.915.36.514.46.1
0.511.95.513.45.713.95.70.512.46.414.06.314.16.1
1.011.25.012.45.413.35.71.011.25.613.16.113.55.9
1.510.64.712.05.112.85.61.510.55.212.45.813.15.9
2.09.94.211.44.912.55.42.010.25.011.85.612.85.8
2.59.84.111.24.912.25.32.59.74.511.65.612.55.7
3.09.84.010.94.711.95.23.09.64.411.25.212.25.7
100.014.37.114.86.814.46.6300.014.46.915.06.214.56.2
0.512.76.213.86.213.86.40.512.86.513.96.214.16.1
1.011.45.612.96.013.36.21.011.75.813.26.113.56.0
1.510.65.012.25.812.86.01.511.05.312.45.813.05.7
2.010.54.911.75.612.55.92.010.24.711.95.512.75.6
2.510.14.611.35.312.25.82.59.94.511.45.112.35.6
3.09.84.311.05.111.95.53.09.64.011.15.112.15.3
150.013.96.915.26.614.86.5350.014.27.015.56.414.65.9
0.512.86.614.26.614.16.50.512.56.514.36.413.85.9
1.011.96.113.36.613.86.51.011.15.813.16.113.45.9
1.511.15.712.66.313.46.51.510.45.312.46.012.85.8
2.010.65.212.05.912.96.22.09.84.711.85.712.65.7
2.510.34.811.65.612.66.02.59.54.511.45.512.25.5
3.09.94.611.45.512.25.83.09.24.011.05.212.05.5
200.014.46.815.26.614.86.3400.014.36.715.35.914.65.6
0.513.06.614.36.414.36.30.512.86.414.05.914.15.5
1.011.86.013.46.213.86.21.011.35.513.15.813.65.5
1.511.05.512.86.113.36.01.510.44.812.45.613.05.3
2.010.55.112.35.812.95.92.09.84.411.95.312.65.3
2.510.14.711.85.712.65.92.59.54.011.45.112.45.3
3.09.84.411.45.412.45.73.09.23.611.04.912.15.2
Tab.1  Summary of μ L (unit: m) for isotropic spatial variability
k (kPa/m)l (m)
Rs = 1:1Rs = 1:2Rs = 1:3
0.020.717.715.1
0.58.416.314.9
1.08.312.114.7
1.58.210.813.0
2.08.19.712.2
2.57.99.011.0
3.07.89.010.3
Tab.2  Deterministic results of l
Fig.9  μ L against k under l = 10 m.
Fig.10  μ L against l under k = 1 kPa/m.
l (m)k (kPa/m)Rs = 1:1Rs = 1:2Rs = 1:3
TCDTCDCTCDTCDCTCDTCDC
50.03.29.787.105.994.102.797.3
0.56.013.180.9012.887.206.993.1
1.09.417.573.1019.880.2010.689.4
1.511.420.468.2026.074.0016.583.5
2.015.629.055.4032.567.5021.278.8
2.512.626.061.4038.062.0025.874.2
3.015.827.157.1042.357.7030.369.7
100.02.810.486.807.292.803.596.5
0.56.016.078.0014.385.709.990.1
1.09.520.769.8022.977.1016.084.0
1.512.823.663.6028.072.0020.979.1
2.015.024.061.0036.163.9026.473.6
2.517.027.955.1044.655.4032.068.0
3.019.130.650.3046.253.8035.065.0
150.04.413.182.508.092.003.796.3
0.57.618.474.0015.584.5010.090.0
1.010.323.766.0023.776.3016.683.4
1.514.727.058.3030.769.2022.977.1
2.017.428.054.6037.562.4030.769.3
2.520.329.949.8042.557.5034.165.9
3.023.130.846.1048.151.9038.062.0
200.03.611.884.605.894.204.395.7
0.56.219.174.7012.587.509.390.7
1.09.325.964.8020.779.3013.686.4
1.512.828.358.9029.071.0019.380.7
2.017.730.352.0034.565.5026.074.0
2.522.532.844.7039.460.6031.268.8
3.025.033.241.8046.153.9035.464.6
250.02.415.781.907.892.204.295.8
0.57.323.069.7016.084.008.991.1
1.010.731.058.3023.276.8015.584.5
1.514.531.953.6030.769.3022.777.3
2.018.533.947.6037.362.7028.671.4
2.522.436.740.9044.655.4032.667.4
3.025.834.439.8048.851.2037.662.4
300.02.415.682.007.792.303.696.4
0.54.723.871.5015.884.208.691.4
1.09.730.959.4023.576.5015.184.9
1.513.332.953.8031.668.4022.377.7
2.017.935.047.1039.360.7027.472.6
2.522.035.842.2043.156.9033.766.3
3.025.539.035.5047.053.0039.160.9
350.02.815.182.107.692.403.696.4
0.55.525.768.8015.684.407.992.1
1.09.531.459.1023.276.8014.885.2
1.512.839.248.0031.868.2022.277.8
2.017.941.540.6039.160.9027.672.4
2.521.743.235.1045.454.6032.567.5
3.026.942.230.9049.250.8038.461.6
400.02.214.982.906.993.103.097.0
0.55.124.270.7014.685.407.692.4
1.09.231.859.0023.576.5014.385.7
1.512.239.748.1031.168.9021.178.9
2.016.943.239.9037.462.6027.472.6
2.521.343.435.3044.355.7033.366.7
3.025.645.029.4048.351.7037.362.7
Tab.3  Summary of occurrence probability for each failure mode for isotropic spatial variability
Fig.11  Occurrence probability of failure modes for l = 10 m for different Rs: (a) Rs = 1:3; (b) Rs = 1:2; (c) Rs = 1:1.
