Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Slope Inclinometers For Landslides: Technical Development

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 12
At a glance
Powered by AI
Slope inclinometers are used to determine the magnitude, rate, direction, depth, and type of landslide movement.

A slope inclinometer is used to monitor the onset and continuation of deformation normal to the axis of a borehole casing by measuring the tilt of the casing.

A slope inclinometer contains accelerometers that measure the inclination of the casing with respect to vertical. Readings are taken starting from the bottom and moving incrementally up to determine changes in the shape and position of the casing over time.

Technical Development

Landslides Timothy D. Stark . Hangseok Choi


DOI 10.1007/s10346-008-0126-3
Received: 21 August 2006
Accepted: 26 July 2007 Slope inclinometers for landslides
© Springer-Verlag 2008

Abstract Slope inclinometers/indicators are used to determine the unit to enable measurements. The electrical cable linking the probe
magnitude, rate, direction, depth, and type of landslide movement. to the readout device is usually marked in 0.3 or 0.6-m increments
This information is usually vitally important for understanding the so the shape of the casing can be measured at consistent depths or
cause, behavior, and remediation of a landslide. However, many locations. The measurements are taken starting at the bottom of
inclinometer measurements fail to achieve these intended aims the inclinometer. Subsequent readings are made of the casing as
because of lack of appreciation of the many factors that need to be the probe is raised incrementally, usually in 0.3 or 0.6-m intervals,
correctly implemented during installation, monitoring, and data to the top of the casing. This process is conducted shortly after the
reduction to yield useful data. This paper presents some guidelines casing is installed to determine the initial shape of the casing, i.e.,
for understanding, installing, and interpreting slope inclinometers obtain the zero reading. The difference between the zero and
and presents three case histories that illustrate some of the pitfalls subsequent readings is used to determine the change in the shape
that can develop if these guidelines are not followed. and position of the initially vertical casing (Terzaghi and Peck
1967). As a landslide moves, the vertical casing moves in the
Keywords Slope stability . Instrumentation . Landslides . Slope direction of landsliding. Comparison of the verticality of the casing
inclinometer . Failure plane with time and width of the slide provides an insight to the
magnitude, rate, direction, depth, and type of the landslide
Introduction movement.
The slope inclinometer commonly used today is derived from a
prototype built in 1952 by Stanley D. Wilson. The inclinometer first Installation and monitoring of inclinometers
became commercially available in the late 1950s from the Slope The slope inclinometer installation and interpretation processes
Indicator Company which Stan Wilson founded (Green and involve several important factors or steps so the resulting
Mikkelsen 1986, 1988). A slope inclinometer is a device for measurements and difference between the zero and subsequent
monitoring the onset and continuation of deformation normal to readings are meaningful. First, the bottom of the inclinometer
the axis of the borehole casing by passing a probe along the casing must be located well below the potential zone of movement so the
(Dunnicliff 1988). Thus, an inclinometer monitors deformation bottom of the inclinometer does not translate. If the inclinometer
normal to the axis of the casing which provides a profile of is not located well below the zone of movement, the inclinometer
subsurface horizontal deformation. The depth at which shear will not capture the total amount of movement. In other words, the
movement is detected by the slope inclinometer is the depth of the inclinometer that is too shallow can yield too small of a movement,
failure surface. The portions of the casing that have not sheared if any, when compared to sufficiently deep inclinometers. This
represent the areas above and below the failure surface if there is discrepancy can lead to confusion about the type, size, and shape
one failure plane impacting the casing. of the slide mass, and/or the magnitude and rate of movement of
The inclinometer probe contains at least one, if not two, force- the slide, as will be illustrated in one of the case histories described
balanced servo-accelerometers that measure the inclination of the at the end of the paper. Second, the same probe and electrical cable
casing with respect to the vertical. If one accelerometer is used, the used for the zero reading should be used for subsequent readings
probe is called a uniaxial probe, and four passes of the probe are so all of the readings are comparable to the zero reading. It is also
required to measure the tilt of the casing in the four different preferable that the same person performs all of the readings so the
directions of movement (A0, A180, B0, and B180 directions which results do not have any bias or unwarranted differences from the
are discussed subsequently). The commonly used probe is a biaxial zero reading. These consistencies are important because the
probe which contains two perpendicular accelerometers, so only magnitude of movement, rate of movement, and direction of
two passes of the probe are required to measure movement in the movement are derived from the difference between the zero and
four different directions. One accelerometer measures the tilt in the subsequent readings, so using the same equipment, and ideally the
plane of the inclinometer wheels which tracks the longitudinal same operator, is critical to make this comparison meaningful. If
grove of the casing, while the other accelerometer measures the tilt different probes are used, the sensors can/will have different
in the plane perpendicular to the wheels. Thus, in a biaxial probe, sensitivities, zero voltages, and calibration factors that can result in
the A-sensor is oriented to the A direction which is parallel to the the appearance of a different inclination or shape of the casing. In
wheels of the probe, and the B-sensor is oriented transverse to the addition, the same electrical cable should be used so that the probe
wheels in the probe. This paper focuses on the use of a biaxial readings are taken at the same depth as the zero reading so the
probe. deflection is determined at the same depth. Unfortunately, in
Figure 1 shows the probe in the casing and the inclination of the practice, it is common for one entity to install and start measuring
casing at every measuring point, θ, with respect to the vertical. The the slope inclinometer casings for a period of time. For some
inclinometer probe is connected to a power source and readout reason(s), another entity is then retained to measure the casings

Landslides
Technical Development
interpretation of the results and precision of the inclinometer
measurements are described in the following sections.

Importance of slope inclinometer data

Magnitude and location of movement


The inclinometer probe does not provide horizontal movement of
the casing directly. As shown in Fig. 1, the probe measures the tilt of
the casing which can be converted to a horizontal movement. In
Fig. 1, the angle θ is the angle of tilt measured by the inclinometer
probe, and L is the measurement interval. The measurement
interval is recommended to be the distance between the probe
wheel carriages to achieve the maximum precision as shown in
Fig. 1a. If the measurement interval is greater than the length of the
wheelbase, deformation profiles of the casing are not smooth
enough to obtain the required precision. A greater interval may
sometimes be used with little loss of accuracy if thin shear zones do
not exist (Dunnicliff 1988; Green and Mikkelsen 1988). This
discussion highlights the importance of using the same probe and
same measurement depths so subsequent values of tilt, i.e.,
horizontal movement, can be compared because the tilt is a
function of the measurement interval.
The deviation from vertical, i.e., horizontal displacement, is
determined by the sine function and expressed as follows:

Deviation from vertical ¼ L  sin θ (1)

The vertical deviation at each measurement interval is the


lateral position of the casing relative to the bottom of the casing
because the bottom of the casing remains fixed and does not move
laterally. The deviation values can be plotted as an incremental
displacement or slope change profile (i.e., slope change vs. depth)
to show movement at each measurement interval. The incremental
displacement profile is useful to dramatize the location of the
deformation zone. A spike in this plot indicates the location of
movement, i.e., the failure plane (see Fig. 2a).
Integration of the slope change, i.e., deviation, between any two
measurement points yields the relative deflection between these
points. The total horizontal displacement, i.e., cumulative dis-
placement, profile of the casing is achieved by summing the
Fig. 1 a Principles of inclinometer configuration of inclinometer equipments. b individual lateral deviations from the bottom of the casing to the
Illustration of inclinometer operation (modified from Dunnicliff 1988 and Slope
top. This summation process is described in Fig. 1b and is shown as
Indicator 2005)
ΣLisinθi in Fig. 1b. The cumulative horizontal displacement profile
(see Fig. 2b) provides a representation of the actual deformation
usually with their probe instead of the initial probe. If litigation pattern (Dunnicliff 1988).
develops, the causation expert has to try to combine the data from It is often difficult to determine the zone of movement within a
the two or more different probes and operators. This is frequently sliding mass from undisturbed samples. As a result, the
difficult to impossible because the zero readings for each probe and incremental deflection and cumulative horizontal displacement
depths of the readings are usually different. This makes determin- profiles shown in Fig. 2 are usually the most reliable means to
ing the magnitude, rate, and direction of cumulative movement determine the zone of shear movement. The cumulative displace-
difficult and extremely time consuming, if not practically ment from inclinometers installed across the width of the slide
impossible during the rigors of litigation (ASTM D 7299 2007). mass should be plotted on a plan view of the slide mass with time
Many inclinometer projects fail to achieve the intended aim to investigate the geometry of the slide mass. This plot also
because of lack of appreciation of the many factors that need to be indicates which portion of the slide mass is moving the fastest. This
correctly implemented during installation, monitoring, and data plot also helps determine the limits of the slide mass.
reduction (Green and Mikkelsen 1986). The precision of inclinom-
eter measurement is limited both by the sensitivity of the Rate of movement
inclinometer probe and by the reading operations that require Another purpose of inclinometer measurements is to determine
successive readings with the same orientation of the instrument at the rate of shear movement. The rate of movement is frequently
the same depth in the casing. Factors affecting the proper more important than the magnitude of movement because it

Landslides
Print will be in black and white

Fig. 2 Example of inclinometer data (I-1 in case no. 3) plotted in terms of a incremental displacement and b cumulative deflection

Landslides
Technical Development
determines whether or not the slide is accelerating, decelerating, or critical cross-section is important for determining causation, back
continuing at the same rate. Of course, if the slide is accelerating or calculation of shear strength parameters, and design of remedial
even maintaining the same rate, evacuation of the affected area measures. The direction of movement can also be used to
should be considered. If the slide is slowing, evacuation may not be determine if the slide is moving as a single unit or not, which
necessary and remedial measures may be possible. The rate of can facilitate determining causation and remediation.
movement can be assessed from a plot of cumulative displacement The horizontal displacement profiles of the casing are usually
versus time data as shown in Fig. 3. determined using the data from the A- and B-axes of the
Whether the slide is accelerating or moving at the same rate inclinometer casing. These axes are mutually perpendicular
is also important to determine shear strength and potential for vertical planes as shown in Fig. 1a. The A-axis is usually oriented
strength loss. For example, if the shear zone is not at residual in the direction of slide movement during installation of the casing.
strength, strength loss will occur with continued movement until These two axes are equipped for the use of two sensors (A and B
the residual condition is reached. This strength loss phenomenon sensors) in a biaxial probe (i.e., biaxial sensors) that is commonly
can result in acceleration of the slide mass and progressive used in practice.
failure of the slope (Skempton 1985). The rate of movement is Two sets of casing grooves allow the inclinometer probe to be
also of importance to investigate the effect of rainfall, slope oriented in either of two planes set at 90° to each other. Thus,
loading, toe excavation, and remedial measures on slope horizontal components of movement, both transverse and parallel
stability. to any assumed direction of sliding, can be computed from the
The displacement vs. time profile at a specific depth interval is inclinometer measurements (Mikkelsen 1996). The B sensor data
useful to determine the rate of movement at that depth. This obtained with the biaxial probe are less accurate and more
profile is shown in Fig. 3 and shows the change in cumulative sensitive to curvature of the casing than those of the A sensor
movement with time. Once detecting the active shear zone, the rate because the size of the casing groove controls the B-axis sensor
of movement can be determined by plotting the cumulative alignment (Green and Mikkelsen 1988). The wheels of the probe are
displacement vs. time. Usually, the shear zone is less than a few designed narrower than the grooves in the casing so the wheels
meters thick, and thus the sum of change over this zone is have some freedom to move side to side. Because the A-axis is in
representative of the magnitude and rate of the entire landslide line with the wheels, it is not affected by this possible and usual side
(Mikkelsen 1996). An increasing slope of the cumulative displace- to side movement of the probe (Richardson 2002). However, the B-
ment vs. time relationship represents an accelerating movement, a axis readings will be affected by the location of the wheels in the A-
decreasing slope represents a decelerating slope, and no slope axis grooves. Thus, for the biaxial inclinometer, it is generally
change represents movement at the same rate. recommended that the A-axis sensor (i.e., parallel to the wheels) be
oriented in the principal direction of the landslide so deformation
Direction of movement corresponds to a positive change. The direction of the landslide is
Determining the direction of movement is important because the usually marked A0 and corresponds to the positive change in
critical cross-section should be parallel to the direction of movement (Cornforth 2005; Mikkelsen 1996).
movement. Knowing the direction of movement can reduce the If the A-axis is perfectly aligned with the direction of landslide
number of cross-sections that need to be considered in the stability movement, the entire shear movement will be measured in the A-
analyses and remedial design because the various cross-sections axis and no movement will be detected in the B-axis. However, it is
should be parallel to the direction of movement. Locating the difficult to determine and align the A-axis in the exact direction of
the landslide, especially if the slide is not a single unit. Thus, the
actual magnitude and direction of movement are determined by
vector summation of the two components of movement measured
in the A- and B-axes. This summation is illustrated in Fig. 4 where
the resultant of movement is determined from the magnitude of
movement of the A- and B-axes and the orientation of the A0
direction. Figure 4 shows the resultant magnitude of movement is
110 mm and the direction of the resultant is S47°E based on the A0
being oriented S20°E and the shear movement being 50 and 98 mm
in the B- and A-axes, respectively. Thus, determining the direction
of the A0 direction is important for determining the direction of
the resultant movement.
Print will be in black and white

The direction of the A-axis is usually determined using a


compass. The potential problem with using a compass is that
sometimes, a metal casing is used to case the upper portion of the
hole and to protect the inclinometer from vandalism. This metal
casing can affect the compass reading. This has lead to two
instances where experts did not agree on the direction of landslide
movement until the error was corrected. This error can be avoided
by placing a straight object, e.g., a board or tape measure, across
the casing in line with the A-axis and holding the compass well
above the metal casing to measure the orientation of the straight
Fig. 3 Example of inclinometer data plotted in terms of displacement versus time object.

Landslides
able to detect large horizontal movements, but probably will not be
sensitive enough to detect the onset of movement. To facilitate
detection of small movements, the inclinometer casing should be
made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic that will readily deform
when subjected to movement as is currently used in practice.
The internal diameter of the inclinometer casing usually ranges
from 40 to 90 mm (Abramson et al. 2002). Increasing the diameter
of the casing will increase the precision of the movement, so the
largest casing size should be used where possible. Large diameter
casings also allow more shear deformation to occur before the
inclinometer probe is not able to pass the distorted segment of the
casing. When the diameter of the casing has been reduced to a
diameter that does not allow the probe to pass, the inclinometer is
referred to as “sheared off” and must be replaced. However, the
casing still might accommodate a time-domain reflectometry cable
which can remotely sense the onset of movement.
After the borehole is complete, the PVC plastic casing is coupled
or glued together in 1.5 to 3.0-m lengths. The casing is lowered into
the borehole and oriented so the A-axis is aligned in the direction
of movement. The groove in the direction of movement should be
marked as A0 to facilitate future movements.
An important aspect of inclinometer installation is the backfill
used between the inclinometer casing and the borehole. The
annular space between the casing and borehole wall can be
backfilled with grout, sand, or pea gravel to ensure that casing
movements reflect soil movement and not simply movement of the
casing in the borehole. Among the possible backfill materials, grout
is the most desirable backfill because grout provides a rigid
Fig. 4 Determining the resultant magnitude and direction of movement using the connection between the soil and casing so movement of the soil is
A- and B-axes translated directly to the casing. Thus, it reflects an accurate
representation of the soil movement. In addition, if sand or pea
gravel is used to fill the annular space, voids can develop where the
Proper installation and monitoring of inclinometers backfill bridges the annular gap. This gap can allow the casing to
deform into the void which will produce errors in the inclinometer
Casing installation measurements and/or false indications of movement, as shown in
To reduce errors in inclinometer measurements, it is recom- Fig. 5 at a depth of about 12 m. The movement indicated in Fig. 5 at
mended that the inclinometer casing be installed as straight and a depth of 12 m is in the opposite direction of the slide movement at
vertical as possible. Errors in inclinometer measurements are a depth of about 31 m. Pea gravel or gravel can also allow the
proportional to the product of casing inclination and angular inclinometer to experience greater deformation than grout. In one
changes in sensor alignment. Therefore, tight specifications on case experienced by the authors, an inclinometer backfilled with
borehole verticality and drilling techniques are preferable (Green pea gravel recorded a deformation of 88.9 mm, even though the
and Mikkelsen 1986, 1988). In addition, the bottom of the diameter of the inclinometer casing is only 47.6 mm. This can
inclinometer casing should be fixed from translation so the total result in confusion because the deformation exceeds the diameter
deformation can be calculated. Thus, the borehole should be of the casing.
advanced to stable ground. This assessment should be based on Grout can be delivered either through a tremie pipe inside the
site-specific factors. A depth of about 6 m or more below the casing or through an external tremie pipe outside the casing.
elevation of the expected active zone of movement is suggested. It Cornforth (2005) recommends the use of an external tremie pipe
is convenient to advance one borehole to a greater depth than because this method does not coat any part of the inner grooves of
required for inclinometer measurement and to use the bottom the inclinometer casing with grout. A grout backfill for an
length of the casing for checking the instrument. In addition, inclinometer should consist of a cement–bentonite–water mixture.
readings from this depth can help in detecting and correcting Initially, cement is mixed with water and then sodium bentonite
systematic errors (Dunnicliff 1988; Richardson 2002). A case powder is added slowly. Mixing continues until the slurry reaches
history is presented subsequently that illustrates the confusion that the consistency of a thick cream. The sodium bentonite provides
can develop if an inclinometer is not fixed in stable ground. plasticity to the grout, which helps to suspend cement particles in a
The inclinometer casing should be flexible enough to move with high water–cement ratio mixture, prevents shrinkage during
the soil when the soil deforms laterally. This is especially true if the setting, and minimizes bleed (Mikkelsen 2002; Mikkelsen and
inclinometer will be used as a warning system to notify nearby Green 2003). Of course, the inclinometer should be grouted from
residents of increased landslide movement. Frequently, at sites the bottom to the top.
with squeezing ground and/or difficult drilling, a metal casing is When inclinometer backfilling is complete, the top of the
used. The inclinometer inside the metal casing will probably be inclinometer casing is cut off and protected from traffic and

Landslides
Technical Development
Print will be in black and white

Fig. 5 Example of inclinometer data (I-1 in case no. 3) after readings shown in Fig. 2

vandalism usually with a steel casing. As mentioned previously, the zero readings (Cornforth 2005). Cornforth (2005) recommends the
horizontal orientation of the A0 groove should be accurately use of a dummy probe to check that there are no obstructions in
measured using a compass and marked for identification. It is the casing after the installation of the inclinometer casing before
advisable to wait 1 to 3 days for the grout to set before taking the using the “production” probe to obtain the zero readings.

Landslides
Inclinometer monitoring error is a combination of both random and systematic errors and is
The “zero” readings are important because all subsequent incli- important in landslides that have not moved significantly. If the
nometer readings are referenced to the changes from the zero movement measured in a slope inclinometer does not exceed the
measurements. The zero or initial measurement of the original system field accuracy, the consultant/expert should view this
profile should be established by at least two sets of readings. If any movement with caution and within the expected error of the probe.
set of readings deviate from the other, these reading should be This will prevent a false conclusion that a landslide exists because
rechecked (Cornforth 2005; Mikkelsen 1996). the movements are within the expected error and thus may not be
Using the same inclinometer probe used for the zero reading, slide-related. Therefore, understanding the typical errors that exist
the tilt measurements should begin from the stable bottom of the in inclinometers is important for consultants/experts to evaluate
inclinometer. The probe should not hit the bottom of the borehole the presence, character, and causation of a landslide.
when it is lowered, so the length of the borehole should be
documented and the probe is slowly lowered using the intervals on Random errors versus systematic errors
the cable to the desired depth. Before starting the zero measure- Mikkelsen (2003) indicates that a random error is typically no
ments, the probe should be held in the same position for at least 10 more than ±0.16 mm for a single reading interval and accumulates
min so the probe can adjust to the temperature in the borehole. at a rate equal to the square root of the number of reading intervals
This procedure prevents errors due to sensor warm-up drift over the entire casing. On the other hand, the systematic error is
(Cornforth 2005; Richardson 2002). about 0.13 mm per reading under controlled laboratory conditions,
For the first measurements after the “zero” readings, the probe and it accumulates arithmetically (Slope Indicator 2005). Thus,
is lowered to the bottom of the casing with the wheels in the A0 systematic errors are more important and significant than random
groove. When the probe reaches the bottom of the inclinometer, errors and should be avoided.
the cable is clamped in the jaws of the pulley on the foot marker The systematic errors may mask shear movements occurring at
corresponding to the lowest depth reached in the zero readings. slip surfaces and thus should be evaluated and corrected during
The probe should then be raised to the surface in the intended data processing. Mikkelsen (2003) provides an explanation of
increments with readings of the A0 and B0 directions at each systematic errors and methods to detect and correct systematic
interval. The measurement interval equal to the wheel-base of the errors. The main types of systematic errors are bias-shift error,
probe is commonly used to achieve the maximum precision. The sensitivity drift, rotation error, and depth positioning error, each of
B0 direction is at 90° clockwise from the A0, and the tilt in the B- which are summarized in the following subsections. Systematic
axis is measured by the second sensor in the probe. After all errors can be minimized by installation of casings that are vertical
readings are taken with the wheels in the A0 groove and the probe and free from excessive curvature and by using mathematical
reaches the surface, the probe is carefully removed and rotated by correction procedures. However, random errors cannot be
180° so that the lower wheels are inserted into the A0 groove and corrected but are less influential because they tend to remain
another set of readings is obtained in the A180 and B180 directions. constant, whereas the systematic errors tend to vary with each
Measuring locations must be identical to those in the first traverse. survey (Mikkelsen 2003). Thus, the limit for precision for a 30-m
This second sets of readings should have the opposite tilt of the measurement (i.e., 60 reading intervals with a 0.5-m probe) is
first set (Cornforth 2005; Dunnicliff 1988; Mikkelsen 1996; about ±1.24 mm after all of the systematic errors are removed.
Richardson 2002) which provides a check on probe accuracy.
Inclinometer measurements generally are recorded as the Bias-shift error
algebraic sums or differences of the pair of readings in the two- The sensor bias is the reading of the probe when it is vertical.
pass survey. Computing the algebraic difference of the readings for Initially, the sensor bias is set close to zero in the factory, but it may
each depth eliminates errors resulting from irregularities in the change during field use. If the sensor bias is zero, the readings of
casing and instrument calibration (Abramson et al. 2002; A0 and A180 should be numerically identical but opposite in sign.
Mikkelsen 1996). Dunnicliff (1988) recommends checking incli- Thus, the magnitude of the bias shift can be evaluated using the
nometer measurements by calculating the algebraic sum of each checksum, which should be zero if there is no bias shift. However,
pair of readings 180° apart and refers to this as the “checksum”. there is usually a slight bias in the output of the probe. This is
Ideally, the checksum should be zero because the two readings have referred to as a bias shift or zero shift. This bias-shift error is
opposite signs. However, in practice, checksums are not zero related to a small change in the bias of the inclinometer probe over
because of bias in the probe, variations in the grooves, and the time. The bias-shift error is the most common systematic error and
positioning of the wheels and/or probe (Slope Indicator 2005). If can be corrected by the standard two-pass reading of both A0 and
checksums do not remain constant, errors have occurred and the A180 directions (Mikkelsen 2003). The bias-shift error can be
probe should be recalibrated before subsequent measurements. usually eliminated during data reduction, but sometimes intro-
duces errors if there is a change in the bias between opposite
Inclinometer accuracy traverse readings, i.e., 180° apart, or if the opposite traverse
The precision of inclinometer measurements depends on several readings are missed. If the error is systematic, the bias is a constant
factors such as the design of the sensor and quality of the casing, value that can be added to each reading and appears as a linear
probe, cable, and readout system. It is extremely important that all component in the inclinometer plot (Slope Indicator 2005).
of the grooves are carefully cleaned and the sensor unit is The bias-shift errors may result from slight jarring of the probe
calibrated regularly. Even if all of these factors are addressed, there due to rough handling by the operator such as dropping or
still can be errors in the readings. Product literature from Slope bumping the probe against the pulley assembly and from warm-up
Indicator (2005) states that the system field accuracy is empirically drift (i.e., sensor temperature equalization; Mikkelsen 2003; Slope
±7.8 mm per 30 m of casing, subject to some qualifiers. This total Indicator 2005). The bias-shift error (BSE) caused by a constant

Landslides
Technical Development
bias shift in a 500-mm Digitilt probe (Slope Inclinometer 2005) is
expressed by Mikkelsen (2003) as:

BSE ¼ ð0:01 mmÞ  b  N (2)

where BSE is the total bias-shift error (mm), b is the bias in units,
and N is the number of reading interval. For example, in a 30-m-
long inclinometer casing, N would be 60. For a bias-shift (b) of 10
units, the total bias-shift error at the top of the casing is equal to 6
mm. Thus, the readings or displacements at the top of the casing
should be reduced by 6 mm, and the readings below the top casing
should be proportionally reduced depending on depth.
The bias-shift error can be removed by subtracting the algebraic
difference between readings of A0 and A180 (i.e., A0 − A180) at
each measurement interval. The correction should be made to the
measurements in stable ground where no later displacement is
expected. Therefore, it is beneficial to have a significant length of
the casing in the stable ground, typically, 1.5 to 3.0 m into stable
ground (Mikkelsen 2003). The bias-shift error at a certain data set Fig. 6 Schematic illustration of rotation error as a function of cross-axis inclination
is eliminated by correcting differences between the initial and (from Mikkelsen 2003)
subsequent (A0 − A180) readings along with a correction unit that
is the difference of the mean bias shifts between the two data sets recommended to use the same probe during the entire monitor-
over the stable ground. The difference between the corrected ing program.
subsequent data set and the initial data set should be close to zero
in the stable ground where no lateral displacement is expected. The Depth positioning error
corrected data are then converted to lateral displacement using the The depth positioning error results from the probe being
probe calibration factor (i.e., 0.01 mm/unit). positioned at different depths than the “zero” readings in the
casing. The difference in the vertical position of the probe is usually
Sensitivity drift caused by a change in the cable reference, cable length, and/or
The causes of sensitivity drift are a drift in the operation amplifier compression or settlement of the casing (Mikkelsen 2003; Slope
in the pre-amplifier of the probe. The sensitivity drift is directly Indicator 2005). Cornforth (2005) concludes that depth positioning
proportional to the magnitude of the readings, and it varies errors are not common in most landslide cases, but it is time-
between data sets but is relatively constant for each data set consuming to quantify and correct the depth positioning errors in
(Mikkelsen 2003). This is the least common error, but it is often the practice. The top of each casing should be surveyed periodically to
most difficult error to identify. If the error is recognized, it is easy determine if a change in elevation has occurred due to slide
to correct by having the probe factory calibrated and then applying movement, and the same cable used for the zero readings should
a suitable correction factor (Mikkelsen 2003). be used for subsequent readings.

