| Literature DB >> 24082854 |
Jia-wen Zhou1, Chong Shi, Fu-gang Xu.
Abstract
Two important features of the high slopes at Gushui Hydropower Station are layered accumulations (rock-soil aggregate) and multilevel toppling failures of plate rock masses; the Gendakan slope is selected for case study in this paper. Geological processes of the layered accumulation of rock and soil particles are carried out by the movement of water flow; the main reasons for the toppling failure of plate rock masses are the increasing weight of the upper rock-soil aggregate and mountain erosion by river water. Indoor triaxial compression test results show that, the cohesion and friction angle of the rock-soil aggregate decreased with the increasing water content; the cohesion and the friction angle for natural rock-soil aggregate are 57.7 kPa and 31.3° and 26.1 kPa and 29.1° for saturated rock-soil aggregate, respectively. The deformation and failure mechanism of the rock-soil aggregate slope is a progressive process, and local landslides will occur step by step. Three-dimensional limit equilibrium analysis results show that the minimum safety factor of Gendakan slope is 0.953 when the rock-soil aggregate is saturated, and small scale of landslide will happen at the lower slope.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24082854 PMCID: PMC3776388 DOI: 10.1155/2013/540636
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Figure 1Site location of the Gushui Hydropower Station.
Figure 2Typical fluvial deposit terrace of the Lancang River in the Gushui Hydropower Station region.
Figure 3Rock masses in the Gushui Hydropower Station region: (a) and (b) are the exposed plate sandstone.
Figure 4Rock-soil aggregate slope distribution in the dam site region of the Gushui Hydropower Station.
Figure 5The Gendakan slope at the Gushui Hydropower Station: (a) photograph of the Gendakan slope; (b) three-dimensional visualization.
Figure 6Layered rock-soil aggregate in the PD 33: (a) and (c) are the small size particle rock-soil aggregates; (b) and (d) are the large size particle rock-soil aggregates.
Figure 7Toppling failure of plate rock masses in the PD 13: (a) the bending fracture surface in the horizontal direction and (b) the bending fracture surface in the vertical direction.
Classification of the toppling failure of plate rock masses.
| Type | Dip of rock layer | Geological characteristics | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strong toppling | Angle of toppling rock layer and normal rock layer is larger than 60°. | A clear breakage phenomenon in rock, the continuity of fracture surface is good and extends in a long length, and each surface is distribution of parallel strips in different distances. The crack in fracture zone is mainly opened, no filling of rock block or debris. The phenomenon of shear dislocation is obvious, and several sets of joints are generated by the toppling effect. | (1) Upper part of slope |
| Weak toppling | Angle of toppling rock layer and normal rock layer is less than 60°. | The strata dip is abnormal, but the breakage phenomenon is not obvious; the distribution of rock mass is multilayer and continuous. Most of them maintain the organization and structure of original rock mass, but the shear strength is decreased in the local region. The crack in fracture zone is partly opened, and there is a filling of calcite crystals or calcarenite. | (1) Lower part of slope |
Figure 8Geological evolution process of slope in the Gushui Hydropower Station region: (a) ancient landscape and (b) current landscape.
An example of shear strength test results for plate basalt and joint surface.
| Type | No. | Physical characteristic | Peak value | Residual value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frication angle (°) | Cohesion (MPa) | Frication angle (°) | Cohesion (MPa) | |||
| Basalt | R-1 | Weak weathering | 51.12 | 2.20 | 43.62 | 1.61 |
| R-2 | Weak weathering | 51.78 | 2.25 | 45.00 | 1.68 | |
|
| ||||||
| Joint | J-1 | Rigid | 36.87 | 0.50 | 35.26 | 0.30 |
| J-2 | Debris silted | 22.29 | 0.21 | 21.31 | 0.17 | |
Figure 9Water content of rock-soil aggregate varied with the horizontal depth.
Figure 10Statistical results for particle size distribution of rock-soil aggregate at the Gendakan slope: (a) field test results and (b) indoor test results.
Some cohesion and friction angle values for rock-soil aggregate in China [20–22].
| Location (position, province) | Cohesion (kPa) | Friction angle (°) | Material characteristics |
|---|---|---|---|
| Xiaowan, Yunnan | 50.0 | 36.0 | Mixture of rock block, boulders, and gravel soil; rock content is approximately 32%; rock diameter is 30–350 mm. |
| Hutiao Valley, Yunnan | 12.6 | 36.5 | Mixture of broken stone and rock block; rock content is approximately 46%; rock diameter is 0.1–1.0 m. |
| Lancang River, Yunnan | 48.0 | 35.0 | Mixture of broken stone, rock block, boulders, and silt; rock content is 20%–35%; rock diameter is 0.3–5.0 m, dense structure. |
| Qingshui River (no. 1), Yunnan | 35.0 | 31.0 | Clay cementation of pebble and basalt block. |
| Qingshui River (no. 2), Yunnan | 65.0 | 30.0 | Calcarenite and clay filling of broken stone and sandstone block. |
| Unknown slope (no. 2), Yunnan | 60.0 | 35.0 | Mixture of slate block, limestone block, and clay; rock diameter is 30–80 mm, loose structure. |
| Liangjiaren, Yunnan | 40.0 | 29.0 | An ice-water deposit, mixture of broken stone, boulders, and silt; rock content is 25%–35%. |
| 18.0 | 19.0 | An ice-water deposit, mixture of broken stone, rock block, and silt; rock content is 25%–35%. | |
| Qianjiangping slope, Hubei | 23.0 | 20.0 | Mixture of broken stone, pebble, and clay; the maximum of rock block diameter is 1.5 m; pebble diameter is 30–100 mm. |
| Baiyiyan, Hubei | 47.9 | 33.8 | Calcarenite and sandy soil filling of broken stone. |
| 55.5 | 35.4 | Mixture of limestone block, sandstone block, and clay. | |
| Huangshi, Hubei | 50.0 | 40.0 | Mixture of limestone block, sandstone block, and clay. |
| 30.0 | 32.8 | Mixture of breccia block, limestone block, and clay. | |
| Yunyang, Chongqing | 26.3 | 13.3 | Mixture of sandstone block, broken pebble, and silty clay; rock content is approximately 20%; rock diameter is 2–20 mm. |
| Fengjie, Chongqing | 42.6 | 26.4 | Mixture of broken stone and clay; rock content is approximately 15%; rock diameter is 10–20 mm. |
| 94.6 | 28.8 | Mixture of breccia block, broken stone, and clay; rock content is approximately 55%; rock diameter is 30–50 mm. | |
| Anle, Chongqing | 55.0 | 32.0 | Mixture of broken stone, sandstone block, and sandy clay; rock diameter is 100–800 mm, talus type. |
| 38.0 | 25.0 | Mixture of pebble and sandy soil; rock diameter is 20–80 mm, alluvium type. | |
| Three Gorges reservoir, Chongqing | 25.0 | 30.0 | Mixture of rock block and silty clay. |
| Dashiban, Sichuan | 25.0 | 13.2 | Mixture of rock block and clay; rock content is 25%–35%. |
| Jinsha River, Sichuan | 48.0 | 39.0 | Mixture of limestone block, pebble, and clay; the maximum rock diameter is approximately 4 m. |
| Feishuiya, Sichuan | 60.0 | 38.6 | Mixture of limestone block, sandstone block, and clay. |
| Xiaoliang Mountain, Sichuan | 65.0 | 31.4 | Mixture of pebble and sandy clay. |
| Dahaizi, Sichuan | 36.0 | 33.0 | Mixture of broken stone and sandy soil. |
| Baishuizhai, Sichuan | 37.2 | 23.1 | Mixture of limestone block, phyllite block, and clay. |
| 46.5 | 28.0 | Mixture of limestone block and sandy soil, dense structure. | |
| Jinsha reservoir, Sichuan | 30.0 | 17.0 | Mixture of broken stone, sandstone block, and silty clay. |
| Yalong River, Sichuan | 60.0 | 35.0 | Mixture of broken stone, sandstone block, and clay; rock content is approximately 30%; rock diameter is 400–1000 mm. |
| Shiwan, Sichuan | 10.0 | 25.4 | Mixture of pebble, granite block, and clay; rock diameter is 40–150 mm. |
| Unknown slope, Jiangxi | 10.0 | 25.0 | Mixture of rock block and clay. |
Figure 11Statistical results for shear strength of rock-soil aggregate in China: (a) cohesion and (b) friction angle.
Figure 12Shear strength test results of rock-soil aggregate under different water content conditions: (a) cohesion and (b) friction angle.
Cohesion and friction angle values of rock-soil aggregate under natural and saturated conditions for the slope stability analysis.
| Condition | Water content (%) | Shear strength | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cohesion (kPa) | Friction angle (°) | ||
| Unsaturated (natural condition) | 9 | 57.7 | 31.3 |
| Saturated (heavy rainfall) | 13 | 26.1 | 29.1 |
Figure 13Engineering geological condition of Gendakan slope in plane.
Figure 14(a) Engineering geological condition of Gendakan slope in Section 1-1 and (b) progressive landslide pattern of rock-soil aggregate slope.
Figure 15An arc-shaped landslide of rock-soil aggregate slope under rainfall condition in the Gushui Hydropower Station region.
Figure 16Three-dimensional limit equilibrium computer model under different conditions: (a) global slope stability; (b) local slope stability case 2; (c) local slope stability case 1, and (d) three-dimensional mesh for (c).
Computed results for the safety factor of Gendakan slope under different conditions.
| Conditions | Natural slope | Heavy rainfall |
|---|---|---|
| Global slope stability | 1.435 | 1.215 |
| Local slope stability case 1 | 1.368 | 1.136 |
| Local slope stability case 2 | 1.159 | 0.953 |
Figure 17Sensitivity analysis results of shear strength parameters and safety factor.