Board Publications Committee

Dennis R. Martenson, P.E., Chair

Carl L. Blum, P.E.
Kenneth L. Carper
Julie Ann Seaman
Robert H. Wortman

Publications
Bruce Gossett, Managing Director and VOLUME 4 Õ NUMBER 2 JUNE 2004
Publisher

Journals Department
Johanna M. Reinhart, Director, Journals Technical Papers
Jackie Perry, Managing Editor, 59 Numerical Study of the Bearing Behavior of Piled Rafts
Journals Oliver Reul
Holly Koppel, Discussion and Closures
69 Numerical Analysis of Rainfall Effects on Slope Stability
Production Department Fei Cai and Keizo Ugai
Charlotte McNaughton, Director, 79 Radioactive Marker Measurements in Heterogeneous Reservoirs: Numerical
Production Study
Angela Cochran, Manager, Journals Massimiliano Ferronato, Giuseppe Gambolati, Pietro Teatini, and
Production
Domenico Baù
Gene Sullivan, Senior Production Editor
Julie Magrin, Production Editor 93 Lateral Resistance of Short Single Piles and Pile Groups Located Near Slopes
Noel Pratt, Production Editor K. S. Chae, K. Ugai, and A. Wakai
Xi Van Fleet, Manager, Information
Services 104 Effect of Nonlinear Soil Behavior on Inelastic Seismic Response of a
Karen A. Ryan, Manager, Copyrights and Structure
Permissions Yong-Seok Kim and Jose M. Roesset
Donna Dickert, Reprints 115 Effective Stress in Unsaturated Soils: Review with New Evidence
N. Khalili, F. Geiser, and G. E. Blight
Publishing Office
Journals Department 127 Application of Kinematically Admissible Solutions to Passive Earth Pressure
ASCE Problems
1801 Alexander Bell Drive Jan Maciejewski and Andrzej Jarzȩbowski
Reston, VA 20191-4400
Telephone: 共703兲 295-6290
E-mail: journal-services@asce.org
 Numerical Analysis of Rainfall Effects on Slope Stability
Fei Cai1 and Keizo Ugai2

Abstract: The finite element analysis of transient water flow through unsaturated–saturated soils was used to investigate effects of
hydraulic characteristics, initial relative degree of saturation, methods to consider boundary condition, and rainfall intensity and duration
on water pressure in slopes. The finite element method with shear strength reduction technique was used to evaluate the stability of slopes
under rainfall. The results of the finite element analysis indicated that the hydraulic characteristics, initial relative degree of saturation,
methods to consider boundary condition, and rainfall intensity and duration had significant influence on the water pressure in slopes, and
thus on the stability of slopes under rainfall. The good comparisons of the numerical results with statistical and observational results
showed the ability of the finite element analysis to evaluate the stability of slopes under rainfall.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲1532-3641共2004兲4:2共69兲
CE Database subject headings: Slope stability; Seepage; Rainfall; Slopes; Water pressures; Finite element method; Numerical
analysis.

Introduction soil permeability on moisture content. Thus some numerical

Rainfall, especially heavy storms in summer and long-term infil-
tration of melting snow, has caused many landslides and slope
failures. Such rain-induced landslides and slope failures are the
most common ones in many countries such as Brazil, Japan,
Hong Kong, and Southeast Asia 共Barata 1969; Brand 1984; Fujita
1997兲. For instance, the annular number of landslides and slope
failure caused by rainfall is beyond 2,700 in recent years in Japan
共Fujita 1997兲. They have posed serious threats and caused severe
damage to many countries over the years. Consequently, the slope
instability under rainfall is attracting increasing attention in many
countries. The deterministic 共e.g., Lumb 1975; Pradel and Raad
1993; Ng and Shi 1998; Gasmo et al. 2000兲, probabilistic 共Suzuki
and Matsuo 1988兲, and statistical 共Okata et al. 1994; Sugiyama
et al. 1995; Finlay et al. 1997兲 analyses have been utilized to
connect landslides and slope failures with the rainfall intensity,
duration, and antecedent rainfall.
The physical process of the infiltration of rainfall into ground
and its seepage through the unsaturated–saturated soils has been
studied by hydrogeologists, soil scientists, and geotechnical re-
searchers. Some equations and numerical models have been de-
rived and developed, and they have been comprehensively evalu-
ated by Ng and Shi 共1998兲. Several serious limitations impose
restrictions on the use of the equations and models because they
do usually not consider sloping ground conditions, down-slope
flows, rainfall intensity, and most importantly, the dependence of
1
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Gunma Univ., Kiryu, Gunma 376-8515,
Japan 共corresponding author兲. E-mail: cai@ce.gunma-u.ac.jp
2
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Gunma Univ., Kiryu, Gunma 376-8515,
Japan. E-mail: ugai@ce.gunma-u.ac.jp
Note. Discussion open until November 1, 2004. Separate discussions
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing
Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos-
sible publication on October 24, 2003; approved on November 5, 2003.
This paper is part of the International Journal of Geomechanics, Vol. 4,
No. 2, June 1, 2004. ©ASCE, ISSN 1532-3641/2004/2-69–78/$18.00.
analyses have been used to assess the failure mechanism of slopes
under rainfall 共Ng and Shi 1998; Gasmo et al. 2000兲. In the nu-
merical analysis, the pore-water pressure in slopes under rainfall
is usually computed by the finite element analysis of water flow
through unsaturated–saturated soils, and the slope stability is usu-
ally evaluated by limit equilibrium methods.
The infiltration of rainfall results in the rise of groundwater
level, and the increase in water pressure or the decrease in matric
suction of unsaturated soils. On the other hand, the matric suction
has been found to be absolutely crucial to the stability of unsat-
urated slopes 共Fredlund and Rahardjo 1993兲. Both the increase in
the water pressure and the decrease in the matric suction cause the
decrease in the shear strength of soils. This, in turn, possibly leads
to the occurrences of landslides and slope failures. Failure mecha-
nisms of these landslides and slope failures include generally both
shallow and deep-seated slips, depending mainly on the thickness
of residual soils and loose fills and rainfall properties. Of course,
long-term and continuous observation is an important means to
understand the behavior of pore-water pressure in slopes under
rainfall. However, it is difficult to clarify the most dangerous
rainfall and the factors influencing the rise of ground water level
due to infiltration of rainfall only by means of long-term obser-
vation.
The main objective of this paper is to investigate effects of
hydraulic characteristics and initial water content of soils, rainfall
intensity and duration, and methods to consider boundary condi-
tions on the pore-water pressure in slopes under rainfall and thus
on the slope stability. The pore-water pressure in slopes under
rainfall was computed by the finite element analysis of transient
water flow through unsaturated–saturated soils. The slope stabil-
ity was investigated by the finite element analysis with reduced
shear strength technique, where the pore-water pressure was de-
termined by the finite element analysis of water flow. The results
from the finite element analysis of slope stability under rainfall
were compared with some statistical and observational results.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004 / 69

Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Modeling Water Flow in Soils
Fundamental Flow Equation
The fluctuation of water level, infiltration, evaporation, and dewa-
tering with wells causes continuous changes of the boundary con-
ditions of water flow through unsaturated–saturated soils. The
transient water flow is strongly influenced by the unsaturated
zone. In contrast to free surface treatments of unconfined flow
problems, the analysis of transient water flow through
unsaturated–saturated soils simulates moisture flux throughout
the entire flow domain. The field variable is the water pressure
head, and the phreatic surface is not a theoretical discontinuity but
a hydraulic isobar, which delineates zones of the full saturation.
The derivation of the equation governing the water flow
through unsaturated–saturated soils is attributed to Richards
共1931兲. The governing equation arises from a consideration of
mass conservation in an unsaturated–saturated medium in con-
junction with an equation of motion, i.e., Darcy’s law. Darcy’s
law has been shown to be valid for the water flow through unsat-
urated soils as well as the flow through saturated soils. The main
difference is that the permeability is assumed to be constant for
saturated soils, while it depends on the pore volume occupied by
water for unsaturated soils. In geotechnical engineering, the phase
relation is indicated by the degree of saturation. However, for the
purpose of implementing Richards’ equation, the permeability is
defined in relation to the volumetric moisture content. The volu-
metric moisture content ␪ is defined as the product of the porosity
and the degree of saturation, i.e., ␪⫽n 0 S r .
Based on mass conservation and Darcy’s law, the differential
equation governing water flow through unsaturated–saturated
soils under the isothermal condition is given by
⳵⌽
ⵜ T 关 K 共 ␪ 兲 ⵜ 共 ⌽⫹z 兲兴 ⫽c 共 ␪ 兲
⳵t
where K(␪)⫽permeability; ⌽⫽pressure head; z⫽elevation head;
t⫽time; and c(␪)⫽⳵␪/⳵⌽⫽specific moisture capacity.
Hydraulic Characteristics
Eq. 共1兲 includes two soil parameters that must be determined: the
permeability and the specific moisture capacity. These parameters
for unsaturated soils are dependent on the volumetric moisture
content, which is in turn related to the water pressure or matric
suction. The matric suction is defined as the difference between
the air and water pressures. Generally, the pore air is connected to
the atmosphere, so the matric suction value is numerically equal
to the pore-water pressure. The relationship between the water
content in a soil and the water pressure can be expressed in a plot
of volumetric moisture content versus matric suction, known as
the soil–moisture characteristic curve. A widely used representa-
tion of the hydraulic characteristics of unsaturated soils is the set
of closed-form equations formulated by van Genuchten 共1980兲,
which is based on the capillary model of Mualem 共1976兲. The
soil–moisture characteristic curve, the specific moisture capacity,
and the permeability functions are given by
S e ⫽ 共 ␪⫺␪ r 兲 / 共 ␪ s ⫺␪ r 兲 ⫽ 共 1⫹ 兩 ␣⌽ 兩 n 兲 ⫺m
c 共 ␪ 兲 ⫽␣ 共 n⫺1 兲共 ␪ s ⫺␪ r 兲 S 1/m
e 共 1⫺S e 兲
1/m m
K 共 ␪ 兲 ⫽K s K r ⫽K s S 1/2
e 关 1⫺ 共 1⫺S e 兲 兴
1/m m 2
respectively, where m⫽1⫺(1/n); n⬎1; and S e ⫽relative degree
of saturation, and ␪ r and ␪ s denote the residual and saturated
70 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004
Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
volumetric moisture content, respectively. K s and K r ⫽saturated
and relative permeability, respectively. ␣, n, and m⫽empirical
parameters of the hydraulic characteristics. Thus the hydraulic
functions are determined by a set of five parameters, ␣, n, ␪ r , ␪ s ,
and K s . For these five parameters of the van Genuchten model,
␪ s and K s can be directly measured by the laboratory test, and the
other three parameters can be determined by fitting the soil–
moisture characteristic curve and the relationship between the
volumetric moisture content and the unsaturated permeability
共van Genuchten 1980兲. The van Genuchten model is considered to
provide a better match to experimental data, and its parameters
have been accumulated for many types of soils. Leong and Raha-
rdjo 共1997a, 1997b兲 have comprehensively evaluated the models
for the hydraulic characteristics of soils.
Numerical Approach
The two-dimensional finite element analysis for the transient
water flow through unsaturated–saturated soils has been adopted
for some practical problems of interest 共Neuman 1973; Akai et al.
1977兲. The finite element formulation can be derived by the
Galerkin principle of weighted residual 共Zienkiewicz and Taylor
1989兲. The numerical integration of the Galerkin solution to the
governing equation is given by
⳵⌽
E ⫹D⌽⫽Q (5)
⳵t
where D⫽seepage matrix; E⫽capacitance matrix; and Q⫽flux
vector reflecting the gravitational flow and the flux boundary con-
ditions.
The time derivative can be approximated using a finite differ-
ence technique. The objective is to obtain an approximation for
⌽t⫹⌬t from the vectors ⌽t and Qt acting in the time interval ⌬t.
(1) Based on the assumption that ⌽ changes linearly in the time
interval ⌬t, ⌽ and ⳵⌽/⳵t at time t⫹␦⌬t are given by
⌽t⫹␦⌬t ⫽ 共 1⫺␦ 兲 ⌽t ⫹␦⌽t⫹⌬t (6)
⳵ ⌽t⫹⌬t ⫺⌽t
⌽ ⫽ (7)
⳵t t⫹␦⌬t ⌬t
Substituting Eqs. 共6兲 and 共7兲 into Eq. 共5兲, the following equa-
tion is obtained:
冉 冊 冋 册
E E
␦D⫹ ⌽t⫹⌬t ⫽⌬t 关共 1⫺␦ 兲 Qt ⫹␦Qt⫹⌬t 兴 ⫺ 共 1⫺␦ 兲 D⫺ ⌽
⌬t ⌬t t
(8)
Thus ⌽t⫹⌬t can be obtained by solving Eq. 共8兲 at time t⫹␦⌬t.
When the parameter ␦ is selected differently, an alternate ap-
proach can be obtained 共Zienkiewicz and Taylor 1989兲. The pa-
rameter ␦⫽1/2 was used in this paper due to a higher order of
accuracy than the others. Because the hydraulic conductivity and
the specific water capacity are functions of the volumetric mois-
ture content, Eq. 共8兲 is highly nonlinear, and is solved by a direct
iteration technique 共Zienkiewicz and Taylor 1989兲.
Either the water pressure or the flow rate must be specified at
all of the boundary nodes in the finite element analysis of water
(2) flow through unsaturated–saturated soils. The boundary node
where the water pressure is specified is called as the Dirichlet
(3) boundary condition, and where the flow rate is specified is re-
ferred to as the Neuman boundary condition. The Neuman bound-
(4)
ary condition possibly changes to the Dirichlet boundary condi-
tion in the finite element analysis of transient water flow. For
example, the slope surface subjected to rainfall was the Neuman
boundary condition if all rainfall can infiltrate into the slope.
However, when the rainfall cannot completely infiltrate into the
slope, the Dirichlet boundary condition with zero water pressure
was more realistic. The Dirichlet boundary condition possibly
changes to the Neuman boundary condition. This shall be dis-
cussed in detail in the next section.

Finite Element Analysis of Slope Stability

Finite Element Method with Shear Strength Reduction

Technique
The slope stability is commonly assessed by limit equilibrium
methods. On the other hand, the finite element method 共FEM兲
with shear strength reduction 共SSR兲 technique 共SSRFEM兲 has
been applied to the slope stability analysis in a two-dimensional
situation 共e.g., Zienkiewicz et al. 1975; Smith and Griffiths 1988;
Ugai 1989; Matsui and San 1992; Dawson et al. 1999; Griffiths
and Lane 1999; Manzari and Nour 2000兲, and three-dimensional
situation 共Ugai and Leshchinsky 1995; Cai and Ugai 2000兲. Stud-
ies have shown that SSRFEM is a reliable and robust approach to
assessing the safety factor of slope and locating the corresponding
critical slip surface. One of the main advantages of SSRFEM is
that the safety factor emerges naturally from the analysis without
the user having to commit to any particular form of the failure
mechanism a priori 共Griffiths and Lane 1999兲. When the slope
stability is evaluated with the effective stress approach, the pore-
water pressure is sometimes computed with the finite element
analysis of water flow or Biot’s consolidation theory. If the same
finite element mesh is used for the analysis of water flow or
consolidation and the analysis of slope stability, the water pres-
sure, computed by the seepage or consolidation analysis, can be
directly used in SSRFEM. This can simplify the slope stability
analysis, and can more accurately consider the effect of the seep- Fig. 1. Flow chart for finite element analysis of slope stability
age force besides the pore-water pressure on the slope stability.
The details can be found in the following section.
In the finite element method with shear strength reduction where the subscripts n and n⫹1 denote the step n and the step
technique, first, the initial stresses in the slope were computed n⫹1, which correspond to the shear strength reduction factor F n
and F n⫹1 , respectively. Dep n and Dn⫹1 ⫽elasto-plastic matrix
ep
using the elastic finite element analysis. The vector of externally
nodal forces, Fext consisted of three parts: 共1兲 surface force; 共2兲 evaluated using the reduced shear strength parameters at the step
body force 共total unit weight of soils兲; and 共3兲 pore water pres- n and the step n⫹1, respectively; and ⌬␧n ⫽strain increment of
sure, computed by the equation described in the following sec- the step n.
tion. Second, the elasto-plastic finite element analysis was con- The shear strength reduction factor F increased incrementally
ducted, where the shear strength parameters c ⬘ and ␾⬘ of the until the slope failure, which means hereby that the elasto-plastic
Mohr–Coulomb yield criterion was replaced with the reduced finite element calculation diverges under a physically real conver-
shear strength parameters c ⬘F and ␾ ⬘F , defined as the actual shear gence criterion, or cannot converge within a user-specified maxi-
strength parameters divided by a shear strength reduction factor F mum number of iterations. The lowest safety factor was consid-
ered as the shear strength reduction factor F just before the
c F⬘ ⫽c ⬘ /F, ␾ F⬘ ⫽tan⫺1 共 tan ␾ ⬘ /F 兲 (9)
divergence of the elasto-plastic finite element calculation. Obvi-
The shear strength reduction factor F was initially selected to be ously, the error of the lowest safety factor was less than the in-
so small, for example 0.01, that c F⬘ and ␾ F⬘ was large enough to crement of the shear strength reduction factor used in the last step
keep the slope in elastic state. Stresses at some points reach the of the elasto-plastic finite element calculation.
Mohr–Coulomb yield criterion with the shear strength reduction Fig. 1 shows the flow chart for the finite element analysis of
factor F increased gradually. When the stress at any point reaches slope stability. The procedure described hereby can compute the
the yield criterion, the increase in the shear strength reduction safety factor of slope within one loop, which can be easily imple-
factor will make stresses at more points reach the yield criterion mented in a computing code. A software package called
because of the residual force induced by the decrease in c ⬘F and SLOPE@FE has been developed 共Cai and Ugai 2001兲. The iso-
␾ ⬘F of the soil. The vector of residual induced by the shear parametric elements with eight nodes are used to model soils.
strength reduction was given by Return mapping algorithm and reduced integration are used for

冕
the elasto-plastic constitutive model, and secant Newton method
R0 ⫽ is used to accelerate the convergence of the modified Newton–
n ⫺Dn⫹1 兲 ⌬␧n d⍀
BT 共 Dep ep
(10)
⍀ Raphson scheme.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004 / 71

Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Shear Strength of Unsaturated Soils
For saturated soils, the principle of effective stress is valid. The
methods for determination of the effective shear strength param-
eters for saturated soils are well established, and widely used in
geotechnical engineering problems. On the other hand, for unsat-
urated soils, the water phase occupies only parts of the pore vol-
ume, while the remainder is covered by air. This must be ac-
counted for when calculating the effective stress. Bishop 共1959兲
has introduced the ␹ factor and suggested the following equation
for the effective stress for an unsaturated soil:
␴ ⬘ ⫽ 共 ␴⫺u a 兲 ⫹␹ 共 u a ⫺u w 兲
where ␴⬘⫽effective normal stress; ␴⫽total normal stress;
u a ⫽pore–air pressure; u w ⫽pore–water pressure; and
␹⫽parameter with the value between zero and unity depending on
soil type and the degree of saturation, accounting for the fact that
the pore water does not occupy the total pore volume.
The shear strength is thus calculated as
␶ f ⫽c ⬘ ⫹␴ ⬘ tan ␾ ⬘
where ␶ f ⫽shear stress at failure; c ⬘ ⫽effective cohesion; and
␾⬘⫽effective friction angle.
Another approach is adopted by Fredlund et al. 共1978兲, in
which the shear strength is calculated using two different friction
angles, and the additional friction angle ␾ b is assumed to be
related to the matric suction
␶ f ⫽c ⬘ ⫹ 共 ␴⫺u a 兲 tan ␾ ⬘ ⫹ 共 u a ⫺u w 兲 tan ␾ b
where (u a ⫺u w )⫽matric suction; and ␾ b ⫽friction angle with re-
spect to the matric suction. The linear failure envelope suggested
by Fredlund et al. 共1978兲 has later been found to be nonlinear,
i.e., ␾ b depends on the matric suction 共Escario and Saez 1986;
Vanapalli et al. 1996; Oberg and Sallfors 1997兲. This also ac-
counts for the fact that the pore water does not occupy the total
pore volume.
The above-mentioned two equations were identical to each
other if the ␹ factor was assumed to be (tan ␾b/tan ␾⬘) although
the shear strength of unsaturated soils is considered to consist of
an independent contribution from the net normal stress, (␴
⫺u a ), and a further contribution from the matric suction, (u a
⫺u w ), besides the effective cohesion 共Fredlund et al. 1978兲.
The ␹ factor in Eq. 共11兲 is usually determined by laboratory
tests on both saturated and unsaturated samples; however, gener-
ally, the laboratory tests on unsaturated soils are costly, time con-
suming, and difficult to conduct in spite of all the research efforts
during the last decades. Since the shear strength of unsaturated
soils is strongly related to the amount of water in the voids of
soils, and, in turn to the matric suction, Oberg and Sallfors 共1997兲
and Vanapalli et al. 共1996兲 proposed that the ␹ factor can roughly
be replaced by the degree of saturation or the relative degree of
saturation. This hypothesis suggests a simple way to evaluate the
shear strength based on the soil–moisture retention curve and the
shear strength parameters of saturated soils. The shear strength
from the hypothesis agrees well with that reported in the literature
although the suggested hypothesis has some limitations 共Vanapalli
et al. 1996; Oberg and Sallfors 1997兲. When the degree of satu-
ration is comparatively high, say, larger than 50%, there is more
good correlation between the predicted and measured values of
the shear strength for unsaturated soils 共Vanapalli et al. 1996;
Oberg and Sallfors 1997兲.
For the analysis of rainfall effect on the slope stability, the
degree of saturation is comparatively high due to infiltration of
rainfall. Therefore, the hypothesis, proposed by Oberg and Sall-
72 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004
Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 2. Model slope and finite element mesh
(11)
fors 共1997兲 and Vanapalli et al. 共1996兲, was used to consider the
effect of shear strength contributed by the matric suction (u a
⫺u w ) on the slope stability.
Nodal Force Due to Pore Water Pressure
Generally, the pore air is connected to the atmosphere, so the
(12)
matric suction values are numerically equal to the pore-water
pressure. Therefore, Eq. 共11兲 can be expressed as
␴ ⬘ ⫽␴⫺␹u w (14)
Thus the effective stress vector ␴⬘ can be given by
␴⬘ ⫽␴⫺␹u w m (15)
where ␴⫽total stress vector; and m⫽ 兵 1,1,0 其 in the two- T
(13)
dimensional situation.
The equivalent nodal forces due to the effective stress in the
finite element analysis were given by
冕
f⫽⫺ BT 共 ␴⫺␹u w m兲 d⍀ (16)
⍀
where B⫽strain–displacement matrix.
Consequently, the nodal forces due to the water pressure 共ma-
tric suction兲 can be expressed as
fu ⫽ 冕 ⍀
BT ␹u w m d⍀ (17)
The water pressure is negative for unsaturated soils, and posi-
tive for saturated soils. As previously noted, the ␹ factor is just
unity for saturated soils. Indeed, the water pressure is usually
calculated at the nodal points in the finite element seepage analy-
sis, and the water pressure at the Gaussian point can be interpo-
lated with the nodal water pressure using the same shape function
as for the displacement interpolation.
Rainfall Effect on Water Pressure
An idealized homogeneous slope with a height of 10 m and a
gradient of 1:1.5 was analyzed with a two-dimensional finite ele-
ment mesh, as shown in Fig. 2. The initial ground water level was
assumed to be horizontal and at the height of Points I and H. The
boundary conditions were as follows: 共1兲 JE and EF were imper-
vious boundaries; 共2兲 JI and IH were the Dirichlet boundaries
with a prescribed total water head of 5 m; and 共3兲 HG and GF
were the boundaries subjected to rainfall. A rainfall with an inten-
sity of 10 mm/h lasted 3 days 共72 h兲, and thus the total rainfall
was 720 mm.
Three sets of the van Genuchten model parameters of hydrau-
lic characteristics, as shown in Table 1, were used to investigate
Table 1. Hydraulic Characteristics of Soils Table 2. Volumetric Moisture Contents at Top of Slope
␣ Ks Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Soil 共m⫺1兲 n ␪r ␪s (10⫺4 cm/s) Soil Se Sr ␪ Se Sr ␪ Se Sr ␪
Glendale clayey loam 共GCL兲 1.060 1.395 0.106 0.469 1.516 a
GCL 0.720 0.789 0.370 0.617 0.704 0.330 0.507 0.618 0.290
Uplands silty sand 共USS兲 7.087 1.810 0.049 0.304 18.292 USSb 0.720 0.771 0.234 0.617 0.679 0.206 0.507 0.586 0.178
Bet Degan loamy sand 共BLS兲 2.761 3.022 0.044 0.375 63.832 BLSc 0.720 0.690 0.259 0.617 0.618 0.232 0.507 0.549 0.205
a
Glendale clayey loam.
b
Uplands silty sand.
c
their effects on the behavior of water pressure in the slope during Bet Degan loamy sand.
rainfall. These sets of parameters are of the Glendale clayey loam
共GCL兲 共van Genuchten 1980兲, the Uplands silty sand 共USS兲
共Staple 1969兲, and the Bet Degan loamy sand 共BLS兲 共Russo and Effect of Hydraulic Characteristics
Bresler 1980兲, and represented a wide range of soils. The soil– The effect of hydraulic characteristics was investigated for Case
moisture characteristic curves and the relative permeability for 1, of which the initial relative degree of saturation was 0.727 at
each type of soil are shown in Fig. 3. the crest of the slope. Fig. 4 shows the time histories of the water
Three initial volumetric moisture contents were assumed for pressure head at the appointed points in Fig. 2. The final water
each type of soil to investigate their effects on the rise of the pressure in the GCL slope was almost the same as that in the USS
water pressure in slopes under rainfall. Based on Eq. 共2兲, the slope; however, the final water pressure in the BLS slope was
permeability of unsaturated soils only depended on their hydrau- much lower than that in the USS slope.
lic properties, i.e., the empirical parameter m and the saturated Figs. 5, 6, and 7 show the contours of the water pressure head
permeability K s , for a certain relative degree of saturation. Con- for Case 1 at various times after rainfall for each type of soils.
sequently, the initial relative degree of saturation S e was assumed There was an unsaturated zone with negative pressure head in the
to be the same at the crest of the slope for each type of soils in middle of the GCL slope due to comparatively low permeability
each case, as shown in Table 2, and linearly increased to unity at 共see Fig. 5兲. The water pressure was positive and, however, very
the level of the initial groundwater. The degrees of saturation, S r ,
and the volumetric moisture contents, ␪, at the top of the slope,
listed in Table 2, were computed with the initial relative degrees
of saturation.

Fig. 3. Hydraulic characteristics Fig. 4. Time histories of pressure head

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004 / 73

Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 5. Contours of pressure head 共m兲 in Glendale clayey loam slope
small in the saturated zone above the unsaturated zone. The un-
saturated zone became smaller and smaller with infiltration of
rainfall from both the crest of the slope and the slope surface. The
groundwater level suddenly rose in the GCL slope, as shown in
Fig. 4, when the unsaturated zone disappeared with the infiltration
of rainfall. In contrast, the groundwater level gradually rose in the
USS and the BLS slopes until the steady groundwater level was
reached. The steady phreatic line, i.e. the contour of zero pressure
head in the BLS slope, was much lower than that in the USS
slope because the saturated permeability is larger than the rainfall
intensity of 10 mm/h.
Figs. 5, 6, and 7 indicate that the water pressure in slopes
under rainfall was greatly dependent on the hydraulic character-
istics. If the rainfall intensity was equal to or larger than a critical
rainfall intensity, the steady-state water pressure in slopes under
rainfall reached its possible maximum, and the steady-state
groundwater level rose to the slope surface. Based on the fact that
under the steady state the infiltration of rainfall through the crest
of slope is fully discharged through a vertical section at the shoul-
der of the slope, the critical rainfall intensity was given by
h sK s
I c⫽
l c冑 1⫹m 2s
where h s ⫽height of the slope; l c ⫽length of the crest of slope; and
m s ⫽hydraulic gradient and was about 1.3 times the slope gradient
because the isobar in the slopes was almost parallel to the slope
surface. Fig. 8 shows that the critical rainfall intensity, computed
by Eq. 共18兲, was consistent with the numerical results. For the
Fig. 6. Contours of pressure head 共m兲 in Uplands silty sand slope
74 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004
Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 7. Contours of pressure head 共m兲 in Bet Degan loamy sand
slope
data of Gasmo et al. 共2000兲, m s was assumed to be the average
value of the gradients of the slope and initial groundwater level.
When the rainfall intensity was larger than the critical rainfall
intensity, the part of the rainfall larger than the critical rainfall
intensity only formed the surface flow, and did not influence the
water pressure in slopes under rainfall.
Effect of Initial Relative Degree of Saturation
The time histories of the water pressure head for Cases 2 and 3
were similar to those for Case 1. For all three initial relative
degrees of saturation, the water pressure suddenly rose in the
GCL slope, but it gradually rose in the USS and the BLS slopes.
The higher the initial relative degree of saturation, the faster the
water pressure rose for all types of soils. However, the finial water
pressure in slopes was independent of the initial volumetric mois-
ture content because the rainfall lasted enough hours to reach the
steady state for the water pressure in slopes.
Effect of Method to Consider Boundary Condition
(18)
There is some difficulty in dealing with the boundary condition in
the finite element seepage analysis when the initial groundwater
level in slopes is not horizontal 共see Fig. 9兲. The boundary EK
共see Fig. 9兲 is conventionally considered as the Dirichlet bound-
ary with a prescribed water pressure in the finite element analysis
of the transient water flow in slope under rainfall 共Ng and Shi
1998; Gasmo et al. 2000兲. Under such an assumed boundary con-
Fig. 8. Predicted and numerical critical rainfall intensity
 Fig. 9. Model slope and initial ground water level
dition, the water flows into the slope through the boundary EK at
the beginning of the analysis. However, the water commenced to
discharge from the slope through the boundary EK after the rain-
fall lasted some hours 共see Fig. 10兲. Obviously, this was not re-
alistic. A novel proposal was that the nodes of the boundary EK
were considered as the Dirichlet boundary condition when the
water flows into the slope, and as the impervious boundary con-
dition 共Neuman boundary condition兲 when the water begins to
discharge from the slope. When the boundary EK was considered
to be the Dirichlet boundary condition, the water pressure in the
steady state is shown in Fig. 11 for the GCL slope and USS slope.
When the proposed method was used to consider the boundary
condition of the boundary EK, the water pressure in the steady
state was identical to that shown in Figs. 5 and 6 for the GCL
slope and USS slope, respectively. Comparing Figs. 5 and 11 for
the GCL slope with a lower permeability, the water pressure in
the slope between the two methods to consider the boundary con-
dition was different only near the boundary EK. On the other
hand, comparing Figs. 6 and 11 for the USS slope with a com-
paratively higher permeability, the water pressure in the slope,
computed by considering the boundary EK as the Dirichlet
boundary condition, was much lower than that using the proposed
method to consider the boundary condition.
Stability of Slopes Under Rainfall
Numerical Results under Uniform Rainfall Intensity
10 mm Õh
The rainfall effect on the slope stability was investigated by
SSRFEM, in which the pore-water pressure was obtained from
Fig. 10. Flow pattern when boundary EK is considered as Dirichlet
boundary condition
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004 / 75
Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 11. Contours of water pressure head 共m兲 when boundary EK is
considered as Dirichlet boundary condition
the foregoing finite element analysis of transient water flow
through unsaturated–saturated soils. In order to compare the ef-
fect of the hydraulic properties on the slope stability during rain-
fall, the mechanical parameters, as shown in Table 3, were as-
sumed to be the same for the three soils 共GCL, USS, and BLS兲
although they are of different grain characteristics and microstruc-
ture. The effect of the matric suction on the shear strength was
considered with the following three hypotheses for the ␹ factor in
Eq. 共11兲: 共1兲 ␹⫽S r ; 共2兲 ␹⫽S e ; and 共3兲 ␹⫽0. The symbols S r ,
S e , and N o in Fig. 12 represent the three hypotheses, respectively.
The time histories of the global safety factor for the GCL slope
are shown in Fig. 12. The slope stability increased when the shear
strength contributed by the matric suction was taken into account.
The global safety factor of slope for ␹⫽S r was higher than that
for ␹⫽S e . The difference of the global safety factors, induced by
the three hypotheses, decreased with infiltration of rainfall due to
the decrease in the matric suction, and the global safety factor
tended towards an identical value after the rainfall lasted some
definite hours. Fig. 12 indicates that for the GCL slope the slope
failure took place if the rainfall with intensity of 10 mm/h lasted
some hours. How many hours depended on the initial relative
degree of saturation. The lower the initial relative degree of satu-
ration, the more slowly the stability decreases, and the longer the
time the rainfall lasts until slope failure takes place.
The difference of the global safety factors, induced by the
three hypotheses, was negligibly small for the USS and BLS
slopes, because the maximum matric suction was only 2.84 kPa in
the USS slope, and 4.32 kPa in the BLS slope, respectively.
Fig. 13 shows the time histories of the safety factor for the
USS slope, in which the effect of the matric suction on the sta-
bility was not considered. The finial safety factor was slightly
lager than that of the GCL slope because the phreatic surface was
a little lower in the USS slope. However, the USS slope should
fail too if the rainfall lasted a long time.
Table 3. Mechanical Properties of Soils
Parameter Value
Young’s modulus, E (MPa) 100.0
Poisson’s ratio, ␯ 共-兲 0.3
Unit weight, ␥ 共kN/m3兲 18.0
Effective cohesion, c ⬘ (kPa) 8.0
Effective friction angle, ␾⬘ 共°兲 25
Dilatancy angle, ␺ 共°兲 0

Fig. 12. Time histories of safety factor of Glendale clayey loam
slope
The time histories of the safety factor for the BLS slope is
shown in Fig. 14, where the matric suction was also not consid-
ered. The minimum safety factor was 1.10, i.e., the BLS slope
should be safe under the rainfall intensity of 10 mm/h, because of
the lowest phreatic surface under the steady state during the rain-
fall, as shown in Figs. 4 and 7.
Fig. 15 indicates that the rainfall duration until the slope fail-
ure decreased almost linearly with the increase in the initial rela-
tive degree of saturation at the crest of the slope for the GCL and
USS slopes. Because the initial relative degree of saturation was
significantly influenced by the antecedent rainfall before the main
rainfall, the antecedent rainfall should be considered in the stabil-
ity analysis of slopes under rainfall.
Fig. 13. Time histories of safety factor of Uplands silty sand slope
76 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004
Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 14. Time histories of safety factor of Bet Degan loamy sand
slope
Effects of Rainfall Intensity and Duration on Slope
Stability
The effects of rainfall intensity and rainfall duration on the
ground water level and matric suction in the slopes were investi-
gated for Case 1 共Table 2兲 and the hypothesis of ␹⫽S e . Fig. 16
indicates the relationships of the slope stability versus the rainfall
intensity and rainfall duration. The GCL slope failed only if the
rainfall lasted sufficient hours, even that the rainfall was with a
large intensity. When the rainfall intensity was greater than 5.46
mm/h, the larger part of the rainfall only formed the surface run-
off for the GCL slope, so the slope failure did not take place until
the rainfall lasted a certain time, i.e., 32 h herein. However, the
BLS slope did not fail when the rainfall intensity was less than a
certain value due to its large hydraulic conductivity. For the USS
and BLS slopes, the larger the rainfall intensity, the faster the
slope failure took place. The computed results indicate that the
slip surface was deep seated and nearly circular, and was slightly
influenced by the water pressure in the slope for the three types of
soils used herein.
Fig. 17 shows a comparison of the numerical results with the
statistical results of two history cases 共Cases 1 and 2兲 reported by
Sugiyama et al. 共1995兲. The statistical result was more similar to
the numerical results for the USS slope, so it is important for
statistical analysis to consider the hydraulic characteristics. Fig.
18 shows the comparison between the numerical results and some
observational results reported by Kazama et al. 共1985兲. The solid
curve 共see Fig. 18兲 was the envelope curve of instability for three
slopes in Fig. 16, and it was similar to the observation results. The
solid curve consisted mainly of two parts: one was the data of the
USS slope with larger rainfall intensity and shorter rainfall dura-
tion, and the other was the data of the GCL slope with a smaller
rainfall intensity and longer rainfall duration. The numerical re-
sults imply that the slope of soils with a comparatively higher
permeability more possibly fails under a rainfall with larger rain-
Fig. 15. Effect of initial relative degree of saturation on rainfall
duration until slope failure

Fig. 16. Effect of rainfall intensity and duration on slope stability
fall intensity; however, the slope of soils with a comparatively
lower permeability more possibly fails under a rainfall with
longer rainfall duration. These comparisons imply that the nu-
merical analysis has the ability to predict the critical rainfall in-
tensity and duration, under which the slope failure takes place.
Conclusions
The slope stability is reduced with infiltration of rainfall due to
the decrease in the shear strength of soils. In this paper, the water
pressure in the slope under rainfall was computed by the finite
element analyses of transient water flow through unsaturated–
saturated soils, and the slope stability was evaluated by the finite
Fig. 17. Comparison of numerical results with statistical results of
Sugiyama et al. 共1995兲
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004 / 77
Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 18. Comparison of numerical results 共solid line兲 with observa-
tional results of Kazama et al. 共1985兲: broken line determined using
all observational data, and dotted broken line using observational data
of Kanto area
element method with shear strength reduction technique. The fol-
lowing conclusions are developed from the results of the finite
element analysis of transient water flow and slope stability:
1. The hydraulic characteristics of soil greatly influenced the
steady state water pressure in slopes and the pattern of the
rise of the water pressure due to the infiltration of rainfall,
and thus on the slope stability. The water pressure possibly
rose suddenly in the slope of the soil with a lower perme-
ability.
2. The initial volumetric moisture content had significant influ-
ence on the procedure of the rise of the water pressure, and
thus on the slope stability. The higher the initial volumetric
moisture content, the faster the water pressure rose in slopes
under rainfall.
3. The slope stability was reduced due to infiltration of rainfall,
and whether the slope failure takes place depended on the
hydraulic characteristics of soils, rainfall intensity, and dura-
tion, as well as the shear strength of soils.
4. The global safety factor of slopes increased if the shear
strength contributed by the matric suction was taken into
consideration, but the effect of the matric suction decreased
and finally disappeared with soils saturated by the infiltration
of rainfall.
5. The slopes with low permeability should fail only if the rain-
fall lasted a sufficient duration even if the rainfall was with a
great intensity. For slopes with comparatively large perme-
ability, the slope failures possibly took place under the rain-
fall with a shorter duration and a greater intensity.
References
Akai, K., Ohnishi, Y., and Nishigaki, M. 共1977兲. ‘‘Finite element analysis
of saturated-unsaturated seepage in soil.’’ Proc., JSCE, No. 264,
87–96 共in Japanese兲.
Barata, F. E. 共1969兲. ‘‘Landslides in the tropical region of Rio de Jan-
eiro.’’ Proc., 7th Int. Conf. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineer-
ing, Vol. 2, Mexico City, 507–516.
Bishop, A. W. 共1959兲. ‘‘The principle of effective stress.’’ Publication 32,
Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Oslo, Norway, 1– 4.
Brand, E. W. 共1984兲. ‘‘Landslides in Southeast Asia: A state of the art
report.’’ Proc., 4th Int. Symp. on Landslides, Vol. 1, Toronto, 17–59.
Cai, F., and Ugai, K. 共2000兲. ‘‘Numerical analysis of the stability of a
slope reinforced with piles.’’ Soils Found., 40共1兲, 73– 84.
Cai, F., and Ugai, K. 共2001兲. User’s guide for SLOPE@FE, Dept. of Civil
Engineering, Gunma Univ., Gunma, Japan 共in Japanese兲.
Dawson, E. M., Roth, W. H., and Drescher, A. 共1999兲. ‘‘Slope stability
analysis by strength reduction.’’ Geptecjmoqie, 49共6兲, 835– 840.
Escario, V., and Saez, J. 共1986兲. ‘‘The shear strength of partly saturated
soils.’’ Geotechnique, 36共3兲, 453– 456.
Finlay, P. J., Fell, R., and Maguire, P. K. 共1997兲. ‘‘The relationship be-
tween the probability of landslide occurrence and rainfall.’’ Can. Geo-
tech. J., 34共6兲, 811– 824.
Fredlund, D. G., Morgenstern, N. R., and Widger, R. A. 共1978兲. ‘‘The
shear strength of unsaturated soils.’’ Can. Geotech. J., 15, 313–321.
Fredlund, D. G., and Rahardjo, H. 共1993兲. Soil mechanics for unsaturated
soils, Wiley, New York.
Fujita, H. 共1997兲. ‘‘State of the art of the landslide control in Japan and
the issues in the future.’’ J. Jpn. Geotech. Soc., 45共6兲, 1– 4 共in Japa-
nese兲.
Gasmo, J. M., Rahardjo, H., and Leong, E. C. 共2000兲. ‘‘Infiltration effects
on stability of a residual soil slope.’’ Comput. Geotech., 26, 145–165.
Griffiths, D. V., and Lane, P. A. 共1999兲. ‘‘Slope stability analysis by finite
elements.’’ Geotechnique, 49共3兲, 387– 403.
Kazama, H., Akutakawa, M., and Oneda, M. 共1985兲. ‘‘Slope failure and
characteristics of rainfall.’’ Proc., 20th Annual Conf. Japanese Society
Soil Mechanics and Foundations Engineering, 1397–1398 共in Japa-
nese兲.
Leong, E. C., and Rahardjo, H. 共1997a兲. ‘‘Review of soil-water charac-
teristic curve equations.’’ J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 123共12兲,
1106 –1117.
Leong, E. C., and Rahardjo, H. 共1997b兲. ‘‘Permeability functions for
unsaturated soils.’’ J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 123共12兲, 1118 –
1126.
Lumb, P. B. 共1975兲. ‘‘Slope failures in Hong Kong.’’ Q. J. Eng. Geol., 8,
31– 65.
Manzari, M. T., and Nour, M. A. 共2000兲. ‘‘Significance of soil dilatancy
in slope stability analysis.’’ J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 126共1兲,
75– 80.
Matsui, T., and San, K. C. 共1992兲. ‘‘Finite element slope stability analysis
by shear strength reduction technique.’’ Soils Found., 32共1兲, 59–70.
Mualem, Y. 共1976兲. ‘‘A new model for predicting the hydraulic conduc-
tivity of unsaturated porous media.’’ Water Resour. Res., 12, 513–522.
Neuman, S. P. 共1973兲. ‘‘Saturated-unsaturated seepage by finite element.’’
J. Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 99共12兲, 2233–2250.
78 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / JUNE 2004
Downloaded 02 Aug 2011 to 111.187.78.216. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Ng, C. W. W., and Shi, Q. 共1998兲. ‘‘A numerical investigation of the
stability of unsaturated soil slopes subjected to transient seepage.’’
Comput. Geotech., 22, 1–28.
Oberg, A. L., and Sällfors, G. 共1997兲. ‘‘Determination of shear strength
parameters of unsaturated silts and sands based on the water retention
curve.’’ Geotech. Test. J., 20共1兲, 40– 48.
Okata, K., Sugiyama, T., Muraishi, H., Noguchi, T., and Samizo, M.
共1994兲. ‘‘Statistical risk estimating method for rainfall on surface col-
lapse of a cut slope.’’ Soils Found., 34共3兲, 49–58.
Pradel, D., and Raad, G. 共1993兲. ‘‘Effect of permeability on surfacial
stability of homogeneous slopes.’’ J. Geotech. Eng., 119共2兲, 315–332.
Richards, L. A. 共1931兲. ‘‘Capillary conduction of liquids through porous
mediums.’’ Physics (N.Y.), 1, 318 –333.
Russo, D., and Bresler, E. 共1980兲. ‘‘Field determinations of soil hydraulic
properties.’’ Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 44, 697–702.
Smith, I. M., and Griffiths, D. V. 共1988兲. Programming the finite element
method, 2nd Ed., Wiley, Chichester, U.K.
Staple, W. J. 共1969兲. ‘‘Moisture redistribution following infiltration.’’ Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., 33, 840– 847.
Sugiyama, T., Okata, K., Muraishi, H., Noguchi, T., and Samizo, M.
共1995兲. ‘‘Statistical rainfall risk estimating method for a deep collapse
of a cut slope.’’ Soils Found., 35共4兲, 37– 48.
Suzuki, H., and Matsuo, M. 共1988兲. ‘‘Procedure of slope failure predic-
tion during rainfall based on the back analysis of actual case records.’’
Soils Found., 28共3兲, 51– 63.
Ugai, K. 共1989兲. ‘‘A method of calculation of global safety factor of
slopes by elasto-plastic FEM.’’ Soils Found., 29共2兲, 190–195 共in Japa-
nese兲.
Ugai, K., and Leshchinsky, D. 共1995兲. ‘‘Three-dimensional limit equilib-
rium and finite element analyses: A comparison of results.’’ Soils
Found., 35共4兲, 1–7.
Vanapalli, S. K., Fredlund, D. G., Pufahl, D. E., and Clifton, A. W.
共1996兲. ‘‘Model for the prediction of shear strength with respect to
soil suction.’’ Can. Geotech. J., 33, 379–392.
van Genuchten, M. T. 共1980兲. ‘‘A closed-form equation for predicting the
hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils.’’ Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 44,
892– 898.
Zienkiewicz, O. C., Humpheson, C., and Lewis, R. W. 共1975兲. ‘‘Associ-
ated and non-associated visco-plasticity and plasticity in soil mechan-
ics.’’ Geotechnique, 25共4兲, 671– 689.
Zienkiewicz, O. C., and Tayor, R. L. 共1989兲. The finite element method,
4th Ed., McGraw–Hill, London.