, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 751–764 | Cite as

Stability analysis of a slope under impact of a rock block using the generalized interpolation material point method (GIMP)

  • André Müller
  • Euripedes A. VargasJrEmail author
Original Paper


The present paper presents a study of a particular instability mechanism observed in coastal ranges of southeastern Brazil. It consists of the failure of a saturated soil slope hit by a rock block detached from higher ground. In the rainy season lasting from November to March, slopes are near or at complete saturation. It is also common under these conditions, that blocks of rock masses of gneissic origins, mainly detaching from the rock mass and sliding along relief joints in higher elevations, acquire momentum to impact lower ground slopes consisting mainly by soil masses eventually saturated. The impact generates pore pressures, which can lead to failure of the slope. The present paper proposes to analyze this condition by using the generalized interpolation material point method (GIMP), a method suitable for analyzing the dynamic character of the problem as well as the generated failure mechanism and ensuing run-out of the failed mass. The paper presents details of the problem and of the coupled fluid-mechanical formulation of GIMP used in analysis. It also presents and discusses the obtained results of the analysis carried out. The paper also comments on the suitability of GIMP for analysis of this type of complex slope stability condition.


Impact Rock block Soil slope GIMP 


  1. Abe K, Shinoda M, Murata M, Nakamura H, Nakamura S (2010) Simulation of landslides after slope failure using the material point method in shaking table tests. Proc., 5th Civil Engineering Conf. in the Asian Region and Australasian Structural Engineering Conf., Engineers, Australia, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  2. Abe K, Izawa J, Nakamura H, Kawai T, Nakamura S (2013) Analytical study of seismic slope behavior in a large-scale shaking table model test using FEM and MPM. 18th Int. Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, ParisGoogle Scholar
  3. Abe K, Soga K, Bandara S (2014) Material point method for coupled hydromechanical problems. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 140(3):04013033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ambati R, Pan X, Yuan H, Zhang X (2012) Application of material point methods for cutting process simulations. Comput Mater Sci 57:102–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andersen S, Andersen H (2010) Modelling of landslides with the material-point method. Comput Geosci 14(1):137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bardenhagen SG, Kober EM (2004) The generalized interpolation material point method. Comput Model Eng Sci 5(6):477–495Google Scholar
  7. Bardenhagen SG, Brackbill JU, Sulsky D (2000) The material point method for granular materials. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 187(3–4):529–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barros WT, Amaral CP, Sobreira FG, D’Orsi RN, Maia HS, Cunha RP (1989) Catastrophic avalanche at the St. Genoveva slope. Solos e Rochas, vol 11. ABMS (Brazilian Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering), São Paulo, pp 17–25 (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  9. Beuth L, Wieckowski Z, Vermeer PA (2011) Solution of quasi-static large-strain problems by the material point method. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 35(13):1451–1465Google Scholar
  10. Bhandari T, Hamad F, Moormann C, Sharma KG, Westrich B (2016) Numerical modelling of seismic slope failure using MPM. Comput Geotech 75:126–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brackbill JU, Ruppel HM (1986) FLIP – a method for adaptively zoned, particle in cell calculations in 2 dimensions. J Comput Phys 65:314–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Campos TMP, Galindo MSV (2016) Evaluation of the viscosity of tropical soils for debris flow analysis: a new approach. Géotechnique 66(7):533–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carter MM, Arduino P, Mackenzie-Helnwein P, Miller GR (2015) Simulating granular column collapse using the material point method. Acta Geotech 10:101–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coussot O, Boyer S (1995) Determination of yield stress fluid behaviour from inclinated plane test. Rheol Acta 34:534–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Daido A (1971) On the occurrence of mud-debris flow. Bull Disas Prev Res Inst 21(187):109–135Google Scholar
  16. Detournay E, Cheng HD (1993) Fundamentals of poroelasticity. Chapter 5 in comprehensive rock engineering: principles, practice and projects, vol. II. Analysis and Design Method, ed. C. Fairhurst, Pergamon Press, pp 113–171Google Scholar
  17. Detournay C, Dzik E (2006) Nodal mixed discretization for tetrahedral elements. In Proceedings of the 4th international FLAC symposium, numerical modeling in geomechanics. Minnesota Itasca Consulting Group IncGoogle Scholar
  18. Dong Y, Wang D, Randolph MF (2017) Runout of submarine landslide simulated with material point method. J Hydrodyn 29(3):438–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dufour F, Prime N, Darve F (2012) A unique constitutive model for soils in landslide analysis, vol 8. Tech Science Press, Henderson, pp 109–115Google Scholar
  20. Duvaut G, Lions JL (1971) Transfert de chaleur dans un fluide de Bingham dont la viscosité depend de la température. J Frict Anal 11:93–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goodarzi M, Rouainia M (2017) Modelling slope failure using a quasi-static MPM with a non-local strain softening approach. Procedia Engineering 175:220–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harlow FH (1964) The particle-in-cell computing method for fluid dynamics. Method Comput Phys 3:319–343Google Scholar
