4.4 Article

Experimental tests of slope failure due to rainfalls using 1g physical slope models

期刊

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS
卷 58, 期 2, 页码 290-305

出版社

JAPANESE GEOTECHNICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.sandf.2018.02.003

关键词

Experimental model test; Slope failure; Rainfall; Unsaturated soils; Pore water pressures

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [23580327]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23580327] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In order to mitigate the damage due to sediment disasters, knowledge about how slopes fail due to rainfall is indispensable. The main objectives of this paper were to investigate experimentally the effects of surface sand layer density and rainfall intensity on the slop failures due to rainfalls. We conducted a series of experimental tests using 1g physical slope models constructed of Kasumigaura sand and a silt soil named DL clay for the permeable residual surface layer and the firm rock foundation, respectively. A total of nine cases with different combinations of surface sand layer densities and rainfall intensities was tested. Two types of failure: surface slide failure and retrogressive failure, were observed depending on the rainfall intensity and the surface sand layer density. The following mechanism of failure was accounted. At first some sands, which contained a lot of accumulated rainwater, flowed out (flowslide) at the slope toes. The flow slides may be due to the reductions of effective stresses as a result. When a surface slide failure occurred, most of the PWP (pore water pressure) values were still negative but the whole sand layers were almost at the saturation condition. In the case of retrogressive failures, seepage surfaces rose up to higher positions and excess PWPs appeared under the seepage surfaces. This difference of generation mechanism of PWP values may be the deciding factor in the difference in the type of failure. (C) 2018 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japanese Geotechnical Socifty.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据