A simulation-optimization model for Stone column-supported embankment stability

considering rainfall effect

, , ,
Kousik Deb , Anirban Dhar , and Sandip Purohit

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1705, 020017 (2016); doi: 10.1063/1.4940265

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4940265
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1705/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics
 A Simulation-Optimization Model for Stone Column-
Supported Embankment Stability Considering Rainfall
Effect
Kousik Deb1,a), Anirban Dhar2,b) and Sandip Purohit3,c)
1
Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Kharagpur, Kharagpur- 721302, India
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Kharagpur, Kharagpur- 721302, India
3
Former B.Tech Student, Department of Civil Engineering, NIT Rourkela, Rourkela, India
a)
Corresponding author: kousik@civil.iitkgp.ernet.in
b)
anirban@civil.iitkgp.ernet.in
c)
sandip.purohit91@gmail.com

Abstract. Landslide due to rainfall has been and continues to be one of the most important concerns of geotechnical
engineering. The paper presents the variation of factor of safety of stone column-supported embankment constructed over
soft soil due to change in water level for an incessant period of rainfall. A combined simulation-optimization based
methodology has been proposed to predict the critical surface of failure of the embankment and to optimize the
corresponding factor of safety under rainfall conditions using an evolutionary genetic algorithm NSGA-II (Non-
Dominated Sorted Genetic Algorithm-II). It has been observed that the position of water table can be reliably estimated
with varying periods of infiltration using developed numerical method. The parametric study is presented to study the
optimum factor of safety of the embankment and its corresponding critical failure surface under the steady-state
infiltration condition. Results show that in case of floating stone columns, period of infiltration has no effect on factor of
safety. Even critical failure surfaces for a particular floating column length remain same irrespective of rainfall duration.

INTRODUCTION
Assessing the stability of soil slopes is of very considerable importance for geotechnical engineering. Majority of
slope failures and landslides take place in the regions experiencing heavy rainfall. Seepage of water into the soil
slope due to infiltration of rainwater increases the pore water pressure and the developed extra stress leads to
instability. The reduction of shear strength takes place due to loss of matric suction of soil media by rainwater. Use
of stone columns into soft soil foundation (below the embankment) reduces the excessive settlement and increases
the shear strength of soft ground. Geosynthetic reinforced soil is being widely used as it provides an
overwhelmingly economical solution in reducing the settlement and increasing the bearing capacity. Thus, the use of
geosynthetic reinforcement at the base of embankment along with stone columns provides an economic and
effective solution when rapid construction and small deformation are required. Various studies are presented on
stability of geosynthetic-reinforced embankments resting on soft soil [1-3]. Studies have also been conducted on
stone column-supported embankments and granular fill-soft soil system with or without stone columns [4-23]. Deb
et al. [24] presented the stability analysis of stone column-supported geosynthetic-reinforced embankment based on
combined simulation-optimization based methodology. However, most of the available analysis on stability of stone
column-supported embankments, the effect of infiltration due to rainfall has not been considered.
The present paper studies the stability of stone column-supported geosynthetic-reinforced embankment resting
on soft foundation at steady-state infiltration condition by using simulation based optimization model [25-26]. In
order to determine the critical failure surface and the corresponding factor of safety, optimization technique is

Progress in Applied Mathematics in Science and Engineering Proceedings

AIP Conf. Proc. 1705, 020017-1–020017-9; doi: 10.1063/1.4940265
© 2016 AIP Publishing LLC 978-0-7354-1352-8/$30.00

020017-1
employed by imposing some constraints. Janbu’s generalized method has been extended for stability analysis of
geosynthetic-reinforced embankments constructed over stone column-improved ground considering rainfall effect.
Numerical analysis simulating the process of infiltration has been utilized to explore the development of the pore-
water pressure in the soil during rainwater infiltration. A simulation model for stability analysis of embankments
constructed over clay reinforced with stone columns has been linked with optimization model i.e. NSGA-II (Non-
dominated sorting Genetic Algorithm-II) [27] to get the minimum factor safety of the embankment slope and
corresponding failure surface.

SIMULATION MODEL
The model proposed by Sabhahit et al. [28, 5] has been used as simulation model for geosynthetic-reinforced
embankments resting on stone column-improved ground. The detailed derivation of the simulation model is
available in Deb et al. [24]. Figure 1 shows a slice of geosynthetic-reinforced embankment resting on stone column-
improved clay, where ΔX is the width of slice; h is the total height of the slice; ΔN and ΔS are normal and shear force
along the base of slice, respectively; ΔW is weight of the slice; he is average height of embankment; hf is average
depth of the soft soil; E and T are normal and shear interslice forces, respectively. The weight of the slice varies with
the location of the water table.
when hp d hf
S S
'W J e he 'XS  J f h f 'XS  (J sat
clay
 J f )h p 'XS  Dg2 h p (J g  J sat
clay
) Dg2 (h f  h p )(J g  J f )
4 4
(1)
when hp t hf
S
'W J e he 'XS  (J sat
Emb
 J e )(h f  h p )'XS  J sat
clay
h f 'XS  Dg2 h f (J g  J sat
clay
) (2)
4
where Je, Jf, Jg are the bulk unit weight of embankment soil, clay and stone column material, respectively. Similarly,
Jsat is the saturated unit weight of soil (clay or embankment soil). Dg is the diameter of stone column.
In phreatic line profiling, the initial elevations at boundaries of the water table hgt0 and hgt1 have been assumed
to estimate the antecedent saturated zone (as shown in Figure 2). The position of water table is then modeled in the
soil media accordingly. This is adopted to abstain from increasing the complexity of the problem. Higher the
elevation of the antecedent water table, lower will be the factor of the safety of the embankment. Position of water
table is simulated for steady-state infiltration condition implying that the infiltration rate is unvarying with respect to
time. The decrease in infiltration rate when soil becomes saturated with gradual time is not investigated here. Due to
a period of steady-state infiltration condition, the formation of saturated zone occurs faster which causes a change in
slope stability.
In the context of phreatic line profiling, the set of assumptions that are conceived for acceptable modeling of the
perched water table are: i) in the sketching of the perched water table, the water table is assumed to be level till the
start of the embankment since there cannot be any arching in the portion of soft foundation soil which is of uniform
thickness, ii) The water table should be beneath the soil surface since the water table cannot have a free surface. i.e.
hgt0 d DH, iii) the curve of the phreatic line should begin from the outset of the slope of the embankment i.e. Xb and
continue likewise. This is due to the fact that the uniform water table throughout the soil slope would mean equal
pressure heads throughout the soil media i.e, hgt1 t DH.
The governing Laplace equation for plotting of antecedent phreatic line is obtained by Dupit’s assumption for
unconfined groundwater flow without recharge at t = 0 as:
K w 2h2
R
2 wx 2 (3)
where h=elevation of the water table from the reference level, R=steady-state infiltration rate (depends upon the
intensity of rainfall), K=hydraulic conductivity, R = I cosT, where I= intensity of rainfall, T= slope angle.

020017-2
 'X

he

'W Fr 7'7 Phreatic line

E+'E
'Y
hf E t

T d hp

c 'S
D
'N

FIGURE 1. Forces acting on a typical slice

Height (m)

Phreatic Line

Xb,Yb
hgt
1
hgt DH
0

Distance (m)

FIGURE 2. Position of water table

The parameter K depends on the zone of the soil media which experiences the rainfall infiltration. For a region
consisting layers of both embankment and clay, the influence of the thickness of the layers being proportional to the
K value corresponds quite reliably. e.g.

020017-3
 K clay h1  K Emb h2
K for X >Xb and Y d DH (4)
h1  h2
For initial conditions, i.e. t=0 hours, h1 = DH - hgt0 and h2 = hgt1 - DH
For subsequent time steps, the alteration of the water table with respect to time of rainfall is determined from the
following equation:
K w2h2 K eff dh
R 
2 wx 2 havg dt
(5)
where Keff = effective porosity, havg = average representative depth of saturated floor. Forward-Time Central Space
(FTCS) method is adopted to solve the partial differential equation and obtain the numerical formulation of the
equation as shown for sketching the phreatic line at the end of a particular period of incessant rainfall:

h n 2
i 1    h 
 2 hin
2 n 2
i 1  2 R 2K eff hin 1  hin
 (6)
'x 2 K Khavg 't
Eq. (6) being an Initial-Boundary Value Problem (IBVP), the initial and boundary values are defined. The
values of h for different nodes obtained from Dupit’s assumption at t =0 act as the initial profile values of antecedent
water table before rainfall and the subsequent profile of water table with regard to different time steps is calculated
using this as a reference.
Boundary value for left side of phreatic curve is dh/dx =0, thus, hi+1 = hi-1. Boundary value for right side is
assumed to be equal to hgt1. The pore water pressure for different slices is obtained as uw =hJw (as shown in Figure
3), where Jw is the unit weight of water. Following the determination of the pore water pressure, the shear stress and
stress strength developed in the slice are then calculated. The suction stress in the slice which lies above the water
table is neglected and assumed to be zero. The detailed factor of safety (F) calculation procedure is available in Deb
et al. [24] without considering the effect of infiltration. Same expression can be used for factor of safety calculation
by incorporation the infiltration effect as described earlier.

'X

Phreatic Surface

Pore-water Pressure acting uw=Jwh

through center of base of slice

FIGURE 3. Pore water pressure acting in a slice

020017-4
 OPTIMIZATION MODEL FORMULATION
The objective considered in this study is minimization of factor of safety (F). In order to obtain an acceptable
critical failure surface, a set of constraints are imposed on design variables, e.g., initial and terminal position, convex
nature of the failure surface as suggested by Sabhahit et al. [5].
The optimization framework can be represented as:

Minimize F (7)

The constraints are same as described by Deb et al. [24]. Real coded Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm
II (NSGA-II) is utilized in this study. NSGA-II can perform well enough for the highly nonlinear test problems,
even for the case of discontinuous Pareto front. NSGA-II utilizes simulated binary crossover (SBX) and polynomial
mutation for crossover and mutation. Further details can be found in Deb [27].

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A computer program based on the formulation has been developed and minimum factor of safety is obtained by
using optimization technique. The variation in the factor of safety with time period of infiltration for as = 0.2, Fr =
100 kN/m, Lg = 6.5m, Keff = 0.4, 't = 0.001 hours, Kclay = 3u10-4 m/s, Ksand = 3u10-2 m/s, I = 10-4/6 is studied, where
as is the area ratio of stone column. The area ratio is equal to the ratio of area of stone column to the total cross
section area of the influence zone. The area ratio can be calculated as: as = Dg2/ (1.05 x S)2 for triangular grid and as
= Dg2/(1.13 x S)2 for square grid, where S is the spacing between stone columns. Fr is the force or mobilized tension
of the geosynthetic reinforcement; Lg is the length of the stone column, DH is the depth or thickness of the soft soil
layer.
Good agreement has been observed when the results obtained from the present work are compared with the
stability of an embankment as reported by Rathgeb and Kutzner [4] and Sabhahit et al. [5]. During the comparison,
the value of Fr is taken as zero. Under the similar condition, the present methodology predicts the same factor of
safety of 1.33 which is also predicted by Rathgeb and Kutzner [4] for circular slip surface. However, the present
methodology predicts about 4% more than the factor of safety obtained from the methodology adopted by Sabhahit
et al. [5]. Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6 show the effect of area ratio, force or mobilized tension of the geosynthetic
reinforcement and length of stone column on factor of safety with different time period of infiltration. In the figures
cu is the undrained cohesion of soft clay, ce is the cohesion of embankment soil, Ie is the friction angle of the
embankment soil and Ig is the friction angle of stone column material. It is observed from the result that as the area
ratio and force in geosynthetic reinforcement increase factor of safety also increases. For Fr=100 kN/m, the factor of
safety is increased by 14.2% as the area ratio increases from 0.2 to 0.35 for initial perched water table condition.
Similarly, for as = 0.2, the increment of factor of safety from unreinforced condition to Fr=100 kN/m and Fr=200
kN/m is 3.53% and 16.42%, respectively. However, for as = 0.2 and Fr=100kN/m, the factor of safety is increased
by 63.76% and 47% as Lg value increases from 4m to 6.5m and 5m to 6.5m, respectively.
It is also observed that for unreinforced condition, factor of safety decreases by 17.45% for 4 hours of incessant
rainfall and by 24% for 8 hours of incessant rainfall (as being 0.2). Similarly, for Fr =200kN/m the reduction of
factor of safety is 5.64% and 10.71% for 4 and 8 hours of rainfall, respectively. The increment is about 14.73% and
33.06% from unreinforced condition to Fr =100kN/m and Fr =200kN/m after 4 hours of rainfall infiltration. The
results also show a 18.93% increase in the factor of safety after 8 hours of rainfall infiltration from unreinforced
condition to Fr =100kN/m and 36.75% increase from unreinforced condition to Fr =200kN/m. The above
observation establishes that as the force in the geosynthetic reinforcement increases there is a substantial increase in
the factor of safety. Though the initial factor of safety for unreinforced condition and Fr =100kN/m is very close, the
reduction in factor of safety for unreinforced condition with subsequent infiltration due to rainfall is much higher.
Thus, geosynthetic-reinforcement with higher tensile force seems very much effective in improving the stability of
the slope. For as = 0.2, the reduction is around 8.51% as period of rainfall infiltration lapses from 0 to 4 hours. The
reduction from initial safety factor is around 12.68% as period of rainfall lapses to 8 hours whereas, for as = 0.35,
the factor of safety is decreased by 3.36% and 9.17% as the period of rainfall infiltration lapses from 0 to 4 and 0 to
8 hours, respectively. The percentage increase for 4 hours of incessant rainfall when area ratio of stone column is
increased from 0.2 to 0.35 is 20.7%. Similarly, the increase in factor of safety (when as is increased from 0.2 to 0.35)
after 8 hours of incessant rainfall is 18.87%. It is observed from the results that apart from contributing to a higher

020017-5
factor of safety than that of as = 0.2, the percentage decrease in factor of safety with subsequent periods of rainfall is
also comparatively lesser for stone column with higher area ratio. Thus, as the period of rainfall increases, use of
stone columns with higher area ratio is very effective to increase the factor of safety

1.5
2 2
cu=15kN/m ,ce=25kN/m , Ie=25qIg=35q
2
1.4 Lg=6.5m, H=10.3923m, DH=6.5m, Fr=100kN/m

as=0.2
Factor od Safety, FS
1.3 as=0.35

1.2

1.1

1.0
0 4 8
Time Period of Infiltration (in Hrs)

FIGURE 4. Effect of infiltration and area ration on factor of safety

1.5

2 2
as=0.2, cu=15kN/m ,ce=25kN/m , Ie=25q
1.4
Ig=35qLg=6.5m, H=10.3923m, DH=6.5m

1.3
Factor of Safety, FS

1.2

1.1

1.0 Fr=200kN
Fr=100kN
Fr=0kN
0.9

0 4 8
Time Period of Infiltration (in Hrs)

FIGURE 5. Effect of infiltration and mobilized tension or force on factor of safety

020017-6
 2 2
as=0.2, cu=15kN/m ,ce=25kN/m , Ie=25q
1.35 2
Ig=35qFr=100kN/m , H=10.3923m, DH=6.5m

Lg=6.5m
1.20
Lg=5m
Factor of Safety , FS Lg=4m
1.05

0.90

0.75

0.60

0 4 8
Time of Infiltration (in Hours)

FIGURE 6. Effect of infiltration and length of stone column on factor of safety

FIGURE 7. Effect of infiltration and length on slip surface

It is interesting to note that in case of floating stone columns (Lg < 6.5m in our case) there is no change in the
factor of safety with different periods of infiltration (as shown in Figure 6). Even the critical failure surfaces for a
particular floating column length remain same irrespective of the period of the rainfall (as shown in Figure 7). The

020017-7
reduction of factor of safety for as = 0.2, Fr =100kN/m and Lg =6.5m for 4 and 8 hours of incessant rainfall
infiltration is 8.51% and 12.68%, respectively. The increment when length of stone columns is increased from 4m to
6.5m is 52.57% and that for increase from 5m to 6.5m is 34.62% for 4 hours of incessant rainfall. Similarly, it is
observed that increment in factor of safety when Lg is increased from 4m to 6.5m is 45.43% and that for 5m to 6.5m
is 28.5% for 8 hours of rainfall infiltration. It is also observed that apart from decrease in factor of safety for
increasing periods of rainfall, there is increasing tendency of the observed curvature of failure surfaces to move
downwards direction.

CONCLUSIONS
A combined simulation-optimization based methodology has been developed to predict the critical surface of
failure of geosynthetic-reinforced embankments resting on stone column improved clay and to optimize the
corresponding factor of safety considering rainfall effect. The proposed methodology combines numerical modeling
to locate the position of water table and a simulation model for predicting the factor of safety of stone column-
supported embankments with evolutionary optimization algorithm NSGA-II. It is observed that apart from decrease
in factor of safety for increasing periods of rainfall, there is increasing tendency of the observed curvature of failure
surfaces to move downwards in the soil media. The results show that with the increase in tensile force in the
geosynthetic reinforcement and use of stone columns with higher area ratio, there is a substantial increase in the
factor of safety. Even as the period of rainfall increases, use of stone columns with higher area ratio and
reinforcement with higher strength is also very effective to increase the factor of safety. In case of floating stone
columns no change in the factor of safety with different periods of infiltration is observed. The critical failure
surfaces for a particular floating column length remain same irrespective of the period of the rainfall. Minor
modifications can be conceived to the proposed framework to integrate more general simulation model with
complex physical conditions.

REFERENCES
1. H. Nouri, A. Fakher and C.J.F.P. Jones, Geotextiles and Geomembranes 24, 175–187 (2006).
2. A. Tolooiyan, I. Abustan, M.R. Selamat and Sh. Ghaffari, Geotextiles and Geomembranes 27, 399–405
(2009).
3. R. K. Rowe and C. Taechakumthorn, Geotextiles and Geomembranes 29, 448–461 (2011).
4. E. Rathgeb and C. Kutzner, Geotechnique 25, 45-50 (1975).
5. N. Sabhahit, P. K. Basudhar and M.R. Madhav, Soils and Foundations 37, 13-22 (1997).
6. S. Murugesan and K. Rajagopal, Geotextiles and Geomembranes 24, 349–358 (2006).
7. K. Deb, S. Chandra and P. K. Basudhar, Geosynthetics International 12, 288-298 (2005).
8. K. Deb, S. Chandra and P. K. Basudhar, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 25, 11-23 (2007).
9. K. Deb, N. Sivakugan, S. Chandra and P. K. Basudhar, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 25, 639- 646
(2007).
10. K. Deb, P. K. Basudhar and S. Chandra, International Journal of Geomechanics, ASCE 7, 266-276 (2007).
11. K. Deb, S. Chandra and P. K. Basudhar, Computers and Geotechnics 35, 323-330 (2008).
12. K. Deb, International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics 32, 1267-1288 (2008).
13. J. L. Borges, T. S. Domingues and A. S. Cardoso, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 27, 667-679
(2009).
14. K. Deb, P. K. Basudhar and S. Chandra, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 28, 177-186 (2010).
15. K. Deb, P.K. Basudhar and S. Chandra, Ground Improvement 163, 231-236 (2010).
16. K. Deb, N. K. Samadhiya and J. B. Namdeo, Geotextiles and Geomembranes 29, 190-196 (2011).
17. S.W. Abusharar and J. Han, Engineering Geology 120, 103-110 (2011).
18. K. Deb and A. K. Das, Applied Mechanics and Materials 567, 699-704 (2014).
19. A. K. Das and K. Deb, Soils and Foundations 54, 1212-1224 (2014).
20. K. Deb, Applied Mathematical Modelling 34, 3871-3883 (2010).
21. K. Deb and S.R Mohapatra, Applied Mathematical Modelling 37, 2943-2960 (2013).
22. K. Deb and A. Majee, Geomechanics and Engineering: an International Journal 7, 539-552 (2014).
23. K. Deb and S. Shiyamalaa, International Journal of Geomechanics, ASCE 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-
5622.0000492 (2015).

020017-8
24. K. Deb, A. Dhar and P. Bhagat, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 16, 1185-1192 (2012).
25. K. Deb and A. Dhar, Computers and Geotechnics 38, 50-57 (2011).
26. K. Deb and A. Dhar, International Journal of Geomechanics, ASCE 13. 222-233 (2013).
27. K. Deb, Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2001).
28. N. Sabhahit, P.K. Basudhar and M.R. Madhav, Geotextiles and Geomembranes 13, 765-780 (1994).

020017-9