Chapter 9 - Slope Stability

Contents
9.1

Failure surfaces

9.2

Short term stability

9.3

Long term stability

9.4

Total stress analysis

9.5

Method of Slices - Fellenius expression

9.6

Method of Slices Simplified Bishop Solution

9.7

Remedial measures for unstable slopes

9-1

9.1

BACK

Failure surfaces

Fig. 1

For fairly uniform soils the shape of the failure mechanism surface approximates to a circular curve. A
o

face failure is unlikely unless the upper part of the slope is very soft. If >3 , a toe failure is most
likely. The presence of very soft or hard layers beneath the slope greatly affects the failure locations.

9.2

Short term stability

BACK

This refers to stability during and immediately after construction. In these cases there is little
opportunity for drainage to occur. The analysis should be carried out in terms of total stress using the
undrained strength parameters, Cu, u. For a fully saturated clay u=0.

9.3

Long term stability

BACK

In the long term dissipation of pore water pressure can occur. An effective stress analysis using the
drained strength parameters, c, is carried out when the long term stability safety factor is sought. If
the soil permeability is high or reliable values for the pore water pressure can be found then an
effective stress analysis can also be applied to the end of construction.

9-2

9.4

BACK

Total stress analysis

Fig. 2

(a)

Choose a trial slip circle and centre.

(b)

Find the C.G. of the failure zone. This can be done by sub-dividing it into strips and taking
moments about the toe.

(c)

Consider the moment equilibrium about centre O

Length of slip arc

= La

Hence the restoring moment

= CuLar

Disturbing moment.

=W e

Hence

(d)

F.O.S. =

CuL ar
We

This procedure is repeated for other circles in order to find the most critical one, with the lowest
factor of safety.

9-3

BACK

Tension cracks

From earlier, the depth of tension crack h0 is given by

h0 =

2c'
Ka

For a total stress analysis with u=0 the value of Ka is 1.0 and the tension crack depth is

h0 =

2c u

when u = 0

When a tension crack develops it

(i)

Reduces the arc length over which the cohesion resists movement.

(ii)

Applies an additional overturning moment if the crack fill with water.

Fig. 3

FOS =

CuL ar
We + Pw y

9-4

9.5

Method of Slices - Fellenius expression

BACK

When 0 the shear resistance is not constant along the slip surface. The presence of internal
friction introduce a strength factor which is dependent upon the depth of the slip surface.

This

problem can be solved by a graphical method in which a number of slices are drawn on a scale
drawing of the trial slip zone.

Fig. 4

By taking moment about O, it can be shown that

FOS =

c ' L + tan ' (W cos ul)

W sin

= length of arc DC

= straight line base length of each slice

= pore-water pressure on base of slice

= indicates the summation of values from each slice

9-5

Assumptions

(i)

Resultant of interslice forces is zero.

(ii)

Base of slice is straight line.

Comments

(i)

Above expression can be converted for total stress analysis by substituting Cu, u and deleting
the pore water pressure term.

(ii)

The vertical slice lines are NOT failure surface.

(iii)

This approach underestimates the safety factor. The results are usually 5 to 20% less than those
obtained by more accurate methods.

9-6

9.6

Method of Slices Simplified Bishop Solution

BACK

By using the same method of slices but with different assumptions a more accurate expression can be
derived
FOS =

{[c ' b + tan ' W (1 ru )]s}

W sin

ru = pore water pressure ratio; the ratio of pore pressure to soil pressure
as ru =

u
ub
, for each slice ru =
h
W

Assumptions

(i)

In most applications it is assumed that ru is constant over the whole failure surface. However,
the individual values of ru can be calculated using the above eqt.

(ii)

Unlike the Fellenius method, the inter-slice forces are not ignored.

It is assumed that the

resultant force on each slice is horizontal.

(iii)

The base of each slice is a straight line.

Comments

(i)

F.O.S. occurs on both sides of simplified Bishop equation.

(ii)

An assumed F.O.S. value is used on the RHS of the equation to calculate the F.O.S. value on
the LHS. This calculated F.O.S. is then substituted in the RHS and the process repeated until it
converges on the solution.

(iii)

This method underestimates F.O.S. The error is usually less than 2% and rarely exceeds 7%.

Improving slope stability

If the F.O.S. for a design slope is insufficient the most obvious way of improving stability is to reduce
the slope angle. In most cases, stepping the slope is more beneficial.
9-7

9.7

BACK

Remedial measures for unstable slopes

If an existing slope fails or shows signs of distress, the following measures may be considered.
(a)

Removal of soil in order to reduce the slope angle or produce a stepped face as above.

(b)

Installation of land drains to lower the water table at the toe of the slope. This increases the
effective stresses and hence the shear strength in this region.

(c)

Removal of unstable soil and replacement by soil with greater shear strength. The cost of
disposal of the unwanted material can be high.

(d)

Reinforcement of the slope with small diameter piles or soil nails driven through the slip surface.

(e)

Reinforcement with horizontal layers of geotextile.

The soil has to be removed and then

backfilled in layers to permit placement of the geotextile.

(f)

Diaphragm walls can provide lateral support but that expense is only justified when important
structures are at risk.

9-8