  23. Kafaji I (2013) Formulation of a dynamic material point method (MPM) for geomechanical problems. PhD thesis, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  24. Kiriyama T (2013) Numerical simulations of progressive failure of triaxial compression tests using generalized interpolation material point method. J Appl Mech 6:1321–1332Google Scholar
  25. Lacerda WA (2004) The behaviour of colluvial slopes in a tropical environment. Proc. 9th international symposium on landslides, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  26. Lacerda WA (2007) Landslide initiation in saprolite and colluvium in southern Brazil: field and laboratory observations. Geomorphology 87:104–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Llano-Serna MA, Farias MM, Pedroso DM (2016) An assessment of the material point method for modelling large scale run-out processes in landslides. Landslides 13:1057 1066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Manchao H, Leal SR, Müller AL, Vargas EA Jr, Ribeiro Sousa L, Xin C (2015) Analysis of excessive deformations in tunnels for safety evaluation. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 45:190–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Moormann C, Hamad F (2015) MPM dynamic simulation of a seismically induced sliding mass. Int. symposium on geohazards and geomechanics. IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental ScienceGoogle Scholar
  30. Muller AL, Vargas Jr EA (2014) The material point method for analysis of closure mechanisms in openings and impact in saturated porous media. In US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium ARMAGoogle Scholar
  31. Nairn JA (2003) Material point method calculations with explicit cracks. Comput Model Eng Sci 4(6):649–663Google Scholar
  32. Owen DRJ, Hinton E (1980) Finite elements in plasticity: theory and practice. Pineridge Press, SwanseaGoogle Scholar
  33. Prime N, Dufour F, Darve F (2014) Solid–fluid transition modelling in geomaterials and application to a mudflow interacting with an obstacle. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 38:1341–1361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ribeiro e Souza L, Vargas Jr EA, Ru Z, Karam K, Leal e Souza R, Muller AL (2016) Analysis of Large Landslides Induced by the 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake, China. In: International Workshop on Natural Hazards, soil characterization and site effects, 2016, San Miguel IslandGoogle Scholar
  35. Simo JC, Hughes TJR (1997) Computational inelasticity. Springer – Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Soga K, Alonso E, Yerro A, Kumar A, Bandara S (2016) Trends in large-deformation analysis of landslide mass movements with particular emphasis on the material point method. Géotechnique 66:248–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Steffen M, Wallstedt PC, Guilkey JE, Kirby RM, Berzins M (2008) Examination and analysis of implementation choices within the material point method (MPM). Comput Model Eng Sci 31:107–127Google Scholar
  38. Sulsky D, Chen Z, Schreyer HL (1994) A particle method for history-dependent materials. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 118:179–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sulsky D, Zhou SJ, Schreyer HL (1995) Application of a particle-in-cell method to solid mechanics. Comput Phys Commun 87:236–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vardon PJ, Wang B, Hicks MA (2017) Slope failure simulations with MPM. J Hydrodyn 29(3):445–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Verruijt A (2010) An introduction to soil dynamics, vol 24. Springer Verlag, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang B, Hicks MA, Vardon PJ (2016a) Slope failure analysis using the random material point method. Géotechnique Letters 6:113–118.
  43. Wang B, Vardon PJ, Hicks MA (2016b) Investigation of retrogressive and progressive slope failure mechanisms using the material point method. Comput Geotech 78:88–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wiezckowski Z (2004) The material point method in large strain engineering problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 193:4417–4438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yerro A, Pinyol NM, Alonso EE (2016) Internal progressive failure in deep-seated landslides. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49:2317–2332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zabala F, Alonso EE (2012) The material point method and the analysis of dams and dam failures. In: Sousa V, Fernandes A (eds) Innovative numerical modelling in Geomechanics, Chapter 8. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 171–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zabala F, Rodari R, Oldecop LA (2007) Seismic analysis of geotechnical structures using the material point method. 4th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, ThessalonikiGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhang HW, Wang KP (2009) Material point method for dynamic analysis of saturated porous media under external contact/impact of solid bodies. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 198:1456–1472CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tecgraf InstitutePontifical Catholic UniversityRio de JaneiroBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringPontifical Catholic UniversityRio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations