CHAPTER FIVE

SLOPE STABILITY OF SOILS

1
 5. Introduction
 The term slope refers to any natural or manmade earth mass, whose

surface forms an angle with the horizontal.

 hills and mountains, river banks, etc. are common examples of natural

slopes.
 Examples of manmade slopes include fills, such as embankments,

earth dams, levees; or cuts, such as highway and railway cuts, canal
banks, foundations excavations and trenches.

 Natural forces (wind, rain, earthquake, etc.) change the natural

topography often creating unstable slopes.

2
 … Introduction
 Failure of natural slopes (landslides) and manmade slopes have resulted

in much death and destruction.

 In assessing the stability of slopes, geotechnical engineers have to pay

particular attention to:

 geology, drainage, groundwater, and the shear strength of the soils.

 The most common slope stability analysis methods are based on

simplifying assumptions and the design of a stable slope relies heavily on

experience and careful site investigation.

3
 … Introduction

4
 … Introduction

5
 Definitions of Key Terms
 Slip plane or failure plane or slip surface or failure surface is the

surface of sliding.

 Sliding mass is the mass of soil within the slip plane and the ground

surface.

 Slope angle (or simply slope) is the angle of inclination of a slope to the

horizontal. The slope angle is usually referred to as a ratio, for example,

2:1 (horizontal: vertical)

6
5.1. Types of Slope Failure
 Failure of a slope along a weak zone of soil is called a translational slide (Fig.
5.1a). are common in coarse-grained soils.
 A common type of failure in homogeneous fine-grained soils is a rotational
slide. Three types of rotational slides often occur.

1. base slide: occurs by an arc enclosing the whole slope. A soft soil layer
resting on a stiff layer of soil is prone to base failure (Fig. 5. 1b).

2. toe slide: whereby the failure surface passes through the toe of the slope
(Fig. 5.1 c).

3. slope slide: whereby the failure surface passes through the slope (Fig. 5.1
d).

7
 A flow slide occurs when internal and external conditions force a soil to

behave like a viscous fluid and flow down even shallow slopes, spreading
out in several directions (Fig. 5.1 e).
 The failure surface is ill defined in flow slides.

 Multiple failure surfaces usually occur and change continuously as flow

proceeds.
 Flow slides can occur in dry and wet soils.

 Block or wedge slides occur when a soil mass is shattered along joints,

seams, fissures, and weak zones by forces emanating from adjacent soils.
The shattered mass moves as blocks and wedges down the slope

8
 Figure 5.1: Some types of slope failure

9
  Slope failures depend on the:
 soil type,
 soil stratification,
 groundwater,
 seepage, and
 slope geometry.

10
 5.2. Some Causes of Slope Failure
 Slope failures are caused in general by natural forces, human

mismanagement and activities.

 As shown in Fig. 5.2, some of the most common causes of slope failures

are:

 erosion,

 rainfall,

 earthquake,

 geological features,

 external loading,

11 construction activities (ex. excavation & fill), reservoir rapid drawdown.
 Figure 5.2: Some causes of slope failure

12
 … Some causes of slope failure

13 ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
5.3. Slope Stability Analysis
Two-Dimensional Slope Stability Analysis

 Slope stability can be analysed using one or more of the following:

 Limit Equilibrium Method,

 Limit Analysis,

 Finite Difference Method, And

 Finite Element Method

 Limit Equilibrium is the most widely used method for stability analysis.

 In the following sections, we will learn some of the commonly used slope

14
stability analysis methods that are based on the limit equilibrium
 Infinite Slopes and Finite Slopes
 The slopes whether natural or artificial may be

Infinite slopes or
Finite slopes

 The term infinite slope is used to designate a constant slope of

infinite extent.

 The long slope of the face of a mountain is an example of this type,

whereas finite slopes are limited in extent.

 The slopes of embankments and earth dams are examples of finite slopes.

The slope length depends on the height of the dam or embankment.

15
 …Infinite Slopes and Finite Slopes

16 ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
5.1. Stability Analysis of Infinite Slopes
 Infinite slopes have dimensions that extend over great distances.

 In practice, the infinite slope mechanism is applied to the case

when a soft material of very long length with constant slope may
slide on a hard material (e.g. rock) having the same slope.

 Let’s consider a clean, homogeneous soil of infinite slope αs as

shown in Figure 5.3.

17
18
Figure 5.3: Forces on a slice of soil in an infinite slope.
 … Stability Analysis of Infinite Slopes
 To use limit equilibrium method, we must first speculate on a

failure of slip mechanism.

 We will assume the slip would occur on a plane parallel to the slope. If

we consider a slice of soil between the surface of the soil and the slip
plane, we can draw a free-body diagram of the slice as shown in Figure
5.3.

19
 

20
 To continue with the limit equilibrium method, we must now use the

equilibrium equations to solve the problem.

 The general objective of infinite slope stability analysis is to determine

either the critical slope or critical height, or alternatively, the

Factor of Safety of the slope.

21
 5.5.1 Factor of Safety
 The factor of safety of a slope is defined as the ratio of the available shear

strength, τf, to the minimum shear strength required to maintain stability

(which is equal to the mobilized shear stress on the failure surface) τm,
that is:

 The shear strength of the soil is governed by the Mohr-Coulomb failure

criterion.

22 ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
 Stability of Infinite Slopes in ϕu=0, Cu Soil
 For the ϕu=0, cu Soil, the Mohr-Coulomb shear strength is given by:

 f  cu
 From statics and using Figure 5.3

N  W cos s and T  W sin  s

 The shear stress per unit length on the slip plane is given by:

T W sin  s cos s
m  
l b
bz
m  sin  s cos s  z sin  s cos s
b
23
 Stability of Infinite Slopes in ϕu=0, Cu Soil
 Factor of safety is then,

cu 2cu
FS  
z sin  s cos  s z sin( 2 s )

 At limit equilibrium, FS = 1. Therefore, the critical slope is

2cu
 c  sin ( 1
2
1
z )

and the critical depth is:

2cu
zc 
 sin( 2 s )

24
 Stability of Infinite Slopes in c’-ϕ’ soil – with no seepage
 For a c’, soil, the Mohr-Coulomb shear strength is given by:

 f  c'   n' tan  '

 The factor of safety FS is then:

c'   n' tan  ' c'  n' tan  '

FS   
m m m
 The normal and shear stresses per unit length at the failure plane in
reference to figure are given by:

N
 'n  and T
l m 
l

25
…Stability of Infinite Slopes in c’-ϕ’ soil – with no seepage
 For a slope without seepage, Js=0. From above Equation we get:

c' W ' cos  s tan  '

FS  
z sin  s cos s W sin  s
c' tan  '
 
z sin  s cos s tan  s

 At limit equilibrium FS = 1. Therefore, the critical depth zc is given by

c'  sec 2  s 
z c   
  tan  s  tan  ' 

26
 … Stability of Infinite Slopes in c’-ϕ’ soil – with no seepage
 For the case where , the factor of safety is always greater than, there is no

limiting value for the depth z, and at an infinite depth, the factor of safety
approaches to . For a coarse-grained soil with c’ = 0, becomes:
tan  '
FS 
tan  s
 At limit equilibrium FS = 1. Therefore, the critical slope angle is:

c  '
 The implication of this equation is that the maximum slope angle of a

coarse-grained soil with c’ = 0, cannot exceed φ.

27
 In other words, the case c’ = 0 and αs>φ is always unstable and can

not be applied to practical situations

28
 Stability of Infinite Slopes in c’-ϕ’ soil –steady state seepage
We will now consider groundwater at the ground surface and assume that
seepage is parallel to the slope. The seepage force is:
J s  i wbz i  sin  s
Since seepage is parallel to the slope, From statics

T  W ' sin  s  J s
  ' bz sin  s   w bz sin  s  ( ' w )bz sin  s
  sat bz sin  s

 Therefore, the shear stress at the slip plane is:

T  sat bz sin  s cos s

m     sat z sin  s cos s
l b
29
… Stability of Infinite Slopes in c’-ϕ’ soil –steady state seepage
 From the definition of factor of safety , we get:

c'  ' bz cos s tan  '

FS  
 sat z sin  s cos s  sat zb cos s tan
( s

c'  ' tan  '

  
 sat z sin  s cos s  sat tan  s

 At limit equilibrium, FS=1. Therefore, the critical height is:

c' csc 2  s
zc 
 tan  s   ' tan  '
30
… Stability of Infinite Slopes in c’-ϕ’ soil –steady state seepage
 At infinite depth the factor of safety becomes:

 ' tan  '

FS  
 sat tan  s

 The equation can also be used for calculating the factor of safety for a

coarse-grained soil with c’ = 0. At limit equilibrium FS = 1, and hence,

the critical slope for a coarse-grained soil with c’ = 0 is given by:

'
tan  s  tan 
 sat

31
… Stability of Infinite Slopes in c’-ϕ’ soil –steady state seepage

 For most soils,  '  sat  12

 Thus, seepage parallel to the slope reduces the limiting slope of a clean,

coarse-grained soil by about one-half.

 If the groundwater level is not at the ground surface, weighted average

unit weights have to be used.

32
 5.2 Rotational Slope Failure

 The infinite slope failure mechanism is reasonable for infinitely long and

homogeneous slopes made of coarse-grained soils, where the failure plane

is assumed to be parallel to the ground surface.

 But in many practical problems slopes have been observed to fail through

a rotational mechanism of finite extent.

 As shown in Fig. (5.2), rotational failure mechanism involves the failure of

a soil mass on a circular or non-circular failure surface.

 In the following sections, we will continue to use the limit equilibrium

method assuming a circular slip surface.

ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
33
 Basic Analysis Approach for Rotational Failure Surface
Limit Equilibrium:
1) Assume some circular (or other shape) failure surface
2) Calculate driving forces (moment about O)
3) Calculate resisting forces (moment about O)
Issues:
• Where is the center of mass?
• How does resistance vary along surface?
• How does normal stress vary along surface?
• Water table and seepage forces?
• Soil layering?
• More complex geometry?
35
 i) Stability of Slopes in cu, ϕu = 0 soil–circular failure
surfaces
 The simplest circular analysis is based on the assumption that a rigid,

cylindrical block will fail by rotation about its center and that the shear
strength along the failure surface is defined by the undrained strength cu.

 Figure 5.3 shows a slope of height H and angle αs

 The trial circular failure surface is defined by its center C, radius R and

central angle θ.

 The weight of the sliding block acts at a distance d from the center.

36
 Figure 4.4: Slope failure in cu, ϕu=0

37 ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
Stability of Slopes in cu, ϕu = 0 soil–circular failure surfaces
 Taking moments of the forces about the center of the circular arc, we have:

cu LR cu R 2 0 
FS   
Wd Wd 180 0

Where: L is the length of the circular arc, W is the weight of the sliding mass
and d is the horizontal distance between the circle center, C, and the
centroid of the sliding mass.

 If cu varies along the failure surface then:

R 2 (cu11  cu 2 2  ...  cun n ) 

0 0 0

FS  
Wd 180 0

38
 Effect of Tension Cracks
 Tension cracks may develop from the upper ground surface to a depth z0 that

can be estimated using Eqn.:

2c'
z0 
 ' ka

 The effect of the tension crack can be taken into account by assuming that the

trial failure surface terminates at the depth z0, thereby reducing the weight W
and central angle θ

 Any external water pressure in the crack creates a horizontal force that must

be included in equilibrium considerations.

39
 ii) Stability of Slopes in c’-ϕ’ soil – Method of Slices
 The stability of a slope in a c’- ϕ’ soil is usually analysed by discretizing the

mass of the failure slope into smaller slices and treating each individual slice
as a unique sliding block.
 This technique is called the method of slices.

 In the method of slices, the soil mass above a trial failure circle is divided into

a series of vertical slices of width b as shown in Fig.

 For each slice:-

 its base is assumed to be a straight line defined by its angle of inclination θ

with the horizontal

40
 its height h is measured along the centerline of the slice.
 Method of Slices (General)
• Assume some failure surface
• Discretize failure surface into smaller elements (slices)
• Bottom of each slice passes through one type of material
• Curved bottom of each slice approximated as chord
• More slices = more refined solution
• 10-40 slices typically sufficient (less for hand solutions)
• Calculate factor of safety for each slice (strength/stress) and overall factor of
safety
• Find lowest FS for different failure surfaces

41
 Side forces make the problem statically indeterminate

42 ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
 Figure : Slice discretization and slice forces in a sliding mass
43
 Figure 4.6: a) Method of slices in c’-ϕ soil,
44
b) Forces acting on a slice.
The forces acting on a slice shown in Fig. (b) are:

 W = total weight of the slice = γ×h×b

 N = total normal force at the base = N’ + U, where N’ is the effective total

normal force and U = ul is the force due to the pore water pressure at the
midpoint of the base length l.

 T = the mobilized shear force at the base = τm x l, where τm is the minimum

shear stress required to maintain equilibrium and is equal to the shear strength
divided by the factor of safety: τm = τf /FS.

 X1, X2 = shear forces on sides of the slice and E1, E2 = normal forces on sides
the slice. The sum of the moments of the inter slice or side forces about the
canter C is zero.

45
 Thus, for moment equilibrium about the center C (note the normal forces
pass through the center):
i n i n i n ( f l ) i i n

T R  R (
i 1
i
i 1
m l )  R
i 1 FS
  (W sin  ) R
i 1
i

where n is the total number of slices. Replacing by the Mohr-Coulomb shear

strength, we obtain:

 (c' 
i n i n
'
n tan  ' )l i  (c' l  N ' tan ' ) i
FS  i 1
i n
 i 1
i n

 (W sin  )
i 1
i  (W sin  )
i 1
i

46
 The term c’l may be replaced by c’b/cos θ

 For uniform c’, the algebraic summation of c’l is replaced by c’L, where L

is the length of the circular arc.

 The values of N’ must be determined from the force equilibrium

equations. However, this problem is statically indeterminate – because we

have six unknown variables for each slice but only three equilibrium
equations. Therefore some simplifying assumptions have to be made.

 In this chapter two common methods that apply different simplifying

methods will be discussed.

 These methods are called the Fellenius method and Bishop simplified

method.
47
Slope Analysis Methods Based on Limit Equilibrium

“OMS”

“Modified
Bishop’s”
 Methods of Investigation Slope Stability
Contemporary methods of investigation are based on:

 assuming a slip surface and a center about which it rotates

 studying the equilibrium of the forces acting on this surface

 repeating the process until the worst slip surface is found . The worst slip

surface which yields the lowest factor of safety.

Restoring Moment
FS 
Disturbing Moment

49
 Fellenius or Ordinary or Swedish Method
 The ordinary or Swedish method of slices was introduced by Fellenius.

 This method assumes that for each slice, the interslice forces X1=X2 and

E1=E2.

 Based on this assumption and from statics, the forces normal to each slice

are given by:

N W cos  N '  ul  N '  W cos  ul

 Substituting N’ into Eqn. above, we obtain:
i n

 (c' l  (W cos  ul ) tan ' )

i
FS  i 1
i n

50
 (W sin  )
i 1
i
For convenience, the force due to pore water is expressed as a function of W:

u i bi
ru 
Wi
 Where ru is called the pore water pressure ratio. Consequently, we have:
i n

 (c' l  W (cos  r
u sec ) tan  ' )i
FS  i 1
i n

 (W sin  )
i 1
i

 The term ru is dimensionless because the term represents the weight of

water with a volume of . Furthermore, ru can be simplified as follows

ub  w hw b  w hw
ru   
W hb h
51
 … Fellenius or Ordinary or Swedish Method
 The Ordinary method (OM) of slices satisfies the moment equilibrium for a

circular slip surface, but neglects both the inter slice normal and shear
forces.

 The advantage of this method is its simplicity in solving the FOS, since the

equation does not require an iteration process.

52
 … Fellenius or Ordinary or Swedish Method

53 ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
… Fellenius or Ordinary or Swedish Method
 The method of slices

Considering moments about O, the sum of the moments of the shear forces T
on the failure arc AC must be equal the moment of the weight of the soil mass
ABCD.

using

54 ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
 … Fellenius or Ordinary or Swedish Method
Example 1

A 45o slope is excavated to a depth of 8m in a deep layer of saturated clay of unit

weight 19kN/m3: the relevant shear strength parameters are cu = 65 kN/m2 and
φu = 0. Determine the factor of safety for the trial failure surface specified in
Figure. The cross-sectional area ABCD is 70m2.

After Craig (2004)

55
 … Fellenius or Ordinary or Swedish Method
Solution

Weight of soil mass = 70 x 19 = 1330 kN/m

The centroid of ABCD is 4.5m from O. The angle AOC is 89.5o and radius OC is
12.1 m. The arc length ABC is calculated as 18.9 m. The factor of safety is given
by:

cu La R 65 x 18.9 x 12.1
FS    2.48
Wd 1330 x 4.5

This is the factor of safety for the trial failure surface selected and is not
necessarily minimum factor of safety.

56
 Bishop Simplified Method
 This method assumes that for each slice X1=X2 but E1≠ E2.

 Assumes that resultant of side forces on each slice act in horizontal

direction and therefore vertical side force components cancel each

other

 These assumptions are considered to make this method more

accurate than the Swedish method.

 An increase of 5% to 20% in the factor of safety over the Swedish

method is usually obtained.

57
 Bishop Simplified Method

Referring to Figure, and writing the force

equilibrium in vertical direction (in order
to eliminate E1 and E2), the following
equation for N’ can be found:
c' l sin 
W  ul cos 
N'  FS
sin  tan  '
cos 
FS

58
 … Bishop Simplified Method
 In addition to the force in the vertical direction, Bishop Simplified method

also satisfies the overall moment equilibrium about the center of the circle as
expressed in Eqn.

 Putting l = b/cos θ and ub=ruW , and substituting Eqn. N‘ into Eqn., we

obtain:
1  c' b  W (1  ru ) tan ' 
i n
FS  i n  
i 1 

i

m
(W sin  ) i


i 1

sin  tan ' This Equation is non-linear in FS

Where m  cos 
FS (that is FS appears on both sides of
the equations) and is solved by
iteration.
59
 An initial value of FS is guessed (slightly greater than FS obtained

by Fellenius’ method) and substituted to FS equation to compute a

new value for FS.

 This procedure is repeated until the difference between the assumed

and computed values is negligible.

 Convergence is normally rapid and only a few iterations are

required.

 The procedure is repeated for number of trial circles to locate

the critical failure surface with the lowest factor of safety.

60
 Example 2
Using Fellenius’/Swedish method determine the factor of safety for the slope
of 1V:2H and height 4.5m using a trial toe circle for which xc = 4.5m and yc =
6.25m. The soil mass is divided into 4 slices all having identical width of b =
3m, whose average height and angle are tabulated below.

c’ = 6.75kPa, φ=170, and  = 1.96 kg/m3

Slice no. 1 2 3 4
h (m) 1.6 3.7 4.6 3.0
(deg.) -23 0 23 51

61
 SOLUTION
This method assumes that the shear forces and normal forces on the two
sides of each slice are equal. The factor of safety is expressed by the
following equation:
i n i 4

 (c' l  (W cos  ul ) tan  ' )

i c' La  tan  '
 (W cos ) i
FS  i 1
i n
 i 4
i 1

 (W sin  )
i 1
i  (W sin  )
i 1
i

Sample calculation for slice 3:

62
 SOLUTION
This method assumes that the shear forces and normal forces on the two sides
of each slice are equal. The factor of safety is expressed by the following
equation:
i n i 4

 (c' l  (W cos  ul ) tan  ' )

i c' La  tan  '
 (W cos ) i
FS  i 1
i n
 i 4
i 1

 (W sin  )
i 1
i  (W sin  )
i 1
i

h α W Wcosα Wsinα
Slice
(m) (Deg) (KN) (KN) (KN)
1 1.6 -23 92.30 84.97 -36.07
2 3.7 0 213.45 213.45 0.00
3 4.6 23 265.37 244.28 103.69
4 3.0 51 173.07 108.92 134.50
63 Total 651.61 202.12
 R 4.5^ 2  6.25^ 2  7.7m

i 4

c' La  tan  '
 (W cos ) i 6.75 * 7.7 * 109.5 *
180
 tan17 * 651.61
FS  i 4
i 1
  1.45
 (W sin  )
202.12
i
i 1

64 ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
 Example 2
Compute the long term FS for the failure surface using the Modified Bishops
Method
 1. Divide into slices (draw to scale)

66 ASTU/Soil Mechanics-II
 2) Trial FS = 2.0 (or from OMS)

FS = 2,206/1,071 = 2.05 (too high)

3) Trial FS = 2.10

FS = 2,221/1,071 = 2.07 (close enough? or keep iterating)