Advertisement

Landslides

, 5:305 | Cite as

A simplified approach for rockfall ground penetration and impact stress calculations

  • Baolin WangEmail author
  • Drummond S. Cavers
Original Article

Abstract

This paper presents a simple procedure for calculating rockfall penetration and ground impact stress for design of pipeline burial depth. Rockfall may damage pipelines by penetrating through cover soils and damaging the pipeline by puncture or excessive impact stress. Design engineers may face a challenging question regarding what burial depth is required for adequate pipe protection. Greater burial depth may provide better protection; however, there are usually site and economic constraints. This paper discusses a simple procedure for calculating the maximum rock penetration and ground impact stress due to rockfall. The procedure may be used to estimate the minimum burial depth required to protect pipelines from rockfall damage. A case study involving a large boulder that fell down a slope and landed on a buried high-pressure gas pipeline is presented to demonstrate and verify the procedure. A calculation was performed before the removal of the boulder to evaluate whether any damage was made to the pipeline. The calculated results agreed well with the actual conditions observed after the boulder was removed.

Keywords

Rockfall Penetration Burial Pipeline Impact stress 

References

  1. Craig RF (1987) Soil mechanics, 4th edn. Van Nostrand Reinhold, UK, p 290Google Scholar
  2. Cundall PA (1971) A computer model for simulating progressive large-scale movements in blocky rock systems. Proceedings of the Symposium of the International Society of Rock Mechanics, Nancy, France. Vol. 1, Paper No. II-8.Google Scholar
  3. Evans SG, Hungr O (1993) The assessment of rockfall hazard at the base of talus slopes. Can Geotech J 30:620–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Jones CL, Higgins JD, Andrew RD (2000) Colorado Rockfall Simulation Program, Version 4.0 (For Windows). Technical report sponsored by Colorado Department of Transportation. Report No: OMB No. 0704-0188, p127Google Scholar
  5. Pfeiffer TJ, Higgins JD (1990) Rockfall hazard analysis using the Colorado Rockfall Simulation Program. Transportation Research Record, No. 1288, Transportation Research Board, US National Research Council, Washington, DC, pp 117–126Google Scholar
  6. Ujihira M, Takagai N, Ogawa K (1995) Numerical analysis of the impact load of falling rock by using the distinct element method. Int J Surf Min Reclam Environ 9(1):11–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Wu S-S (1984) Rockfall evaluation by computer simulation, Transportation Research Record, No.1031, Transportation Research Board, US National Research Council, Washington, DC, pp 1–5Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geological Survey of Canada, Natural Resources CanadaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.AMEC Earth & Environmental Ltd.BurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations