Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192
DOI 10.1007/s12665-009-0178-2
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Back analysis of an excavated slope failure in highly fractured
rock mass: the case study of Kargar slope failure (Iran)
Mostafa Sharifzadeh Æ Mohsen Sharifi Æ
S. Mohammad Delbari
Received: 27 August 2008 / Accepted: 27 April 2009 / Published online: 15 May 2009
Ó Springer-Verlag 2009
Abstract This paper examines the failure of Kargar cut
slope located at the south part of Esfahan subway using
analytical and numerical back analysis methods. The
excavated trench has 27 m depth with near vertical walls
due to the space limitation around it. The geology of the
area comprises weathered and heavily jointed shale and
sandstone overlaid by alluvium deposits. Despite the slope
being supported by shotcrete and fully grouted rock bolts,
a catastrophic failure occurred at the east wall. Due to the
uncertainty about the causes of failure initiation, back
analyses have been performed via both the limit equilib-
rium and numerical method for considering various
probable mechanisms. In the back analysis with limit
equilibrium method, the rock mass is assumed as an
equivalent continuum and Hoek–Brown failure criterion
and geological strength index (GSI) are applied to calcu-
late the shear strength parameters. The results show that
GSI value was 33 in the failed mass. In the numerical back
analysis, the distinct element method is applied to study
the contribution of rock joints to the failure and progres-
sive rock mass strength degradation until failure. The
results show that threshold values of joint cohesion and
friction were 0.2 MPa and 30°, respectively. Also the
Dedicated to Ali Sharifzadeh who lost his life in a tragic car accident
during the preparation of this paper.
M. Sharifzadeh (&)
M. Sharifi
Department of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum Engineering,
Amirkabir University of Technology, Hafez 424,
15875-4413 Tehran, Iran
e-mail: sharifzadeh@aut.ac.ir; most.sharif@gmail.com
S. M. Delbari
Parsehpaydar Consulting Company, Tehran, Iran
modeled slip surface being step-shaped agrees with the
observed one.
Keywords Slope stability
Cut slope
Highly jointed
rock
Back analysis
Limit equilibrium analysis

Distinct element method
Introduction
Each failure process in soil and rock slopes can be rea-
sonably accounted as a large scale in situ shear test per-
formed by nature. With understanding of the failure
mechanism and collecting the required data for the failed
mass, its geomechanical properties can be acquired by a
specific method which is called back analysis. It is gen-
erally accepted that shear strength parameters obtained by
back analysis of slope failures ensure more reliability than
those obtained by laboratory or in situ testing which is
influenced by scale effect. Therefore, this type of analysis
is a most powerful method that can be used to determine
the shear strength parameters of failed material. These back
calculated values may then be used for remedial work and
the redesign of failed slope and design of new slopes in
similar geotechnical condition.
In order to conduct a successful back analysis strategy, it
is essential to understand the processes and mechanisms
driving instability. As Sonmez et al. (1998) proposed, the
rock slope stability analysis methods depending on the
jointing condition generally may be classified into two
main categories consisting: (a) methods suitable for slopes
in hard jointed rocks, and (b) methods suitable for slopes in
heavily jointed and weak rock masses.
In the first category, it is assumed that failure surface is
structurally controlled by the main discontinuities in rock
123
184
material as a continuous plane or series of interconnected
planes (Fig. 1a). The potential for failure is dependent on
the orientation of discontinuities and shear strength along
them. This mechanism is only valid in cases where the
volume of the failed block is relatively small or major
persistent discontinuity planes such as faults or bedding
planes are present in the hard rock.
In the second category, another mechanism may cause
failure. Several researchers such as Einstein et al. (1983),
Eberhardt et al. (2004) and others believe that the final
failure surface is combination of the pre-existing discon-
tinuities and new propagating cracks in rock substance as
shown in Fig. 1b. In this case, the brittle fracture initiation
and propagation through rock material and their interac-
tions with natural discontinuities that take place under a
progressive degradation of strength finally bring the slope
to failure. Determination of the strength of this category of
rock mass is a difficult task. When slope failure occurs
under such mechanism, back analysis methods could be
carefully applied to calculate the rock mass strength.
Considering the above mentioned mechanisms and
complexity involved in the problem, both limit equilibrium
and numerical methods that can be used to back analyze the
slope failure. Selection of the analysis technique depends on
the potential mode of failure with careful consideration
being given to the inherent strengths and limitations in each
methodology. The advantages and limitation of each method
in slope stability analysis was discussed in detail by Stead
et al. (2006). The limit equilibrium method is applicable for
both categories. The purpose of the back analysis in the first
category is to determine the shear strength parameters along
the sliding discontinuities. However, to apply the limit
equilibrium discipline for rock slopes in the second cate-
gory, the jointed rock mass is assumed as a continuum and its
shear strength parameters are back analyzed by the methods
developed for soil slope stability. This method is commonly
used in the first category slopes with relatively accurate
results. But regarding the various simplifying assumptions
Fig. 1 Failure mechanism in rock slopes. a Hard rock along main
discontinuities, b highly jointed rock mass along natural joints and
rock material (after Eberhardt et al. 2004)
123
Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192
considered in this method, it should be applied more care-
fully for the second category slopes. Also with limit equi-
librium methods, there is no possibility to investigate the
complex behaviors accompanied in rock mass deformation
such as internal deformation, material fracturing and pro-
gressive failure. For this reason, continuum or discontinuum
numerical analysis methods are recommended to provide
approximate solution to any problem.
Discontinuum modeling constitutes the most commonly
applied numerical approach to rock slope analysis. The
distinct element method (DEM) is a discontinuum method
which is most suitable to problems in the jointed media. It
has been successfully used in the slope stability problems.
Also Eberhardt (2003) reviewed the most applicable anal-
ysis methods considering the advancement of computer
codes prepared for this purpose.
In this paper, the back analysis of Kargar slope failure
excavated in highly jointed rock masses has been studied
using both the limit equilibrium and numerical method. In
Sect. ‘‘Introduction’’, the geology of the area and also
geotechnical and geomechanical rock parameters used in
preliminary design of Kargar slope are described. Then the
failure accident and most relevant mechanism are
explained in Sect. ‘‘Project description, geological and
geotechnical characteristics’’. First part of Sect. ‘‘Back
analyses of the slope failure’’ deals with the limit equilib-
rium analysis. With considering rock mass as a continuum
media, shear strength parameters have been calculated by a
specific back analysis procedure. In the second part of
Sect. ‘‘Back analyses of the slope failure’’, distinct element
method has been applied to investigate the role of dis-
continuities and other relevant phenomena contributing the
progressive failure process. Then shear strength parameters
of rock joints have been estimated at the moment of slope
failure. Finally in Sect. ‘‘Discussion and conclusions’’ the
results are summarized and some concluding remarks are
presented.
Project description, geological and geotechnical
characteristics
Kargar station is a part of Esfahan subway line located at
the south of Esfahan city at the center of Iran as depicted in
Fig. 2. The excavated trench has 102 m length, 25 m width
and about 27 m depth with near vertical (10V:1H) slope
faces because of space limitation around it.
It should be mentioned that slope faces of Kargar station
have been supported by reinforced shotcrete with 30 cm in
thickness and fully grouted rock bolts. The installation
pattern of rock bolts consists of two rows of 12 m length,
8 rows of 6 m length and 4 rows of 6 m length with 32 mm
in diameter and 2 9 2 spacing installed only in rock masses.
Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192
Fig. 2 General layout of Kargar station and failure location occurred
in the east slope
The geology of the area
According to Nabavi (2003), the geology of the project
area generally comprises the sequences of shale and
sandstone layers belonging to Shemshak formation covered
by recent alluvium with 3–10 m in thickness. Shale layers
are generally thin but locally are moderately thick. From a
strength point of view, they are classified as poor rocks,
with their compressive strength lower than 25 MPa. The
jointing pattern varies in wide range, but globally three
185
joints system were observed accompanied with a locally
random joint system.
The thickness of sandstone layers differs from few
centimeters to about 1 m. Their compressive strength has a
wide range from weak to strong. They contain persistent
and evident discontinuities and usually three joint systems
are recognized in the rock mass.
The geological profile of Kargar station has been illus-
trated in Fig. 3. The thickness of alluvium deposit is about
9–10 m. The Shemshak formation, which is located under
alluvium deposits, consists of a sequence of shale and
sandstone layers dipping 35–40° toward south. The original
ground water level was in near contact with alluvium
material and underneath rock mass but site observations at
the instance of failure showed that the water level was near
the surface with about 6 m depth.
Geotechnical characteristics
Based on the geological mapping, the rock masses are
highly and closely jointed in studied area. The orientation
of joints shows large variation in dip and dip direction. The
characteristics of the discontinuities in the east slope
including bedding and joint sets are presented in Table 1.
According to geotechnical studies, the rock mass of the
project area has been classified into four different zones
consisting shale (sh), stiff sandstone (ss), medium sand-
stone (s) and friable sandstone (sf). The lithological com-
bination of the rock mass in the target area approximately
composes 50% of shale, 20% of stiff sandstone, 25% of
sandstone and 5% of friable sandstone. The rock masses in
each zone were classified by RMR and geological strength
index (GSI) methods as presented in Table 2. It should be
noted that the RMR values are in basic form, i.e., the RMR
has been determined without considering the orientation of
discontinuities.
The physical and mechanical properties of rock material
were determined using laboratory tests. The compressive
strength of rock materials in different zones determined by
point load test and uniaxial compressive test are presented
in Table 3. The results show that shale and friable sand-
stone have the lowest strength, while stiff sandstone is the
strongest. Also some laboratory direct shear tests were
carried out on natural discontinuities or saw-cut samples to
measure the shear strength parameters as depicted in
Table 3.
Kargar failure accident
Kargar failure accident occurred on 28 June 2006 in the
south part of east slope in which a large amount of material
included alluvium and underneath rock mass entered to the
123
186 Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192

Fig. 3 The geological profile of

Kargar station along east slope 1668.9
1665.2

1660 1660

1650 1650

1642 1642

10+912.98

11+015.2
11+000
10+970
10+940
Alluvium Shale and sandstone

Shale and silty shale Sandstone

Table 1 The characteristics of discontinuities in the east slope of causes, a normal fault with approximate direction of north–
Kargar Station (Nabavi 2003) west and 60–70 dip angle was introduced. Although the
Discontinuity type Dip Dip dir. Spacing (cm) above mentioned fault had not been found directly during
the excavation of slope trench, but geological mapping
Bedding 40 185 – done in the adjacent tunnel confirmed the existing of such
Joint set 1 (JS1) 65 050 20–30 fault near that area.
Joint set 2 (JS2) 85 340 15–20 Because of high dip angle of fault, its distance to the
Joint set 3 (JS3) 80 060 20–30 slope toe and circular mode of failure, slip surface could not
Joint set 4 (JS4) 80 255 10–20 be fully located on the fault plane. Therefore, it can be
concluded that only some part of the slip surface could be
located on fault and the other part included larger area of
Table 2 Rock mass classification of Kargar station (Nabavi 2003)
slip surface passed through the surrounding jointed rock
mass. To better describe the failure mechanism, it can be
Rock unit Abundancy (%) Rock mass classification stated that the low shear strength of assumed fault plane, the
RMR GSI highly jointed rock mass, weakness of shale rock material,
the weight of alluvium overburden and piezometric pres-
Shale (sh) 50 40 35
sure due to the groundwater level resulted in progressive
Stiff sandstone (ss) 20 53 48
rock mass degradation, and after the slip surface develop-
Sandstone (s) 25 47 42
ment, eventually leaded to the catastrophic failure.
Friable sandstone (sf) 5 20 15

Back analyses of the slope failure

excavated trench (Fig. 4). It should be mentioned that
before the failure occurred, a number of tension and lon-
gitudinal cracks initiated behind the slope crest and on
shotcrete surface, respectively. Based on the preliminary
observations, the depth of failure was estimated about 15–
20 m, but just after the removing of materials it is found
that the failure extended to the slope toe. The failure
location and its distribution on ground surface has been
indicated in Fig. 2 in which the length of failure is 77 m
and its maximum width reaches 12 m (Sharifzadeh et al.
2006).
Due to the complexity involved in the failure process,
the main causes and acting mechanism have not been fully
understood. For this reason, different mechanisms were
considered according to the inspection and detailed map-
ping done after failure. In one of the assumed failure
Failure of Kargar cut slope as discussed earlier was fol-
lowed or preceded by progressive deformation and exten-
sive internal disruption of the slope mass. The factors
controlling initiation and eventual sliding may be complex
and are not easily allowed for in a simple static analysis.
Addressing these challenges, we decided to apply the
combined use of limit equilibrium and numerical modeling
techniques to maximize the advantages of both.
Limit equilibrium techniques are very simple and
commonly adopted methods for structurally controlled
slopes. Also, they could be used in highly and closely
jointed rock mass with more caution being paid to the
inherent limitations. Because in such cases failure mecha-
nism may accompany with internal strength degradation
and progressive development of failure surfaces, it is

123
Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192 187

Table 3 Laboratory
Parameters Shale (sh) Stiff S (ss) Sandstone (s) Friable S (sf)
mechanical properties of
different rock materials (Nabavi Unit weight (kN/m3) 26 26 25 25
2003)
Uniaxial compressive strength (MPa) 9–45 50–67 22–41 18–22
(Average UCS) (22) (62) (28) (21)
Direct shear test
c (kPa) 150–200 60 40–60 15–20
u (°) 25–35 34–35 15–25 25

Fig. 4 Failure accident at east slope of Kargar station (Sharifzade
et al. 2006)
inadequate to treat these processes by limit equilibrium
methods. In contrast, numerical methods are able to pro-
vide approximate solution to more complicated problems.
In this research, discontinuum distinct element method was
selected to study the Kargar slope failure. This method
permits the treatment of rock slope stability problems
involving complexities relating to geometry, material
anisotropy, non-linear behavior, the inclusion of in situ
stresses and the presence of coupled processes.
Figure 5 illustrates the conceptual model considered for
the back analysis. The slip surface composed of two sep-
arate parts, namely, the fault plane in the upper part and
jointed rock mass in the lower part. The main reason for
assuming such slip surface is the high dip angle of the fault
plane which varies from 65 to 80°. Considering the fault
distance from slope face, it is acceptable to assume that the
larger area of slip surface passed through the rock mass
(see Fig. 5). The subsequent sections deal with the previ-
ously mentioned back analysis methods.
Limit equilibrium back analysis
The limit equilibrium techniques which are routinely
adopted methods for soil and rock slope problems are
undertaken to provide a factor of safety based on a
Fig. 5 Schematic illustration of assumed slip surface for limit
applied for limit equilibrium back analysis method (Sharifzade
et al. 2006)
comparison of resisting forces or moments to disturbing
forces or moments. Methods vary with respect to the slope
failure mechanism. Those methods developed for soil
slopes may be taken on where very weak rock or closely
jointed rock mass encountered in slope. They are generally
referred to as circular or rotational failure. Several methods
exist (e.g., Ordinary, Bishop’s modified, Janbu, etc.) with
each differing in terms of assumptions to determine the
factor of safety. The principles of these methods have been
fully described by Abramson et al. (2002).
In the back analysis of slope failure, general shape of
sliding surface and volume of failed mass are known, while
the shear strength parameters of sliding surface are
unknown. The principle of limit equilibrium back analysis
is equality of resisting forces/moments with disturbing
forces/moments at the instant of failure. In other words, the
factor of safety is equal 1 which introducing the threshold
of rupture. The composed equation included two unknowns
(i.e., cohesion and friction angle when considering Mohr–
Coulomb failure criterion) which satisfied by infinite set of
answers. Therefore, such back analysis strategy may yield
inaccurate results.
In order to overcome this problem, the practical back
analysis procedure proposed by Sonmez et al. (1998) and

123
188 Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192

Sonmez and Ulusay (1999) is used for the Kargar failure material behaviors, complex geometries and slip surface.
event. This procedure is particularly applicable in closely Figure 6 demonstrates the limit equilibrium model made
fractured rock masses in which the non-linear Hoek–Brown for the back analysis of Kargar east slope. As discussed
failure criterion (Hoek and Brown 1997) is utilized in earlier, the slip surface consists of vertical tension crack in
conjunction with the rock mass classification system (i.e., alluvium part and two inclined lines passing through the
GSI) to satisfy the limit equilibrium condition. Therefore, a fault plane and the rock mass. Also, the existing conditions
new equation has been added to the previous one to provide of slope before failure including supporting system and
the Hoek–Brown constants (m and s). In this strategy, the pore water pressure described in Sect. ‘‘Project description,
most realistic GSI value defining the pair of m and s con- geological and geotechnical characteristics’’ have been
stants is back calculated by the following procedure. modeled directly as shown in Fig. 6.
The non-linear Hoek–Brown failure criterion for jointed Using the procedure described above to back analyze the
rock masses is defined by: east slope failure of Kargar station, it reveals that the GSI
 0 0:5 value for the failed rock mass is equal to 33 as shown in
0 0 r3
r1 ¼ r3 þ rci m þ s ð1Þ Fig. 7. Based on geotechnical investigation presented in
rci
Table 2, the preliminary estimated GSI value lies between
where r01 and r03 are the maximum and minimum effective 40 and 44°, whereas the new back calculated value is lower
stresses at failure and m and s are the constants of criterion than estimated one. It is obvious that the slope was designed
corresponding to the to rock mass characteristics. Once the with the underestimated shear strength parameters.
GSI value has been estimated, these constants are The shear strength of the slope rock mass found in the
calculated as follows: back analysis is demonstrated in Fig. 8. Due to the popu-
  larity of the Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion, it is neces-
GSI  100
mb ¼ mi exp ð2Þ sary to express the rock mass strength in terms of the
28  14D
  cohesion and friction angle. Due to the non-linearity
GSI  100 encompassing in Hoek–Brown failure criterion, it is not
s ¼ exp ð3Þ
9  3D possible to establish a direct correlation between these two
criteria. This is done by fitting a tangent line to that part of
where mi is the material constant of intact rock and can be
the curve laid on the stress range equivalent to the 27 m
calculated from the tables proposed by Hoek (1990) and D
slope height. As shown in Fig. 8, the equivalent cohesion
is the disturbance factor of rock mass caused by excavation
and friction angle of rock mass are 0.19 MPa and 45°,
process. It varies form 0 for undisturbed in situ rock masses
respectively.
to 1 for very disturbed rock masses. Since the Kargar
Despite the simplicity of the limit equilibrium method, it
trench has not been excavated by blasting method, this
has some disadvantages as discussed earlier. To incorporate
factor is assumed zero.
The back analysis procedure which is performed in a
trial and error approach can be carried out using the fol-
lowing steps:
(a) Primarily, the GSI value which is called GSI(s) is
guessed then the constant s is calculated by the
utilization of Eq. 3.
(b) On considering the existing slip surface in limit
equilibrium software and applying the Hoek–Brown
failure criterion defined in Eq. 1, the constant m is
determined by trial and error technique to lead a
factor of safety equal to unity.
(c) The constant m calculated in the previous step is
substituted in Eq. 2 and new GSI value called GSI(m)
is obtained. These steps will continue until the
selected GSI(s) value become equal to the calculated
GSI(m) which is the goal of the back analysis.
To incorporate these calculations into computer, the
Slide software (Rocscience 2002) has been adopted with Fig. 6 Limit equilibrium model provided for back analysis of Kargar
regard to the high capability to model heterogonous east slope

123
Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192 189

70

60

50

40
GSI(m)

30

20

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
GSI (s)
Fig. 9 Distinct element model made for numerical back analysis of
Fig. 7 GSI determination by limit equilibrium back analysis method Kargar slope failure

1.4
determines displacements induced in the blocks by unbal-
Hoek-Brown
1.2 Mohr-Coulomb
anced forces. Joints are viewed as interfaces between the
blocks and are treated as a boundary condition rather than a
Shear stress (MPa)

1 special element in the model. Elastic and plastic behavior

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Normal stress (MPa)
Fig. 8 Hoek–Brown and equivalent Mohr–Coulomb shear strength
for failed rock mass
these limitations, numerical back analysis has been also
considered to study the failure mechanism in detail.
Numerical back analysis
In recognition of the controlling influence jointing on
complex rock slope deformation and their contribution to
progressive failure, distinct element technique (DEM) was
used. The distinct element method developed by Cundall
(1971) has been applied for the numerical back analysis of
Kargar slope failure because it proved powerful in mod-
eling of jointed rock masses. DEM treats the problem
domain as an assemblage of distinct, interacting bodies or
blocks subjected to external loads and expected to undergo
significant motion with time. Algorithms generally use a
force–displacement law to specify the interaction between
deformable intact rock blocks and law of motion, which
Hoek-Brown clasiffication
GSI= 33 sigci= 24 Mpa mi= 10
Hoek-Brown criterion
mb= 0.914 s= 0.00058
Mohr-Coulomb criterion
Coh.= 0.19 Mpa Fri.= 45 deg.
0.8 1 1.2
of blocks is introduced through their discretization into
internal constant-strain elements.
The distinct element modeling is performed to back
calculate the shear strength parameters of joint planes. The
geometry of Kargar slope made in UDEC 3.0 (Itasca 2002)
is depicted in Fig. 9 containing bedding planes (dip = 30),
J1 and J3 joint sets (dip = 70) oriented toward slope face
and J4 joint set (dip = 80) oriented in reverse direction. It
1.4 is assumed that the entire joints have identical shear
strength and their persistency is high compared to the slope
dimension. The model preparation for back analyzing the
slope failure consists of following steps:
(a) Applying in situ stress prior to the slope excavation
(b) Slope excavation and fluid flow analysis to apply
piezometric pressure
(c) Installation of support system and performing the
back analysis
Similar to the previous limit equilibrium model, the
existing conditions prior to the slope failure has been
modeled in sequence mentioned above. The vertical stress
was applied corresponding to the gravity of material and
the horizontal stress was defined with considering k = 2
(the ratio of horizontal to vertical stress). After the slope
excavation, transient fluid flow was carried out to calculate
the distribution of pore water pressure between joint
domains. Also the fully grouted rock bolts were modeled
by cable element integrated in UDEC. The main required
parameters for this type of the cable element are summa-
rized in Table 4.

123
190 Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192

Table 4 Mechanical characteristics of rock bolts used in distinct element model

Diameter Young’s modulus Allowable yield Grout shear stiffness Bond cohesive
(mm) (MPa) load (MN) (MN m-1 m-1) strength (MN/m)

32 200,000 0.32 5,800 0.8

Table 5 Definition of Coulomb parameters of joint sets for different both analytical and numerical methods were used. Owing
damage models to such poor quality condition and also based on the joint
Shear strength Damage Damage Damage spacing compared to the slope size, the analysis of slope
parameters model 1 model 2 model 3 failure could be examined by both continuum and discon-
tinuum analysis techniques. We applied the limit equilib-
Cohesion (MPa) 0.5 0.25 0.125
rium method to back calculate rock mass strength as a
Friction angle 30 30 30
continuum media. In other hand, DEM was considered to
provide a better insight into behavior of joints and pro-
Since compressive strength of the intact rock is very
gressive failure of slope. Therefore, the slope failure has
high compared to shear strength of discontinuities, shearing
been studied by two separate analysis strategies.
will control the failure occurrence. Therefore, only shear
The geological mapping revealed that the Kargar slope
strength of the discontinuity planes which is defined by
failure was influenced by a fault with north–west strike and
cohesion and friction angle in the Coulomb constitutive
dip angle of 65–80° near the failure area. Considering the
model were addressed in back analysis. Considering the
location and very steep angle of fault plane, the failure
lesser variability of the friction angle compared to the
could not have taken place under the fully structural
cohesion, back analysis modeling was carried out assuming
mechanism. Instead, it could be more probable that only
a constant discontinuity friction angle of 30°.
small portion of the slip surface may be located on the fault
The progressive failure and strength degradation of
plane and major remaining portion of the slip surface passed
discontinuity cohesion has been simulated with three
through the highly jointed rock mass. It should be empha-
damage models presented in Table 5. Results shown in
sized that the high depth and steep angle of slope face, the
Fig. 10 indicate that the slope is stable when the discon-
weight of the alluvium material, low shear strength of the
tinuity cohesion is 0.5 MPa in first model. The failure
rock mass and the fault plane, saturation of the rock mass
process initiates when the discontinuity cohesion is
and improper design of the support system were the main
reduced to 0.25 MPa (i.e., model 2) and final failure occurs
contributing sources of the failure occurrence.
when the discontinuity cohesion is further decreased to
The importance of the slope failure for determining
0.125 MPa. Also Fig. 11 illustrates the total displacement
shear strength properties of the rock mass led us to apply
at the top of the slope for different damage models. With
back analysis methods. Inherent complexities on failure
regard to the obtained results, the discontinuity cohesion is
initiation and its development caused different techniques
considered about 0.2 MPa at the moment of failure.
to be applied to back calculate the shear strength of the
After obtaining the shear strength parameters of dis-
rock mass and joint surfaces, respectively. This problem
continuities from back analysis, the slope behavior and
was studied using both limit equilibrium and numerical
failure mechanism is examined in the calibrated model
method. In limit equilibrium method, rock mass was con-
(cohesion of 0.2 MPa and friction angle of 30°). Figure 12
sidered as a continuum and its strength was determined
shows the shear displacement along discontinuities and
using Hoek–Brown failure criterion and GSI value by
mode of failure in alluvium material. The maximum shear
applying the specific back analysis procedure. The results
displacement is about 25 cm occurring along the bedding
showed that the GSI value of the failed mass had been 33 at
plane near the slope toe. The tension crack initiation and its
the instant of the failure. Based on the assumed failure
development in alluvium deposits (circle points) are well
criterion, the equivalent cohesion and friction angle have
modeled. The width of the unstable block measured with
been calculated 0.19 MPa and 45°, respectively. It must be
attention to the tension crack location approaches to 12 m
mentioned that the strength parameters assumed in the
which is very close to observed one in the field.
preliminary slope design were remarkably higher than
the parameters obtained during back analysis. Therefore,
Discussion and conclusions the underestimation of strength parameters was one of the
failure causes.
In this research, to study the failure mechanism and geo- Due to the simplistic assumptions of the limit equilib-
technical parameters of the rock mass at Kargar east slope rium technique, there is no possibility to study the inherent

123
Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192 191

Fig. 10 Distribution of
horizontal displacement in
different damage models

25
Damage model 1
Total displacement (cm)

Damage model 2
20 Damage model 3

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance from slope crest (m)

Fig. 11 Total displacement calculated in different assumed damage

models

deformation of rock mass, failure mechanism and other

complex behaviors which may be involved in slope failure.
To take into account these issues for back analyzing of the
slope failure, the distinct element method was applied. The
results showed that the DEM can be successfully used for
rock slope failure analysis especially in jointed and highly
jointed rock masses. The cohesion and friction angle of
joint surfaces obtained were 200 kpa and 30°, respectively.
Fig. 12 Distribution of shear displacement along discontinuities and
the failure mode of alluvium in calibrated model
The calibrated model showed good agreement with the
field observation of failure geometry. It should be stressed
that in distinct element method, discontinuities are con-
sidered as a fully persistent plane. This condition would be

123
192
most applicable at the stage of initiation of progressive
failure process where a significant portion of the slip sur-
face has already developed.
Despite the simplicity of presented back analysis
methods, it is necessary to be aware of few limitations of
analysis approaches and basic assumptions. Popescu and
Yamagami (1994) well addressed the challenges that the
back analysis methods faced on engineering applications.
The fundamental problem involved is always data quality,
and consequently, the back analysis approach must be
applied with care and the results interpreted with caution.
It is also to be pointed out that the three-dimensional
geometry may affect the back calculated strength
parameters of Kargar slope. To avoid the any adverse
effects of back calculated parameters on further stability
analysis, it is necessary to asses the influence of param-
eters variation on slope behavior using a sensitivity
analysis procedure.
Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank the management and
executive team of the Esfahan subway project in Alamoot Con-
struction Company for their great contributions to prepare the
required information.
References
Abramson LW, Lee T, Sharma S, Boyce G (2002) Slope stability and
stabilization methods, vol 2. Wiley, New York
Cundall PA (1971) A computer model for simulating progressive
large scale movements in blocky rock systems. In: Proceedings
123
Environ Earth Sci (2010) 60:183–192
of the symposium of international society of rock mechanics,
vol. 1. Paper No. II-8, Nancy, France
Eberhardt E (2003) Rock slope stability analysis—utilization of
advanced numerical techniques. A note printed in Earth and
Ocean Sciences at UBC, Vancouver, Canada
Eberhardt E, Stead D, Coggan JS (2004) Numerical analysis of
initiation and progressive failure in natural rock slopes—the
1991 Randa rockslide. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41(1):69–87
Einstein H, Veneziano D, Baecher B, O’Reilly J (1983) The effect of
discontinuity persistence on rock slope stability. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci Geomech Abstr 20(5):227–236
Hoek E (1990) Estimating Mohr–Coulomb friction and cohesion
values from Hoek–Brown failure criterion. Int J Rock Mech
Miner Sci Geomech Abstr 27(2):227–229
Hoek E, Brown T (1997) Practical estimates of rock mass strength. Int
J Rock Mech Min Sci 34(8):1165–1186
Itasca (2002) UDEC–Universal Distinct Element Code, version 3.0.
Itasca Consulting Group, Inc, Minneapolis
Nabavi MH (2003) Geological and geotechnical report of Esfahan
subway project—South stage. (in Farsi)
Popescu ME, Yamagami T (1994) Back analysis of slope failures—a
possibility or a challenge?. Proc. 7th Congress Intern. Assoc.
Engg. Geology, Lisbon. (6):4737–4744
Rocscience (2002) Slide user’s guide. Rocscience Inc., Toronto, ON,
Canada
Sharifzade M, Sharifi M, Delbari SM (2006) Stability analysis and
design of Kargar cut slope at Esfahan subway project. (in Farsi)
Sonmez H, Ulusay R (1999) Modifications to the geological strength
index (GSI) and their applicability to stability of slopes. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 36:743–760
Sonmez H, Ulusay R, Gokceoglu C (1998) A practical procedure for
the back analysis of the slope failures in closely jointed rock
masses. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 35(2):219–233
Stead D, Eberhardt E, Coggan JS (2006) Developments in the
characterization of complex rock slope deformation and failure
using numerical modeling techniques. Eng Geol 83(3):217–235
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.