强化岩石边坡稳定性分析:将部分因子法整合到极限平衡法中

Hare Ram Timalsina
{"title":"强化岩石边坡稳定性分析:将部分因子法整合到极限平衡法中","authors":"Hare Ram Timalsina","doi":"10.3126/jes2.v3i1.66235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rock slope stability is crucial for sustainable design. Especially concerning natural or artificial rock-cut slopes. The stability of these slopes depends largely on features of rock mass, particularly discontinuities. Failure modes are determined by these features and are evaluated using kinematics analysis with stereographic projections. Various methods exist for analyzing rock slopes, including the limit equilibrium method (LEM), which assesses stability based on a factor of safety (FS). Conversely, the partial factor method (PFM), predominantly used in Europe, offers a more reliable and probabilistic approach, incorporating uncertainty factors. Although Eurocode, which employs the PFM, is widely utilized, it faces disputes and undergoes updates based on ISRM recommendations. The partial factor method is considered more conservative than the limit equilibrium method due to its comprehensive probabilistic approach. The choice between methods depends on project requirements, data availability, and expertise. This study compares the limit equilibrium and partial factor methods for rock slope analysis, concluding that the partial factor method is more conservative and sustainable for long-term stability assessment. Whereas, the traditional method is often used for short-term assessments.","PeriodicalId":510231,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering and Sciences","volume":"11 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhanced Rock Slope Stability Analysis: Integrating the Partial Factor Method into the Limit Equilibrium Method\",\"authors\":\"Hare Ram Timalsina\",\"doi\":\"10.3126/jes2.v3i1.66235\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Rock slope stability is crucial for sustainable design. Especially concerning natural or artificial rock-cut slopes. The stability of these slopes depends largely on features of rock mass, particularly discontinuities. Failure modes are determined by these features and are evaluated using kinematics analysis with stereographic projections. Various methods exist for analyzing rock slopes, including the limit equilibrium method (LEM), which assesses stability based on a factor of safety (FS). Conversely, the partial factor method (PFM), predominantly used in Europe, offers a more reliable and probabilistic approach, incorporating uncertainty factors. Although Eurocode, which employs the PFM, is widely utilized, it faces disputes and undergoes updates based on ISRM recommendations. The partial factor method is considered more conservative than the limit equilibrium method due to its comprehensive probabilistic approach. The choice between methods depends on project requirements, data availability, and expertise. This study compares the limit equilibrium and partial factor methods for rock slope analysis, concluding that the partial factor method is more conservative and sustainable for long-term stability assessment. Whereas, the traditional method is often used for short-term assessments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":510231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Engineering and Sciences\",\"volume\":\"11 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Engineering and Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3126/jes2.v3i1.66235\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3126/jes2.v3i1.66235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

岩石斜坡的稳定性对于可持续设计至关重要。特别是对于天然或人工开凿的岩石斜坡。这些斜坡的稳定性在很大程度上取决于岩体的特征,尤其是不连续性。破坏模式由这些特征决定,并通过立体投影运动学分析进行评估。目前有多种分析岩石斜坡的方法,包括极限平衡法(LEM),该方法根据安全系数(FS)评估稳定性。与此相反,主要在欧洲使用的部分系数法(PFM)提供了一种更可靠的概率方法,其中包含不确定系数。尽管采用 PFM 的欧洲规范得到了广泛应用,但它也面临着争议,并根据 ISRM 的建议进行更新。与极限平衡法相比,部分因素法因其全面的概率方法而被认为更为保守。不同方法之间的选择取决于项目要求、数据可用性和专业知识。本研究比较了岩石边坡分析中的极限平衡法和部分系数法,得出的结论是部分系数法在长期稳定性评估中更为保守和可持续。而传统方法通常用于短期评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enhanced Rock Slope Stability Analysis: Integrating the Partial Factor Method into the Limit Equilibrium Method
Rock slope stability is crucial for sustainable design. Especially concerning natural or artificial rock-cut slopes. The stability of these slopes depends largely on features of rock mass, particularly discontinuities. Failure modes are determined by these features and are evaluated using kinematics analysis with stereographic projections. Various methods exist for analyzing rock slopes, including the limit equilibrium method (LEM), which assesses stability based on a factor of safety (FS). Conversely, the partial factor method (PFM), predominantly used in Europe, offers a more reliable and probabilistic approach, incorporating uncertainty factors. Although Eurocode, which employs the PFM, is widely utilized, it faces disputes and undergoes updates based on ISRM recommendations. The partial factor method is considered more conservative than the limit equilibrium method due to its comprehensive probabilistic approach. The choice between methods depends on project requirements, data availability, and expertise. This study compares the limit equilibrium and partial factor methods for rock slope analysis, concluding that the partial factor method is more conservative and sustainable for long-term stability assessment. Whereas, the traditional method is often used for short-term assessments.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信