Influence of Slope Thickness and Soil Porosity on the Failure Mechanism of Reduced-Scale Slope Models

Abstract:

This paper presents a self-made apparatus which has been used for estimating the adverse influence induced by some factors. There are two main factors that can make significant impact on the result of slope model tests: boundary effect and porosity effect. The relationship between the sliding angle and boundary effect can be achieved when the soil is at a loose condition of packing. The angle will decrease as the slope thickness increases and it will keep at a rough constant value when the thickness is relatively big, namely, the influence induced by the boundary effect which can be ignored at that time. In this paper, a theoretical method is employed to quantify and confirm this relationship. Corresponding predicted results agree well with the experimental results. But this conclusion is not suitable to dense soil. Special attention is also given to dense soil within a given porosity range, and a comparison between boundary effect and porosity is described. It could be seen clearly that the porosity is a stronger factor to the variation of the sliding angle than the boundary condition. These conclusions are valuable to a practitioner in taking modification work for such type of apparatus to get an optimal resolution for the latter experiment.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 671-674)
• Pages: 218-225
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.671-674.218
• Online since: March 2013
• Authors: Ping Wang, Long Hou, S.M. Asce
• Keywords: Boundary Effect, Influence Factor, Porosity, Sensitive Factor, Slope Model

References

[1] Collins, B. D., and Znidarcic, D. (2004). Stability analyses of rainfall-induced landslides., J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 130(4), 362-372.

DOI: 10.1061/(asce)1090-0241(2004)130:4(362)

[2] Courrech, S., Gondret, P., Perrin, B., and Rabaud, M. (2002). Wall effects on granular heap stability., Europhysics Letters., 9(4), 1-7.

DOI: 10.1209/epl/i2003-00156-5

[3] Damm, B., and Terhorst, B. (2010). A model of slope formation related to landslide activity in the Eastern Prealps, Austria., Geomorphology., 122(2010), 338-350.

DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.11.001

[4] Elgamal, A., Yang, Z., Adalier, K. and Sharp, M.K. (2003). Effect of Rigid Container Size on Dynamic Earth Dam Response in Centrifuge Experiments., Procs., 16th ASCE Engineering Mechanics Conference, July 16-18, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA.

[5] Godt, J. W., Baum, R. L., and Lu, N. (2009). Landsliding in partially saturated materials., Geophys. Res. Lett., 36(L02403), 1-5.

DOI: 10.1029/2008gl035996

[6] Karpenko, Y. A., Akay, A. (2001). A numerical model of friction between rough surfaces., Tribology International., 34, 531-545.

DOI: 10.1016/s0301-679x(01)00044-5

[7] Lu, N., and Godt, J. (2008). Infinite slope stability under steady unsaturated seepage conditions., Water Resour. Res., 44(W11404), 1-13.

DOI: 10.1029/2008wr006976

[8] Metcalf, J. R. (1966). Angle of repose and internal friction., Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. , 3, 155-161.

[9] Raman, S., Longstreet, A., and Guha. (2002). A fractal view of tool–chip interfacial friction in machining., Wear., 253(2002), 1111-1120.

DOI: 10.1016/s0043-1648(02)00238-7

[10] Vaid, Y. P., Negussey, D. (1984). Relative density of pluviated sand samples., Soils and Foundations., 24(2), 101-105.

DOI: 10.3208/sandf1972.24.2_101