4.6 Article

Slope stability analysis by strength reduction method based on average residual displacement increment criterion

Journal

BULLETIN OF ENGINEERING GEOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Volume 80, Issue 6, Pages 4367-4378

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10064-021-02237-y

Keywords

Strength reduction method; Slope failure criterion; Safety factor; Average residual displacement increment

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFD1100405]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A new criterion for slope stability evaluation based on residual displacement increment is proposed in this paper, avoiding the randomness and subjectivity in selecting characteristic points and judging displacement mutation points. This criterion provides a more accurate and reliable method for assessing slope stability.
The strength reduction method (SRM) is one of the main methods for evaluating slope stability and its key step is to select failure criteria reasonably and correctly. At present, non-convergence of numerical iteration, penetration of plastic zone, and the catastrophe of characteristic points displacement are usually used as slope failure criteria. To avoid the randomness of selecting characteristic points and the subjective error, this paper presents a new criterion: residual displacement increment criterion based on the displacement catastrophe criterion of characteristic points. In this criterion, the average residual displacement increment is calculated after each reduction, and the strength reduction factor corresponding to the maximum average residual displacement increment is regarded as the safety factor of the slope. This new criterion avoids the randomness of selecting characteristic points and the subjective error of judging the displacement mutation point artificially. The two-dimensional slope stability calculated by this criterion is compared with the other three criteria and Spencer method, which verifies the applicability and accuracy of this criterion.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available