Rotation error Slope inclinometer case histories


The rotation error occurs when the inclinometer casing deviates
significantly from vertical. If the accelerometer sensing axis in the Case no. 1—Locating the critical failure surface and back analyses
A-axis is rotated slightly towards the B-axis, the A-axis acceler- Slope inclinometers are vitally important in determining the
ometer will be sensitive to inclination in the B-axis. The B critical failure surface. Determining the critical failure surface is
component in the A-axis reading is the A-axis rotation error, as can important for defining the size of the slide mass, causation, and
be seen in Fig. 6. The rotation error angle (Δ) in Fig. 6 can be back calculation of the mobilized shear strength parameters. One
expressed as: of the main uncertainties in the stability analysis is the shear
strength of the problematic layer at the time of sliding. This is
r 
problematic because of difficulties in obtaining a representative
Δ ¼ sin1 (3)
s and undisturbed sample of the material, the fact that the sample is
probably not representative of the shear strength before sliding,
and the ability to simulate the field in laboratory size devices. To
The rotation error can be detected by identifying that the casing overcome this dilemma, a limit-equilibrium back analysis of the
is severely out of vertical alignment by the shape of the casing landslide is usually conducted to investigate the shear behavior
deformation and by observing that the lateral displacement graphs and overall shear strength of the weak layer during the history of
in both directions (A- and B-axes) resemble each other (Cornforth the slope. However, a proper back analysis is frequently not
2005). The rotation error correction can be accommodated in the performed for many reasons, including the improper use of slope
DigiPro or Gtilt software by entering the correction value as sine of inclinometer data and search for the critical failure surface.
the rotation error, Δ, (Mikkelsen 2003). In practice, rotation Several other cases could have been used to demonstrate the
errors can occur when a replacement or different inclinometer appropriate use of slope inclinometers in determining the critical
probe is used for measurement at a site. Therefore, it is highly failure surface and conducting a back analysis of the landslide than

Landslides
the one presented. However, Fig. 7 presents a cross-section from weak layer. The back analysis must use the critical failure surface so
one case history that involves a single-family residence atop an the minimum value of friction angle, ϕ, is obtained. A common
approximately 70-m-high cutslope for a major east–west state problem is a search for the critical failure surface instead of forcing
highway. This residence and a prior residence in the essentially the failure surface to pass through the sheared inclinometers and
same location were distressed by the cutslope. The opposing expert the observed surface features. It is proper to conduct a search for
in this case failed to utilize the only slope inclinometer at the the failure surface that yields the lowest back-calculated friction
cutslope toe when locating and defining the critical failure surface. angle between the inclinometer(s) and the surface features. This
Instead of considering a deep bedrock landslide through the can be accomplished by fixing the failure surface in the slope
inclinometer which was “sheared off” at a depth of 10 m at the stability software at the location of the inclinometers and the
slope toe, the expert concluded that periodic heave of the highway surface features and allowing the software to search between these
pavement was caused by expansive soils, differential settlement fixed points.
caused by a transition from natural to fill material, and/or poor This process should be repeated for several cross-sections to
pavement construction. This might be a reasonable hypothesis determine the critical cross-section and the critical failure surface.
if the inclinometer at the cutslope toe had not been sheared off The critical cross-section is not automatically located at the center
at a depth of 10 m. The stability analyses performed by this of the slide mass. In addition, the critical cross-section should be
expert for the slides on the face of the cutslope also did not parallel to the direction of movement determined from the slope
include the slope inclinometer as shown in Fig. 7. Figure 7 also inclinometers. The resultant vector of each inclinometer should be
shows that a deep bedrock failure surface can incorporate/explain plotted on a plan view to determine the direction of sliding and the
the heave of the highway pavement, the sheared inclinometer, the various cross-sections that should be drawn parallel to this
distressed residence, the failure surface found in large diameter direction. It is possible for a landslide not to move as a single
borings near the residence, and the slope inclinometers installed unit, and thus, all of the inclinometer direction vectors may not be
adjacent to the residence. in the same direction.
All slope inclinometers should be included on the various cross- In summary, all of the inclinometer data should be used with
sections to better understand the location of the critical failure the surface information to establish as much of the critical failure
surface. Even inclinometers that do not show any shear movement surface as possible. In the lengths of the failure surface that are not
should be included because the failure surface must be below these well defined by inclinometer data, a search can be conducted using
inclinometers. The depth of shear movement in inclinometers that slope stability software to locate the critical failure surface between
are greater than 15 to 30 m, depending on the geology, should be the inclinometer and surface data. This should be repeated for a
included on the cross-section but given different symbols variety of cross-sections parallel to the direction of movement
depending on the distance from the cross-section. The inclin- determined from slope inclinometer data to locate the critical
ometers more than 15 to 30 m away should not be given less weight cross-section and determine the mobilized shear strength.
than closer inclinometers when determining the critical failure
surface. Using the appropriate slope inclinometers and the location Case no. 2—Determining the magnitude and direction of movement
of surface features, possible failure surfaces should be sketched on In this case, the opposing experts reported different directions or
the cross-section. The failure surface that explains all of the orientations for the direction of movement measured in a number
observed movement and distress is probably the critical failure of slope inclinometers. Coincidently, the different directions
surface. supported the different causation hypotheses that were being
A back-analysis should be conducted for each cross-section to advanced by the two experts. One example of the difference in the
determine the critical cross-section and the mobilized shear calculated vectors for this case is one expert reported the direction
strength parameter, i.e., friction angle (Stark et al. 2005), for the of movement as S47°E, while the first author reported the direction

Fig. 7 Use of slope inclinometer data and searching for the critical failure surface

Landslides
Technical Development
of the inclinometer as S37°W. The vectors developed by the 2003). I-1 is upslope of I-2 by ten vertical meters, but the length of
opposing expert pointed to the location of maximum grading, 6.7 the inclinometer is only 3 m longer. This case history illustrates the
m, which the expert believed caused the slide by removing toe importance of installing inclinometers a sufficient depth into stable
support. The vectors calculated by the first author pointed to a ground, otherwise confusion about the results can develop. For
location with only 1.8 to 2.4 m of grading and thus concluded that comparison purposes, I-1 should have extended to a depth of about
this surficial grading did not trigger the large and deep (about 37 40 m so the bottom of the inclinometer would be located at the
m) landslide. After considerable debate, it was determined that the same elevation (not depth) as I-2.
difference in the vectors was caused by an error in measuring the The difference in the magnitude of movement between these
direction of the A0 axis because of the presence of a metal casing as two inclinometers caused substantial confusion amongst the four
described previously. consultants that considered the data. From the data, it is unclear
whether (1) a slide block extends from the slope toe and terminates
Case no. 3—Importance of inclinometer depth before I-1, which would explain the smaller magnitude of
In this case, the locations of slope inclinometer I-1 and I-2 are movement measured in I-1 than I-2, (2) the slide block extends
indicated in Fig. 8. Slope inclinometer I-2 is located on a slope behind I-1, which explains the distress observed in the residences at
adjacent to a housing development, and the resulting data are the top of slope, but is not in agreement with the magnitude of
shown in Fig. 9. The top of the inclinometer is located at an movement in I-1, or (3) there is a second slide block involving I-1
elevation of about 124 m above mean sea level. Below a depth of that has moved a smaller amount than the slide block that contains
26.2 to 26.5 m (see Fig. 9), no significant movement of the casing I-2.
was measured. At a depth of 26.2 to 26.5 m, there is a distinct offset The first hint of a problem with the data in I-1 is the fact that
in the inclinometer casing, indicating shear movement of about there is no portion of the inclinometer that has not moved. Thus,
50.8 mm as of 3 July 2003. More importantly, above this depth, the the total magnitude of movement at I-1 is not known, even though
inclinometer casing is essentially vertical, indicating a rigid block is the various consultants thought 15.2 mm corresponds to the total
moving on a distinct shear surface. The shear movement of 50.8 magnitude of movement. An expert should carefully compare
mm is significant and well outside the possible range of the inclinometers to check for accuracy issues and installation errors
accuracy errors discussed above. In fact, this inclinometer may that render the data suspect. Comparing Figs. 2 and 9 shows that
become unreadable if additional displacement occurs because the below a depth of 26.2 to 26.5 m in I-2, the shape of the casing is
diameter of the casing is only 73 mm and additional shear essentially identical to when it was installed. Thus, the 50.8 mm of
displacement may prevent the probe from passing a depth of 26.2 movement recorded in I-2 is the total amount of movement that
to 26.5 m. The vector of movement for the readings is roughly has occurred at the location of I-2. Conversely, one cannot
perpendicular to the slope contours, which indicates that the rigid determine the maximum amount of movement at I-1 because there
block is moving away from the top of slope. is no portion of the casing below the failure surface that has not
Another inclinometer (I-1) is installed upslope of inclinometer moved, as clearly shown in I-2. Thus, the maximum amount of
I-2 and is shown in Fig. 2. The top of inclinometer I-1 is located at movement of the I-1 casing is at least 15.2 mm and could be similar
an elevation of about 133 m above mean sea level or at an elevation to I-2, i.e., 50.8 mm. To reconcile this dilemma, a comparison of the
that is about 10m higher than the top of inclinometer I-2. I-1 is also data in Figs. 2 and 9 shows that the signatures of these two
located about 180 lineal meters upslope of inclinometer I-2. The inclinometers are similar, which suggests that a translational
movement in I-1 is shown in Fig. 2 and corresponds to a similar movement is occurring at the same elevation in inclinometers I-1
elevation, not depth, as observed in I-2 but with a significantly and I-2.
smaller magnitude (about 15.2 mm instead of 50.8 mm as of 3 July Evidence that the movement in I-1 is probably greater than that
shown in Fig. 2 is that not only do both inclinometers show a
similar pattern of shear displacement but they also show similar
rates of movement. Figure 3 shows the displacement versus time
data from I-1 and I-2. The relationships show that the rate of
movement in both inclinometers accelerated from April 2002 to
November 2002. After November 2002, the movement in both
inclinometers slowed but is still occurring. This reduction in
displacement rate is caused by implementation of a remedial
measure. Thus, the idea of two different slide blocks is not
supported after careful comparison of the behavior of I-1 and I-2.
Print will be in black and white

