The current design standards for the use of anchors in slopes is based on two-dimensional (2D) limit equilibrium analyses. Anchors are considered as discrete loads and the 2D anchor, factored based on the spacing distance, corresponds to extending anchors indefinitely in the third dimension. A three-dimensional (3D) analysis offers a more realistic representation of the problem, including the true discrete nature of the anchor point loads. This paper explores the typical differences between analyzing anchors in 2D and 3D, using four typical conceptual models. Slopes with constant cross sections were shown to be adequately represented by the traditional 2D approach. The maximum difference between 2D and 3D models was 21% and becomes negligible for lower anchor spacing values, as expected. A slope with an external load was analyzed to evaluate critical slip surfaces with lower aspect ratios. Slip surfaces with lower aspect ratios presented higher edge effects that contributed to the stability of the slope. The results indicate that optimum design requires the 3D evaluation of field conditions inducing low aspect ratios, such as concave and convex surfaces, weak layers, and external loads.
Subjects: anchor, limit equilibrium method, three-dimensional analysis
Author: Murray Fredlund, Gilson de F. N. Gitirana Jr., Ruth McKeown and HaiHua Lu