Advertisement

Landslides

, Volume 10, Issue 6, pp 737–756 | Cite as

Geomechanical interpretation of the Downie Slide considering field data and three-dimensional numerical modelling

  • K. S. Kalenchuk
  • D. J. Hutchinson
  • M. S. Diederichs
Original Paper

Abstract

Downie Slide has been interpreted as a massive, composite rockslide, and a number of landslide zones have been defined based on the interpretation of morphological features and a detailed assessment of spatially discriminated slope behaviour. Key factors controlling the mechanics of massive slow-moving landslides can be interpreted through the observation and detailed study of the slope behaviour and physical characteristics. Once identified, key components influencing slope deformation can be tested using three-dimensional numerical models. Two series of numerical simulations have been developed to test how explicitly defined internal shear zones, and the interaction between landslide morphological regions, influence global landslide behaviour. Results from these numerical simulations, when compared to field monitoring data, indicate that internal shear zones have little influence on Downie Slide deformation, while the interaction between morphological zones plays a larger role in slope kinematics.

Keywords

Downie Slide Landslide morphology Landslide mechanisms Numerical modelling Slope stability 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank BC Hydro, particularly the late John Psutka and Dennis Moore, for site and data access. This work has been made possible through contributions by NSERC, CFI and GEOIDE.

References

  1. Aguilar FJ, Agüera F, Aguilar MA, Carvajal F (2005) Effects of terrain morphology, sampling density and interpolation methods on grid DEM accuracy. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 71(7):805–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bourne DR, Imrie AS (1981) Downie Slide investigations report on 1981 drilling program. B.C. Hydro Hydroelectric Generation Projects Division. Report no. H 1469Google Scholar
  3. Bourne DR, Imrie AS, Wade MD (1978) Downie Slide investigations report on 1976–1977 field work. B.C. Hydro Hydroelectric Generation Projects Division. Report no. HE.C. 925Google Scholar
  4. Brown RL, Psutka JF (1980) Structural and stratigraphic setting of the Downie Slide, Columbia River valley, British Columbia. Can J Earth Sci 17:698–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cruden AM, Varnes DJ (1996) Landslide types and processes. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides investigation and mitigation special report 247. National Academy, Washington, DC, pp 36–75Google Scholar
  6. Enegren EG (1995) Re-assessment of the static stability analysis of Downie Slide 1994. Columbia River—Revelstoke Project Downie Slide. Report no. H2889 18 ppGoogle Scholar
  7. Gerraghty D, Lewis M (1983) Downie Slide field report on contract CR-10A geology and construction. B.C. Hydro and Power Authority, 40 ppGoogle Scholar
  8. Golden Software Inc. (2002) Chapter 4: creating grid files. In: Surfer 8 contouring and 3D surface mapping for scientists and engineers user’s guide. Golden Software, Inc., Golden, pp 89-162Google Scholar
  9. Hardy RL (1990) Theory and application of the multiquadratic-biharmonic method. Comput Math Appl 19:163–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. BC Hydro (1974) Summary of 1973 exploration program. B.C. Hydro Engineering Hydroelectric Design Division. Report serial no. 725Google Scholar
  11. BC Hydro (1976) Summary of 1974–1975 exploration program. Report number 744, June 1976Google Scholar
  12. Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. (2003) 3DEC 3 Dimensional distinct element code: Theory and background. Excerpts from version 3.0 program manualGoogle Scholar
  13. Jory LT (1974) Appendix 2 summary of geology. In: Revelstoke Project Downie Slide Investigations Summary of 1973 Exploration Program. BC Hydro report no. 725, 8 ppGoogle Scholar
  14. Kalenchuk KS, Hutchinson DJ, Diederichs MS (2009a) Downie Slide—interpretations of complex slope mechanics in a massive, slow moving, translational landslide. In: Proc. of GeoHalifax2009–Canadian Geotechnical Conf. Halifax, Nova Scotia, pp 367-374Google Scholar
  15. Kalenchuk KS, Hutchinson DJ, Diederichs MS (2009b) Influence of shear surface geometry on deformation processes in massive landslides. In: Diederichs M, Grasselli G (eds) 3rd Canada–US Rock Mechanics Symposium, 20th Canadian Rock Mechanics Symposium. Toronto, May, 10 ppGoogle Scholar
  16. Kalenchuk KS, Hutchinson DJ, Diederichs MS (2009c) Application of spatial prediction techniques to defining three-dimensional landslide shear surface geometry. Landslides 6(4):321–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kalenchuk KS, Diederichs MS, Hutchinson DJ (2012) Three-dimensional numerical simulations of the Downie Slide to test the influence of shear surface geometry and heterogeneous shear zone stiffness. Comput Geosci 16:21–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kjelland N (2004) Constraints on GIS-based decision support systems for slope stability analysis via geotechnical modelling. Dissertation M.Sc., Queen’s UniversityGoogle Scholar
  19. Mikkelsen PE (1996) Chapter 11: field instrumentation. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides investigation and mitigation special report 246. National Academy, Washington, DC, pp 278–316Google Scholar
  20. Patton FD, Hodge RAL (1975) Airphoto study of the Downie Slide British Columbia. Report prepared for the Downie Slide Review Panel British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority Revelstoke Dam Project: 21 ppGoogle Scholar
  21. Picarelli L, Russo C (2004) Remarks on the mechanics of slow active landslides and the interaction with man-made works. In: Lacerda, Ehrlich, Fontoura, Sayao (eds) Landslides: Evaluation and stabilization. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 1141–1176Google Scholar
  22. Piteau DR, Mylrea FH, Blown IG (1978) Chapter 10: Downie Slide, Columbia River, British Columbia, Canada. In: Voight B (ed) Rockslides and avalanches. Elsevier, New York, pp 365–392Google Scholar
  23. Smith WHF, Wessel P (1990) Gridding with continuous curvature splines in tension. Geophysics 55(3):293–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wheeler JO (1965) Big Bend map-area, British Columbia (82 M east half). Geol. Survey of Can., Paper 64-32, 37 ppGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. S. Kalenchuk
    • 1
    • 2
  • D. J. Hutchinson
    • 1
  • M. S. Diederichs
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Geological Sciences and Geological EngineeringQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  2. 2.Mine Design EngineeringKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations