Professional Documents
Culture Documents
International Journal of
Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrmms
art ic l e i nf o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 11 September 2012
Received in revised form
15 October 2013
Accepted 31 December 2013
Circular failure is one of the most probable instabilities on slopes with severely crushed rock or soil
slopes. Another type of instability is blockexural toppling, which is the most common type of toppling
failure. In this type of failure, some rock blocks are broken by bending and other topples due to their
weight. In some slopes, a soil mass has direct contact with the rock mass with the potential of block
exural failure. If so, the total slope failure potential is the combination of circulartoppling failure. This
instability can be called secondary toppling failure, for which there is no solution available in the
literature. Studies on circular and toppling failure are reviewed. Then the interaction between soil mass
and rock blocks is studied. Considering the interaction between soil and rock, this study proposes a
theoretical model for stability analysis for the combination of circulartoppling failure and the required
equations are developed. Solving these equations manually is time-consuming; thus a special computer
code is programmed to analyze the combination failure. The code receives slope's information from the
user and calculates the factor of safety subject to combination failure circumstances. Finally, a real case
(instability of a slope in Vana village along Haraz road in northern Iran) is analyzed with this code and
results are compared with the observed data.
& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Circular failure
Toppling failure
Rock slope
Interaction between soil and rock
Limit equilibrium theory
Plasticity
1. Introduction
Possible instabilities in rock slopes consist of several types,
depending on loading conditions, rock mass properties, excavation
geometry and topography. One type of these instabilities is
toppling failure. It is generally divided into exural, blocky and
blockexural toppling [1]. If the rock mass consists of just a set of
steep discontinuities, and direction of these discontinuities is
parallel or almost parallel to the slope, rock slope acts as cantilever
beams located on each other (each of beams connected at their
base to bed rock is named column). In such a case, if tensile stress
due to bending, which is caused by the column's weight, exceeds
the tensile strength, the rock columns are broken down. This
instability is called exural toppling. If rock mass has another
discontinuity parallel to the direction of slope, but steeper than
the slope, the columns are separated from their base and form
blocks. The rock blocks do not withstand the bending stress and
may tend to topple under the weight force components. This type
of failure is called blocky toppling. Above pure state, they are
rarely observed in real cases and most toppling failure is in the
form of blockexural, which is the combination of blocky and
exural toppling [2]. In this failure, some columns are broken by
exural stress and some are overturned by the weight.
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mohtarami@ut.ac.ir (E. Mohtarami).
1365-1609/$ - see front matter & 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2013.12.020
44
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
ck
ed ro
-grain ironment
Fine
nv
soil e
and
ck y
Ro
en
m
on
vi r
t
en
Fig. 1. (a) Real example of circular-toppling failure and (b) schematic of the slope consists of two medium with different behavior.
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
45
Failure stages
Prior to Failure
Failure initiation
Fig. 3. Denition of: (a) at-rest, (b) active and (c) passive pressures [26].
46
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
Fig. 4. (a) The slip lines and the failure area based on Sokolovski method [31] and (b) plastic stress areas for the active soil pressure mode using the theory of plasticity.
sec
cos tan sin tan sin = cos
1
0
tan cos s sin
cos 2 s
C
B
2
2
cos
cos
sin
3
tan
cos
exp
3
tan
sin
3
tan
s
s
s
C
B
B
C
sin
cos
exp
3
tan
cos
1
3
tan
C
B
s
s
C
B
C
B
A
@ cos 2 s cos sin exp 3 tan s
ka
1
r
sec
cos
tan sin
0
ka
1
sin 2 cos s sin cos s
cos 2 s cos s
cos 2 cos
2 1 9 tan 2 cos
cos 2 cos s cos s
C
B
s
s
s
)C
B (
B
sin 3 tan s sin 3 tan s cos exp 3 tan s C
C
B
B
C
cos 1 3 tan s sin cos exp 3 tan s
C
B
C
B
A
@ cos 2 cos sin cos exp 3 tan
s
s
s
2
s
kac
sec
cos tan sin tan sin = cos
tan
sec
r
kac
cos tan sin
8 cos sin sin cos
s
cos cos s
>
>
s
> cos cos s
<
cos s cos s cos exp tan
cos sin s cos s
>
>
>
: cos s cos s exp 2 tan s 1
sin cos cos
s
s
ka
r
ka
9
>
>
>
=
>
>
>
;
where
and
are the active coefcients of non-cohesive soil
s
r
for smooth wall and rough wall, respectively. kac and kac are the
active coefcients of cohesive soil for smooth wall and rough wall,
respectively. We show these four variables with ka . Parameters , ,
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
Table 1
Comparison of Coulomb and proposed method's results with numerical method.
s
Depth FEM
(degree) (degree) (m)
(KN/m2)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
20
40
20
40
20
40
20
40
20
40
20
40
20
40
20
40
20
40
6.687 59.881
6.708 37.265
6.715
83.122
6.715
39.610
6.881 88.358
6.881
41.842
6.618
87.411
6.618
41.591
6.473
88.573
6.473
42.098
6.705 95.639
6.705 45.196
6.386 94.705
6.386 45.187
6.652 103.092
6.652 49.460
6.587 107.245
6.601 52.522
Error of
offered
theory
(%)
0.048
0.270
0.057
0.070
0.061
0.076
0.065
0.083
0.072
0.090
0.080
0.102
0.087
0.115
0.095
0.138
0.105
0.167
0.002
0.029
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.012
0.018
0.026
0.021
0.027
0.016
0.016
0.024
0.032
0.023
0.027
0.021
0.030
57.030
27.201
78.417
36.847
82.965
38.671
81.693
38.122
82.164
38.305
87.985
40.571
86.489
39.989
93.296
42.638
96.011
43.769
59.762
36.184
81.459
38.818
89.242
41.340
85.838
40.510
86.713
40.961
94.109
44.473
92.432
43.741
100.721
48.125
104.992
50.947
47
the internal soil friction angle, the angle between the lower bound
of soil plastic zone and the upper bound of the last block. The
angle between the lower and the upper bound of soil plastic zone
is shown in Fig.4.
To calculate the force on the topmost rock column, the active
coefcient of soil mass must be rst calculated according to real
conditions (one of the above four states). Eqs. (1)(4) should be
solved for the maximum amount of ka . Determination of the
maximum amount of ka depends on two variables, and . If
0, the results of the proposed equations are the same as
Rankine and Coulomb's methods. However, this solution gives
more accurate results when the soil friction angle s is greater
than 351 and is about =2 or more and a 0, comparing to
Rankine and Coulomb's methods.
To evaluate the accuracy in the results of the proposed method,
they are compared with the results of nite element method and
Coulomb methods (Table 1). By changing the angle of the retaining
wall and soil friction angle, a stress is obtained which acts on the
wall in a certain depth in three methods. Fig. 5ac shows the
geometry of the constructed models in Plaxis 3D Tunnel [34]. If the
numerical answers are considered accurate, the errors presented
in Table 1 belong to Coulomb and the proposed method as
compared to the numerical method. It can be seen that the error
of Coulomb's method increases with reducing the angle of the
retaining wall. Instead, the error of the proposed theory remains in
the acceptable range.
When the active coefcient of the soil mass ka is calculated
from one of above equations, the force on the topmost rock
(KN/m 2 )
10.000
0.000
-10.000
-20.000
-30.000
-40.000
-50.000
-60.000
-70.000
-80.000
-90.000
-100.000
-110.000
-120.000
Fig. 5. (a) Displacement of soil and wall with 251 and 201; (b) displacement of soil and wall with 251 and 401; and (c) stress distribution and deformation in
model with 401 and 201.
48
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
cos
1= cos kaq
tan s
and s and c are the unit weights of the soil mass and soil cohesive,
respectively.
In a soil mass with cohesion, there might be an area that
experiences the tensile stress. The existence of the tensile stresses
in the upper body leads to the cracks and ssures in the soil mass
and also, separation of the soil from the rock columns at length
L0 (Fig. 6b). This part of soil has no direct effect on rock column;
however its total effect is considered as a uniform load on the top
of soil mass, which is shown as q in Eqs. (5) and (6). The length of
tensile crack can be determined by setting E in Eq. (6) equal to
zero, shown as Eq. (8) [32].
L0
in which
kac
kac c kaq q
ka s
toppling have equal safety factor, equal to the safety factor for
whole slope.
The basal failure plane is emanated from the toe of the slope,
and oriented at an angle 10201 upward, from the normal to
the main discontinuities [23].
L0
A ' a . ( L L0 )
k . .
L L0
( L L0 ) 2
2
L L0
3
Fig. 6. (a) Applied forces on the topmost column and (b) tensile cracks within a cohesive mass.
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
tb
tf
K1
49
pi +i 1
T i i+ 1
T i i11
Mi
pi i 1 1
i
i -1
s
i- 1
Li
H
Fig. 7. Model for investigating blockyexural toppling failure when blocks with potential of blocky and exural toppling located the alternating binary consecutive.
strength. The column may also break under shear forces, which
happen if the applied loads mobilize enough shear stress on
rock at column base to overcome rock shear strength.
In this paper, blocks and columns are generally called column
wherever their type is not important, but when their type is
important in calculation process, we will call them column or
block depending on whether they are connected or not connected
at their base, respectively. So the blockexural toppling is the
combination of four modes of blocky toppling, sliding, exural
toppling, and shearing in the rock columns.
Fig. 7 shows a theoretical model for the circulartoppling
failure. In this section, an analysis method is introduced for all
four modes of blockexural toppling. In this analysis, any column
within the slope under study (say ith column) may potentially fail
in exural toppling or blocky toppling mode. The following cases
are considered in the analysis:
4.1. Blocky toppling failure mode
Block i, which is presumably subject to blocky toppling, is
either stable or fails in the state of toppling, sliding, topplingsliding
or slidingtoppling. Thus, these four states of instability should be
considered in the analysis. The topmost block (adjacent to the soil
mass) may similarly have one of these ve states; however, it is
under applied pressure by soil at one side, which is calculated by
Eq. (5). Limit equilibrium for the ve states are as follows:
a) Pure toppling failure mode: In this mode, the block i is not
sliding but is subject to toppling. The equilibrium state can be
shown as follows (Fig. 8a):
(
f x max ;
f y may ;
Si oN i tan p ;
T i 1 pi 1 tan d ;
T i 1 pi 1 tan d ;
Li minhi ; hi 1 :
9
10
8 w i
a gi ax wi sin pns V i pi 1 V i Si ce wi cos e
>
>
>
>
>
>
b wgi aiy wi cos pns tan pss pcs T i 1 N i V i ce wi sin e
>
>
>
>
<
2
t2 h
c wgi i 3 i ai wi sin h2i ce wi cos e h2i N i ei pns Mi
>
>
>
Vy
>
>
pi 1 Li i3 i wi cos ce wi sin e t2i
>
>
>
>
>
t2
Vz
:
pss pcs pns tan t i i3 i w6 i cos zi 2yi
11
where pns is vertical component of load applied by soil on rock
mass, pss is tangential component of load applied by soil on rock
mass, pcs is shear force on contact plane of soil and topmost
column, wi is weight of column I, g is acceleration of gravity, ax is
component of acceleration acting on column i along the X axis,
50
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
pi + 1
tb
Ti 1
T i 1
Ma i
i
pi 1
i +1
tf
Ti + 1
Ti +1
pi1
e < 0
La i
Ma i
e > 0
La i
Fig. 8. (a) Force on a single block with potential of blocky toppling failure and (b) force on a column with the potential of exural toppling failure.
pti 1
Li 1
2
pti 1
w t 2b
V i yi
3 6
cos zi 2yi
V i :zi
3
8 i A IB
Li 1
w t 2b
V i yi
3 6
8 i A TB
ps
n
ps
3
5
cos zi 2yi V i 3 zi
Fig. 9. Forces act on the topmost rock column due to active landslide of soil mass.
12b
total
psoil
12a
pss pcs t b
ps
13
b) Sliding failure mode: In this mode ith, block has only sliding
potential without blocky toppling potential. Equilibrium equations and some simplifying assumptions can be as follows:
8
T
pi 1 tan d ;
>
< i1
T i 1 pi 1 tan d ;
>
: S N tan ;
i
i
p
e t b =2;
Li hi =2;
ax ay 0:
14
15a
psi 1
i
8 h
tan p
tan p
>
< wi sin cos F s ce cos e sin e F s
tan
tan
tan
>
: pns 1 tan F s p pss pcs F s p V i V i F s p V i
1
tan p
1
tan d
Fs
8 i A TB
9
>
=
>
;
15b
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
i+1
i+1
51
pi+1
pi+1
Mi
Mai
Fig. 10. Position of application of the normal force on block i from the upper block when the upper block is: (a) pure sliding, shearing, slidingtoppling type and (b) pure
toppling, topplingsliding type.
If pti 1 and psi 1 are both positive for a block, which shows
instability, the block should be further examined for possible
topplingsliding and slidingtoppling failure. These two states
are explained in the next sections.
c) Topplingsliding failure mode: If pi 1 ; t 4 0, pi 1 ; s 4 0 and
pi 1 ; t 4 pi 1 ; t , the failure happens in topplingsliding mode.
By solving Eqs.(10) and (11) and using assumptions in (16),
pts
i 1 , it can be calculated for intermediate blocks and the
topmost one as follows:
(
Si N i tan p
T i 1 pi 1 tan d ;
ei 0;
aix
ai h2i ;
T i 1 pi 1 tan d ;
aiy ai t2b ;
ai Z0:
16
1
2
2
pts
i 1 wi sin ce cos e 4t b hi 3hi t b tan p
k
2
cos ce sin e tan p 4hi t 2b 3hi t b
"
1
2
pi 1 4t 2b 4hi 6M i hi 6M i t b tan p
k
tan d
2
V i yi V i zi
t b 4V i V i V i tan p
k
tb
#
w cos zi 2yi t b tan p hi
8 i A IB
17a
2 tan p
1
t 2b 4V i V i V i tan p
V i yw V i zw
k
tb
#
w cos zw 2yw t b tan p hi
1 2
2
hi 4V i V i V i tan p V i yw V i zw
k
hi
where k is:
tan d 2
2
2
t b hi
k 4t 2b hi 6Li hi tan p 6Li t b 4
Fs
6M i hi t b tan p
h
i
1
2
pss pcs 6t b t b tan p hi 4 tan p hi t 2b
k
17b
1 h
2
2
pts
i 1 wi sin ce cos e 4t b hi 3hi t b tan p
k
i
2
cos ce sin e tan p 4hi t 2b 3hi t b
1
tan
2
2
tan p 2t 2b 4hi 6t b hi
pns 4t 2b 4hi
k
Fs
#
8 i A TB
aix Z 0
T i 1 pi 1 tan d
0:
aiy
ai
T i 1 pi 1 tan d ;
18
9
8
h
i
tan p
>
>
tan d 1 h2i t b tan d M i
>
>
Fs
>
> pi 1
>
>
>
>
h
i
=
<
tan p hi
tan
t
t
h
p
b
b
i
w
cos
sin
c
e
i
pst
e 2
Fs
2
2
2
Fs
i1
>
>
>
>
i
>
> hh
t2
tan
Vy
>
>
Vz
>
;
: 2i V i V i F s p V i i3 i i3 i w6 b cos zi 2yi >
1
tan p
h
8 i A IB Li 1
tan d i
Fs
2
19a
52
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
Start
input parameters
Calculation of columns
data & optimization of ka.
n = n+1
n = n+1
No
Is it first stage?
n=0
Fs = 1
Calculate of pi (i=0-n).*
Yes
Display Fs as an output.
End
Unit
Input parameters
Unit
Height of slope
Average thickness of the layers in blocky mode
Average thickness of the layers in exural mode
Distance between the soil mass to rock slopes crest
Slope angle with the horizontal
Inclination of top surface of slope
Inclination of the layers
Inclination of the failure plane
Inclination of block base plane
Friction angle between block and underneath rock
Friction angle along the block interface
m
m
m
m
degree
degree
degree
degree
degree
degree
degree
degree
degree
degree
KN/m3
KN/m3
degree
KN/m3
KN/m3
degree
i
9
8 h tan
p
>
>
tan 1 h2i t b tan M i
pns
>
>
Fs
>
>
>
>
>
h
i >
>
>
>
>
tan p hi
tb
tb
hi tan p
>
>
=
< wi cos
Fs
2 2 ce sin e 2 2
Fs
st
h
i
pi 1
tan
h
p
>
>
s
c
>
>
>
> 2i ps ps tan p V i V i F s V i
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
2
>
>
t
;
: ps pc t V i yi V i zi w b cos z 2y
i
i
s
s b
3
3
6
1
tan p
h
Li 1
tan d i
8 i A TB
19b
Fs
2
Only sliding
Sliding Toppling
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
53
Start
Input parameters.
Initial calculations
Yes
Calculate of
&
Block is
connected at its
bottom?
No
Calculate of
&
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Calculate of
Calculate of
Fig. 13. (a) Overview of the slope and the Haraz road and (b) the soil part on top of the slope and partially equilibrium.
20
ei t f =2
>
>
>
>
: ai ai 0
x
Bending moment (M) and axial force (N) on the column at the
base point of the column are obtained as follows:
N i wi cos T i 1 T i 1 V i ce wi sin e
21
the tensile rock strength st , the rock breaks and the column is
overturned. In equilibrium conditions, the tensile stress mentioned
in Eq. (23) is equal to the tensile strength of rock. It may be
rewritten as Eq. (24) and safety factor of rock column against the
tensile stress and hence, against toppling is obtained from Eq. (25).
Mt N
sty tf =2 f i
23
2I i t f
M
2I i
N
st i
tf
tf
t =2
F s st =syf
24
25
V i yi
tf
h
T i 1 T i 1
M wi sin ce cos e i pi 1 M i
2
3
2
V i zi
V i Lout
pi 1 Li
22
3
where Lout is the eccentric water pressure at base. The total stress
in the column should be calculated from both M and N, as
shown in Eq. (23). If the total tensile stress in rock column exceeds
54
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
9
8
t
>
>
pi 1 M i tan d 2f 2 tant2 d Ii
>
>
>
>
f
>
>
>
h
i>
=
<
V i yi
V i zi
hi
ft
pi 1 wi 2 sin ce cos e V i Lout 3 3
>
>
>
>
>
> 2I s w cos ce sin V
>
>
i
e
>
>
;
: tf i F st i
tf
tf
2 tan d I i
tan d Li
2
t 2f
of psh
i 1 for intermediate and topmost column, it is obtained
from Eqs. (28a) and (28b), respectively.
(
aix aiy 0;
T i 1 pi 1 tan d ; ei t f =2;
T i 1 pi 1 tan d ;
:
27
!1
8 i A IC
26a
9
8
t
>
pn M tan 2f wi h2i sin ce cos e >
>
>
>
> sh i
i
>
>
=
<
V i yi
V i zi
s
c tf
ft
pi 1 V i Lout 3 3 ps ps 2
>
>
>
>
s
c
>
>
>
>
;
: 2tIi sF st wi cos ce sint e ps ps V i
f
f
tf
tan d Li 1
2
Si N i tan r Ct f
8 i A TC
tan r
psh
sin ce cos e
i 1 pi 1 wi cos ce sin e
Fs
V i V i
tan r
V i Ct f
Fs
1
tan r
8 i A IC 1
tan d
Fs
28a
26b
tan r
tan r
n
wi cos ce sin e
psh
i 1 ps 1 tan
Fs
Fs
#
sin ce cos e
8 i A TC
tan r
tan r
V i V i
V i Ct f
Fs
Fs
1
tan r
tan d
1
Fs
pss pcs
28b
t
sh
c) Stable mode: When pfi
1 ; pi 1 r 0, the column is stable and
pi 1 is assumed to be zero in the subsequent calculation for
other columns or blocks.
0m
6.7
25
Soil mass
31.92 m
45
53
77
Table 3
Conducted tests in soil and rock parts.
Conducted tests in rock parts
Test name
Description
Test name
Description
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
55
possible failure mode of each block; and (c) safety factor and
stability state of the slope. Furthermore, we can obtain the applied
force on topmost block by the soil by running the computer code.
The analysis revealed that safety factor for this slope was equal
to 1.64 for combined circulartoppling failure, which was higher
than the acceptable gure by authorities. The slope was found at
stable state; however, it should be noted that due to future
erosions, soil value and active soil pressure may increase during
the years. Thus update evaluation may be necessary from time to
time. Moreover, despite the general stability of this slope, local
rock falls can still happen. Fig. 15 shows potential rock falls due to
erosion resulted by the running water.
