Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of Slope Angle on Seismic Response of Unreinforced and Reinforced Soil Slopes in Shaking Table Tests

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Indian Geotechnical Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper studies the effect of slope angle on the seismic response of unreinforced and reinforced soil slopes through a series of laboratory shaking table tests. Slopes were constructed using clayey sand and geogrids were used for reinforcing the slopes. The slope angle varies from 45°, 60° and 75° in different tests and the quantity and location of reinforcement is varied in different tests. Acceleration of base shaking varies from 0.1 to 0.3 g in the model tests and the frequency of base shaking was 2–10 Hz in different tests. The slope is instrumented with ultrasonic displacement sensors and accelerometers at different elevations. The response of different slopes is compared in terms of the horizontal displacements of the slope and acceleration amplifications measured at different elevations. At all frequency levels and base acceleration conditions, unreinforced slopes showed higher acceleration amplifications and increased displacements with the increase in steepness It was also observed from the test results that increase in steepness of the slope has detrimental effects on both acceleration amplifications and displacement response of unreinforced as well as reinforced model soil slopes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bonaparte R, Schmertmann GR, Williams ND (1986) Seismic design of slopes reinforced with geogrids and geotextiles. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on geotextiles, Vienna, Austria, vol 1, pp 273–278

  2. Ventisette CD, Gigli G, Bonini M, Corti G, Montanari D, Santoro S, Sani F, Fanti R, Casagli N (2015) Insights from analogue modelling into the deformationmechanism of the Vaiont landslide. Geomorphology 228:52–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Koga Y, Matsuo O (1990) Shaking table tests of embankment resting on liquefiable sandy ground. Soils Found 30(4):162–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Perez A (1999) Seismic response of geosynthetic reinforced steep slopes. M.S. thesis, University of Washington, USA

  5. Ling HI, Leshchinsky D, Chou NN (2001) Post-earthquake investigation on several geosynthetic-reinforced soil retaining walls and slopes during the Ji–Ji earthquake of Taiwan. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 21(4):297–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Prasad SK, Towhata I, Chandradhara GP, Nanjundaswamy P (2004) Shaking table tests in earthquake geotechnical engineering. Curr Sci 87(10):1398–1404

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lo Grasso AS, Maugeri M, Recalcati P (2005) Seismic behavior of geosynthetic reinforced slopes with overload by shaking table tests. In: Gabr EA, Bowders JJ, Elton D, Zornberg JG (eds) Slopes and retaining structures under static and seismic conditions, ASCE GSP140, pp 1–14

  8. Dolce M, Cardone D, Ponzo FC, Valente C (2005) Shaking table tests on reinforced concrete frames without and with passive control systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 34:1687–1717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Midorikawa M, Azuhata T, Ishihara WA (2006) Shaking table tests on seismic response of steel braced frames with column uplift. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 35(14):1767–1785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Huang CC, Chen YH (2004) Seismic stability of soil retaining walls situated on slope. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 130(1):45–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Huang CC, Horng JC, Chang WJ, Chueh SY, Chiou JS, Chen CH (2010) Dynamic behavior of reinforced slopes: horizontal acceleration response. Geosynth Int 17(4):207–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Huang CC, Horng JC, Chang WJ, Chiou JS, Chen CH (2011) Dynamic behavior of reinforced walls–horizontal displacement response. Geotext Geomembr 29(3):257–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Krishna AM, Latha GM (2007) Seismic response of wrap-faced reinforced soil-retaining wall models using shaking table tests. Geosynth Int 14(6):355–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Latha GM, Krishna AM (2008) Seismic response of reinforced soil retaining wall models: influence of backfill relative density. Geotext Geomembr 26(4):335–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Subermahani M, Ghalandarzadeh A, Fakher A (2009) Experimental study on seismic deformation modes of reinforced-soil walls. Geotext Geomembr 27(2):121–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Srilatha N, Latha GM, Puttappa CG (2013) Effect of frequency on seismic response of reinforced soil slopes in shaking table tests. Geotext Geomembr 36:27–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Varghese RM, Latha GM (2014) Shaking table tests to investigate the influence of various factors on the liquefaction resistance of sands. Nat Hazards 73(3):1337–1351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Koga Y, Ito Y, Washida S, Shimazu T (1988) Seismic resistance of reinforced embankment by model shaking table tests. In: Proceedings of international symposium on theory and practice of earth reinforcement, Kukuda, Japan, pp 413–418

  19. Kramer SL (2004) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  20. Makdisi FI, Seed HB (1978) Simplified procedure for estimating dam and embankment earthquake-induced deformations. J Geotech Eng Div 104(7):849–867

    Google Scholar 

  21. Yegian M, Marciano E, Ghahraman V (1991) Seismic risk analysis for earth dams. J Geotech Eng 117(1):18–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Perez A, Holtz R (2004) Seismic response of reinforced steep soil slopes: results of shaking table study. In: Yegian MK, Kavazanjian E (eds) Geotechnical engineering for transportation projects, ASCE GSP 126, Los Angeles, CA, USA, pp 1664–1672

  23. Viswanadham BVS, Mahajan R (2007) Centrifuge model tests on geotextile-reinforced slopes. Geosynth Int 14(6):365–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Turan A, Hinchberger SD, El Naggar H (2009) Design and commissioning of a laminar soil container for use on small shaking tables. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29:404–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Krishna AM, Latha GM (2009) Seismic behavior of rigid-faced reinforced soil retaining wall models: reinforcement effect. Geosynth Int 16(5):364–3732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ling HI, Leshchinsky D, Wang JP, Rosen A (2009) Seismic response of geocell retaining walls: experimental studies. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 135(4):515–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Liu CN, Yang KH, Ho YH, Chang CM (2012) Lessons learned from three failures on a high steep geogrid-reinforced slope. Geotext Geomembr 34:131–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rajabian A, Viswanadham BVS, Ghiassian H, Salehzadeh H (2012) Centrifuge model studies on anchored geosynthetic slopes for coastal shore Protection. Geotext Geomembr 34:144–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yang KH, Hung WY, Kencana EY (2013) Acceleration-amplified responses of geosynthetic-reinforced soil structures with a wide range of input ground accelerations. In: Meehan C, Pradel D, Pando MA, Labuz JF (eds) Proceedings of geo congress 2013, California, USA, pp 1178–1187, 3–7 March 2013

  30. Latha GM, Varman AMN (2014) Shaking table studies on geosynthetic reinforced soil slopes. Int J Geotech Eng 8(3):299–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Dong H, Ikuo T, Ping QJ, Tetsuya M (2014) Shaking table tests on topographic effects of mountain slopes on their seismic failure. In: International symposium, geohazards: science, engineering and management, Kathmandu, Nepal, pp 348–358, 20–21 November 2014

  32. ASTM D 6637 (2001) Standard test method for determining tensile properties of geogrids by the single or multiple-rib tensile method. ASTM standards, West Conshohocken

    Google Scholar 

  33. Iai S (1989) Similitude for shaking table test on soil–structure–fluid model in 1 g gravitational field. Soils Found 29(1):105–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Burd HJ, Brocklehurst CJ (1990) Finite element studies of the mechanics of reinforced unpaved roads. In: Proceedings of conference on geotextiles, geomembranes and related products, The Hague, Netherlands, pp 217–221

  35. Hardin B, Richart F Jr (1963) Elastic wave velocities in granular soils. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 89(1):33–66

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hatami K, Bathurst RJ (2000) Effect of structural design on fundamental frequency of reinforced-soil retaining walls. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 19(3):137–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Srilatha N, Latha GM, Puttappa CG (2016) Seismic response of soil slopes in shaking table tests: effect of type and quantity of reinforcement. Int J Geosynth Ground Eng 2:33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Bathurst RJ, Hatami K, Alfaro MC (2002) Geosynthetic reinforced soil walls and slopes: seismic aspects. In: Shukla SK (ed) Geosynthetics and their applications. Thomas Telford, London, pp 327–392

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lo Grasso A, Maugeri M, Recalcati P (2004) Shaking table tests and analysis of reinforced slopes. In: Proceedings of 3rd Asian regional conference on geosynthetics, Seoul, Korea, pp 669–676, 21–23 June 2004

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560012, India

    N. Srilatha

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560012, India

    G. Madhavi Latha

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, MSRIT, Bangalore, 560054, India

    C. G. Puttappa

Authors
  1. N. Srilatha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. Madhavi Latha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. G. Puttappa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Madhavi Latha.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Srilatha, N., Latha, G. & Puttappa, C.G. Effect of Slope Angle on Seismic Response of Unreinforced and Reinforced Soil Slopes in Shaking Table Tests. Indian Geotech J 47, 326–337 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-017-0225-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-017-0225-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation