Topic 04 3DSlopeStability Peru May 2015

5/10/2015
Geotechnical Design of Earth and Tailings Dams
3D Slope Stability & Computer Example

TIMOTHY D. STARK, Ph.D., P.E., D.GE
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS at URBANA-CHAMPAIGN
tstark@illinois.edu
Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina

Lima, Peru
May 25-27, 2015
Timothy D. Stark ‐ Course Notes ‐ ©
2
May 19, 2015 - Course Agenda
TIME PRESENTATION TOPIC SPEAKER(S)
Topic 04 - Saturated and Unsaturated Seepage

8:00–8:30 am Seepage through dams and levees/case histories (Stark)
8:30–9:00 Filter Requirements (Stark)
9:00–9:20 Seepage Computer Example – San Luis Dam (Stark)
9:20–9:50 Seepage Control Measures (Stark)
9:50–10:00 Break/Networking/Discussion
Topic 05 - Shear Strength & 2D Slope Stability

10:00–10:30 Locating Critical Cross-Section & Critical Slip Surface (Stark)
10:30–11:30 Shear Strength Modeling (Stark)
11:30–12:00 2D Slope Stability Methods and Factor of Safety (Stark)
12:00–2:00 Lunch and Networking

Topic 06 - 3D Slope Stability & Computer Example
2:00–3:00 Rapid Drawdown & 3D Slope Stability (Stark)
3:00–3:50 Slope Stability Computer Example – San Luis Dam (Stark)
15:50–16:00 Break/Networking/Discussion
Topic 07 - Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering

16:00–16:30 Soil Liquefaction (Stark)
16:30–17:30 Post-Liquefaction Shear Softening Shear Strength & Clays (Stark)
17:30–18:00 Liquefaction Case History – Tuttle Creek Dam (Stark)
1
5/10/2015
Reliability Analysis – Factor of Safety
• Duncan (2000) ‐ Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engrg., 126, (4), pp. 307‐316.
• Calculate FS (FMLV) using MLV (most likely value) for
each parameter
• Estimate standard deviation (σ) of parameters.
• Calculate FS (F+) using MLV +1σ for each parameter.
• Calculate FS (F‐) using MLV ‐1σ for each parameter.
• Δ
Duncan (2000)
Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©
• Estimate σ of FS
Δ Δ Δ Δ
2 2 2 2
• Calculate analysis coefficient of variation (VF)
Duncan (2000)
2
5/10/2015
Fully Softened Strength Envelope 5/61
  
b
 FS  a * Pa *  n 
 Pa 
CF 20% (25%CF45% 50%
(30<LL<80) (30<LL<130) (30<LL<300)
Correlation +95% -95% Correlation +95% -95% Correlation +95% -95%
a 0.61 0.64 0.59 0.52 0.55 0.49 0.38 0.43 0.33
b 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.87
Gamez and Stark (2014)
• Duncan (2000) ‐ Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engrg., 126, (4), pp. 307‐316.
Duncan (2000)
3
5/10/2015
Reliability Analysis – Probability of Failure
Duncan (2000)
Construction Induced Pore Pressures
4
5/10/2015
Sherman and Clough (1968)
u
ru 
h
10
2D v. 3D Slope Stability
• 2D analyses assume plane strain condition
• Slopes are not infinitely wide - 3D effects
5
5/10/2015
11
Comparison of 2D and 3D FS
• F3D> F2D For Appropriate Conditions
• Difference is Caused by Shear Forces Along the
Edges of the Slide Mass
• F3D v. F2D Comparison is Only Meaningful When the
Minimum Factors of Safety
Side Shear Resistance
12
6
5/10/2015
13
3D PARAMETRIC STUDY
• Quantify effect of ignoring 3D side resistance
Timothy D. Stark ‐ Course Notes ‐ © Stark and Eid (1998)
14
EFFECT OF 3D SIDE RESISTANCE
Stark and Akhtar (2011)
7
5/10/2015
15
3D SLOPE STABILITY SOFTWARE
• CLARA 2.31 - Stark and Eid (1998)
• TSLOPE3
• 3D-PCSTABL
• REAME
• SS3D
• FLAC 3D
• PLAXIS 3D
• 3DDEM-Slope
16
New 3D Software
Conventional 3‐D geometry input
• Input 2‐D parallel cross‐section
• Borehole/inclinometer data required
• Local linear interpolation
Use of DEM
• Options for interpolation in gridding
software (SURFER)
• Generate surfaces from limited data
points
• Consider overall distribution of data
• Easy to visualize
• Allows use of GIS data sets from geology,
hydrogeology, and mapping
• Piezometric or SUCTION surface,
stratigraphy, etc.
8
5/10/2015
17
New 3D Software
• Rotational slides
• Ellipsoid
• Aspect ratio 0.8 to 2.67
• Translational Slide
• Arellano and Stark (2000) Model
18
Demonstration of 3DDEM‐Slope
9
5/10/2015
19
IMPORTANCE OF 3D ANALYSES IN PRACTICE
•BACK-CALCULATION OF SLOPE FAILURES

• COMPLEX SLOPE CONDITIONS
Geometry
Pore-Water Pressures
Shear Strength
20
Inverse Analysis – Stark and Eid (1998)
• Translational failure
• Large MSW slope failure
• Stark et al. (2000)
• Slide mass » 1,000,000 m3
• Average slope = 21°
10
5/10/2015
21
Inverse Analysis – Stark and Eid (1998)

• Results
• 3D matches laboratory tests
50%
20%
22
Complex Geometries in Practice
11
5/10/2015
23
Uses of 3D Analyses in Practice
24
Walberg et al. (2013). "Seismic Retrofit of Tuttle Creek Dam," ASCE JGGE, 139(6), 975-986.
Downstream Slope/Toe
Stabilization
• 351 Transverse Shear Walls

• Self hardening cement-bentonite slurry walls
• 4 ft (1.2 m) wide
• 20 ft (4.3 m) c-c spacing (29% ratio)
• 45 ft (13.7 m) long and 62 ft (18.9 m) deep
Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - © • 20 ft (6.1 m) into Foundation Sand
12
5/10/2015
25
Diagram from USACE
Rockfill EL 1159’ Top of Dam
Shale & L.S.

