Allan, F.C. and Yacoub, T.E.

Rocscience Inc., Toronto, ON, Canada

Curran, J.H.
University of Toronto & Lassonde Insitute, Toronto, ON, Canada

Purpose
To investigate the effect of a purely random Gaussian field on slope stability using Shear

Strength Reduction (SSR). Comparison of purely random fields to interpolation based on samples from a random field. To investigate the effect of different interpolation methods, in particular Kriging, on the factor of safety distribution.

Kriging
Kriging is a statistically rigorous approach to interpolating unknown values

Can be applied to sparsely sampled rock data to estimate a spatially variable property
Requires a basis, i.e. a set of spatially situated

known values

Kriging
Estimates a property at an unknown point as a weighted linear sum of all known points

x x i n Z y = wi Z yi i=1 z z i

Kriging
Ordinary kriging is a weighted average method where the weights are determined by the solution

to the following system of equations:

c11 c 21 cn1 1 c12 c1n cnn 1 1 w1 c1x 1 1 wn cnx 0 1 1

cij is the covariance between two points. wi are kriging weights and 1 is a Lagrangian optimization parameter.

Kriging Advantages
Helps compensate for data clustering Works well with correlated samples

Gives estimate of error (Kriging variance)

Availability of error gives rise to stochastic sampling techniques (Gaussian simulation) Can take into account both distance and direction when calculating weights

Kriged points revert to the mean when no data points are close

Stochastic Shear Strength Reduction

The stability of a test slope was modeled using shear

strength reduction and the FEM.

Only the Mohr-Coulomb shear strength parameters c and

were treated as spatial variables.

Stochastic Shear Strength Reduction

Fully randomized fields of soil properties were tested. Three levels of soil variability were considered.

Rock Type I II III

Cohesion (c) (MPa) 0.025 0.05 0.10 COV 4.3% 8.7% 17.3%

Friction Angle () () 2 5 10 COV 3.7% 9.3% 18.5%

Stochastic Shear Strength Reduction

Fully randomized fields of soil properties were tested. Three levels of soil variability were considered.

Friction angle contour map for a representative spatially variable trial slope

Stochastic Shear Strength Reduction

The mean factor of safety of a spatially random slope is

lower than its homogeneous equivalent, an effect that increases with increasing soil COV.
0.4 0.35 0 = 1.34 0.3 Relative Frequency 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 Factor of Safety 1.35 1.4 1.45 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Relative Frequency 0.4 0.35 0.4 0.4 0 = 1.34

0.35
0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 1.05 1.1 1.15

0.35
0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0

1.2 1.25 1.3 Factor of Safety

1.35

1.4

1.45

Stochastic Shear Strength Reduction

Spatial variability captures failure due to localized

weakness and identifies possible alternate modes of failure.

Two representative contour plots of shear displacement at failure.

Interpolation Methods
Ordinary kriging was tested and compared to other

interpolation methods for soil properties, namely inverse distance weighting (IDW) and the geometric Chughs Method (MCM).

kriging

IDW

MCM

Friction angle contour plots interpolated

Interpolation Methods
Sets of 10, 50, 100 and 200 input points were used as the

basis for interpolation. The smallest sets of input points create the most variable FS distributions.
3.5 3 Probability Density 2.5 2 200 Points 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 1 2 Factor of Safety 3 10 Points Probability Density 50 Points 100 Points 3.5 3 10 Points 50 Points 100 Points 200 Points 1.5 1 0.5 0

2.5
2

kriging

MCM
0 1 2 Factor of Safety 3

Factor of safety distributions for interpolated slopes for Type III rock

Interpolation Methods
Increasing the number of input points lowers the mean

factor of safety. This is due to the smoothing effect of interpolation, especially kriging. Larger sets of (randomized) input points produce a rougher field and greater possibility of localized weakness contributing to overall failure.

Interpolation Methods
1.10 MCM IDW Kriged FS Coefficient of Variation 1.05 Relative FS (*) 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0 50 100 150 No. of Basis Points 200 250 40% 35% MCM IDW Kriged

30%
25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 0 50 100 150 No. of Basis Points

200

250

Normalized mean FS and COV for each interpolation method and size of basis

Spatial Correlation Length

Correlation length (CL), which is a measure of the degree

of influence a value has on its neighbours, or the roughness of the field. The correlation length was kept constant. The effect of varying CL was left to future work.
Z
Z Y

Z Y Y X

0.58 0.56

0.58
0.54 0.52

0.58 0.56

0.56 0.54
0.5

0.52

0.52
0.5

0.5

Effect of decreasing correlation length on a kriged field of a property

0.54

Interpolation Methods
The FS predicted by inverse distance weighting and kriging

were found to be highly correlated, while MCM was poorly correlated with both.
2.5 2.3 FS - Inverse Distance Weighting 2.1 FS - MCM 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.9 FS - Kriging 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.9 FS - Kriging 2.1 2.3 2.5

Factors of safety predicted by kriging/IDW and kriging/MCM

Conclusions
This research supports the use of kriging as a valid tool for

interpolating rock properties when data are scarce. Because of the smoothing effect of kriging, it does not fully preserve the spatial variability of the original material.
It is thus a partial measure, a way to account for measured

deviations from mean rock properties without fully anticipating probabilistic weakness, or a way to test the resilience of a designed slope to material property variation.

Conclusions
Because SSR does not assume a mode of failure, it is a

good method for accommodating spatial variability Further research will study the effect of kriging parameters (e.g. correlation length, anisotropy, moving window kriging) and test sequential Gaussian simulation (SGS), a more computationally intensive method based on kriging.