Seismic Stability Analysis of Waterfront Rock Slopes Using the Modified Pseudo-Dynamic Method

  • Xin-Bao GuEmail author
  • Qi-Hong Wu
Original Paper


A modified pseudo-dynamic method is introduced in the paper at first, then geometric model of seismic stability on the waterfront rock slope considering the non-linear twin shear criterion is established. Finally the influence factors on the stability of rock slope are analyzed. The conclusions are drawn that the stability of rock slope decreases as the external loading \(q\), rock unit weight \(\gamma\), horizontal seismic acceleration coefficient \(k_{h}\) and vertical seismic acceleration coefficient \(k_{v}\) increases, and it increases as uniaxial compressive strength \(\sigma_{c}\), the water depth \(h_{1}\) and parameters of rock mass properties \(m_{i}\) and \(GSI\) of rocks increases. These conclusions can provide great instruction significance for the future engineering design.


Seismic stability analysis Waterfront rock slope Modified pseudo-dynamic method 



This work is supported by the first batch of Natural Science Foundation of SiChuan Provincial Department of Education (No. 17ZA0270); Talent Introduction Projection in 2016 in SiChuan University of Science & Engineering (No. 2016RCL19). The open foundation item in key laboratory about nondestructive testing and engineering calculation in university in 2016 (No. 2016QYJ02); The key research fund project: department of education of SiChuan province (No. 11za027), science and technology project of safety production in SiChuan province (aj20170601105926). This work was Supported by the Opening Project of SiChuan Province University Key Laboratory of Bridge Non-destruction Detecting and Engineering Computing (2017QYY01); Natural Science Foundation of SiChuan Provincial Department of Education (16ZB0246).


  1. Basha BM, Babu GLS (2009) Computation of sliding displacements of bridge abutments by pseudo-dynamic method. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29(13):103–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Basha BM, Babu GLS (2010) Seismic rotational displacements of gravity walls by pseudo-dynamic method with curved rupture surface. Int J Geomech 10(4):93–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bellezza I (2014) A new pseudo-dynamic approach for seismic active soil thrust. Geotech Geol Eng 32(2):561–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bellezza I (2015) Seismic soil thrust on hills using; a new pseudo-dynamic approach. Geotech Geol Eng 33(4):795–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen WF, Liu XL (1990) Limit analysis in soil mechanics. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  6. Chondhury D, Ahmad SAH (2008) Stability of waterfront retaining wall subjected to pseudodynamic earthquake forces. J Waterway Port. Coastal Ocean Eng 134(4):252–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Choudhury D, Ahmad SM (2007) Design of waterfront retaining wall for the passive case under earthquake and tsunami. Appl Ocean Res 112(29):37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Choudhury D, Katdare AND (2013) New approach to determine seismic passive resistance on retaining walls considering seismic waves. Int J Geomech 13(6):852–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Choudhury D, Ivatdare AD, Pain A (2014) New method to compute seismic active earth pressure on retaining wall considering seismic waves. Geotech Geol Eng 32(2):391–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoek E, Brown ET (1980) Empirical strength criterion for rock masses. ASCE J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 106(9):1013–1035Google Scholar
  11. Liu XY (2011) The application range of pseudo-static method and the calculation of earthquake force. J Univ Jinan 25(4):431–436 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  12. Maghous S, Buhan P, Bekaert A (1998) Failure design of jointed rock structures by means of a homogenization approach. Mech Cohesive-Frictional Mater 3(3):207–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pain Anindya, Choudhury Deepankar, Bhattacharyya SK (2017) Seismic rotational stability of gravity retaining walls by modified pseudo-dynamic method. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 94(3):244–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pianc (2001) Seismic design guidelines for port structures. A. A. Ballkema Publishers, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  15. Rajesh BG, Choudhury D (2016) Generalized seismic active thrust on retaining wall with submerged backfill using modified pseudo-dynamic method. Int J Geomech 17(3):261–273Google Scholar
  16. Richards R, Elms D (1979) Seismic behaviour of gravity retaining walls. J Geotech Eng 105(4):449–464Google Scholar
  17. Saada Z, Maghousb S, Gamier D (2011) Seismic bearing capacity of shallow foundations near rock slopes using the generalized Hoek-Brown criterion. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 35(6):724–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. SawadaT Nomachi SG, Chen WF (1994) Seismic bearing capacity of a mounded foundation near a down-hill slope by pseudo-static analysis. Soils Found 34(1):11–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Westergaard HM (1933) Water pressures on dams during earthquakes. Trans Am Soc Civ Eng 98(3):418–433Google Scholar
  20. Whitman RV, Liao S (1985) Seismic design of retaining walls. In: Miscellaneous Paper GL-85-1, US Army Eng. Waterways Experiment Station VicKsburg. MississiupiGoogle Scholar
  21. Yu MH, He LN, Song LY (1985) Twin shear stress theory and its generalization: Scientia Sinica (Sciences in China, English edition). Ser A 28(11):1113–1120Google Scholar
  22. Yu MH, Zan YW, Zhao J (2002) A unified strength criterion for rock material. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 39(8):975–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zhou XP, Qian QH, Cheng H, Zhang HP (2015) Stability analysis of two-dimensional landslides subjected to seismic loads. Acta Mech Solida Sin 28(3):262–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhou XP, Gu XB et al (2016) Seismic bearing capacity of shallow foundations resting on rock masses subjected to seismic loads. KSCE J Civ Eng 20(1):216–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil EngineeringSiChuan University of Science & EngineeringZigongChina
  2. 2.School of Architecture and Civil EngineeringChengdu UniversityChengduChina

Personalised recommendations