Skip to main content
Log in

Overturning stability of L-shaped rigid barriers subjected to rockfall impacts

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Landslides Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Reinforced concrete barriers are commonly used as defence measures in hilly areas to contain falling boulders and landslide debris. These barriers are conventionally designed to satisfy the conditions of force and momentum equilibrium with a factor of safety. A major limitation of this approach is that the inertial resistance of the barrier is neglected such that the design could be over-conservative. This paper presents a novel displacement-based approach for the assessment of overturning stability of rigid L-shaped barriers subjected to rockfall impacts. Analytical solutions, which are derived based on conservation of momentum and energy, are used to take into account the contributions of the self-weight and, thus, the inertial resistance of the barrier in resisting an impact. The actual amount of energy transferred from the impacting boulder to the barrier is considered by including the coefficient of restitution between the two objects. The accuracy of the analytical solutions has been confirmed by laboratory impact experiments. Numerical assessments conducted using the new solutions indicate that a reasonably sized rigid barrier, due to its own inertial resistance, may adequately withstand the impact action of a heavy boulder rolling down a hillslope without relying on any anchorage to its support. A range of geometric design of the barriers with L-shaped cross sections also has been considered and analysed. The new approach presented in this paper is easy to apply in practice and will be useful for engineers designing concrete barriers as passive rockfall mitigation measures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

l :

Length of base slab

c :

Length of side wall

COR:

Coefficient of restitution

d :

Height of side wall

g :

Gravitational acceleration

h :

Height of barrier

h i :

Vertical distance between point of impact and the axis of rotation

I θ :

Rotational inertia

KE0 :

Initial kinetic energy of boulder

KE1 :

Rebound kinetic energy of boulder

KE2 :

Kinetic energy gained by the barrier

M :

Total mass of barrier

M base :

Mass of barrier base slab

M side :

Mass of a single side wall

M stem :

Mass of stem wall

M o :

Overturning moment

M r :

Restoring moment

m :

Mass of boulder

n :

Number of side walls

PE:

Potential energy gained by the barrier due to rotation

R :

Distance between the axis of rotation and the point of impact

r base :

Distance between the axis of rotation and the centroidal axis of the base slab

r side :

Distance between the axis of rotation and the centroidal axis of the side wall

r stem :

Distance between the axis of rotation and the centroidal axis of the stem wall

v 0 :

Initial velocity of boulder

v 1 :

Rebound velocity of boulder

v 2 :

Velocity of barrier at the point of impact

w base :

Width of base slab

w side :

Width of side wall

w stem :

Width of stem wall

\( \overline{x} \) :

Horizontal distance to the barrier’s centre of gravity from global vertical axis

\( \overline{y} \) :

Vertical distance to the barrier’s centre of gravity from global horizontal axis

z :

Global axis (axis of rotation)

z c :

Centroidal axis

Δ :

Horizontal displacement of barrier

Δ C.G. :

Rise in the centre of gravity of barrier

Δ C.G. (crit) :

Rise of the barrier’s centre of gravity at the critical overturning condition

κ :

A dimensionless ratio considering mass and geometrical effects

θ :

Angle of rotation

θ crit :

Critical angle of rotation

\( \dot{\theta} \) :

Angular velocity

References

  • AASHTO (2014) AASHTO LRDF bridge design specifications, 7th edn. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Washington, D.C

    Google Scholar 

  • Ali M, Sun J, Lam N, Zhang L, Gad E (2014) Simple hand calculation method for estimating deflection generated by the low velocity impact of a solid object. Aust J Struct Eng 15(3):243–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourrier F, Nicot F, Darve F (2008) Physical processes within a 2D granular layer during an impact. Granul Matter 10(6):415–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CEB (1988) Concrete structures under impact and impulsive loading. Bulletin d’Information No. 187. Comité euro-international du béton (CEB), Lausanne

    Google Scholar 

  • CEN (2006) Eurocode 1—actions on structures—part 1–7: general actions—accidental actions. EN 1991–1-7. Brussels, Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN)