Pre-Drilling
Pressure
EL 1075’ Relief Wells
Normal Pool Sand
Shale & Limestone
Impervious
Fine Grained Blanket (Silts & Clay)
Liquefied
Sands
1,200’ – 1,600’
26
Walberg et al. (2013). "Seismic

Retrofit of Tuttle Creek Dam," ASCE
JGGE, 139(6), 975-986.
13
5/10/2015
27
Stark and Eid (1998)
28
14
5/10/2015
29
NOT FOR MAXIMIZING SLOPES
2D FS > 1.5
30
REQUIRED 3D FACTOR OF SAFETY = ?
Akhtar (2011)
Required 3D FS = f(W/H)
15
5/10/2015
31
Summary of 3‐D Analysis in Practice
• 3‐D FS > 2‐D FS for all conditions considered herein
• Inverse Analyses
• Use 3‐D for mobilized strength
• 3D inverse strength more representative of field/laboratory
testing
• Design
• Use 2‐D analysis to maintain current conservatism
• State and federal codes should specify “minimum 2‐D FS of 1.5”
• Initial Estimate of 3‐D FS
• Rotational slides: 2‐D weighted average
• Translational slides:
‐ Charts
‐ 3DDEM‐Slope
32
Quiz
16
5/10/2015
33
Questions & Comments

tstark@illinois.edu

Lima, Peru
May 25-27, 2015
T.D. Stark - Course Notes - ©
34
Geotechnical Design of Earth and Tailings Dams
Slope Stability Computer Example

tstark@illinois.edu

Lima, Peru
May 25-27, 2015
17
5/10/2015
35
SAN LUIS DAM
US Bureau of
Reclamation
California DWR
36
US Bureau of
Reclamation
18
5/10/2015
37
Stark (1987)
38
Drawdown Example
19
5/10/2015
39
Drawdown Example
Slopewash
40
160
155
150
Total Head (m)
145
140
135 PZ‐135‐9B (New)
PZ‐135‐9B (Calibrated)
130 PZ‐135‐9B (Stark)
125
5600 5800 6000 6200 6400 6600 6800
Elapsed Days
cv =3.22 m2/yr kh =1 x 10-8 cm/s
cv =1.02 x 10-3 cm2/s
mv =5 x 10-5 cm/s
20
5/10/2015
41
Transient Seepage
42
Shear-Induced Pore Pressures
u    3  
B  B 1  (1  A) 1  
    1 
u f
Af 
 1( f )
21
5/10/2015
Slope Stability
43
Slope Stability Results

44
Stark and
Condition SLIDE
Duncan (1991)
Reservoir Full
Zone 1: c’=5.27 kPa, ϕ’=25˚
2.0 1.9
Slopewash: c’=0 kPa, ϕ’=25˚
Reservoir Drawdown
Zone 1: c’=5.27 kPa, ϕ’=25˚
1.3 1.5
Reservoir Drawdown
Zone 1: c’=5.27 kPa, ϕ’=25˚
1.0 1.05
22
5/10/2015
45
Questions & Comments

tstark@illinois.edu

Lima, Peru
May 25-27, 2015
T.D. Stark - Course Notes - ©
46
23

Topic 04 3DSlopeStability Peru May 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Topic 04 3DSlopeStability Peru May 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

5/10/2015

Geotechnical Design of Earth and Tailings Dams

3D Slope Stability & Computer Example

Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina

Topic 04 - Saturated and Unsaturated Seepage

Topic 05 - Shear Strength & 2D Slope Stability

12:00–2:00 Lunch and Networking

Topic 07 - Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering

Reliability Analysis – Factor of Safety

Reliability Analysis – Factor of Safety

Gamez and Stark (2014)

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Reliability Analysis – Factor of Safety

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Reliability Analysis – Probability of Failure

Construction Induced Pore Pressures

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Sherman and Clough (1968)

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Timothy D. Stark ‐ Course Notes ‐ © Stark and Eid (1998)

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

IMPORTANCE OF 3D ANALYSES IN PRACTICE

•BACK-CALCULATION OF SLOPE FAILURES

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Inverse Analysis – Stark and Eid (1998)

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

• 351 Transverse Shear Walls

Rockfill EL 1159’ Top of Dam

Shale & L.S.

Walberg et al. (2013). "Seismic

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Stark and Eid (1998)

Timothy D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Questions & Comments

TIMOTHY D. STARK, Ph.D., P.E., D.GE

Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina

T.D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

Geotechnical Design of Earth and Tailings Dams

Slope Stability Computer Example

Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina

Shear-Induced Pore Pressures

Slope Stability Results

Questions & Comments

TIMOTHY D. STARK, Ph.D., P.E., D.GE

Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina

T.D. Stark - Course Notes - ©

You might also like