Rock and Soil Mechanics ›› 2023, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (S1): 603-611.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2022.1156

• Geotechnical Engineering • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Unity of three types of energy catastrophe criteria for slope failure

HUA Cheng-ya, YAO Lei-hua   

  1. School of Engineering and Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China
  • Received:2022-07-26 Accepted:2022-12-30 Online:2023-11-16 Published:2023-11-19
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41807228).

Abstract: The research on the failure criterion for the strength reduction method (SRM) is a hot issue in the field of slope stability analysis. Three types of commonly used failure criteria, namely, the marked displacement mutation criterion, the plastic zone penetration criterion and the calculation program nonconvergence criterion are considered in correspondence with three types of energy catastrophe criteria, namely, the energy catastrophe criterion for gravity potential loss, the catastrophe criterion of dissipated energy increment and the catastrophe criterion of kinetic energy increment, respectively. To unify the three types of energy catastrophe criteria, a new failure criterion-variational value criterion for the SRM was proposed based on the principle of minimum potential energy. The calculation formulas of the second-order variational value of the total potential energy of a numerical model were derived. A method for applying variation was found. A variational value calculation procedure was written. Then, the process of judging the stability or instability of the model based on the positive or negative of the variational value was given. The unity of the variational value criterion and the three types of energy catastrophe criteria was verified through a typical slope example. The generality of the unity of the variational value criterion and the three types of energy catastrophe criteria was discussed by changing the typical parameters of the numerical model, such as mesh density, slope angle and slope height. It is shown that the results calculated by the variational value criterion are close to those calculated by the three types of energy catastrophe criteria, with the relative error of less than 5%. The variational value criterion unifies the three types of energy catastrophe criteria, and provides a mechanical explanation for the unity of the three types of energy catastrophe criteria.

Key words: slope, strength reduction method, failure criterion, energy catastrophe criteria, principle of minimum potential energy

CLC Number: 

  • TU 433
[1] DENG Qi-ning, CUI Yu-long, WANG Jiong-chao, ZHENG Jun, XU Chong, . ChatGPT-assisted programming approach for three-dimensional slope stability calculation [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(S1): 322-334.
[2] DONG Yuan, HU Ying-guo, LIU Mei-shan, LI Geng-quan, MA Chen-yang. Cumulative damage evolution mechanism in homogeneous rock high slopes induced by excavation blasting [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(9): 2929-2942.
[3] XU Quan, HOU Jing, YANG Jian, YANG Xin-guang, NI Shao-hu, CHEN Xin. Fine stability analysis of rock slope based on synthetic rock mass technology [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(7): 2062-2070.
[4] JIANG Yi-jian, LI Huan-huan, ZHU Da-yong, LING Dao-sheng. A linear programming model for slope considering thrust line position and limit equilibrium upper and lower bound solutions [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(6): 1745-1754.
[5] KE Wen-hai, YANG Wen-hai, LI Yuan, WU Lei, . Dynamic response of pile foundation in slope topography under SH wave [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(5): 1545-1544.
[6] GAO Ping-hong, GAO Chen-bo, PENG Cheng-wei, LIU Fei-yu, . Model test and discrete element analysis of granite residual soil slopes under rainfall conditions [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(5): 1632-1642.
[7] SONG Xiang-hua, XIAO Heng-lin, NI Hua-yong, TAN Yong, . Macro and micro study on the failure triggering mechanism of sandy soil slopes due to rainfall [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(3): 969-979.
[8] SUN Wen-chao, WANG Jun-hao, XU Wen-jie, DONG Xiao-yang, REN He, WANG Hong-bing, ZHANG Xue-jie, WANG Heng-wei, . Stability and disaster dynamics analysis of highway debris dump site based on material point method [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(3): 991-1000.
[9] YUAN Zhi-rong, JIANG Shui-hua, CHANG Zhi-lu, XIANG Hu, LIU Yu-wei, HUANG Jin-song, . Reliability analysis of slope stability considering non-uniform distribution of initial soil water content and pore water redistribution [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(3): 1001-1012.
[10] LIU Wen-jing, DENG Hui, ZHOU Xin. Dynamic response of high steep rock slope with a double-layer ductile shear zone under earthquake action [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(11): 3534-3548.
[11] ZHAO Fei, SHI Zhen-ming, YU Song-bo, ZHOU Yuan-yuan, LI Bo, CHEN Jian-feng, ZHANG Qing-zhao, ZHENG Hong-chao. Research progress on dynamic failure and reinforcement of stratified rock slopes [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(11): 3585-3614.
[12] TAO Gao-liang, ZHOU Heng-jie, XIAO Heng-lin, ZHOU Hong-yu, . Mechanical and vegetative properties and anti-erosion effect of a new ecological slope protection material [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(10): 3018-3032.
[13] DENG Zhi-ping, ZHONG Min, JIANG Shui-hua, PAN Min, HUANG Jin-song, . Efficient reliability analysis of three-dimensional slopes with nonstationary random field modeling of soil parameters [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(10): 3243-3252.
[14] DENG Dong-ping, XU Run-dong, PENG Yi-hang, WEN Sha-sha. Limit equilibrium method based on mode of slip surface stress analysis for slope stability under the characteristics of spatial heterogeneity and anisotropy in soil strength [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(1): 55-72.
[15] MO Yun, HU Xin-li, CUI De-shan, GU Dong-ming, XIE Zhao-yu, YANG Yong, . A method for determining Hoek-Brown criterion parameters and estimating mechanical parameters of arenated dolomite masse [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2025, 46(1): 257-265.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!