首页> 外文期刊>Journal of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering >Meta-Analysis of 301 Slope Failure Calculations. II: Database Analysis
【24h】

Meta-Analysis of 301 Slope Failure Calculations. II: Database Analysis

机译:301边坡破坏计算的Meta分析。二:数据库分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In response to the growing need for statistical information regarding slope stability risk analysis, this work applies inferential analysis to a compiled database of 157 failed slopes and corresponding 301 safety factor (SF) calculations. As presented in the companion paper, this database also includes a number of slope stability factors, including analytical method used, stress approach (effective versus total), assumed slip surface geometry, slope type, applied correction factors, and soil Atterburg limits. Although the SF data were found to be fairly well fit by a lognormal distribution, pronounced curvature of the residuals was observed, likely related to various unaccounted slope factors. In response, inferential statistics are used in this paper to analyze the effects of analytical method, slope type, soil plasticity, and effective versus total stress analysis. ANOVA hypothesis testing indicated significant differences between analytical methods and significant interactions between slope types and pore-water stress approaches. Direct SF calculation methods, such as infinite slope, wedge, and the ordinary method of slices were found to produce SF near 1 as expected, but higher order methods in general, and force methods in particular, predicted safety factors significantly greater than 1. Clay content alone was not a discernible influence on SF calculations. A reduced factor ANOVA model was developed to predict SF, given analytical method (a main effect) and the interactions between analytical method with both slope type and pore-water pressure approach.
机译:为响应对有关边坡稳定性风险分析的统计信息的日益增长的需求,这项工作将推论分析应用于已编译的157个失效边坡的数据库和相应的301安全系数(SF)计算。如随附文件中所述,该数据库还包括许多边坡稳定性因素,包括所使用的分析方法,应力方法(有效与总应力),假定的滑移面几何形状,边坡类型,应用的校正因子和阿特堡土壤极限。尽管通过对数正态分布发现SF数据非常吻合,但观察到残差明显的曲率,这很可能与各种未解释的斜率因素有关。因此,本文使用推论统计来分析分析方法,边坡类型,土壤可塑性以及有效应力与总应力分析的影响。方差分析假设检验表明,分析方法之间存在显着差异,边坡类型与孔隙水应力方法之间也存在显着相互作用。发现直接SF计算方法(如无限斜率,楔形和常规切片方法)会产生SF,接近预期的1,但通常使用高阶方法,特别是力方法,预测的安全系数明显大于1。Clay内容本身对SF计算并没有明显的影响。在给定分析方法(主要效果)以及分析方法与边坡类型和孔隙水压力方法之间的相互作用的基础上,开发了折减系数方差分析模型来预测SF。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号