Skip to main content
main-content

Tipp

Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen

28.11.2018 | Original Paper | Ausgabe 7/2019

Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 7/2019

A modified stereographic projection approach and a free software tool for kinematic analysis of rock slope toppling failures

Zeitschrift:
Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment > Ausgabe 7/2019
Autoren:
Jun Zheng, Qing Lü, Jianhui Deng, Xiaojuan Yang, Xiang Fan, Zhenjie Ding

Abstract

Toppling failure is one of the common instability modes of rock slopes. Up to date, the stereographic projection approach is still an indispensable tool for kinematic toppling failure analysis of rock slopes, since it is very convenient to perform kinematic analysis that is based on all discontinuity orientations, not just some representative values, and it visually shows the analysis results. This paper first discussed the limitations of the Goodman’s graphical approach for kinematic analysis of rock slope toppling failures, and then proposed a modified graphical approach and developed practical software in a spreadsheet of Microsoft Excel for practitioners. The discrepancy between the results obtained from Goodman’s approach and our modified approach was investigated with respect to different limit values of the intersection angle between the strikes of the slope and discontinuity (denoted as γTlim), cut slope dip angles, and discontinuity friction angles. The results showed that: (1) when γTlim = 30°, the designed slope according to the Goodman’s graphical approach might be conservative or unsafe, which is related to the cut slope angle and the friction angle of discontinuity; (2) when γTlim = 30° and cut slope dip angle ≤60°, with respect to discontinuity friction angle = 10°, 20°, 30° or 40°, the designed slope according to the Goodman’s graphical approach might be conservative; (3) when γTlim = 30° and cut slope dip angle ≥70°, with respect to discontinuity friction angle = 10°, 20°, 30° or 40°, the designed slope according to the Goodman’s graphical approach is possibly unsafe; (4) when γTlim = 30° and cut slope dip angle ≤60°, with the discontinuity friction angle increasing from 10° to 40°, the discrepancy of the critical regions determined by the two approaches increases with respect to the same values of cut slope dip angle; (5) when γTlim = 30° and cut slope dip angle ≥70°, with the discontinuity friction angle increasing from 10° to 40°, the discrepancy of the critical regions determined by the two approaches first increases and then decreases with respect to the same values of cut slope dip angle; and (6) therefore, when performing kinematic analysis of rock slope toppling failures, the modified graphical approach proposed in this paper is recommended.

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 50.000 Bücher
  • über 380 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Umwelt
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




Testen Sie jetzt 30 Tage kostenlos.

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 69.000 Bücher
  • über 500 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Umwelt
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Testen Sie jetzt 30 Tage kostenlos.

Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2019

Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 7/2019 Zur Ausgabe