Environmental Earth Sciences

, Volume 61, Issue 6, pp 1215–1225

The impacts of hysteresis on variably saturated hydrologic response and slope failure

Original Article

Abstract

This investigation employs 3D, variably saturated subsurface flow simulation to examine hysteretic effects upon the hydrologic response used to drive unsaturated slope stability assessments at the Coos Bay 1 (CB1) experimental catchment in the Oregon Coast Range, USA. Slope stability is evaluated using the relatively simple infinite slope model for unsaturated soils driven by simulated pore-water pressures for an intense storm that triggered a slope failure at CB1 on 18 November 1996. Simulations employing both hysteretic and non-hysteretic soil–water retention curves indicate that using either the drying soil–water retention curve or an intermediate soil–water retention curve that attempts to average the wetting and drying retention curves underestimates the near-surface hydrologic response and subsequently the potential for slope failure. If hysteresis cannot be considered in the hydrologic simulation, the wetting soil–water retention curve, which is seldom measured, should be used for more physically based slope stability assessment. Without considering hysteresis or using the wetting soil–water retention curve, the potential for landsliding in unsaturated materials may be underestimated and a slope failure could occur when simulations predict stability.

Keywords

Hysteresis InHM Landslide Unsaturated Modeling Hillslope 

Abbreviations

CB1

Coos Bay 1

InHM

Integrated hydrology model

FS

Factor of safety

1D

One-dimensional

2D

Two-dimensional

3D

Three-dimensional

USA

United States of America

References

  1. Anderson MG, Howes S (1985) Development and application of a combined soil water—slope stability model. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 18:225–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson MG, Kemp MJ, Lloyd DM (1988) Applications of soil water finite difference models to slope stability problems. In: Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on landslides. Lausanne, Switzerland, pp 525–550Google Scholar
  3. Anderson SP (1995) Flow paths, solute sources, weathering, and denudation rates: The chemical geomorphology of a small catchment. PhD dissertation, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson SP, Dietrich WE (2001) Chemical weathering and runoff chemistry in a steep headwater catchment. Hydrol Process 15:1791–1815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson SP, Dietrich WE, Montgomery DR, Torres R, Loague K (1997a) Concentration discharge relationships in runoff from a steep, unchanneled catchment. Water Resour Res 33:211–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anderson SP, Dietrich WE, Montgomery DR, Torres R, Conrad ME, Loague K (1997b) Subsurface flowpaths in a steep, unchanneled catchment. Water Resour Res 33:2637–2653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson SP, Dietrich WE, Brimhall GH (2002) Weathering profiles, mass balance analysis, and rates of solute loss: linkages between weathering and erosion in a small, steep catchment. Geol Soc Am Bull 114:1143–1158Google Scholar
  8. Andronopoulos B (1982) The geological structure and the tectonic evolution as factors of instability in the Pindos Zone area (Greece). Rock Mech 15:1–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bishop AW (1959) The principle of effective stress. Teknisk Ukeblad 39:859–863Google Scholar
  10. Borja RI (2006) On the mechanical energy and effective stress in saturated and unsaturated porous continua. Int J Solids Struct 43:1764–1786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cho SE, Lee SR (2002) Evaluation of surficial stability for homogeneous slopes considering rainfall characteristics. J Geotech Geoenviron 128:756–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chow VT (1959) Open-channel hydraulics. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, p 680Google Scholar
  13. Christiansen JE (1942) Irrigation by sprinkling. California Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin, Report 670Google Scholar
  14. Duncan JM (1996) State of the art: limit equilibrium and finite-element analysis of slopes. J Geotech Eng ASCE 122:577–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunne T (1990) Hydrology, mechanics, and geomorphic implications of erosion by subsurface flow. In: Higgins CG (ed) Groundwater geomorphology: the role of subsurface water in earth-surface processes and landforms, Special Paper, vol 252. Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO, pp 1–28Google Scholar
  16. Dunne T (1994) Hydrogeomorphology—an introduction. Trans Jpn Geomorpholog Union 15A:1–4Google Scholar
  17. Ebel BA, Loague K (2006) Physics-based hydrologic response simulation: Seeing through the fog of equifinality. Hydrol Process 20:2887–2900. doi:101002/hyp6388 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ebel BA, Loague K (2008) Rapid simulated hydrologic response within the variably saturated near surface. Hydrol Process 22:464–471. doi:101002/hyp6926 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ebel BA, Loague K, Dietrich WE, Montgomery DR, Torres R, Anderson SP, Giambelluca TW (2007a) Near-surface hydrologic response for a steep, unchanneled catchment near Coos Bay, Oregon: 1 Sprinkling experiments. Am J Sci 307:678–708. doi:102475/04200702 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ebel BA, Loague K, VanderKwaak JE, Dietrich WE, Montgomery DR, Torres R, Anderson SP (2007b) Near-surface hydrologic response for a steep, unchanneled catchment near Coos Bay, Oregon: 2 physics-based simulations. Am J Sci 307:709–748. doi:102475/04200703 Google Scholar
  21. Ebel BA, Loague K, Montgomery DR, Dietrich WE (2008) Physics-based continuous simulation of long-term near-surface hydrologic response for the Coos Bay experimental catchment. Water Resour Res 44:W07417. doi:101029/2007WR006442 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ebel BA, Mirus BB, Heppner CS, VanderKwaak JE, Loague K (2009) First-order exchange coefficient coupling for simulating surface water–groundwater interactions: parameter sensitivity and consistency with a physics-based approach. Hydrol Process 23:1949–1959. doi:101002/hyp7279 Google Scholar
  23. Evans SG (1982) Landslides and surficial deposits in urban areas of British Columbia; a review. Can Geotech J 19:269–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fourie AB, Rowe D, Blight GE (1999) The effect of infiltration on the stability of the slopes of a dry ash dump. Géotechnique 49:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Freeze RA (1978) Mathematical models of hillslope hydrology. In: Kirkby MJ (ed) Hillslope hydrology. Wiley, New York, pp 177–225Google Scholar
  26. Gasmo JM, Rahardjo HM, Leong EC (2000) Infiltration effects on stability of a residual soil slope. Comput Geotech 26:145–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Godt JW, Baum RL, Lu N (2009) Landsliding in partially saturated materials. Geophys Res Lett 36:L02403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gomi T, Sidle RC, Richardson JS (2002) Understanding processes and downstream linkages of headwater systems. Bioscience 52:905–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Griffiths DV, Lane PA (1999) Slope stability analysis by finite elements. Geotechnique 49:387–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hattendorf I, St Hergarten, Neugebauer HJ (1999) Local slope stability analysis. In: St Hergarten, Neugebauer HJ (eds) Process modelling and landform evolution. Springer, New York, pp 169–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Heppner CS, Loague K (2008) A dam problem: simulated upstream impacts for the Searsville Watershed. Ecohydrology 1:408–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Heppner CS, Ran Q, VanderKwaak JE, Loague K (2006) Adding sediment transport to the Integrated Hydrology Model (InHM): development and testing. Adv Water Resour 9:930–943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Heppner CS, Loague K, VanderKwaak JE (2007) Long-term InHM simulations of hydrologic response and sediment transport for the R-5 catchment. Earth Surf Proc Land 32:1273–1292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Iverson RM (2000) Landslide triggering by rain infiltration. Water Resour Res 36:1897–1910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnson KA, Sitar N (1990) Hydrologic conditions leading to debris flow initiation. Can Geotech J 27:789–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jones JP, Sudicky EA, Brookfield AE, Park Y-J (2006) An assessment of the tracer-based approach to quantifying groundwater contributions to streamflow. Water Resour Res 42:W02407. doi:101029/2005WR004130 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kool JB, Parker JC (1987) Development and evaluation of closed-form expressions for hysteretic soil hydraulic properties. Water Resour Res 23:105–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Krahn J, Lam L, Fredlund DG (1996) The use of finite element computed water pressures in slope stability analysis. In: Senneset K (ed) Proceedings of the seventh international symposium on landslides. Trondheim, Norway, pp 1277–1282Google Scholar
  39. Lamberti GA, Gregory SV, Ashkenas LR, Wildman RC, Moore KM (1991) Stream ecosystem recovery following a catastrophic debris flow. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 48:196–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Likos WJ, Lu N (2004) Hysteresis of capillary stress in unsaturated granular soil. J Eng Mech ASCE 130:646–655. doi:101061/ASCE073393992004130:6646 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Loague K, VanderKwaak JE (2004) Physics-based hydrologic response simulation: Platinum bridge, 1958 Edsel, or useful tool. Hydrol Process 18:2949–2956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Loague K, Heppner CS, Abrams RH, VanderKwaak JE, Carr AE, Ebel BA (2005) Further testing of the Integrated Hydrology Model (InHM): event-based simulations for a small rangeland catchment located near Chickasha, Oklahoma. Hydrol Process 19:1373–1398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Loague K, Heppner CS, Mirus BB, Ebel BA, Ran Q, Carr AE, BeVille SH, VanderKwaak JE (2006) Physics-based hydrologic-response simulation: foundation for hydroecology and hydrogeomorphology. Hydrol Process 20:1231–1237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lu N, Godt J (2008) Infinite slope stability under steady unsaturated seepage conditions. Water Resour Res 44:W11404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lu N, Likos WJ (2006) Suction stress characteristic curve for unsaturated soil. J Geotech Geoenviron 132:131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mirus BB, Ebel BA, Loague K, Wemple BC (2007) Simulated effect of a forest road on near surface hydrologic response. Redux Earth Surf Proc Land 32:126–142. doi:101002/esp1387 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mirus BB, Loague K, VanderKwaak JE, Kampf SK, Burges SJ (2009) A hypothetical reality of Tarrawarra-like hydrologic response. Hydrol Process 23. doi:101002/hyp7241
  48. Montgomery DR, Dietrich WE (2002) Runoff generation in a steep, soil-mantled landscape. Water Resour Res 38:1168–1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Montgomery DR, Dietrich WE, Torres R, Anderson SP, Heffner JT, Loague K (1997) Hydrologic response of a steep, unchanneled valley to natural and applied rainfall. Water Resour Res 33:91–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Montgomery DR, Dietrich WE, Heffner JT (2002) Piezometric response in shallow bedrock at CB1: implication for runoff generation and landsliding. Water Resour Res 38:1274–1292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Montgomery DR, Schmidt KM, Dietrich WE, McKean J (2009) Instrumental record of debris flow initiation during natural rainfall: implications for modeling slope stability. J Geophys Res 114:F01031. doi:10.1029/2008JF001078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ng CWW, Shi Q (1998a) Influence of rainfall intensity and duration on slope stability in unsaturated soils. Q J Eng Geol 31:105–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ng CWW, Shi Q (1998b) A numerical investigation of the stability of unsaturated soil slopes subjected to transient seepage. Comput Geotech 22:1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rahardjo H, Lim TT, Chang MF, Fredlund DG (1994) Shear strength characteristics of a residual soil. Can Geotech J 32:60–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ran Q, Heppner CH, VanderKwaak JE, Loague K (2007) Further testing of the Integrated Hydrology Model (InHM): multiple-species sediment transport. Hydrol Process 21:1522–1531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Roering JJ, Schmidt KM, Stock JD, Dietrich WE, Montgomery DR (2003) Shallow landsliding, root reinforcement, and the spatial distribution of trees in the Oregon Coast Range. Can Geotech J 40:237–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Roering JJ, Kirchner JW, Dietrich WE (2005) Characterizing structural and lithologic controls on deep-seated landsliding; implications for topographic relief and landscape evolution in the Oregon Coast Range, USA. Geol Soc Am Bull 117:654–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Scheidegger AE (1972) Hydrogeomorphology. J Hydrol 20:193–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schmidt KM (1999) Root strength, colluvial soil depth, and colluvial transport on landslide-prone hillslopes. PhD Dissertation, Department of Geological Sciences, University of Washington, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  60. Schmidt KM, Roering JJ, Stock JD, Dietrich WE, Montgomery DR, Schaub T (2001) The variability of root cohesion as an influence on shallow landslide susceptibility in the Oregon Coast Range. Can Geotech J 38:995–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schrefler BA (1984) The finite element method in soil consolidation (with applications to surface subsidence). PhD dissertation, University College of Swansea, Swansea, UKGoogle Scholar
