Skip to main content

A Comparison of 1D and 2D Spatial Variability in Probabilistic Slope Stability Analysis

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Geotechnics for Transportation Infrastructure

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering ((LNCE,volume 28))

Abstract

Slope stability analysis is a highly challenging task in geotechnical engineering as the influence of uncertainty involved in geotechnical properties on failure behavior of slopes is inevitable. Traditional deterministic slope stability approach, based on a single factor of safety (FoS) parameter, cannot explicitly encounter the uncertainties involved in geotechnical properties and failure mechanism, leading to erroneous results of slope stability. Hence, slope stability practice is highly persuadable to probabilistic treatment, which allows quantification of the uncertainty and rationally integrating the same into the analysis. The present study investigates the influence of inherent spatial variation of soil domain in probabilistic slope stability analysis. To accomplish this, a hypothetical slope is analyzed, considering 1D spatial variation, with the aid of GeoStudio 2007, using Morgenstern-Price limit equilibrium method (LEM) coupled with Monte Carlo simulation (MCS). The results are compared with those of Griffiths et al. (2007), wherein 2D random field for soil shear strength was considered and the analysis was carried out with the help of random finite element method (RFEM). The influence of correlation lengths on the probabilities of failure is compared. The results reveal that the probability of failure highly depends on spatial variation of soil property in both the methods. When correlation length is small, the failure probability is essentially zero; failure probability increases rapidly for intermediate correlation lengths, and for large correlation lengths, the failure probability becomes constant. It is also found that combining LEM with one-dimensional random field gives lower probabilities of failure than RFEM, as RFEM is more efficient in simulating the field uncertainty. Moreover, RFEM can search and identify the weakest path through the soil domain for the failure to occur, whereas LEM presumes a predefined failure plane.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allahverdizadeh P, Griffiths DV, Fenton GA (2015) The random finite element method (RFEM) in probabilistic slope stability analysis with consideration of spatial variability of soil properties. IFCEE 2015. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, pp 1946–1955

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty R, Dey A (2017) Importance of spatial variability on probabilistic slope stability. In: Indian geotechnical conference IGC 2017, IIT Guwahati, Guwahati, India, 14–16 December 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • DeGroot DJ (1996) Analyzing spatial variability of in situ soil properties. In: Uncertainty in the geologic environment : from theory to practice: proceedings of Uncertainty ’96, pp. 210–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkateb T, Chalaturnyk R, Robertson PK (2003) An overview of soil heterogeneity: quantification and implications on geotechnical field problems. Can Geotech J 40(1):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenton GA, Griffiths DV (1993) Statistics of block conductivity through a simple bounded stochastic medium. Water Resour Res 29(6):1825–1830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenton GA, Griffiths DV (2008) Risk assessment in geotechnical engineering. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, NJ, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths DV, Fenton GA (2000) Influence of soil strength spatial variability on the stability of an undrained clay slope by finite elements. Slope stability 2000. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, pp 184–193

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths DV, Fenton GA (2007) Probabilistic methods in geotechnical engineering. CISM courses and lectures, vol 491

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths DV, Fenton GA, Denavit MD (2007) Traditional and advanced probabilistic slope stability analysis. Probabilistic applications in geotechnical engineering. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, pp 1–10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths DV, Asce F, Fenton GA, Asce M (2004) Probabilistic slope stability analysis by finite elements, 130: 507–518

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks MA, Nuttall JD, Chen J (2014) Influence of heterogeneity on 3D slope reliability and failure consequence. Comput Geotech 61:198–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamshidi Chenari R, Alaie R (2015) Effects of anisotropy in correlation structure on the stability of an undrained clay slope. Georisk Assess Manage Risk Engineered Syst Geohazards 9(2):109–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang SH, Li DQ, Cao ZJ, Zhou CB, Phoon KK (2014) Efficient system reliability analysis of slope stability in spatially variable soils using monte carlo simulation. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 141(2):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Ji J, Liao HJ, Low BK (2011) Modeling 2-D spatial variation in slope reliability analysis using interpolated autocorrelations. Comput Geotech 40:135–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitch W (1994) Deterministic and probabilistic analyses of reinforced soil slopes. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, TX

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacasse S, Nadim F (1996) Uncertainties in characterizing soil properties. In: Uncertainty in the Geologic Environment: from Theory to Practice, pp. 49–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Li DQ, Qi XH, Phoon KK, Zhang LM, Zhou CB (2014) Effect of spatially variable shear strength parameters with linearly increasing mean trend on reliability of infinite slopes. Struct Saf 49:45–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li DQ, Jiang SH, Cao ZJ, Zhou W, Zhou CB, Zhang LM (2015) A multiple response-surface method for slope reliability analysis considering spatial variability of soil properties. Eng Geol 187:60–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloret-Cabot M, Fenton GA, Hicks MA (2014) On the estimation of scale of fluctuation in geostatistics. Georisk Assess Manage Risk Eng Syst Geohazards 8(2):129–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgenstern NR (2000) Performance in geotechnical practice—FCCN. In: The inaugural Lumb lecture. Hong Kong Institution of Engineers

    Google Scholar 

  • Paice GM (1997) Finite element analysis of stochastic soils

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanmarcke E (1977) Probabilistic modeling of soil profiles. J Geotech Eng Div

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanmarcke E (1983) Random fields, analysis and synthesis. MIT Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rubi Chakraborty .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Chakraborty, R., Dey, A. (2019). A Comparison of 1D and 2D Spatial Variability in Probabilistic Slope Stability Analysis. In: Sundaram, R., Shahu, J., Havanagi, V. (eds) Geotechnics for Transportation Infrastructure. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering , vol 28. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6701-4_34

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6701-4_34

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-6700-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-6701-4

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics