Numerical Evaluation of Geogrid-Reinforced Slopes under Various Soil and Geometric Configurations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31436/iiumej.v27i3.4705Keywords:
Geogrid reinforcement, Slope stability, SLOPE/W, Slope geometry, Reinforcement spacingAbstract
This study examines the stability of geogrid-reinforced slopes under different soil and geometric conditions using SLOPE/W. The Morgenstern–Price method was used to analyze three homogeneous soil parameter sets: silty clay, clayey sand, and clayey silt. Four slope inclinations (25°, 30°, 45°, and 60°) were considered, along with total slope heights of 18, 24, 30, and 36 m. The reinforced slopes were modeled using UX1100 uniaxial geogrid at vertical spacings of 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 m. Each reinforced model was compared with its corresponding unreinforced model under the same dry, drained, and static conditions, with pore-water pressure set to zero. The results show that FOS decreased as the slope inclination and total height increased. The calculated FOS also varied with the soil parameters. Silty clay generally produced the highest FOS, while clayey sand produced the lowest despite having a higher friction angle, due to the combined effects of cohesion, friction angle, and unit weight. As expected, the 0.5 m spacing produced the highest FOS among the three spacings because it provided more reinforcement layers within the same slope height. However, closer spacing did not provide adequate stability in every case. For the 36 m slope at 60°, the reinforced FOS values were 1.49, 1.06, and 1.17 for silty clay, clayey sand, and clayey silt, respectively, which were below the adopted requirement of 1.5. The findings show that geogrid spacing should be assessed alongside soil conditions and slope geometry. The results provide comparative trends for the idealized dry slope conditions considered and are not intended as site-specific design recommendations.
ABSTRAK: Kajian ini menilai kestabilan cerun bertetulang geogrid bagi keadaan tanah dan geometri yang berbeza menggunakan SLOPE/W. Kaedah Morgenstern–Price digunakan untuk menganalisis tiga set parameter tanah homogen, iaitu lempung berkelodak, pasir berlempung dan kelodak berlempung. Empat kecerunan, iaitu 25°, 30°, 45° dan 60°, dipertimbangkan bersama jumlah ketinggian cerun 18, 24, 30 dan 36 m. Cerun bertetulang dimodelkan menggunakan geogrid uniaxial UX1100 pada jarak menegak 0.5, 1.0 dan 1.5 m. Setiap model bertetulang dibandingkan dengan model tanpa tetulang yang sepadan dalam keadaan kering, tersalir dan statik yang sama, dengan tekanan air liang ditetapkan kepada sifar. Keputusan menunjukkan bahawa Faktor Keselamatan (FOS) menurun apabila kecerunan dan jumlah ketinggian cerun meningkat. Nilai FOS yang dikira turut berubah mengikut parameter tanah. Lempung berkelodak secara umumnya menghasilkan FOS tertinggi, manakala pasir berlempung menghasilkan FOS terendah walaupun mempunyai sudut geseran yang lebih tinggi, disebabkan oleh pengaruh gabungan kejelekitan, sudut geseran dan berat unit. Seperti yang dijangka, jarak 0.5 m menghasilkan FOS tertinggi antara tiga jarak yang dianalisis kerana lebih banyak lapisan tetulang digunakan pada ketinggian cerun yang sama. Walau bagaimanapun, jarak yang lebih rapat tidak memberikan kestabilan yang mencukupi bagi semua keadaan. Bagi cerun setinggi 36 m pada kecerunan 60°, nilai FOS bertetulang ialah 1.49, 1.06 dan 1.17 masing-masing untuk lempung berkelodak, pasir berlempung dan kelodak berlempung. Semua nilai tersebut berada di bawah keperluan FOS 1.5 yang digunakan dalam kajian. Dapatan menunjukkan bahawa jarak geogrid perlu dinilai bersama keadaan tanah dan geometri cerun. Keputusan ini memberikan trend perbandingan bagi keadaan cerun kering yang diidealkan dan tidak dimaksudkan sebagai cadangan reka bentuk khusus tapak.
Downloads
References
Gajamer V, Kumar A. (2023) A comprehensive review on rainfall-induced slope failures: Mechanism, models, and influencing factors. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, 303:177–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7245-4_16
Lias R, Jais IBM, Lat DC. (2022) Climatic influence on slope failure: A case study at Kem Terendak, Melaka. International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering and Technology, 13(1):39–49. https://doi.org/10.30880/IJSCET.2022.13.01.004
Kan?k M. (2022) Failure mechanism of a soil slope and stabilization method: A case study. F?rat University Journal of Experimental and Computational Engineering, 1(3):129–138. https://doi.org/10.5505/FUJECE.2022.35744
Shiraliyev N, Khalilova A, Abbasova A. (2024) Geotechnical justification for designing landslide prevention measures. Nature & Science, 6(10):28–38. https://doi.org/10.36719/2707-1146/49/28-38
Haque Nayem N. (2023) Enhancement of soil characteristics using different stabilization techniques. Journal of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering. https://doi.org/10.11648/J.JCCEE.20230804.12
Mizal-Azzmi N, Mohd-Noor N, Jamaludin N. (2011) Geotechnical approaches for slope stabilization in residential area. Procedia Engineering, 20:474–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROENG.2011.11.190
Palmeira EM, Araújo GLS, Santos ECG. (2021) Sustainable solutions with geosynthetics and alternative construction materials—A review. Sustainability, 13(22):12756. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU132212756
Idrus J, Hamzah N, Ramli R, Md Nujid M, Sadikon SF. (2023) Enhancing slope stability with different slope stabilization measures: A case study using SLOPE/W software. Jurnal Kejuruteraan, 35(6):1427–1434. https://doi.org/10.17576/JKUKM-2023-35(6)-15
Liu H, Zheng J, Zhang R, Xie P. (2022) Probabilistic stability analysis of reinforced soil slope with non-circular RLEM. Geosynthetics International, 30(4):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1680/JGEIN.21.00003
Zeng Y, Zhang Y, Hu W, Chen M, Hu Q, Liu X, Zhu X. (2024) A case study on soil slope landslide failure and parameter analysis of influencing factors for safety factor based on strength reduction method and orthogonal experimental design. PLOS ONE, 19(5):e0300586. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300586
Basta MM, Rabie MH, Mansour MA, Elbanna WM. (2024) A comparative study between soil nailing and berms for slope stabilization: Performance and analysis. Engineering Research Journal, 183(3):65–88. https://doi.org/10.21608/ERJ.2024.303147.1072
Jian-yong S, Sheng L. (2014) Slope stability analysis method considering transfer of sliding failure surface and influence of engineered berm. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 36(6):998–1004. https://doi.org/10.11779/CJGE201406002
Elahi TE, Islam MA, Islam MS. (2022) Parametric assessment of soil nailing on the stability of slopes using numerical approach. Geotechnics, 2(3):615–634. https://doi.org/10.3390/GEOTECHNICS2030030
Alok A, Burman A, Samui P, Kaloop MR, Eldessouki M. (2024) A generalized limit equilibrium-based platform incorporating simplified Bishop, Janbu and Morgenstern–Price methods for soil slope stability problems. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2024:3053923. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/3053923
Slope Engineering Branch, Public Works Department Malaysia. (2010) Guidelines for Slope Design. JKR 21500-0011-10. Jabatan Kerja Raya Malaysia.
Marto A, Yusoff SYM. (2017) Major soil type, soil classification, and soil maps. In: Soils of Malaysia, pp. 69–101. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/B21934-4.
Salmasi F, Abraham J, Nourani B. (2022) Determining the analysis of the stability of embankments against sliding and prediction of sliding and critical factor of safety. In: Novel Perspectives of Engineering Research, Vol. 9, pp. 98–125. https://doi.org/10.9734/BPI/NPER/V9/2028A
Zhang L, Peng B, Zhou S, Cui P, Liu Y. (2024) Numerical study on stability of geosynthetic-encased stone column-supported embankments based on equivalent methods. Computers and Geotechnics, 169:106179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2024.106179
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 IIUM Press

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.