7. Conclusions
By nding p0 (i.e., pi 1 for toe column), the stability of a slope
subject to circular-toppling failure can be judged as follows:
8
>
< p0 4 0 Unstable
p0 0 Limit equilibrium condition
>
: p o 0 Stable
0
6. Case study
A real case including a slope subject to failure was studied
using the proposed method. This slope is located in Vana village,
along Haraz road in northern Iran, 70 km from Amol city. The
slope consists of rhyolite tuff overlooking Haraz road with the
potential of toppling. Fig. 13 shows the general view of the slope
and Fig. 14 depicts the slope schematically. As can be seen in these
gures, a large amount of sediments and volcanic debris is
dumped on the top of slope, behind the rock columns. This mass
generates the soil active pressure. Ongoing erosion of the sediments and volcanic rock not only increases the active pressure, but
also causes the rock falls, which have already caused some
accidents and injuries. Due to the concern of possible failure of
block rocks, a research project was organized by research institute
of the Ministry of Roads and Urban Development for the evaluation of the general stability of the slope. The existing residential
and commercial buildings next to this slope helped authorities
accept the minimum FS to be equal to 1.55.
A number of exploration drillings were performed within the
slope to obtain the geo-mechanical properties. Moreover, observations were made through the existing tunnel of an old coal mine in
the area. Table 3 shows the main obtained data used for this study.
The stability of the slope in Vana village was analyzed using the
proposed method and the developed code. The code shows several
items as outputs: (a) Geometry and geo-mechanical parameters,
which are partially inputted by the user and partially calculated
by the code; (b) forces between the columns (pi 1 and pi 1) and
Different types of the toppling failure are still a major instability for slopes in nature and slopes all over the world. Combined
circulartoppling failure is a kind of instability not studied before
in details. In this paper, a complete solution was presented for this
type of failure. A new formulation was developed to investigate
the stability of slope components (the soil and rock part).
The developed solution in this paper has taken all the effective
parameters (external forces, water pressure and earthquake) into
account. Every column can be in any mode of failure, including a
stable mode. The presented solution unstable forms were widely
analyzed from the point of limit equilibrium method in discontinuous rock and allowed for any combination of failure in the
columns, i.e., failure mode of each column could be different with
the mode of neighboring columns. Another advantage of the
proposed solution is that the topmost column can have any
inclination and the applied force by soil mass can be calculated
by plasticity theory, which has good accuracy.
A computer code was developed to ease the use of the proposed
solution. The code was simple and fast; it gave the nal state of
stability as well as safety factor of the slope. By using this code, the
effect of different parameters (like block inclination, friction, etc.) on
stability can be simply and quickly studied. Such a study can help
the users decide on the necessary measures for making the slope
more stable.
References
[1] Goodman RE, Bray JW. Toppling of rock slopes. In: Boulder CO, Proceedings of
the specialty conference on rock engineering for foundations and slopes.
New York: American Society of Civil Engineers; 1518 August 1976, p. 20123.
[2] Amini M, Majdi A, Veshadi MA. Stability analysis of rock slopes against block
exure toppling failure. Int J Rock Mech Rock Eng 2012;45(4):51932.
[3] Collin A. Recherches exprimentaux sur les glissements spontans des terrains
argileux. Paris: Carilian-Goeurley et Dalmont; .
[4] Taylor DW. Stability of Earth slopes. J Boston Soc Civ Eng 1937;1:33786.
[5] Willie DC, Mah CW. Rock slope engineering (civil and mining). 4th Edition.
UK: Spoon Press. London: Taylor and Francis Group; 2004.
[6] Bishop AW. The use of the slip circle in the stability analysis of slopes.
Gotechnique 1955;5:717.
[7] Nonveiller E. The stability analysis of slopes with a slide surface of general
shape. Proc 6th Int Conf Soil Mech Found Eng Montreal 1965;2:7993.
[8] Morgenstern NR, Price VE. The analysis of the stability of generalised slip
surfaces. Gotechnique 1965;15:7993.
[9] Chen Z, Morgenstern NR. Extensions to the generalized method of slices for
stability analysis. Can Geotech J 1983;20(1):10419.
[10] Muller L. New considerations of the Vaiont slide. Felsmech Engenieurgeologie
1968;6(1):191.
[11] Ashby J. Sliding and toppling modes of failure in models and jointed rock
slopes [M.Sc. thesis]. London, United Kingdom: London University, Imperial
College; 1971.
[12] Hofmann H. Kinematische modellstudien zum boschungs-problem in regalmassig geklufteten medien [Ph.D. thesis]. Karlsruhe, Germany: University of
Karlsruhe; 1972.
[13] De Freitas MH, Watters RJ. Some eld examples of toppling failure. Gotechnique 1973;23:495514.
56
E. Mohtarami et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 67 (2014) 4356
[14] Whyte RJA. Study of progressive hanging wall caving at chambishi copper
mine in Zambia using the base friction model concept [M.Sc. thesis]. London,
United Kingdom: London University, Imperial College; 1973.
[15] Soto CA. Comparative study of slope modelling techniques for fractured
ground [M.Sc. thesis]. London, United Kingdom: London University, Imperial
College; 1974.
[16] Zanbak C. Design charts for rock slopes susceptible to toppling. J Geotech Eng
ASCE 1983;109:103962.
[17] Goodman R, Shi G. Block theory and its application to rock engineering.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1985; 338.
[18] Aydan , Shimizu Y, Ichikawa Y. The effective failure modes and stability of slopes
in rock mass with two discontinuity sets. Rock Mech. Rock Eng 1989;22(3):16388.
[19] Davies JN, Smith PLP. Flexural toppling of siltstones during a temporary
excavation for a bridge foundation in North Devon. In: Hadson JA, editor.
Comprehensive rock engineering. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1993. p. 75975.
[20] Zaruba Q, Mencl V. Engineering geology. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1976.
[21] Aydan , Kawamoto T. Stability of slopes and underground openings against
exural toppling and their stabilization. Rock Mech Rock Eng 1992;25(3):14365.
[22] Adhikary DP, Dyskin AV, Jewell RJ. Modeling of exural toppling failures of
rock slopes. In: Proceedings of the eighth international congress rock
mechanics. Tokyo; 1995, p. 259.
[23] Adhikary DP, Dyskin AV, Jewell RJ, Stewart DP. A study of the mechanism of
exural toppling failure of rock slopes. Rock Mech Rock Eng 1997;30(2):7593.
[24] Adhikary DP, Dyskin AV. Modeling of progressive and instantaneous failure of
foliated rock slopes. Rock Mech Rock Eng 2007;40(4):34962.
[25] Aydan , Amini M. An experimental study on rock slopes against exural
toppling failure under dynamic loading and some theoretical considerations
for its stability assessment. J Sch Mar Sci Technol 2009;7(2):2540.
[26] Braja MD. Principles of geotechnical engineering. 7th edition. Stamford, USA:
Cengage learning; 2010.
[27] Lambe TW, Whitman RV. Soil mechanics. Massachusetts institute of technology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: John Wiley and Sons; 1969.
[28] Caquot A, Kerisel J. Table for the calculation of passive pressure, active
pressure and bearing capacity of foundations (trans. by MA Bec, London).
Paris: Gauthier-Villars; 1948.
[29] Janbu N. 4thEarth pressure and bearing capacity calculations by generalized
procedure of slices, Vol. 2. London: ICSMFE; 1957; 20712.
[30] Shields DH, Tolunay AZ. Passive pressure coefcients by method of slices.
JSMFD, ASCE 1973;99(SM 12):S104353.
[31] Sokolovski VV. Statics of granular media. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1965.
[32] Behnia K, Tabatabai AM. Soil mechanics. 2nd Ed. Tehran: Tehran University
Press; 1987.
[33] Chen WF, Rosenfarb JL. Limit analysis solutions of Earth pressure problems.
Jpn Soc Soil Mech Found Eng 1973;13(4):4560.
[34] PLAXIS V.8. Finite element code for soil and rock analyses. PLAXIS-3D.
Reference manual. Edited by Brinkgreve et al. DUT, The Netherlands. www.
plaxis.nl.2004.