Chapter 8.

Analysis of slope stability

In this chapter, we are going to show you how to verify the slope stabilityfor critical
circular and polygonal slip surfaces (using its optimization), and the differences between
methods of analysis of slope stability.

Assignment

Perform a slope stability analysis for a designed slope with a gravity wall. This is a
permanent design situation. The required safety factor is SF = 1,50. There is no water in the
slope.

Scheme of the assignment

Solution

For solving this problem, we will use the GEO5 program, Slope stability. In this text,
we will explain each step to solve this problem:

 Analysis nr. 1: optimization of circular slip surface (Bishop)

 Analysis nr. 2: verification of slope stability for all methods
 Analysis nr. 3: optimization of polygonal slip surface (Spencer)
 Analysis result (conclusion)
Basic input – Analysis 1:

In the frame “Settings” click on “Select” and choose option nr. 1 – “Standard – safety
factors”.

Dialog window “Settings list”

Then model the interface layers, resp. terrain using these coordinates:

Adding interface points

Firstly, in the frame “Interface” input the coordinate range of the assignment. „Depth of
deepest interface point“ is only for visualization of the example – it has no influence on the
analysis.

Then, input the geological profile, define the parameters of soil, and assign them to the
profile.

Dialog window “Add new soils”

 Note: In this analysis, we are verifying the long-term slope stability. Therefore we are solving
this task with effective parameters of slip strength of soils (  ef , cef ). Foliation of soils – worse

or different parameters of soil in one direction - are not considered in the assigned soils.

Table with the soil parameters

Soil Unit weight Angle of internal Cohesion of soil Assigned Soil

(Soil classification) 
 kN m 3  friction  ef  cef kPa Region
MG – Gravelly silt, 1
19,0 29,0 8,0
firm consistency
S-F – Sand with trace 3
17,5 31,5 0,0
of fines, dense soil
MS – Sandy silt, stiff 4
18,0 26,5 16,0
consistency, S r  0,8

Model the gravity wall as a Rigid Body with a unit weight of   23,0 kN m 3 . The
slip surface does not pass through this object because it is an area with large strength. (More
info in HELP – F1)

In the next step, define a surcharge, which we consider as permanent and strip with its
location on the terrain surface.

Dialog window “New surcharges”

Note: A surcharge is entered on 1 m of width of the slope. The only exception is concentrated
surcharge, where the program calculates the effect of the load to the analyzed profile. For
more information, see HELP (F1).

Skip the frames “Embankment”, “Earth cut”, “Anchors”, “Reinforcements” and

“Water”. The frame “Earthquake” has no influence on this analysis, because the slope is not
located in seismically active area.

Then, in the frame “Stage settings”, select the design situation. In this case, we
consider it as “Permanent” design situation.

Frame “Stage settings”

Analysis 1 – circular slip surface

Now open up the frame “Analysis”, where the user enters the initial slip surface using
coordinates of the center ( x, y ) and its radius or using the mouse directly on the desktop – by
clicking on the interface to enter three points through which the slip surface passes.

Note: In cohesive soils rotational slip surfaces occur most often. These are modeled using
circular slip surfaces. This surface is used to find critical areas of an analyzed slope. For
non-cohesive soils, an analysis using an polygonal slip surface should be also performed for
slope stability verification (see HELP – F1).

Now, select “Bishop” as the analysis method, and then set type of analysis as
“Optimization”. Then perform the actual verification by clicking on “Analyze”.
 Frame “Analysis” – Bishop – optimization of circular slip surface

Note: optimization consists in finding the circular slip surface with the smallest stability– the
critical slip surface. The optimization of circular slip surfaces in the program Slope stability
evaluates the entire slope, and is very reliable. For different initial slip surfaces, we get the
same result for a critical slip surface

The level of stability defined for critical slip surface when using the “Bishop” evaluation
method is satisfactory :

SF  1,82  SFs  1,50 SATISFACTORY.

Analysis 2:
Now select another analysis on the toolbar in upper right corner of your Analysis
frame in GEO5.

Toolbar “Analysis”

In the frame Analysis, change the analysis type to “Standard” and as method select
“All methods”. Then click on “Analyze”.
 Frame “Analysis” – All methods – standard type of analysis

Note: Using this procedure, the slip surface made for all methods corresponds to critical slip
surface from the previous analysis scenario using the Bishop method. For better results the
user should choose the method and then perform an optimization of slip surfaces.

The values of the level of slope stability are:

 Bishop: SF  1,82  SFs  1,50 SATISFACTORY.

 Fellenius / Petterson: SF  1,61  SFs  1,50 SATISFACTORY.

 Spencer: SF  1,79  SFs  1,50 SATISFACTORY.

 Janbu: SF  1,80  SFs  1,50 SATISFACTORY.

 Morgenstern-Price: SF  1,80  SFs  1,50 SATISFACTORY.

 Šachuňanc: SF  1,63  SFs  1,50 SATISFACTORY.

Note: the selection of method of analysis depends on experience of the user. The most popular
methods are the method of slices, from which the most used is the Bishop method. The Bishop
method does yield conservative results.

For reinforced or anchored slopes other rigorous methods (Janbu, Spencer and Morgenstern-
Price) are preferable. These more rigourous methods meet all conditions of balance, and they
better describe real slope behaviour.

It is not needed (or correct) to analyze a slope with all methods of analysis. For example, the
Swedish method Fellenius – Petterson yields very conservative results, so the safety factors
could be unrealistically low in the result. Because this method is famous and in some
countries required for slope stability analysis, it is a part of GEO5 software.
Analysis 3 – polygonal slip surface

In the last step of analysis, input the polygonal slip surface. As a method of analysis,
select “Spencer”, as analysis type select “optimization”, enter a polygonal slip surface and
perform the analysis.

Frame “Analysis” – Spencer – optimization of polygonal slip surface

The values of the level of slope stability are:

SF  1,58  SFs  1,50 SATISFACTORY.

Note: Optimization of a polygonal slip surface is gradual and depends on the location of the
initial slip surface. This means that it is good to make several analyses with different initial
slip surfaces and with different numbers of sections. Optimization of polygonal slip surfaces
can be also affected by local minimums of factor of safety. This means the real critical surface
does need to be found. Sometimes it is more efficient for the user to enter the starting
polygonal slip surface in a similar shape and place as an opitimised circular slip surface.
 Local minimums

Note: We often get complaints from users that the slip surface after the optimization
“disappeared”. For non-cohesive soils, where cef  0 kPa the critical slip surface is the same

as the most inclined line of slope surface. In this case, the user should change parameters of
the soil or enter restrictions in which the slip surface can’t pass.

Conclusion

The slope stability after optimization is:

 Bishop (circular - optimization): SF  1,82  SFs  1,50

SATISFACTORY.
 Spencer (polygonal - optimization): SF  1,58  SFs  1,50
SATISFACTORY.
This designed slope with a gravity wall satisfies stability requirements.