Proceedings of EnCon2008 2nd Engineering Conference on Sustainable Engineering Infrastructures Development & Management December 18 -19, 2008, Kuching,

Sarawak, Malaysia ENCON2008-paper no here

The Influence of Rising Groundwater on Slope Stability and Engineering Properties of Soil
Nasiman Sapari, Indra Sati Hamonangan Harahap and Mohd Nordin Adlan
Abstract Infrastructural development on hilly and undulating grounds such as roads and highways often involves earthwork and construction of slope. Slope failures in tropical countries are common particularly during rainy seasons. This paper presents the findings of a field survey and laboratory model experiment on the influence of rising groundwater level towards the stability of slope and properties of soil. The study was based on slopes constructed in the campus of Universiti Teknologi Petronas supported by a laboratory experiment using a slope model with a dimension of 1m long x 0.5m width x 0.4m depth, packed with soil to represent a man-made slope of 34. The levels of the groundwater in the laboratory model were varied to allow different level of water saturation inside the soil. The effects of the groundwater levels on the slope were examined by determining the engineering properties of the soil at various depths and observing the slope behavior. It was found that the slope was stable as long as the groundwater is lower than the toe of the slope. As the water level become higher than the toe, the moisture of the soil increased to level that can cause slope failure. Slope failure occurred when the moisture of the soil reached 40%.

Keywords: Slope failures, rainy seasons, groundwater level, moisture, slope behavior

N most engineering construction, slopes are designed in order to obtain suitable space requirements for developmental projects. The design criteria among others hinges on the stability, safety and costs. However despite of all the calculations assisted by visualization using computer modeling, many parts of the world in the past century suffered from slope failures and landslides including the 220 major cases in Asia and 25000+ deaths and injuries in the North, Central and South America [1]. The factors that lead to the slope failures are obviously very complex including not only the physical and engineering parameters but also socio-politics and economics influences. Tools are available for engineers to design safe slope such as Seep/W and Slope/W that was developed by The Geo-slope International Ltd. Canada. Huat et al. [2] came out with another tools and chart to be used for calculating the safety factor of a slope. However models are working based on assumptions and the real complex nature of the material behind the slopes influencing its behavior remains a challenge to geotechnical engineers to factorize it. These complexities among others include the influence of sub-surface flow path due to the structure of the parent rocks [3], the presence and orientation of impermeable layers that lead to the occurrence of perch water table [4] and the hydrological systems that are influenced by fissure systems [5]. The simplified model is based on homogenous matrix therefore can not answer all the slope problems. It is not surprising if two slopes that appear to have similar safety factor behave differently where one become fail and the other remain stable. The variability in hydro-geological conditions seems to warrant individual attention to be made to slope prior to its construction as well after the construction. The influence of the hydro-geological factor on slope stability requires a longer term of observation particularly the water table fluctuations.

I. INTRODUCTION

Nasiman Sapari is an Associate Professor with Civil Engineering Department, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Iskandar, 31750 Tronoh, Perak, Malaysia (corresponding author, phone: +605-3687297; fax: +605-3656716; e-mail: nasiman@petronas.com.my). Indra Sati Hamonangan Harahap is an Associate Professor with Civil Engineering Department, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Iskandar, 31750 Tronoh, Perak, (e-mail: indrasati@petronas.com.my). Mohd Nordin Adlan is an Associate Professor with Civil Engineering Department, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Iskandar, 31750 Tronoh, Perak, Malaysia (email: nordin_adlan@petronas.com.my).

This paper attempts to highlight the effects of rising water table on slope stability and the engineering properties of the soil. As compared to antecedent rainfalls and matrix suctions water table is relatively simpler to be measured and technically controllable. It is also a sensitive parameter that can be used for the development of a proactive landslide warning system for remedial actions and hazard mitigations. The data presented in this paper were obtained arising from the interest in understanding and solving two landslide cases in the campus of Universiti Technologi PETRONAS (UTP). These landslides were reported to be caused a broken surface drain, due to poor maintenance, which led to excessive surface runoff flowing through the ground and soften the soil of the slope.

II. MATERIALS AND METHOD Field and laboratory studies were carried out after the occurrence of landslides at the man-made slopes inside the campus. The field study involved a slope survey on the existing designed slope that includes the slope inclination angle, slope height, surface drainage, vegetation cover, surface erosion characters, the presence or absence of groundwater seepage and the ground condition at the toe of the slope. The location of the survey area is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Aerial view of the survey area indicating the locations of the landslide. The designed slopes were located on the hilly side of the campus underlain by residual soil from the weathering of sedimentary rocks consisting of predominantly silt stone and sand stone. Soil samples were collected during the field survey from locations near the landslide areas for laboratory analysis on engineering properties of the soil including the hydraulic conductivity, bulk density, plastic limit and liquid limit. A physical slope model was constructed in the laboratory using a rectangular tank made up of acrylic sheet measuring 1m x 0.4m x 0.4m as shown in Figure 2. This size was used to simulate the flow of groundwater through the soil up to maximum gradient of 1:4.

Figure 2: Slope model and seepage of water.

The tank was divided into two parts one for soil and the other for water. Soil from the landslide area was packed into the tank gradually using the bulk density obtained from laboratory analysis with slope inclination of 34o angle. The partition between the soil and water was made up of perforated plate lined with a geotextile layer to simulate groundwater movement into the soil. An outlet was provided at the toe side of the slope to allow water to be discharged at similar level as the level of the toe.

Water was introduced into the tank to simulate the movement of groundwater from behind the slope at three different levels namely 7cm, 14cm and 21cm respectively as shown in Figure 3. In each level, water was kept for 24 hours and then followed by sampling and analysis of the soil from the slope at the three different heights for moisture content and shear strength.

Water Compartment

Soil Compartment

33cm 3rd Soil Layer 2nd Soil Layer 7cm 1st 1st Soil Layer 16cm 46cm 26cm 12cm 18cm

3cm

26cm 3rd Soil Layer 2nd 14cm 2nd Soil Layer 1st Soil Layer 16cm 46cm 26cm 12cm 18cm

3cm

19cm 3rd 3rd Soil Layer 2nd Soil Layer 21cm 1st Soil Layer 16cm 46cm 26cm 12cm 18cm

3cm

Figure 3: Water levels and the influence on soil at different layers.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Results from the field survey show that most of the slope in the campus was designed with 34 degree inclination angles. The slope varies in height from as low as 2m to more than 10m. Slopes higher than 3m were provided with terrace and surface drains to channel the runoff water down to the main drain. Two locations in the campus are having land sliding problems. The landslides are relatively small involving approximately 50 tones of soil with depth and width about 2m and 6m respectively (Figure 4). There was no casualty involved in this landslide except damage to properties which include broken surface drain and completely buried part of the main drain that lead to flooding of the area.

Figure 4: Picture of the landslide covering the main drain at the toe of the slope.

A close observation at the toe of the landslide reveals that the ground at the toe area is always soaked with water and soft. There was a point where groundwater was seeping out from the ground and flowing in to the main drain. These phenomena suggest that the level of water table at these landslide areas was at or above the toe of the slope. Results from the laboratory analysis indicate that the soil is of sandy loam type. The engineering properties of the soil are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Properties of the residual soil at the cut slopes Hydraulic conductivity, k 3.38 x 10-6 m/s Plastic limit 27.13 % Liquid limit 42.88 % Bulk density 19 kN/m3 Moisture content as collected 11.44 % Fine fraction (<0.063 mm) 4.99 % Parent material Sand and silt stones Weathering grade Grade V and VI Soil type Sandy loam 4

The cohesion of the soil was almost 0 as the moisture content of the soil reaching 42% level i.e. close to its liquid limit. Results of the analysis of soil samples from different height of the slope as the soil was subjected by different levels of water table are shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Moisture content of soil samples fro different level of the slope model as subjected by different level water. Level of water (from the bottom of the tank) 21 cm Location of soil sample Layer 3 (14 to 21 Cm) Layer 2 (7 to 14 cm) Layer 1 (0 to 7 cm) Layer 3 (14 to 21 cm) Layer 2 (7 to 14 cm) Layer 1 (0 to 7 cm) Layer 3 (14 to 21 cm) Layer 2 (7 to 14 cm) Layer 1 (0 to 7 cm) Moisture content, % 40.71 41.72 42.33 37.34 40.48 40.64 13.27 21.56 35.57

14 cm

7 cm

As the water level behind the slope was kept slightly above the toe of the slope (4cm), the bottom 7 cm of the soil at the toe of the slope reached it plastic limit of above 27 percent moisture content. At this level of moisture deformation may have started, however it was not observable during the experiment probably due to short duration of observation. Seepage of water was observed and measured to be 28.34 ml/hr. All the layers of the soil were above the plastic limit level when the simulated water table behind the slope was raised to 11 cm higher than the toe of the slope. Soils in both Layer 1 and Layer 2 were containing moisture op to 40 % level i.e. almost completely saturated with water. Further increase in water table have resulted the soil at the toe of the slope reaching almost the liquid limit of 42.88 %. Surface deformation and slope failure were observed at this level of moisture content. The amount of water seepage increased to 113.4ml/hr when the water was 11 cm higher than the toe and finally to 255.15 ml/hr when the level was raised to 18 cm above the toe. This slope model is obviously could not be compared to the actual slope in term of it height i.e. the weight of the soil as a factor that trigger failure. The objective using the model is merely to identify the relationship between the level of groundwater and the moisture content of the soil at the toe of the slope The observed of groundwater seepage during the field survey indicated that the water table behind the slope was higher than the toe of the slope. Although groundwater would not rise from rainwater above the slope itself, it is likely that the groundwater was coming from the hills behind the slope which make up a bigger catchments area. High water content in residual soil at the toe of a slope was also observed by Raharjo et al. [6]. Similar reason was given by Simon et al. [7] and Londono [8] for river bank collapse particularly after a period of flooding. The excessive seepage forces after river level drops are the reason for the failure. Preliminary analysis on the factor of safety (FS) using Bishop Method with SLOPE/W program developed by Geoslope Int. Ltd based on the actual geometry and strength parameters obtained from the site indicates that significant improvement in factor of safety can be obtained through lowering the groundwater level. Two cases were analysed: one with higher ground water level reflecting the existing condition and the other with a lower ground water reflecting the effect of horizontal drain (Figure 5). For the first case, with the slope height of 30m, slope inclination (tan ) of 1:4, cohesion c of 28kPa, bulk density of 25 KN/m3, effective angle of friction, of 25oand radius of slip surface of 22m., the factor of safety is 1.1. The factor of safety for the second case is 1.6. This improvement in factor of safety indicates that lowering ground water level by using horizontal drain drilled to the bottom of the slip circle could be an effective mitigation measure.

Figure 5: (a) Analysis with existing ground water level and (b) Analysis with lower ground water level to simulate the effect of horizontal sub drainage

It was also observed that low rise slopes with limited hills behind them were not showing any seepage of groundwater. These slopes although having similar inclination angle, have shown no sign of instability. Similar observation was made by Chowdhury and Flentje [9] who found that landslides would not be triggered by high-intensity of short-duration rainfall unless the soil moisture was already high. The only problem faced by these slopes was surface erosion and formation of gullies from the top to the bottom of the slope particularly in areas that are devoid of vegetation.

IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Landslides at the UTP campus may be triggered by excessive pore water pressure due to high (rising of) water table behind the slope. The excessive pore water pressure behind the slope has changed the water content of the soil at the slope to almost the liquid limit level and hence reduced the shear strength of the soil. This conclusion differs from the earlier assumption that broken surface drains and the flow of surface runoff as the reasons for the slope failure. It is more likely that the landslides were the reasons for the broken drains as none other broken drains were found in places where ground water seepage is absent. The remedial actions for the above landslide problems therefore need to address the issue of ground water level. Long term study on ground water pattern within UTP campus in relation to the rainfall characteristics and its effect on slope stability are being carried out when this paper is written. The ground water was found to have significant influence on the factor of safety. This is shown by slope stability analysis which indicates the value of FS near to 1 when groundwater level is at the toe of the slope.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support for this project from Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS and the assistance from the student for the laboratory and computer works. REFERENCES [1] OFDA/CRED, International disaster database, Catholic University of Lauven, Belgium, 2006, http:www.cred.be/emdat. [2] B.B.K. Huat, F. Faisal and R.S.K. Rajoo, Stability analysis and stability chart for unsaturated residual soil slope, Americal Journal of Environmental Science, Vol. 2(4): pp154-160, 2006. [3] Y. Onda, M. Tsujimura, and, H. Tabuchi, The role of subsurface water flow paths on hillslope hydrological processes, landslide and landform development in steep mountains of Japan, Hydrological Processes J., Vol. 18(4): pp 637-650, 2004. [4] M. Reid, H. Nielsen, and S.Dreiss, Hydrology factors triggering a shallow hillslope failure, Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists, Vol 25(3): pp349-361, 1988. [5] T.W.J. Van Asch, J.P Malek, L.P.H. Van Beek and D.Amitrano, Techniques, advances, problems and issues in numerical modelling of landslide hazard, Bulletin de la Societe Geologique de Franc, Vol. 178(2):pp65-88, March, 2007. [6] H. Rahardjo, T. Lee, E. Leong, and R. Rezaur, Response of residual soil slope to rainfall, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 42(2): pp340-351. 2005. [7] A. Simon, R. Thomas, A. Curini, and D. Shields, Case study: Channel stability of the Missouri River, Eastern Montana, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 128(10): pp 880-890, 2002. [8] A.C. Londono, Discussion of Response of a residual soil slope to rainfall, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 43: pp979-983, 2006. [9] R. Chowdhury, and P. Flentje, Uncertainties in rainfall-induced landslide hazard, Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrology, Vol. 35: pp 61-70, 2002.