  62. Scott PS, Farquhar GJ, Kouwen N (1983) Hysteretic effects on net infiltration. In: Advances in infiltration, Publication 11–83. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, pp 163–170Google Scholar
  63. Sidle RC, Ochiai H (2006) Landslides: processes, prediction and land use. Water Resources Monograph 18. American Geophysical Union, Washington, p 312Google Scholar
  64. Sidle RC, Onda Y (2004) Hydrogeomorphology: overview of an emerging science. Hydrol Process 18:597–602. doi:101002/hyp1360 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Simoni S, Zanotti F, Bertoldi G, Rigon R (2008) Modelling the probability of occurrence of shallow landslides and channelized debris flows using GEOtop-FS. Hydrol Process 22:532–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Smerdon BD, Medoza CA, Devito KJ (2007) Simulations of fully coupled lake groundwater exchange in a subhumid climate with an integrated hydrologic model. Water Resour Res 43:W01416. doi:101029/2006WR005137 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Stark TD, Eid HT (1998) Performance of three-dimensional slope stability methods in practice. J Geotech Geoenviron 124:1049–1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. US Geological Survey (2004) Landslide types and processes fact sheet 2004-3072Google Scholar
  69. Taylor G, Hale C, Joos S (2005) Climate of Coos County. Special report, Oregon Climate Service, Corvallis, Oregon, Oregon State University, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  70. Terzaghi K (1943) Theoretical soil mechanics. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Torres R (1997) Unsaturated zone processes and the hydrologic response of a steep, unchanneled valley. PhD Dissertation, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  72. Torres R, Dietrich WE, Montgomery DR, Anderson SP, Loague K (1998) Unsaturated zone processes and the hydrologic response of a steep, unchanneled catchment. Water Resour Res 34:1865–1879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Tsaparas I, Rahardjo H, Toll DG, Leung EC (2002) Controlling parameters for rainfall-induced landslides. Comput Geotech 29:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Van Asch ThWJ, Buma J, Van Beek LPH (1999) A view on some hydrological triggering systems in landslides. Geomorphology 30:25–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. van Genuchten MTh (1980) A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 44:892–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. VanderKwaak JE (1999) Numerical simulation of flow and chemical transport in integrated surface-subsurface hydrologic systems. PhD dissertation, University of Waterloo, Ontario, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  77. VanderKwaak JE, Loague K (2001) Hydrologic-response simulations for the R-5 catchment with a comprehensive physics-based model. Water Resour Res 37:999–1013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Vieira BC, Fernandes NF (2004) Landslides in Rio de Janeiro: the role played by variations in soil hydraulic conductivity. Hydrol Process 18:791–805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wilkinson PL, Anderson MG, Lloyd DM (2002) An integrated hydrological model for rain-induced landslide prediction. Earth Surf Proc Land 27:1285–1297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wilson CJ, Dietrich, WE (1987) The contribution of bedrock groundwater flow to storm runoff and high pore pressure development in hollows. In: Beschta RL, Blinn T, Grant GE, Ice GG, Swanson FJ (eds) Proceedings of the international symposium on erosion and sedimentation in the Pacific Rim, IAHS Publication 165, pp 49–59Google Scholar
  81. Wong F (1984) Uncertainties in FE modeling of slope stability. Comput Struct 19:777–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wright SG, Kulhawy FG, Duncan JM (1973) Accuracy of equilibrium slope stability analysis. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 99:783–791Google Scholar
  83. Wu Y-S, Haukwa C, Bodvarsson GS (1999) A site-scale model for fluid and heat flow in the unsaturated zone of Yucca Mountain. J Contam Hydrol 38:185–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian A. Ebel
    • 1
    • 3
  • Keith Loague
    • 1
  • Ronaldo I. Borja
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Geological and Environmental SciencesStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  3. 3.U.S. Geological SurveyMenlo ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations