Kovacevic, N., Hight, D. W. & Potts, D. M. (2007). Géotechnique 57, No.

1, 63–74

Predicting the stand-up time of temporary London Clay slopes at

Terminal 5, Heathrow Airport



N. KOVAC E V I C , D. W. H I G H T a n d D. M . P OT T S y

The paper describes the results of finite element analyses
of the temporary slope geometries in London Clay at
London Heathrow Airport’s Terminal 5. The aims of the
analyses were to examine the times before failures devel-
oped, and to identify the failure mechanisms involved.
The brittle behaviour of the London Clay was modelled,
and the effects of progressive failure were taken into
account. The possible presence of tectonic shears with
their strength close to residual was considered by com-
paring analyses with and without a tectonic shear zone.
The predicted time to failure of the slopes and the form
of the failure, whether shallow or deep-seated, were
determined by a combination of the assumed permeabil-
ity profile and whether or not allowances were made for
increases in permeability as the clay swelled, the average
surface suction, the in situ K0 profile, the depth of
excavation, and whether or not a low-strength tectonic
shear surface was present in the slope. The analyses fall
into the category of Class A predictions, and were used
in the assessment of how long temporary slopes to deep
excavations could be left open before backfilling, and how
the slopes should be monitored.
KEYWORDS: clay; excavation; numerical modelling; slopes;
suction; time dependence
Cet article décrit les résultats d’analyses à éléments finis
des géométries de versant temporaire dans la London
Clay (argile de Londres) au Terminal 5 de l’aéroport
d’Heathrow de Londres. Il modélise le comportement
fragile de l’argile de Londres (London Clay) et prend en
considération les effets de rupture progressive. La pré-
sence éventuelle de cisaillements tectoniques dont la force
est proche de résiduelle a également été prise en compte
en comparant des essais avec et sans zone de cisaillement
tectonique. Le temps estimé de rupture des versants et la
forme de la rupture, profonde ou peu profonde, ont été
déterminés par association du profil de perméabilité
supposé et la possibilité ou non d’augmentations de la
perméabilité à mesure que l’argile gonfle, de la succion
en surface moyenne, du profil de K0 in situ, de la
profondeur de l’excavation et de la présence ou non sur
le versant d’une surface de cisaillement tectonique de
faible force. Les essais entrent dans la catégorie des
prédictions de Classe A. Ils ont été utilisés pour évaluer
combien de temps des versants temporaires allant jus-
qu’à des excavations profondes peuvent rester ouverts
avant de les remblayer et estimer comment contrôler ces
versants.

INTRODUCTION numerical techniques, and these have been used to analyse

The majority of the below-ground construction at London the role of progressive failure in London Clay slopes in both
Heathrow Airport’s new Terminal 5 (T5) was carried out in the short and long term (Potts et al., 1997; Vaughan et al.,
open-cut excavations made in the London Clay Formation 2004). The scale of the excavations at T5 (see Fig. 1)
(hereafter London Clay) which underlies Terrace Gravels. justified the use of these state-of-the-art techniques to take
There was a need to adopt slopes that were as steep as into account the effects of progressive failure in assessing
possible, to minimise the excavation and backfill volumes, the stand-up time of the temporary slopes.
but which would be stable for periods up to 6 months.
Temporary slope geometries were selected on the basis of
experience and precedents for other, usually shallower, short-
term slopes cut in the London Clay (e.g. Chandler, 1984).
It is extremely difficult to assess the stability of temporary
slopes cut in stiff overconsolidated plastic clays, such as
London Clay, partly because they are brittle and prone to
progressive failure. Nevertheless, it is still common to design
these slopes using limit equilibrium (LE) methods of analy-
sis. However, progressive failure is a strain-dependent phe-
nomenon, and thus conventional LE stability analyses are
not well suited for stability problems of this kind. In this
respect finite element (FE) analyses are far superior. They
do not impose a predetermined failure mechanism, and can
assess operational strengths rationally on the basis of the
development and distribution of strain within the slope.
Progressive failure can now be modelled using advanced

Manuscript received 5 May 2006; revised manuscript accepted 4

November 2006.
Discussion on this paper closes on 1 July 2007, for further details
see p. ii.


Geotechnical Consulting Group, London, UK.
y
Imperial College, University of London, UK. Fig. 1. Plan view of excavations at Terminal 5

63
64 KOVACEVIC, HIGHT AND POTTS
Coefficient of earth pressure at rest, K0
To calibrate the numerical methods, and to provide gui-
0 0·5 1 2 3 4 5
dance on the likely hydraulic boundary conditions, two case 0
histories of temporary slope failures local to T5 (Prospect Terrace
2 2·95 Gravels
Park and Wraysbury Reservoir) were also analysed
0·5 17
(Kovacevic et al., 2004) using the same techniques. Investi-
gations of the temporary slope failure at Prospect Park by 1·6
10 2·1
Chandler et al. (1998) revealed the presence and influence
on that failure of tectonic shear surfaces, on which shear Tectonic shear zone
strengths were only a little above residual. As Prospect Park 1·5 1·8 7
lies only 2 km to the north of the T5 site, identifying the
Bottom of
possible presence of tectonic shear surfaces was an impor- 20 excavation
tant aim of the ground investigations at T5, and allowance
London Clay
for their potential presence was made in the FE analyses. ⫺3

Depth: m
(Units A3, B and C)

Elevation: m
The FE analyses were carried out on a ‘standard’ stepped
section involving a series of 5 m high 1V:1H slopes in the 1·35
30
London Clay, with 5 m wide gently sloping berms (1V:20H)
between, and a maximum depth of 20 m (Fig. 2). Given the
different excavation depths at T5, shallower excavation ⫺13
depths (approximately 15 m and 10 m) having the same Best-estimated K0
‘Reduced’ K0
section were also analysed. 40 p.w.p.

1·2
⫺23
GROUND CONDITIONS
Ground conditions at Terminal 5 are discussed in detail 50 London Clay
elsewhere (Hight et al., 2003). A typical stratigraphical (Unit A2)
sequence is shown in Fig. 3. Approximately 4 m of Terrace 1·2
Gravels overlie the London Clay. Below a depth of 45 m the 0 250 500 750 1000
London Clay is stiffer and much stronger (Unit A2). Pore water pressure: kPa
In the ground investigations there were signs in the rotary
cores of tectonic shears at depths between 13 and 15 m, and Fig. 3. Adopted soil stratigraphy, K0 profiles and pore water
pressure distribution
so the potential presence of a tectonic shear zone was
modelled in the analyses at the depths shown in Fig. 3 (see
also Fig. 2).
The best estimated profile of the coefficient of earth Gravels were modelled as a linear elastic perfectly plastic
pressure at rest, K0 , is presented in Fig. 3. Bearing in mind material, the London Clay was characterised by the general-
the difficulties in determining K0 , the sensitivity of the ised non-linear elastic strain-softening plastic model of the
predictions to its value was checked by adopting in some Mohr–Coulomb type in which effective stress shear strength
analyses a reduced K0 profile, also shown in Fig. 3. parameters c9 and
9 vary according to the plastic deviatoric
The groundwater table was in the Terrace Gravels, 2 m strain invariant pD , defined as
below the ground surface. Based on site measurements, a
hydrostatic distribution of pore water pressures was adopted
p 2 2 h
p 2
2
2 i
D ¼ 1  p2 þ p2  p3 þ p3  p1 (1)
in the London Clay, there being no evidence of under- 3
drainage.

Pre-peak behaviour is formulated by a non-linear elastic

SOIL MODELS AND MODEL PARAMETERS model of the form described by Jardine et al. (1986) in
The soil models employed in the analyses are described in which the secant shear (Gsec ) and bulk (Ksec ) moduli depend
some detail by Kovacevic et al. (2004). Whereas the Terrace on both the current strain and stress levels according to

Point ‘A’
Cut-off wall

Point ‘B’
5
1·
1: Thames Gravels
1:20
5m
1
1:

1:20
London Clay
5m

1
1:

Tectonic shear zone

1
1:

London Clay

Fig. 2. ‘Standard’ section

 STAND-UP TIME OF TEMPORARY LONDON CLAY SLOPES AT HEATHROW AIRPORT 65
(    ª ) Permeability: m/s
Gsec D ⫺12 ⫺11
¼ A þ B cos Æ log10 (2) 10 10 10⫺10 10⫺9 10⫺8
p90 3C 0
Terrace
(    º ) Gravels

K sec v
¼ R þ S cos  log10 (3)
p9 T
10

Tectonic shear zone

where p9 ¼ ( 19 þ  29 þ  39 )=3 is the mean effective stress,

Depth below ground level: m

D is the deviatoric strain invariant defined by equation (1), Bottom of
v ¼ 1 + 2 + 3 is the volumetric strain, and A, B, C, R, S, 20 excavation
Typical range of
measured permeabilities
T, Æ, ª,  and º are all constants. from Fig. 4(b)

The analyses were coupled—that is, they involved conso-

lidation/swelling—and it was therefore necessary to specify
permeability k. The database on reliably measured per- 30
meability values in London Clay (Hight et al., 2003) is London Clay
shown in Fig. 4(b). Overall, there is a trend for the per- (Unit A3, B and C)

meability to decrease with depth, and this trend was mod- Permeability:
elled in the analyses. In the analyses of overall stability, the 40 Horizontal
Vertical
horizontal permeability was assumed to be three to five
times higher than the vertical permeability, as shown in Fig.
4(a). More permeable zones, with even higher horizontal London Clay
(Unit A2)
permeabilities, were assumed to coincide with zones where 50
silt seams were observed. In these analyses no allowance
was made for any changes in permeability of the clay during (a)
swelling, on the assumption that this effect would be re-
stricted to a zone close to the surface of the slope, and Horizontal permeability: m/s
changes in the body of the slope would be dominated by the
10⫺12 10⫺11 10⫺10 10⫺9 10⫺8
zones of higher horizontal permeability. In contrast, for 0
analyses of local stability, where changes in permeability
Biii
close to the surface would be important, isotropic permeabil-
ity was assumed and linked to the mean effective stress p9 Bi
according to a non-linear relationship of the form proposed 10 Biii Biii
A3
by Vaughan (1994), Biii
A2 A2

A2
Depth below ground level: m

A2

k ¼ k 0 ebp9
Bii Bii
(4) A2 Bii
A2
20 Typical range
A2 very sandy
A2 A2
A2
where k0 is the permeability at zero mean effective stress
(m/s), and b is a parameter that has dimensions m2 /kN. The A3
A2
two sets of parameters adopted in the study are: (a) k0 ¼ 2 30
A3

3 10–9 m/s, b ¼ 0.007 m2 /kN; and (b) k0 ¼ 5 3 10–10 m/s, A2

b ¼ 0.003 m2 /kN. The resulting variations in initial per- A3 A3

A2
meability with depth resulting from the use of this model A2
A2
with the above two sets of k0 and b are shown in Fig. 4(b). 40 A2
The model parameters used in the analyses are the same A3 Wraysbury; Garga (1970)
Kennington
as those used in the back-analyses of the failed temporary Westminster; Burland &
Hancock (1977)
slopes at Prospect Park and Wraysbury Reservoir (Kovacevic T5 SBPM
et al., 2004). For completeness, they are summarised in 50
Camden Town
A2 Guildford; Hutchinson (1984)
Tables 1 and 2. The predicted behaviour of the London Clay k0 ⫽ 2 ⫻ 10⫺9 m/s,
b ⫽ 0·007 m2/kN
in drained simple shear, undrained triaxial extension{ and k0 ⫽ 5 ⫻ 10⫺10 m/s,
b ⫽ 0·003 m2/kN
oedometer swelling tests, using the model and parameters, is
shown in Figs 5, 6 and 7 respectively. Where possible, the (b)
measured response from the appropriate laboratory tests is Fig. 4. Adopted permeability profiles in London Clay: (a)
superimposed. It can be seen that the observed behaviour anisotropic permeability to investigate overall stability; (b)
was reasonably well predicted by the model used. isotropic permeability to investigate local stability

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES
The FE analyses were carried out using the computer code
ICFEP. To represent the cross-section being analysed (Fig.
2), the FE mesh shown in Fig. 8 was developed.
Plane-strain eight-noded isoparametric elements with ‘re-
duced’ 2 3 2 integration were used. All eight nodes of an
element had both displacement and pore water pressure
degrees of freedom. A modified Newton–Raphson approach
{
A typical stress path during excavation is extension rather than
compression.
with a sub-stepping stress point algorithm was used to solve
the finite element equations (Potts & Zdravkovic, 1999).
No horizontal displacement was allowed on the vertical
boundaries, whereas the bottom boundary was fixed in both
the vertical and horizontal directions. The bentonite cut-off
wall, assumed to be 20 m back from the top of the slope
(see Fig. 2), was used to model dewatering of the Terrace
Gravels. The far-end vertical boundary was assumed to be
permeable (a source of water), whereas the near end vertical
boundary was assumed to be the axis of symmetry, and as
such was impermeable (no flow). The bottom boundary was
deep (55 m), and assumed to be impermeable.
66 KOVACEVIC, HIGHT AND POTTS
Table 1. Material properties assumed in the analyses

Property Terrace Gravels London Clay Tectonic shear

Bulk unit weight, ª: kN/m3 20 20 20

Peak strength c9p ¼ 0,
9p ¼ 35s c9p ¼ 8 kPa,
9p ¼ 25s –
Residual strength – c9r ¼ 2 kPa,
9r ¼ 13s c9r ¼ 0,
9r ¼ 13:5s
Plastic strain at peak, pDp : % – 2 –
Plastic strain at residual, pDr : % – 15 –
Young’s modulus, E: MPa 20 * *
Poisson’s ratio,  0.2 * *
Angle of dilation, ł 17.58 0 0
Coefficient of permeability, k – See Figs 4(a) and 4(b) As for London Clay
Coefficient of earth pressure at rest, K0 0.5 See Fig. 3 1.6y

*Small-strain stiffness parameters used; see Table 2.

y
Not to violate the yield criterion.

Table 2. Coefficients and limits for non-linear elastic secant shear moduli and bulk of London Clay

Shear A B C: % Æ ª D,min : % D,max : % Gmin : kPa

970 890 0.001 1.47 0.7 0.00173 0.173 3333.3

Bulk R S T: %  º v,min : % v,max : % Kmin : kPa

772.5 712.5 0.001 2.069 0.42 0.005 0.15 4000

Displacement across half a typical element thickness: m Axial strain: %

0 0·025 0·05 0·075 0·1 0 2 4 6 8 10
150 0

⫺50
Shear stress, t: kPa
Shear stress: kPa

100

⫺100

50 ⫺150

⫺200
0
0 5 10 15 20 ⫺150
Shear strain: %
Pore pressure change: kPa

Fig. 5. Predicted behaviour of London Clay in drained simple ⫺100 Measured (d ⫽ 11·35 m)
shear Predicted (s⬘ ⫽ 133·3 kPa)

Excavation was simulated by removing layers of elements ⫺50

from the mesh at a uniform rate. Swelling of the London
Clay (the Terrace Gravels were modelled as a drained
material) was allowed during excavation, keeping a specified 0
pore water pressure (suction) at the excavation boundary. 0 2 4 6 8 10
Swelling was simulated in the FE analyses by applying Axial strain: %
increments of time t. The time increments during excavation 50
were small enough (typically 0.01 years) for there to be no
significant amount of swelling in materials with relatively Fig. 6. Observed and predicted response of London Clay in
low permeabilities (such as the London Clay). Subsequently, triaxial extension
after excavation was completed, the time steps were in-
creased (typically to 0.1 years). However, when collapse was local instability involving the berms was predicted to occur.}
approached, the time steps were reduced again. Clearly, the local instabilities were of more immediate con-
cern at T5 and the form and timings of these failures were
investigated in the second phase.
RESULTS OF THE ANALYSES
The FE analyses of the temporary slopes at T5 were
carried out in two phases. In the first phase, the aims of the }
Local instabilities had to be suppressed (by allocating non strain-
analyses were to examine the time before there was overall softening properties to the ‘superficial’ finite elements that were
failure and to identify the failure mechanism involved. How- about to fail) in order to enable the overall (deep-seated) failure to
ever, prior to overall instability developing in these analyses, occur.
 STAND-UP TIME OF TEMPORARY LONDON CLAY SLOPES AT HEATHROW AIRPORT 67
5
conservative assumption, equivalent to a ‘wet’ boundary with
Measured (d ⫽ 13·55 m)
rain infiltration in excess of evapo-transpiration).
4 Predicted (d ⫽ 13·55 m)
Volumetric strain: %

3 Influence of the tectonic shear zone. None of the analyses

predicted failure at the end of rapid excavation in the London
Clay. The movement vectors during excavation to 20 m below
2 ground level (bgl) are shown in Fig. 9(a) (Run 1: no tectonic
shear zone present) and Fig. 9(b) (Run 3: with tectonic shear
1
zone). The tectonic shear zone was influential during
excavation, resulting in substantially greater predicted move-
ments when it was present. This can also be seen from Fig.
0 10(a), which shows the development of the horizontal
0 50 100 150 200 250
Vertical effective stress: kPa movements at the top of the slope (point ‘A’ in Fig. 2)
during excavation. For the analysis with the tectonic shear
Fig. 7. Observed and predicted swelling of London Clay in zone (Run 3) the rate of movement increased after 8 m of
oedometer test excavation but decreased substantially once the excavation
passed the depth of the tectonic shear zone (approximately
Overall stability 14 m bgl). With further excavation the tectonic shear zone
The overall stability was analysed on a parametric basis. was no longer influential. Monitoring of both surface and
Various factors were considered, including: internal movements was recommended, therefore, to provide
(a) the presence of a tectonic shear zone an indicator of whether or not a tectonic shear zone was
(b) the width of excavation present and likely to affect the stability.
(c) the initial value of K0 Excavation in the London Clay gives rise to depressed
(d )pore pressures at the gravel/clay interface in front of pore water pressures; the amount of pore water pressure
the cut-off wall depression was larger when the tectonic shear zone was
(e) the depth of excavation. assumed to be present in the analyses (cf. Figs 11(a) and
11(b)). The analysis that modelled the tectonic shear zone
A summary of all the analyses of overall stability performed predicted slope collapse to occur 7 years after excavation
is presented in Table 3. Note that zero pore water pressure was complete, slightly longer than the analysis without the
at the excavation boundary was maintained both during shear zone (6.7 years). The predicted failure mechanisms are
excavation and subsequent swelling in all these analyses (a shown in Figs 12(a) and 12(b) by means of the incremental

Modelled excavation
Free boundary
20 m
Impermeable

Permeable

Impermeable boundary

Fig. 8. Finite element mesh used in the analyses

Table 3. Summary of all analyses performed to investigate overall stability

Run Description Time to failure:

years

1 Excavation to 20 m bgl (bottom of excavation), then pore pressure dissipation 6. 7

11 Excavation to 15 m bgl (depth of third berm), then pore pressure dissipation 7. 0
12 Excavation to 10 m bgl (depth of second berm), then pore pressure dissipation 10.0
2 Excavation to 20 m bgl (bottom of excavation) as in Run 1, but ‘floor’ width of excavation –
increased from 40 m (Run 1) to 80 m (Run 2)
3 Excavation to 20 m bgl with a tectonic shear at 14–15 m bgl, then pore pressure dissipation 7. 0
31 Excavation to 15 m bgl with a tectonic shear at 14–15 m bgl, then pore pressure dissipation –
4 Excavation to 20 m bgl (bottom of excavation) as in Run 1, but K0 profile reduced according to 4. 5
Fig. 3
5 Excavation to 20 m bgl (bottom of excavation) as in Run 1, but increased pore water pressure at 6. 6
the gravel/clay interface from 0 kPa (Run 1) to 10 kPa (Run 5)
68 KOVACEVIC, HIGHT AND POTTS

25 m
Suction zone

25 m
⫺150
⫺50
⫺100 0
50
100
150
200
250
300 kPa
350

(a) (a)

Suction zone

⫺150 ⫺50
⫺100 0
Tectonic shear zone
Tectonic shear zone 50
100
150
200
250
300 kPa
350

(b) (b)

Fig. 9. Predicted displacement vectors during excavation (a) Fig. 11. Predicted contours of pore water pressure at the end
without and (b) with tectonic shear zone modelled in the excavation (a) without and (b) with tectonic shear zone
analyses of overall stability modelled in the analyses of overall stability

displacement vectors} just prior to collapse. The mechanisms

Depth of excavation: m are deep-seated and start from the toe of the slope, even
0 5 10 15 20 when the tectonic shear zone was present in the analysis
0 (Fig. 12(b)). In both cases the role of progressive failure was
Horizontal movements: mm

substantial, as shown by Figs 13(a) and 13(b), which in-

100
dicate that the operational strength along the predicted base
rupture surfaces was at residual (the plastic shear strain
Shear
contour is in excess of pD ¼ 15%): The final rupture surface
200 did not involve the modelled tectonic shear zone (see Fig.
No shear zone - Run 1
With shear zone - Run 3
13(b)), which seemingly caused a slightly shallower failure
300
mechanism.
(a) Development of the horizontal movements at the top of
the London Clay (the crest of the first berm, point ‘B’ in
0
Horizontal movements: mm

Fig. 2) after excavation (i.e. excluding the movements during

excavation) is shown in Fig. 14(a). The formation of the
100 base shear zone approximately 1 year after excavation, well
before eventual collapse, is evident when the tectonic shear
zone was absent (Run 1). This caused larger movements to
200
Width: 2 ⫻ 20 m - Run 1 precede the collapse because of larger horizontal stress relief
Width: 2 ⫻ 40 m - Run 2 through the base shear zone formation, which in the case
300 with the tectonic shear zone present (Run 3) had already
(b) partly occurred during slope excavation (see Fig. 10(a)).
0 Figure 15(a) shows a superficial slip in the London Clay
Horizontal movements: mm

starting from the second berm (9.2 m bgl) and propagating

towards the first berm (4.2 m bgl) predicted by the analysis
100 with no tectonic shear zone 5.3 years after excavation. A
step increase in the horizontal movement at the crest of the
200 first berm associated with the formation of this slip is clearly
Best estimated K0 - Run 1
‘Reduced’ K0 - Run 4
shown in Fig. 14(a) before the local failure was suppressed.
‘Increased’ p.w.p. - Run 5 Similarly, the analysis with the tectonic shear zone present
300 predicted a superficial failure (see Fig. 15(b)). This local
(c)

Fig. 10. Predicted horizontal movements in the analyses of

}
overall stability at the slope crest during excavation: influence The absolute magnitude of the incremental displacement vectors
of (a) tectonic shear, (b) width of excavation, and (c) initial K0 is not of importance, because it is their relative magnitude and
profile and pore water pressure at the gravel/clay interface directions that indicate the current mechanism of behaviour.
 STAND-UP TIME OF TEMPORARY LONDON CLAY SLOPES AT HEATHROW AIRPORT 69
Time since excavation: years
0 2 4 6 8 10
0

Horizontal movements: mm
25 m

!
! !
100
!
!
Base
!
200 shear
!
Exc. ⬃20 m bgl, no shear zone - Run 1
300 Exc. ⬃20 m bgl, with shear zone - Run 3
Exc. ⬃15 m bgl, with shear zone - Run 31
(a)

(a) 0

Horizontal movements: mm
100

Base !
200 shear
!
Best estimated K0 - Run 1
Tectonic shear zone 300 ‘Reduced’ K0 - Run 4
‘Increased’ p.w.p. - Run 5
(b)

0
Horizontal movements: mm

100
(b) !
Base !
Fig. 12. Predicted incremental displacement vectors just prior 200 shear
! !
to collapse (a) without and (b) with tectonic shear zone
20 m - Run 1
modelled in the analyses of overall stability 15 m - Run 11
300
10 m - Run 12
(c)

Fig. 14. Predicted horizontal movements in the analyses of

25 m

εpD ⫽ 15% overall stability at the top of London Clay after excavation:
influence of (a) tectonic shear, (b) initial K0 profile and pore
εpD ⫽ 2%
water pressure at the gravel/clay interface, and (c) depth of
excavation. Note: (!) denotes development of superficial failure,
which was suppressed in analyses of overall stability
εpD ⫽ 15%

because they started developing from the third berm (also

the position of the tectonic shear zone) and propagated
towards the second berm. Note that the above times are
(a)
based on a permeability that stays constant during swelling
and are, therefore, overestimates of the time for superficial
failures to develop.

Influence of width of excavation. To check the sensitivity of

εpD ⫽ 2%
Tectonic shear zone
εpD ⫽ 15%
(b)
Fig. 13. Predicted contours of plastic shear strain at the end of
excavation (a) without and (b) with tectonic shear zone
modelled in the analyses of overall stability
failure had to be suppressed at several stages during the
analysis, and the exclamation marks in Fig. 14(a) indicate
the timings of these events (2.5, 4.5, 5.5 and 6.6 years after
excavation). It seems that all superficial failures were insti-
gated by the presence of the modelled tectonic shear zone
predictions to the width of the excavation, which varied
considerably in the excavations at T5, the width of the floor
at the end of excavation was increased from 2 3 20 m (Run
1) to 2 3 40 m (Run 2). Development of the horizontal
movement at the top of the slope as excavation proceeded for
the two cases considered is shown in Fig. 10(b). It can be
seen that the width of the excavation has no influence on the
pattern of movements during excavation. During the swelling
stages of the analysis, this influence was also of no
importance.
Influence of the initial K0 profile. The previous FE study of
slopes cut in the London Clay showed that the main factor
that controls the behaviour of these slopes is the initial K0
value assumed in the analyses (Potts et al., 1997). This is so
because progressive failure is generated primarily by the high
lateral stresses (defined by the K0 value) in the soil prior to
70 KOVACEVIC, HIGHT AND POTTS
25 m
(a)
Tectonic shear zone
(b)
Fig. 15. Predicted superficial slips that in the analyses of overall
stability were suppressed (a) without and (b) with tectonic shear
zone modelled in the analyses
excavation. In particular, the value of K0 strongly influences
the location of the shear surface and the time to collapse.
To investigate the influence of this important factor on the
behaviour of the temporary slopes at T5, an analysis (Run 4)
was carried out with no tectonic shear present and in which
the ‘reduced’ K0 profile shown in Fig. 3 was assumed.
Lowering K0 values in the analysis shortened the time to
failure (from 6.7 years to 4.5 years), and produced a slightly
shallower slip surface and a smaller amount of shearing
along the base shear zone.
The horizontal movements at the top of the slope (point
‘A’ in Fig. 2) during excavation (Fig. 10(c)) and at the crest
of the first berm (the top of the London Clay, point ‘B’ in
Fig. 2) after excavation was completed (Fig. 14(b)) are
predicted to be smaller as a result of the ‘reduced’ K0
profile. It is interesting to note that the analysis that mod-
elled the ‘reduced’ K0 profile did not predict the develop-
ment of superficial failure in either of the berms.
These effects of a reduced K0 are related to the smaller
magnitude of unloading and correspondingly smaller pore
pressure reduction.
Influence of pore pressures at the gravel/clay interface. The
London Clay/Terrace Gravel interface was seen in excava-
tions to undulate significantly, so that there was a risk of
ponded water and of higher pore water pressure at this
interface. An analysis (Run 5) was therefore performed that
modelled an increased pore water pressure at the gravel/clay
interface in front of the cut-off wall from 0 to 10 kPa. The
tectonic shear zone was not present in this analysis.
Predicted horizontal movements during excavation and
subsequent swelling from this analysis are superimposed on
Figs 10(c) and 14(b) respectively. The increased pore water
pressures resulted in slightly more horizontal movements,
especially subsequent to excavation, during swelling (see
Fig. 14(b)). It is noteworthy that development of the base
shear zone and the ‘superficial’ failure between the first and
the second berm starts somewhat earlier. The ultimate time
to deep-seated failure was also slightly reduced (from
6.7 years to 6.6 years).
Influence of the depth of excavation. Given that open-cut
excavations at T5 were dug to various depths, the ‘standard’
section was ‘re-analysed’, excavating to depths of the third
berm (15 m bgl, Run 11) and the second berm (10 m bgl,
Run 12). No tectonic shear zone was modelled in these
analyses.
When excavation to 15 m bgl was modelled, the predicted
deep-seated slip developed from the toe of the slope 7 years
after excavation. The analysis that modelled the excavation
to 10 m bgl predicted no deep-seated failure, even 10 years
after excavation. However, the ‘superficial’ failures, starting
from the toe of the slope and emerging at the first berm,
had to be ‘suppressed’ on two occasions: 4.5 years and
9 years after excavation.
Development of the horizontal movements at the top of
the London Clay after excavation to the different depths is
shown in Fig. 14(c). As before, the exclamation signs
indicate developments of the ‘superficial’ failures that always
took place in the first berm. It can be seen that development
of the base shear zones was delayed by the reduced depth of
excavation. Also, the movements associated with formation
of the base shear zone may well be reduced. However, the
absolute magnitude of movements does not appear to be
influenced by the depth of excavation.
Local stability
The analyses of overall stability of the temporary slopes
at T5 showed that the slopes were stable in the short term,
immediately after excavation. However, it was clear from the
analyses that local instability was likely to develop before
overall instability in some situations. It was probable that
the time for these shallow failures to develop would depend
on
(a) the initial permeability profile in the London Clay
(b) the way in which permeability changed as the clay
swelled
(c) the pore water boundary conditions, that is, the average
suction operating at the exposed surface of the London
Clay.
To provide information on the likely combination of these
parameters, the back-analyses of the local instability at
nearby Prospect Park and Wraysbury Reservoir sites
(Kovacevic et al., 2004) were used. The times to failure
were best matched using a non-linear permeability model
(see equation (4) with k0 ¼ 2 3 10–9 m/s and b ¼ 0.007 m2 /
kN) and assuming a suction of 25 kPa was maintained at the
London Clay surface. The same non-linear permeability
model, initially with k0 ¼ 2 3 10–9 m/s and b ¼ 0.007 m2 /
kN and subsequently with k0 ¼ 5 3 10–10 m/s and b ¼
0.003 m2 /kN, was used in all analyses described henceforth.
The sensitivity of local stability to
(a) the presence of the tectonic shear zone
(b) the surface pore pressure boundary conditions
(c) the initial K0 profile
(d ) the initial permeability profile
(e) the slope geometry
is described below. A summary of all the analyses of local
stability performed is presented in Table 4.
It is worth mentioning that, in all the analyses that
 STAND-UP TIME OF TEMPORARY LONDON CLAY SLOPES AT HEATHROW AIRPORT 71
Table 4. Summary of all analyses performed to investigate local stability

Run Section Tectonic Surface suction: kPa K0 Permeability Slope Time to failure:
analysed shear years

C1 Standard Yes 0 Standard Standard Berms 0.17

C2 Standard Yes 25 Standard Standard Berms 1.42*
C3 Standard Yes 0 ‘Lower’ Standard Berms 0.13
C4 Standard Yes Zero-slopes, Standard Standard Berms 0.26
impermeable berms
C5 Standard Yes 0 Standard ‘Lower’ Berms 1.1
D1 Standard No 0 Standard Standard Berms 0.2
D1Ay Standard No 0 Standard Standard Berms Varied
D2 Standard No 25 Standard Standard Berms 1.11*
D3 Standard No 0 ‘Lower’ Standard Berms 0.54*
D4 Standard No 0 Standard ‘Lower’ Berms 2.2*
E1 Standard Yes 0 Standard Standard Uniform 0.2
E2 Standard Yes 25 Standard Standard Uniform 0.57
F1 Standard No 0 Standard Standard Uniform 0.43


F2 Standard No 25 Standard Standard Uniform 0.59

*Deep-seated failures predicted.

y
Superficial failure(s) suppressed.

modelled local stability, it was assumed that the Terrace Depth of excavation: m
Gravels overlying the London Clay had been removed 0 5 10 15 20
Horizontal movements: mm 0
25 years prior to the excavation of the slopes in the London
Clay. This was to represent formation of the lagoons at the
T5 site, which occupies the old Perry Oaks Sewage Works 100
where lagoons had been constructed some 25 years prior to Shear
construction of T5. This was a similar situation to that at 200
Prospect Park, where the prior removal of the gravel was Shear
shown in the back-analyses to be an important feature of the
recent site history when a low-strength tectonic shear surface 300 No shear zone - Run D1 (isotropic permeability)
With shear zone - Run C1 (isotropic permeability)
was present. No shear zone - Run 1 (anisotropic permeability)
With shear zone - Run 3 (anisotropic permeability)

Influence of the tectonic shear zone with zero suction at the Fig. 16. Predicted horizontal movements at the top of London
slope surface (Runs C1 and D1). To study the influence of Clay during excavation: influence of tectonic shear and prior
the tectonic shear zone with zero suction at the slope surface, gravel removal
the results from Run C1 (with tectonic shear zone) and Run
D1 (no tectonic shear zone) were compared. There was no
influence of the tectonic shear zone for the stage of the Time since excavation: years
analysis that modelled excavation of the 4 m thick Terrace 0 0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0 2·5
0
Horizontal movements: mm

Gravels 25 years before construction of T5. However, during

excavation of the London Clay for T5 the presence of the 100
tectonic shear zone caused (a) larger pore pressure changes
and (b) almost twice the magnitude of ground movements. 200
The latter can be seen in Fig. 16, which shows the 300 No shear:
development of the horizontal movements at the top of the Zero suction (Run D1)
London Clay. Predictions from the previous analyses that 400 Suction 25 kPa (Run D2)
modelled the anisotropic (but constant) permeability, Runs 1 500
‘Reduced’ K0, zero suction (Run D3)
and 3, are also shown for comparison. Whereas there was no ‘Reduced’ k, zero suction (Run D4)
difference in the horizontal movements when the tectonic (a)
shear zone was absent in the analyses, its presence caused Time since excavation: years
more movements in the analysis that modelled the non-linear 0 0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0 2·5
0
Horizontal movements: mm

permeability. The reason for the stronger influence of the

tectonic shear zone in the latter analysis is reduction in 100
strength on that surface during the 25-year period of swelling
200
after removal of the gravel from the lagoons, which was
modelled in the analyses of local stability. 300 With shear:
The analysis without the tectonic shear zone (Run D1) Zero suction (Run C1)
400
predicted the failure of the first berm 0.2 years after excava- Suction 25 kPa (Run C2)
tion (see Fig. 17(a)). The tectonic shear zone caused the ‘Reduced’ K0, zero suction (Run C3)
500
‘Reduced’ k, zero suction (Run C5)
failure of the second berm (the berm above the tectonic
(b)
shear zone) to take place 0.17 years after excavation (see
Fig. 17(b), Run C1). Swelling promoted by the non-linear Fig. 17. Predicted horizontal movements at the top of the first
permeability model employed and zero suction imposed on berm after excavation (a) without and (b) with tectonic shear
the excavated slope surface are the main reasons for the zone modelled in the analyses of local stability: influence of
‘quick’ superficial failures predicted by these analyses. surface suction, initial K0 and permeability profiles
72 KOVACEVIC, HIGHT AND POTTS
Influence of the surface pore pressure boundary conditions
(Runs C2 and D2). The zero pore water pressure assumption
at the excavated clay surface may well be conservative, and
the back-analyses at Prospect Park suggested that an average
surface suction of 25 kPa was a more realistic assumption.
Not only did the analyses that modelled a surface suction
of 25 kPa predict longer times to failure (1.11 years and
1.42 years after excavation, depending on whether the tec-
tonic shear zone was absent or present in the analyses), but
the predicted failure mechanisms were quite different. In-
stead of the berm failures predicted by the analyses that
modelled the zero pore water pressure at the clay surface,
the analyses now predicted deep-seated failures similar to
those shown in Figs 12(a) and 12(b). Clearly, therefore, the
method of modelling the permeability of London Clay, in
particular whether or not allowances are made for increases
in permeability during swelling, have a major impact on
predictions of the time before which deep-seated failures
will develop.# Thus the assumption made at the beginning
of the study that the effects of swelling on permeability only
needed to be taken into account when examining local
instability was erroneous.
Development of the horizontal movements at the crest of
the first and second berms after excavation is shown in Figs
17 and 18 for the cases without and with the tectonic shear
zone respectively. The role of the increased surface suction
in extending times to failure is apparent. With increased
surface suctions the failures are preceded by the develop-
ment of the base shear zones from the toe of the slope
Time since excavation: years
0 0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0 2·5
Horizontal movements: mm
(approximately 0.2 years after excavation), even in the case
when the tectonic shear zone was modelled in the analysis.
A further analysis modelled the tectonic shear zone to be
present and zero pore water pressure at the 1:1 slopes
between the berms, but with the tops of the berms them-
selves to be impermeable. It was believed that these condi-
tions might be achieved by sealing the berms. As in the case
when zero pore water pressure was applied across the whole
exposed clay surface (i.e. the slopes and berms), this analy-
sis predicted the superficial failure in the second berm
immediately above the tectonic shear zone but with the time
to failure extended from 0.17 years to 0.26 years. This
marginal increase, together with the practical difficulties,
was considered insufficient to justify sealing the berms.
Influence of the initial K0 profile with zero suction at the
slope surface (Runs C3 and D3). The analyses of local
stability that modelled the ‘reduced’ initial K0 profile (see
Fig. 3) predicted smaller movements during the main
excavation, but only when the tectonic shear zone was
included in the analyses. Surprisingly, it seems that the
assumed K0 profile does not have any influence on move-
ments during the main excavation when there is no tectonic
shear zone. This may well be due to the prior removal of the
Terrace Gravels and subsequent swelling over a time period
of 25 years.
When the tectonic shear zone was present, the same local
failure was predicted (the second berm), but the time to
failure was slightly reduced (0.13 years in comparison with
0.17 years). However, when the tectonic shear zone was not
present, the role of the reduced K0 profile was significant. A

0
deep-seated failure was now predicted from the toe of the
100 slope, instead of the superficial one taking place in the first
berm, and the time to failure increased from 0.2 years to
200
0.54 years.
300 Development of the horizontal and vertical movements for
the first and second berm predicted by these two analyses is
400
also superimposed in Figs 17 and 18, where the role of the
No shear:
500 Zero suction (Run D1) reduced initial K0 profile can be clearly identified.
Suction 25 kPa (Run D2)
‘Reduced’ K0, zero suction (Run D3)
‘Reduced’ k, zero suction (Run D4) Influence of the initial permeability profile with zero suction
(a) at the slope surface (Runs C5 and D4). It can be seen from
Time since excavation: years the field permeability data for the London Clay from various
0 0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0 2·5 sites shown in Fig. 4(b) that the scatter is substantial, and
permeability can vary between 10–11 m/s and 10–8 m/s. In all
Horizontal movements: mm

100
analyses of local stability presented so far, the ‘standard’
permeability profile given by k0 ¼ 2 3 10–9 m/s, b ¼
200 0.007 m2 /kN (see equation (4) and Fig. 4(b)) and deduced
300
on the basis of the back-analyses of temporary slope failures
at Prospect Park and Wraysbury Reservoir was utilised.
400 However, it was decided to investigate the influence of the
With shear: initial permeability by employing a ‘new’ permeability profile
500 Zero suction (Run C1)
in which a lower permeability is assumed in the first 20 m or
Suction 25 kPa (Run C2)
‘Reduced’ K0, zero suction (Run C3) so and a higher permeability thereafter, as shown in Fig. 4(b).
‘Reduced’ k, zero suction (Run C5) This involved assuming k0 ¼ 5 3 10–10 m/s and b ¼
(b) 0.003 m2 /kN in equation (4).
The London Clay response during excavation was essen-
Fig. 18. Predicted horizontal movements at the top of the tially undrained, and the influence of the ‘reduced’ per-
second berm after excavation (a) without and (b) with tectonic meability on results during excavation was small.
shear zone modelled in the analyses of local stability: influence
During subsequent swelling, the analysis that modelled the
of surface suction, initial K0 and permeability profiles
tectonic shear zone predicted a superficial failure in the
second berm, just above the tectonic shear zone, in the same
#
The prior removal of the gravel modelled in the analyses of local way as the analysis that utilised the ‘standard’ permeability
stability may also contribute to shortening of the stand-up time, but profile. However, the time to failure was extended from
only when the tectonic shear zone was present in the analysis, as 0.17 years to 1.1 years, as can be seen from Fig. 18(b),
shown by the back-analyses of the slope failure at Prospect Park which shows the development of the horizontal movements
(Kovacevic et al., 2004). at the crest of the second berm after excavation. It is
 STAND-UP TIME OF TEMPORARY LONDON CLAY SLOPES AT HEATHROW AIRPORT
interesting to note that whereas the analysis that modelled
the ‘standard’ permeability predicted failure of the second
berm to take place relatively quickly (0.17 years) without
formation of the base shear zone, this zone is quite apparent
when the ‘reduced’ permeability was used in the analysis.
The analysis that did not model the tectonic shear zone
predicted an overall (deep-seated) failure to occur 2.2 years
after the main excavation. This is in sharp contrast with the
superficial failure in the first berm predicted by the analysis
modelling the ‘standard’ permeability, which occurred ‘only’
0.2 years after excavation. Development of the horizontal
movements at the crest of the first and second berm is
shown in Figs 17 and 18. It can be seen that the ‘reduced’
permeability again delayed the formation of the base shear
zone from the toe of the slope (0.3 years).
Influence of the slope geometry. In some of the analyses
presented above, local failures involving the berms are
predicted. The non-linear permeability model used in the
analyses promotes superficial swelling, and the berms,
because of their relatively steep slopes, are particularly
vulnerable. Thus it was decided to change the slope geometry
in such a way as to avoid berms and have a uniform slope of
1 vertical to 1.6 horizontal. For practical reasons, only one
5 m wide berm was envisaged at the interface between the
Terrace Gravels and London Clay.
The ‘uniform’ slope was also stable at the end of excava-
tion, even when the tectonic shear zone was present. In fact,
results at the end of excavation were very similar to those
obtained for the ‘bermed excavation’.
The analysis without a tectonic shear and with zero pore
pressure at the excavated surface predicted a superficial
failure 0.43 years after excavation (Fig. 19(a)). By then, the
base shear zone from the toe of excavation was well formed
25 m
(a)
Tectonic shear zone
(b)
Fig. 19. Predicted incremental displacement vectors just prior
to collapse (a) without and (b) with tectonic shear zone
modelled in the analyses of local stability: ‘uniform’ slope
73
(Fig. 20(a)), indicating that the overall slope stability was
relatively low.
The analysis with the tectonic shear zone predicted a
slope failure to occur even more quickly, only 0.2 years after
excavation was completed. The failure developed from the
tectonic shear zone (Fig. 19(b)). At this time, formation of
the base shear zone at the toe of the slope was in an early
stage of development (Fig. 20(b)).
The increased surface suction (25 kPa) modelled during
both construction and swelling simply extended the time to
failure from 0.2 years to 0.57 years when the tectonic shear
zone was present in the analysis. However, the analysis
without the tectonic shear zone present predicted a deep-
seated failure 0.59 years after excavation, supporting the
statement above that overall stability of the slope with zero
surface suction was rather low when it failed superficially
0.43 years after excavation.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A series of FE analyses was undertaken to assess the
stability of the temporary bermed slopes at T5 and to predict
their stand-up time. Sensitivity studies, using reasonable
bounds to K0 , in situ permeabilities, and surface suction
conditions, showed that the slopes were stable in the short
term immediately after excavation. However, the time to
failure of the slopes and the form of the failure, whether
shallow or deep-seated, was determined by a combination of
the assumed permeability profile and by whether or not
allowances were made for increases in permeability as the
clay swelled, the average surface suction, the in situ K0
profile, the depth of excavation, and whether or not a low-
strength tectonic shear surface was present in the slope.
When deep-seated failures were predicted, the slip surface
developed from the toe of the slope, irrespective of whether
a tectonic shear zone was present or not, and involved the
25 m
εpD ⫽ 2%
εpD ⫽ 15%
(a)
εpD ⫽ 2%
εpD ⫽ 2%
Tectonic shear zone
εpD ⫽ 15%
(b)
Fig. 20. Predicted contours of plastic shear strain just prior to
collapse (a) without and (b) with tectonic shear zone modelled
in the analyses of local stability: ‘uniform’ slope
74 KOVACEVIC, HIGHT AND POTTS
formation of a basal shear. The slip surface penetrated less It is hoped that the monitoring results at T5 will be
deeply into the slope when a tectonic shear zone was present available in the near future, allowing the comparison be-
and when the K0 profile was reduced. The risk of a deep- tween the Class A predictions (Lambe, 1973) reported herein
seated failure developing within the required stand-up time and field observations to be made.
reduced as the depth of excavation reduced, because the
formation of a basal shear was delayed.
The superficial failures involved the berms and were
predicted to take place earlier than the deep-seated failures. NOTATION
The stability of the first berm from the top was critical when b parameter in equation (4)
homogeneous slopes (no tectonic shear zones) were consid- A, B, C constants
ered. In the case of the slopes with the tectonic shear zone, Gsec secant shear modulus
the stability of the berm directly above the shear zone was Gmin minimum shear modulus
critical. k permeability
Not surprisingly, the time to failure was influenced most by k0 permeability at zero mean effective stress
K0 coefficient of earth pressure at rest
the assumptions regarding permeability, although what was
Ksec secant bulk modulus
surprising was the magnitude of the effect on the time to deep- Kmin minimum bulk modulus
seated failures of allowing for an increase in permeability as p9 mean effective stress
the clay swelled. Results of analyses using the non-linear R, S, T constants
permeability model, which captured the effects of swelling, s9 average effective stress
were regarded as the more reliable. These showed that t shear stress
Æ, ª, , º constants
(a) If a condition of zero suction was maintained at the D deviatoric strain invariant
exposed surface of the London Clay, superficial berm D,min , D,max minimum, maximum deviatoric strain invariant
failures would occur 0.17 years after excavation if a v volumetric strain
tectonic shear zone was present and 0.2 years after v,min , v,max minimum, maximum volumetric strain
excavation if no such zone was present. 1 , 2 , 3 principal strains
(b) If an average suction of 25 kPa was maintained at the pD plastic deviatoric strain invariant
exposed surface of the London Clay, a deep-seated 1 , 2 , p3
p p
plastic principal strains
failure would develop first, after 1.42 years if a tectonic  19 ,  29 ,  39 principal effective stresses
shear zone was present and after 1.11 years if no such
zone was present. A basal shear zone was predicted to
occur approximately 0.2 years after excavation, irre-
spective of whether a tectonic shear zone was present, REFERENCES
and to be accompanied by an identifiable increase in Burland, J. B. & Hancock, R. J. R. (1977). Underground car park at
movements. the House of Commons, London: geotechnical aspects. Struct.
(c) The adoption of a uniform slope, as opposed to a Engng 55, No. 2, 87–100.
bermed slope, would have increased the risk of a deep- Chandler, R. J. (1984). Recent European experience of landslides in
seated failure. over-consolidated clays and soft rocks. Proc. 4th Int. Symp.
Landslides, Toronto 1, 61–81.
On the basis of the back-analyses of the temporary slope Chandler, R. J., Willis, M. R., Hamilton, P. S. & Andreau, I.
failures at Prospect Park and Wraysbury we considered that it (1998). Tectonic shear zones in the London Clay Formation.
was reasonable to expect an average suction of 25 kPa to apply Géotechnique 48, No. 2, 257–270.
and that deep-seated failures would not occur during the Garga, V. K. (1970). Residual strength under large strains and the
required 6-month period when the cuts would be open. No effect of sample size on the consolidation of fissure clay. PhD
deep-seated failures have been reported. However, shallow thesis, University of London.
Hight, D. W., McMillan, F., Powell, J. J. M., Jardine, R. J. &
berm failures did occur and were generally associated with
Allenou, C. P. (2003). Some characteristics of London Clay.
water ponding on the berm or running down the cut face. Proceedings of the international workshop on characterisation
The presence of a tectonic shear zone was shown to and engineering properties of natural soils, Singapore, Vol. 2,
increase the size of movements during excavation but to pp. 81–908.
reduce movements after excavation. Its presence made super- Hutchinson, J. N. (1984). Landslides in Britain and their counter-
ficial berm failures above the zone more likely and to occur measures. J. Japan Landslide Soc. 21, No. 1.
in a shorter time; however, its presence increased the time Jardine, R. J., Potts, D. M., Fourie, A. B. & Burland, J. B. (1986).
for deep-seated failures to develop. Studies of the influence of non-linear stress–strain character-
If the K0 profile was lower than that deduced from the istics in soil–structure interaction. Géotechnique 36, No. 3,
377–396.
ground investigation then the risk of shallow failures would
Kovacevic, N., Hight, D. W. & Potts, D. M. (2004). Temporary
have been reduced in a homogeneous slope but increased in slope stability in London Clay: back analyses of two case
a slope having a tectonic shear zone. histories. Advances in geotechnical engineering, Proceedings of
The results suggest the potential usefulness of suction the Skempton Conference, London, Vol. 3, pp. 1–14.
measurements, together with displacement monitoring, as a Lambe, T. W. (1973). Predictions in soil engineering. Géotechnique
means of monitoring and controlling temporary cut slope 3, No. 2, 149–202.
behaviour. Potts, D. M. & Zdravkovic, L. (1999) Finite element analysis in
The results of the analyses were used to guide the monitor- geotechnical engineering: Theory. London: Thomas Telford.
ing of the slopes at T5. Inclinometers were installed to Potts, D. M., Kovacevic, N. & Vaughan, P. R. (1997). Delayed
determine whether an extensive tectonic shear surface was collapse of cut slopes in stiff plastic clay. Géotechnique 47,
No. 5, 953–982.
present, which would be evident as the location of concen-
Vaughan, P. R. (1994). Assumption, prediction and reality in
trated movements during excavation, and if and when a basal geotechnical engineering. Géotechnique 44, No. 4, 573–603.
shear zone developed, again evident as a location of concen- Vaughan, P. R., Kovacevic, N. & Potts, D.M. (2004). Then and
trated movements at the level of the toe of the slope. Suctions now: some comments on the design and analysis of slopes and
were also monitored as a check on whether the assumption of embankments. Advances in geotechnical engineering, Proceed-
an average surface suction of 25 kPa was reasonable. ings of the Skempton Conference, London, Vol. 3, 15–64.