    Google Scholar 

  • Chau KT, Wong RHC, Lee CF (1998) Rockfall problems in Hong Kong and some new experimental results for coefficients of restitution. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 35(4–5):662–663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jankowski R (2010) Experimental study on earthquake-induced pounding between structural elements made of different building materials. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 39(3):343–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim K-M, Briaud J-L, Bligh R, Abu-Odeh A (2012) Design guidelines and full-scale verification for MSE walls with traffic barriers. J Geotech Geoenviron 138(6):690–699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwan JSH (2012) Supplementary technical guidance on design of rigid debris-resisting barriers, GEO Report No. 270, Geotechnical Engineering Office, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

  • Kwan JSH, Sun HW, Lam C, Koo RCH, Ho KKS (2016) Recent advances in landslide risk management measures in Hong Kong. Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Landslides, Napoli, Italy, pp 1219–1227

  • Lam NTK, Yong ACY, Lam C, Kwan JSH, Perera JS, Miri Disfani M, Gad E (2018) Displacement-based approach for the assessment of overturning stability of rectangular rigid barriers subjected to point impact. J Eng Mech. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0001383,04017161

    Google Scholar 

  • Micallef K, Sagaseta J, Fernández Ruiz M, Muttoni A (2014) Assessing punching shear failure in reinforced concrete flat slabs subjected to localised impact loading. Int J Impact Eng 74:14–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng CWW, Choi CE, Su AY, Kwan JSH, Lam C (2016) Large-scale successive boulder impacts on a rigid barrier shielded by gabions. Can Geotech J 53(10):1688–1699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paronuzzi P (1989) Probabilistic approach for design optimization of rockfall protective barriers. Q J Eng Geol 22(3):175–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patnaik A, Musa A, Marchetty S, Liang R (2015) Full-scale testing and performance evaluation of rockfall concrete barriers. Trans Res Rec 2552:27–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perera S, Lam N, Pathirana M, Zhang L, Ruan D, Gad E (2016) Deterministic solutions for contact force generated by impact of windborne debris. Int J Impact Eng 91:126–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun J, Lam N, Zhang L, Gad E, Ruan D (2014) Contact forces generated by fallen debris. Struct Eng Mech 50(5):589–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun J, Lam N, Zhang L, Ruan D, Gad E (2015) Contact forces generated by hailstone impact. Int J Impact Eng 84:145–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyllie DC (2015) Rock fall engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 270 p

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Financial support from the Australian Research Council (ARC) Discovery Project DP170101858 entitled New Approach for Design of Barriers for Impact is gratefully acknowledged. The third author is grateful for financial support from the theme-based research grant T22-603/15-N provided by the Research Grants Council of the Government of the Hong Kong SAR, China. This paper is published with the permission of the Head of Geotechnical Engineering Office and the Director of Civil Engineering and Development of the Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arnold C. Y. Yong.

Appendices

Appendix A

Rectangular

For a rectangular block with height h, length l and mass M, the rotational inertia about its centroidal axis and its base corner can be respectively expressed as:

$$ {I}_{\theta \left(\mathrm{centroid}\right)}=M\left(\frac{h^2+{l}^2}{12}\right) $$
(A1)
$$ {I}_{\theta \left(\mathrm{base}\right)}=M\left(\frac{h^2+{l}^2}{3}\right) $$
(A2)

L-shaped

Figure 7 shows an isometric view of the L-shaped barrier previously shown in Fig. 2. The distances between the global axis z and the centroidal axis of the stem wall zc(stem) and that of the base slab zc(base) are rstem and rbase respectively. The total rotational inertia is the sum of the moments of inertia of the wall Iz(stem) and of the base slab Iz(base). By the parallel axis theorem, the rotational inertia of the stem wall about axis z is:

Fig. 7
figure 7

A schematic L-shaped barrier and reference axes

$$ {I}_{z\left(\mathrm{stem}\right)}={I}_{z_{\mathrm{c}}\left(\mathrm{stem}\right)}+{M}_{\mathrm{stem}}{r}_{\mathrm{stem}}^2 $$
(A3)

which can be expanded to:

$$ {I}_{z\left(\mathrm{stem}\right)}={M}_{\mathrm{stem}}\left(\frac{d^2+{w}_{\mathrm{stem}}^2}{12}\right)+{M}_{\mathrm{stem}}\left[\left(\frac{d^2}{4}+{dw}_{\mathrm{base}}+{w}_{\mathrm{base}}^2\right)+{\left(\frac{w_{\mathrm{stem}}}{2}\right)}^2\right] $$
(A4)

Since wstem and wbase are typically much smaller than d, ignoring the contributions of their higher-order terms leads to:

$$ {I}_{z\left(\mathrm{stem}\right)}\approx {M}_{\mathrm{stem}}\left(\frac{d^2}{12}\right)+{M}_{\mathrm{stem}}\left(\frac{d^2}{4}+{dw}_{\mathrm{base}}\right) $$
(A5)

Substituting d = h − wbase (see Fig. 7) into Eq. A4 and rearranging thus gives:

$$ {I}_{z\left(\mathrm{stem}\right)}\approx \frac{M_{\mathrm{stem}}}{3}\left(h-{w}_{\mathrm{base}}\right)\;\left(h+2{w}_{\mathrm{base}}\right) $$
(A6)

According to Eq. A2, the rotational inertia of the rectangular base slab about the global axis z can be written as:

$$ {I}_{z\left(\mathrm{base}\right)}=\frac{M_{\mathrm{base}}}{3}\left({l}^2+{w}_{\mathrm{base}}^2\right) $$
(A7)

Therefore, the total rotational inertia of the barrier can be obtained by summing Eqs. A6 and A7:

$$ {I}_z\approx \frac{M_{\mathrm{stem}}}{3}\left(h-{w}_{\mathrm{base}}\right)\;\left(h+2{w}_{\mathrm{base}}\right)+\frac{M_{\mathrm{base}}}{3}\left({l}^2+{w}_{\mathrm{base}}^2\right) $$
(A8)

Expanding and ignoring the contribution of wbase2 leads to:

$$ {I}_z\approx \frac{M_{\mathrm{stem}}}{3}\left({h}^2+{hw}_{\mathrm{base}}\right)+\frac{M_{\mathrm{base}}{l}^2}{3} $$
(A9)

Equation A8 can be used to estimate the rotational inertia of an L-shaped barrier, but the result will be slightly less than the true value since the higher-order terms of wstem and wbase have been neglected. For example, for a barrier with h and b equal to 5 m and wstem and wbase equal to 0.5 m, the value of \( {I}_{z_1{z}_1} \) is underestimated by 5% if estimated using Eq. A9. This is deemed acceptable for the purpose of routine design since the error is on the safe side. In the main text, Iz is written as Iθ to denote that it is the rotational inertia about the axis of rotation.

Rectangular side walls

Figure 8 shows an L-shaped barrier with two rectangular side walls. The side walls have height d and length c, and the mass of a single side wall is Mside. The rotational inertia of a single rectangular side wall about its centroidal axis zc is:

Fig. 8
figure 8

A schematic L-shaped barrier with rectangular side walls and reference axes

$$ {I}_{z_{\mathrm{c}}\left(\mathrm{side}\right)}={M}_{\mathrm{side}}\left(\frac{c^2+{d}^2}{12}\right) $$
(A10)

where d = h − wbase and c = l − wstem. By the parallel axis theorem, the side wall’s rotational inertia about the axis z is:

$$ {I}_{z\left(\mathrm{side}\right)}={I}_{z_{\mathrm{c}}\left(\mathrm{side}\right)}+{M}_{\mathrm{side}}{r}_{\mathrm{side}}^2 $$
(A11)

where rside is the distance between axes zc and z, and can be expressed as:

$$ {r}_{\mathrm{side}}^2={\left(\frac{d}{2}+{w}_{\mathrm{base}}\right)}^2+{\left(\frac{c}{2}+{w}_{\mathrm{stem}}\right)}^2 $$
(A12)

Substituting Eqs. A10 and A12 into Eq. A11 and rearranging gives:

$$ {I}_{z\left(\mathrm{side}\right)}={M}_{\mathrm{side}}\left[\left(\frac{c^2+{d}^2}{12}\right)+{\left(\frac{d}{2}+{w}_{\mathrm{base}}\right)}^2+{\left(\frac{c}{2}+{w}_{\mathrm{stem}}\right)}^2\right] $$
(A13)

So far, only a single side wall has been considered. For barriers with two identical side walls or more, the combined rotational inertia is therefore:

$$ {I}_{z\left(\mathrm{side}\right)}={nM}_{\mathrm{side}}\left[\left(\frac{c^2+{d}^2}{12}\right)+{\left(\frac{d}{2}+{w}_{\mathrm{base}}\right)}^2+{\left(\frac{c}{2}+{w}_{\mathrm{stem}}\right)}^2\right] $$
(A14)

where n is the number of side walls. Summing Eqs. A9 and A14 gives the rotational inertia of the whole barrier:

$$ {I}_z\approx \frac{M_{\mathrm{stem}}}{3}\left({h}^2+{hw}_{\mathrm{base}}\right)+\frac{M_{\mathrm{base}}}{3}\times {b}^2+{nM}_{\mathrm{side}}\left[\left(\frac{c^2+{d}^2}{12}\right)+{\left(\frac{d}{2}+{w}_{\mathrm{base}}\right)}^2+{\left(\frac{c}{2}+{w}_{\mathrm{stem}}\right)}^2\right] $$
(A15)

Equation A15 can be used to calculate the rotational inertia of an L-shaped barrier with any number of rectangular side walls or counterforts about axis z, which is the assumed axis of rotation. Equation A15 is only approximate but the error is on the safe side as previously discussed. In the main text, Iz is shown as Iθ to denote that it is the rotational inertia about the axis of rotation.

Appendix B

Figure 9 shows an L-shaped barrier at the critical overturning condition, that is, when the barrier’s centre of gravity lies immediately above its point of rotation. The following derivation is applicable to any shape so long as the barrier’s centre of gravity is known. As shown in Fig. 9, the initial centre of gravity is located at the horizontal distance \( \overline{x} \) measured from the outer edge of the stem wall and the vertical distance \( \overline{y} \) measured from the bottom of the base slab. The distance between the point of rotation and the centre of gravity is thus \( \sqrt{{\overline{x}}^2+{\overline{y}}^2} \). At the critical overturning condition, the barrier’s angle of rotation and the rise of the centre of gravity are denoted as θcrit and ΔC. G. (crit) respectively. From geometry, it can be shown that:

Fig. 9
figure 9

Cross-section of a schematic L-shaped barrier at critical overturning condition

$$ {90}^{{}^{\circ}}={\theta}_{\mathrm{crit}}+\beta $$
(B1)

Substituting \( \beta ={\tan}^{-1}\left(\frac{\overline{y}}{\overline{x}}\right) \) and rearranging thus gives:

$$ {\theta}_{\mathrm{crit}}={90}^{{}^{\circ}}-{\tan}^{-1}\left(\frac{\overline{y}}{\overline{x}}\right) $$
(B2)

The rise of the centre of gravity, ΔC.G. (crit), can be expressed as:

$$ {\varDelta}_{\mathrm{C}.\mathrm{G}.\left(\mathrm{crit}\right)}=\sqrt{{\overline{x}}^2+{\overline{y}}^2}-\overline{y} $$
(B3)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lam, C., Yong, A.C.Y., Kwan, J.S.H. et al. Overturning stability of L-shaped rigid barriers subjected to rockfall impacts. Landslides 15, 1347–1357 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-0957-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-0957-5

Keywords

Navigation