Fig.12  Occurrence probability of failure modes for k = 1 kPa/m for different Rs: (a) Rs = 1:3; (b) Rs = 1:2; (c) Rs = 1:1.
Fig.13  Effect of lx on βS for different Rs: (a) Rs = 1:3; (b) Rs = 1:2; (c) Rs = 1:1.
Fig.14  μ L against lx under: (a) k = 0; (b) k = 1 kPa/m.
lx (m)k (kPa/m)Rs = 1:1Rs = 1:2Rs = 1:3
TCDTCDCTCDTCDCTCDTCDC
10005.594.5010.090.08.818.672.6
1013.586.5018.381.414.327.657.7
15006.393.7011.288.89.319.771.0
1013.686.4021.478.215.127.257.7
20005.894.209.091.09.115.975.0
1014.413.6022.078.015.226.858.0
25006.193.908.891.27.716.975.4
1013.686.4018.781.314.227.158.7
30005.994.109.490.67.515.776.8
1015.085.0018.281.812.925.961.2
35005.994.1010.189.96.215.778.1
1014.385.7020.079.512.024.263.8
40005.894.2010.289.86.917.675.5
1014.485.6019.480.612.426.061.6
Tab.4  Summary of occurrence probability for each failure mode for isotropic spatial variability
Fig.15  Occurrence probability of failure modes for k = 0 kPa/m with anisotropic spatial variability for different Rs: (a) Rs = 1:3; (b) Rs = 1:2; (c) Rs = 1:1.
Fig.16  Occurrence probability of failure modes for k = 1 kPa/m with anisotropic spatial variability for different Rs: (a) Rs = 1:3; (b) Rs = 1:2; (c) Rs = 1:1.
1 D V Griffiths, X Yu. Another look at the stability of slopes with linearly increasing undrained strength. Geotechnique, 2015, 65(10): 824–830
https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.14.T.030
2 K Lim, A J Li, A V Lyamin. Three-dimensional slope stability assessment of two-layered undrained clay. Computers and Geotechnics, 2015, 70: 1–17
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.07.011
3 R L Michalowski. Slope stability analysis: A kinematical approach. Geotechnique, 1995, 45(2): 283–293
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1995.45.2.283
4 R H Renani, D C Martin. Factor of safety of strain-softening slopes. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 2020, 12(3): 473–483
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.11.004
5 H S Yu, R Salgado, S W Sloan, J M Kim. Limit analysis versus limit equilibrium for slope stability. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 1998, 124(1): 1–11
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1998)124:1(1
6 S M Dasaka, L M Zhang. Spatial variability of in situ weathered soil. Geotechnique, 2012, 62(5): 375–384
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.8.P.151.3786
7 D V Griffiths, G A Fenton. Bearing capacity of spatially random soil: The undrained clay Prandtl problems revisited. Geotechnique, 2001, 51(4): 351–359
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2001.51.4.351
8 S H Jiang, J Huang, D V Griffiths, Z P Deng. Advances in reliability and risk analyses of slopes in spatially variable soils: A state-of-the-art review. Computers and Geotechnics, 2022, 141: 104498
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2021.104498
9 J Li, P Hu, M Uzielli, M J Cassidy. Bayesian predication of peak resistance of a spudcan penetrating sand-over-clay. Geotechnique, 2018, 68(10): 905–917
https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.17.P.154
10 J Montgomery, R W Boulanger. Effects of spatial variability on liquefaction-induced settlement and lateral spreading. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2017, 143(1): 04016086
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001584
11 L A Roberts, A Misra. Reliability-based design of deep foundations based on differential settlement criterion. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2009, 46(2): 168–176
https://doi.org/10.1139/T08-117
12 A H Soubra, T Al-Bittar, J Thajeel, A Ahmed. Probabilistic analysis of strip footings resting on spatially varying soils using kriging metamodeling and importance sampling. Computers and Geotechnics, 2019, 114: 103107
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2019.103107
13 Y Wang, Z J Cao, D Li. Bayesian perspective on geotechnical variability and site characterization. Engineering Geology, 2016, 203: 117–125
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.08.017
14 T T Zhang, X F Guo, J Baroth, D Dias. Metamodel-based slope reliability analysis—Case of spatially variable soils considering a rotated anisotropy. Geosciences, 2021, 11(11): 465
https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11110465
15 T T Zhang, X F Guo, D Dias, Z B Sun. Dynamic probabilistic analysis of non-homogeneous slopes based on a simplified deterministic model. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2021, 142: 106563
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106563
16 S E Cho. Effects of spatial variability of soil properties on slope stability. Engineering Geology, 2007, 92(3−4): 97–109
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2007.03.006
17 S E Cho. Probabilistic assessment of slope stability that considers the spatial variability of soil properties. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2010, 136(7): 975–984
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000309
18 S Javankhoshdel, R J Bathurst. Simplified probabilistic slope stability design charts for cohesive and cφ soils. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2014, 51(9): 1033–1045
https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2013-0385
19 S H Jiang, X Liu, J Huang, C B Zhou. Efficient reliability-based design of slope angles in spatially variable soils with field data. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2022, 46(13): 2461–2490
https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.3414
20 D V Griffiths, G A Fenton. Probabilistic slope stability analysis by finite elements. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2004, 130(5): 507–518
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2004)130:5(507
21 D V Griffiths, R M Marquez. Three-dimensional slope stability analysis by elasto-plastic finite elements. Geotechnique, 2007, 57(6): 537–546
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2007.57.6.537
22 D V Griffiths, J Huang, G A Fenton. Probabilistic infinite slope analysis. Computers and Geotechnics, 2011, 38(4): 577–584
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2011.03.006
23 D Zhu, D V Griffiths, J Huang, G A Fenton. Probabilistic stability analyses of undrained slopes with linearly increasing mean strength. Geotechnique, 2017, 67(8): 733–746
https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.16.P.223
24 J Huang, A V Lyamin, D V Griffiths, K Krabbenhoft, S W Sloan. Quantitative risk assessment of landslide by limit analysis and random fields. Computers and Geotechnics, 2013, 53: 60–67
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2013.04.009
25 M Chwała. Upper-bound approach based on failure mechanisms in slope stability analysis of spatially variable cφ soils. Computers and Geotechnics, 2021, 135: 104170
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2021.104170
26 H ZhangY ZhaoC Li. Probabilistic slope stability analysis based on the upper bound theorem. In: Proceedings of 2010 International Conference on E-Product E-Service and E-Entertainment. Henan: IEEE, 2010, 1–4
27 L H Zhao, S Zuo, Y L Lin, L Li, Y B Zhang. Reliability back analysis of shear strength parameters of landslide with three-dimensional upper bound limit analysis theory. Landslides, 2016, 13(4): 711–724
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0604-3
28 K K Phoon, F H Kulhawy, M D Grigoriu. Reliability-based design for transmission line structure foundations. Computers and Geotechnics, 2000, 26(3−4): 169–185
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-352X(99)00037-3
29 G A Fenton, E H Vanmarcke. Simulation of random fields via local average subdivision. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 1990, 116(8): 1733–1749
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1990)116:8(1733
30 D Li, X Qi, Z Cao, X Tang, W Zhou, K K Phoon, C Zhou. Reliability analysis of strip footing considering spatially variable undrained shear strength that linearly increases with depth. Soil and Foundation, 2015, 55(4): 866–880
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2015.06.017
31 S Shu, Y Gao, Y Wu. Probabilistic bearing capacity analysis of spudcan foundation in soil with linearly increasing mean undrained shear strength. Ocean Engineering, 2020, 204: 106800
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106800
32 Y Gao, F Zhang, G Lei, D Li, Y Wu, N Zhang. Stability charts for 3D failures of homogeneous slopes. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2013, 139(9): 1528–1538
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000866
33 S Shu, B Ge, Y Wu, F Zhang. Probabilistic assessment on 3D stability and failure mechanism of undrained slopes based on the kinematic approach of limit analysis. International Journal of Geomechanics, 2023, 23(1): 06022037
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0002635
34 D C Drucker, W Prager. Soil mechanics and plastic analysis or limit design. Quarterly of Applied Mathematics, 1952, 10(2): 157–165
https://doi.org/10.1090/qam/48291
35 K S Li, P Lumb. Probabilistic design of slopes. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1987, 24(4): 520–535
https://doi.org/10.1139/t87-068
36 W F Chen. Limit Analysis and Soil Plasticity. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1975