In summary, the similarity in the signature and rates of


movement between I-1 and I-2 and the fact of I-1 is too shallow to
determine the total amount of movement resulted in the
conclusion that the translational slide block extended upslope of
I-1. This conclusion is also in agreement with the observed distress
in the housing development behind the slope crest. This depth of
sliding also corresponds to a slicken-sided clay layer that extends
under the housing development. Based on this case history, it is
recommended that all slope inclinometers be installed to an
elevation (depth) that will ensure that the bottom of the
Fig. 8 Location map of slope inclinometers I-1 and I-2 inclinometer will not move and thus provide a fixed reference

Landslides
Print will be in black and white

Fig. 9 Results from slope inclinometer I-2 that is downslope of the inclinometer in Fig. 2

for determining the total amount of movement. This can be Conclusions


accomplished by installing adjacent, if not all, inclinometers to the Slope inclinometers are used to determine the vitally important
same elevation, not depth. This can be accomplished by increasing magnitude, rate, direction, depth, and type of landslide movement.
the length of the inclinometers, as the borings are located further This information is used to understand the cause, behavior, and
upslope. remediation of a landslide. However, many inclinometer measure-

Landslides
Technical Development
ments fail to achieve these intended aims because of lack of Green GE, Mikkelsen PE (1988) Deformation measurements with inclinometers.
appreciation of the many factors that need to be correctly Transportation Research Record 1169. Transportation Research Board, Washington,
pp 1–15
implemented during installation, monitoring, and data reduction. Mikkelsen PE (1996) Field instrumentation. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides
The installation factors include ensuring the bottom of the investigation and mitigation, Special Report 247. Transportation Research Board,
inclinometer is located in stable ground, the use of the proper National Research Council, Washington, pp 278–316
backfill to fix the inclinometer in the slide mass, and the use of a Mikkelsen PE (2002) Cement–bentonite grout backfill for borehole instruments. Geotech
flexible casing so it can detect small amounts of movement. The News 20(4):38–42
Mikkelsen PE (2003) Advances in inclinometer data analysis. Symposium on Field
systematic errors that need to be considered in the data reduction Measurements in Geomechanics, FMGM 2003, Oslo, 13 pp
phase include the bias-shift error, sensitivity drift, rotation error, Mikkelsen PE, Green GE (2003) Piezometers in fully grouted boreholes. Symposium on
and depth positioning error. This paper presents some guidelines Field Measurements in Geomechanics, FMGM 2003, Oslo, 10 pp
for addressing these installation factors and applying correction Richardson TM (2002) On the validity of slope inclinometer data. WV DOH Project No. RP
factors for common measurement errors. Three case histories are 156 Final Report, West Virginia Department of Transportation, Division of Highway
Skempton AW (1985) Residual strength of clays in landslides, folded strata and the
presented to illustrate the confusion that can develop if these laboratory. Geotechnique 35(1):3–18
installation and monitoring factors are not considered. Slope Indicator (2005) Citing online sources: advice on online citation formats [online].
http://www.slopeindicator.com
Acknowledgment Stark TD, Choi H, McCone, S (2005) Drained shear strength parameters for analysis of
The contents and views in this paper are the authors’ and do not landslides. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, ASCE 131(5):575–588
Terzaghi K, Peck RB (1967) Soil mechanics in engineering practice, 2nd edn. Wiley, New
necessarily reflect those of any of the developers, homeowners, York
consultants, or anyone else involved in the case histories.

References
T. D. Stark
Abramson LW, Lee TS, Sharma S, Boyce GM (2002) Slope stability and stabilization Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
methods, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign,
ASTM D 7299 (2007) Practice for verifying performance of a vertical inclinometer probe Urbana, IL 61801, USAT. Stark
Cornforth DH (2005) Landslides in practice: investigation, analysis, and remedial/ e-mail: tstark@uiuc.edu
preventative options in soils. Wiley, New York
Dunnicliff J (1988) Geotechnical instrumentation for monitoring field performance. H. Choi ())
Wiley, New York Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering, Korea University,
Green GE, Mikkelsen PE (1986) Measurement of ground movement with inclinometers. Anam-Dong, Seongbuk-Gu,
Proceedings of Fourth International Geotechnical Seminar on Field Instrumentation Seoul 136-713, South Korea
and In-Situ Measurement, Singapore, pp 235–246 e-mail: hchoi2@korea.ac.kr

Landslides

You might also like