Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/4534
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPantelidis, Lysandros-
dc.contributor.authorGriffiths, D.V.-
dc.date.accessioned2015-06-05T10:59:25Z-
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-09T13:52:12Z-
dc.date.available2015-06-05T10:59:25Z-
dc.date.available2015-12-09T13:52:12Z-
dc.date.issued2014-02-
dc.identifier.citationCanadian Geotechnical Journal, 2014, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 208-216en_US
dc.identifier.issn12086010-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/4534-
dc.description.abstractIn traditional allowable stress design, as known, the safety factor is calculated with respect to shear strength of soil(s) by dividing the available shear strength by the mobilized stresses. The limit-state method, on the other hand, compares — in the form of the inequality Ed ≤ Rd— the effects of all the actions, Ed, with the corresponding resistance of the ground, Rd. Although this method considers different loading conditions by using suitable combinations of design values, it is still based on direct comparison of the available shear strength with the mobilized stresses. In the present paper, various factoring strategies (in addition to the traditional one with respect to shear strength of soils) are integrated into a limit-state method framework. Eurocode 7 has been chosen for this purpose. The whole procedure aims at giving a more comprehensive insight into the design of slopes and the sensitivity of safety level of slopes to the various parameters. In addition, the proposed methodology, as shown, may result in a safety level of slopes signifi- cantly lower than the respective one obtained using the limit-state method in its traditional form. As man-made slopes that conform to design standards often fail in practice, even though conservative input values are used, these failures must be treated with more skepticism by practitioners adopting supplementary design practices such the one presented herein.en_US
dc.formatpdfen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofCanadian Geotechnical Journalen_US
dc.rights© Canadian Scienceen_US
dc.subjectSlope stabilityen_US
dc.subjectLoad and resistance factor design (LRFD)en_US
dc.subjectFactoring strategyen_US
dc.subjectUltimate limit stateen_US
dc.subjectLimit state methoden_US
dc.subjectEurocode 7en_US
dc.titleIntegrating Eurocode 7 (load and resistance factor design) using nonconventional factoring strategies in slope stability analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.collaborationCyprus University of Technologyen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Coloradoen_US
dc.collaborationNewcastle Universityen_US
dc.subject.categoryCivil Engineeringen_US
dc.journalsSubscriptionen_US
dc.reviewPeer Revieweden
dc.countryCyprusen_US
dc.countryUnited Statesen_US
dc.countryAustraliaen_US
dc.subject.fieldEngineering and Technologyen_US
dc.publicationPeer Revieweden_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1139/cgj-2013-0239en_US
dc.dept.handle123456789/148en
dc.relation.issue2en_US
dc.relation.volume51en_US
cut.common.academicyear2013-2014en_US
dc.identifier.spage208en_US
dc.identifier.epage216en_US
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.openairetypearticle-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Civil Engineering and Geomatics-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Engineering and Technology-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0001-5979-6937-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Engineering and Technology-
crisitem.journal.journalissn1208-6010-
crisitem.journal.publisherCanadian Science Publishing-
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα/Articles
CORE Recommender
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

11
checked on Nov 8, 2023

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

8
Last Week
0
Last month
0
checked on Oct 29, 2023

Page view(s) 5

664
Last Week
9
Last month
4
checked on Feb 19, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in KTISIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.