37 Z Y Chen. Random trials used in determining global minimum factors of safety of slopes. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1992, 29(2): 225–233
https://doi.org/10.1139/t92-026
38 J T Christian, C C Ladd, G B Baecher. Reliability applied to slope stability analysis. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1994, 120(12): 2180–2207
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1994)120:12(2180
39 S D Koppula. On stability of slopes in clays with linearly increasing strength. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1984, 21(3): 577–581
https://doi.org/10.1139/t84-059
40 S Javankhoshdel, B Cami, R J Chenari, P Dastpak. Probabilistic analysis of slopes with linearly increasing undrained shear strength using RLEM approach. Transportation Infrastructure Geotechnology, 2021, 8(1): 114–141
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40515-020-00118-7
41 S H Jiang, J Huang, X H Qi, C B Zhou. Efficient probabilistic back analysis of spatially varying soil parameters for slope reliability assessment. Engineering Geology, 2020, 271: 105597
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105597
42 R L Michalowski. Stability charts for uniform slopes. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2002, 128(4): 351–355
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2002)128:4(351
[1] Mehrdad KARAMI, Mohammad NAZARI-SHARABIAN, James BRISTOW, Moses KARAKOUZIAN. Evaluation of the stability of terraced slopes in clayey gravel soil using a novel numerical technique[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(5): 796-811.
[2] Ramin VALI, Saeed KHOSRAVI, Majid BEYGI. Undrained seismic bearing capacity of strip footing adjacent to a heterogeneous excavation[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(4): 566-583.
[3] Shili MA, Liquan XIE, Tsung-Chow SU. Model testing of tripod caisson foundations in silty clay subjected to eccentric lateral loads[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(3): 467-476.
[4] Shiguo XIAO, Shaohong LI. LSSVM-based approach for refining soil failure criteria and calculating safety factor of slopes[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2022, 16(7): 871-881.
[5] Yangpan FU, Mansheng LIN, You ZHANG, Gongfa CHEN, Yongjian LIU. Slope stability analysis based on big data and convolutional neural network[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2022, 16(7): 882-895.
[6] Guangyu DAI, Fei ZHANG, Yuke WANG. Stability analysis of layered slopes in unsaturated soils[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2022, 16(3): 378-387.
[7] Shuvankar DAS, Debarghya CHAKRABORTY. Effect of interface adhesion factor on the bearing capacity of strip footing placed on cohesive soil overlying rock mass[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(6): 1494-1503.
[8] Shan LIN, Hong ZHENG, Chao HAN, Bei HAN, Wei LI. Evaluation and prediction of slope stability using machine learning approaches[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(4): 821-833.
[9] Mantu MAJUMDER, Debarghya CHAKRABORTY. Bearing and uplift capacities of under-reamed piles in soft clay underlaid by stiff clay using lower-bound finite element limit analysis[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(2): 537-551.
[10] Rajarshi PRAMANIK, Dilip Kumar BAIDYA, Nirjhar DHANG. Reliability assessment of three-dimensional bearing capacity of shallow foundation using fuzzy set theory[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(2): 478-489.
[11] Huayang LEI, Yajie ZHANG, Yao HU, Yingnan LIU. Model test and discrete element method simulation of shield tunneling face stability in transparent clay[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(1): 147-166.
[12] Wengang ZHANG, Libin TANG, Hongrui LI, Lin WANG, Longfei CHENG, Tingqiang ZHOU, Xiang CHEN. Probabilistic stability analysis of Bazimen landslide with monitored rainfall data and water level fluctuations in Three Gorges Reservoir, China[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(5): 1247-1261.
[13] Adam HAMROUNI, Daniel DIAS, Badreddine SBARTAI. Soil spatial variability impact on the behavior of a reinforced earth wall[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(2): 518-531.
[14] Mosbeh R. KALOOP, Alaa R. GABR, Sherif M. EL-BADAWY, Ali ARISHA, Sayed SHWALLY, Jong Wan HU. Predicting resilient modulus of recycled concrete and clay masonry blends for pavement applications using soft computing techniques[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(6): 1379-1392.
[15] Yundong ZHOU, Fei ZHANG, Jingquan Wang, Yufeng GAO, Guangyu DAI. Seismic stability of earth slopes with tension crack[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(4): 950-964.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed