Journal of Advances in Geotechnical Engineering

Volume 3 Issue 3

Slope Stability Analysis Under Earthquake Load Using Plaxis

Software
Ancheli Siby Jacob1, Katta Venkataramana2*
1
Student, 2Professor
Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Surathkal, Karnataka,
India.
*Corresponding Author
E-mail Id:-ven.nitk@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Ensuring the stability of slopes is always a challenging problem for geotechnical engineers.
Be the slope manmade or natural, unless it is safe under every load condition, it can inflict
damage to human life and livelihood. The two basic approaches in slope stability analysis
are limit equilibrium method and finite element method. This paper aims to review the effect
of various magnitude earthquakes on stability of slopes of different height, slope angle and
shear strength parameters using the finite element software PLAXIS. Stability of a slope is
best assessed in terms of its factor of safety which is computed by strength reduction
technique.

Keywords:-PLAXIS, Strength reduction technique

INTRODUCTION and is therefore used widely. It converts

Slope failure is a grave hazard that
requires immense attention to be taken
care of. Be it man-made or natural, their
stability should be checked against all
possible threats. The seismic response of
slope, therefore, has always been an
important concern for geotechnical
engineers. The two common methods of
analysis used in geotechnical engineering
for designing and predicting the behavior
of slopes are the conventional limit
equilibrium and finite element methods.
The main advantage of finite element
analysis over limit equilibrium method is
that the mode of failure or failure surface
need not be determined beforehand. Also,
the stresses, pore pressures, deformations
and failures under seepage can easily be
calculated here [3]. For seismic slope
stability analysis, some of the prominent
methods used are pseudo-static method,
Newmark sliding block analysis method,
numerical analysis method, and testing
method. Amongst this, pseudo-static
method is the simplest analysis technique
the seismic force into an equivalent
horizontal and vertical force and gives the
analysis results [1].
In this study, our aim is to carry out
stability analysis of highway embankment
by FEM based PLAXIS 2D software. Here
the stability is analysed in terms of its
Factor of Safety (FOS) for slopes of
different heights of various inclinations,
different soil parameters, and for under
various earthquake intensities.
FINITE ELEMENT MODEL
Slopes of different heights- 3m, 6m, and
9m, each of different side slopes such as
2H: 1V, 1.5H: 1V, 1H: 1V, 0.5H:1V are
considered for this study. Based on the
assumption that the slope is fully drained, a
finite element model has been created and
analysed using PLAXIS 2D. Plain strain
model was adopted because of its uniform
cross-section and 15 noded plain strain
element has been used for the
discretization of the slope material. To

HBRP Publication Page 1-8 2020. All Rights Reserved Page 1

 Journal of Advances in Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3

impart seismicity, the pseudo-static set to ‘medium’. Generated mesh is shown

approach facilitated by PLAXIS is used.
And thus, the slope is analysed for
different earthquake accelerations of 0.2g,
0.4g, and 0.6g. Figure 1 shows a sample
slope structure used for analysis.
MATERIAL MODEL
Properties of the homogenous slope
considered for the analysis is listed below
in Table 1.
ANALYSIS
A mesh is generated with global coarseness
in Figure 2. Calculation process in
PLAXIS is divided intoseveral calculation
phases. The first calculation phase (initial
phase) calculates the initial stress field by
means of ‘gravity procedure’ or ‘K0
procedure’. Loads are activated in the
second phase. Third phase is the safety
analysis phase wherein FOS of the given
slope under any loading is calculated. After
defining each construction stage, the
program is calculated and the results are
viewed in the output screen. A sample
deformed mesh is shown in Figure 3.

Table 1:-Parameters for slope stability analysis

Values Units
Parameters considered
Material model Mohr-Coulomb
Type of material behaviour Drained
0.2g, 0.4g, 0.6g m/s2
Earthquake acceleration
Slope height 3,6,9 m
Angle of shearing resistance 5,10,15,20,25,30,35,40 Degree (0)
Cohesion 25,50,100,200 kN/m2
2H:1V, 1.5H:1V,
Inclination
1H:1V, 0.5H:1V
Soil unit weight above phreatic level 18.5 kN/m3
Soil unit weight below phreatic level 20 kN/m3
Modulus of elasticity
30,000 kN/m2
Poissons ratio 0.3
Dialatancy angle
0 Degree (0)

Permeability in horizontal direction 0.05 m/day

Permeability
in vertical direction 0.05 m/day

Fig.1:-Slopegeometry

HBRP Publication Page 1-8 2020. All Rights Reserved Page 2

 Journal of Advances in Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3

Fig.2:-Generatedmesh Fig.3:-Deformedmesh

RESULTS ANDDISCUSSIONS

Fig.4:-FOS variation for a 3m high slope of 2H:1V Fig.5:-FOS variation for a 3m high slope of 1H:1V

HBRP Publication Page 1-8 2020. All Rights Reserved Page 3

 Journal of Advances in Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3

Fig.6:-FOS variation for a 3m high slope of 0.5H:1V inclination

Figure 4-6 shows FOS values for a 3m high
slope of inclinations 2H:1V, 1H:1V and
0.5H:1V respectively. Each of this slope is
analysed for a no surcharge case under
0.2g, 0.4g and 0.6g earthquake
accelerations. From these figures, a
considerable reduction in stability factor of
slopes can be observed with increasing
earthquake acceleration. Only a slight
change in FOS happens on increasing
inclination from 2H: 1V to 1H: 1V, but the
reduction increases as the slope inclination
changes to 0.5H:1V. As the cohesion and
frictional angle values increases, FOS also
increases. It is also seen that as the
earthquake acceleration increases, slopes
having lower soil parameter combination
tends to fail first.

HBRP Publication Page 1-8 2020. All Rights Reserved Page 4

 Journal of Advances in Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3

Fig.7:-FOS variation for a 6m high slope of 2H:1V inclination

Fig.8:-FOS variation for a 6m high slope of 1H:1V Fig.9:-FOS variation for a 6m high slope of
inclination 0.5H:1V inclination

HBRP Publication Page 1-8 2020. All Rights Reserved Page 5

 Journal of Advances in Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3

Figure 7-9 shows FOS values for a 6m high
slope of inclinations 2H:1V, 1H:1V and
0.5H:1V respectively under 0.2g, 0.4g and
0.6g earthquake accelerations. Conclusions
made about 6m high slopes are same as
that we got from 3m high slopes.
Figure 10-12 shows FOS values for a 9m
high slope of inclinations 0.5H:1V,
2H:1Vand 1H:1V respectively under 0.2g,
0.4g and 0.6g earthquake accelerations. A
similar observation as that to 3m and 6m
high slopes can be made out here too.

Fig.10:-FOS variation for a 9m high slope of 0.5H:1V inclination

Fig.11:-FOS variation for a 9m high slope of 2H:1V inclination

HBRP Publication Page 1-8 2020. All Rights Reserved Page 6

 Journal of Advances in Geotechnical Engineering
Fig.12:-FOS variation for a 9m high slope of 1H:1V inclination
CONCLUSIONS
The analysis of slopes using PLAXIS
software gave an insight into the variation
of factor of safety with the variation in
slope angles, slope heights, cohesional
strength values, frictional angle values and
earthquake accelerations. The following
conclusions have been drawn:
For various cases of slope angles, slope
heights, cohesional strength values,
frictional angle values and earthquake
accelerations, the Factor of safety values
are obtained and are presented in tabular
form. These tables may be of great use in
directly obtaining factor of safety for any
practical purposes.
As earthquake acceleration increases, FOS
decreases. For the typical cases studied,
HBRP Publication Page 1-8 2020. All Rights Reserved
Volume 3 Issue 3
FOS decreases by 24-38% when
earthquake acceleration is increased from
0.2g to 0.4g and by 24-30% when the
acceleration is changed from 0.4g to 0.6g,
except for the very steep slopes which fails
under the new increased acceleration.
Under 0.2g acceleration, it can be observed
that all slopes are safe unless it is very
steep with very low c-Φ values. i.e., 6 m
slopes with inclination 1H:1V with c=25
kN/m2,Φ
<100 and slopes with inclination 0.5H:1V
with c=25 kN/m2, Φ <150 become unstable
under given acceleration. Similarly, 9 m
slopes with inclination 1H:1V with c=25
kN/m2, Φ <200 and slopes with inclination
0.5H:1V with c=25 kN/m2, Φ <300 also
fail under 0.2g acceleration.
Under 0.4g accelerations, 3m high slopes
Page 7
 Journal of Advances in Geotechnical Engineering
are stable for all c-Φ values for c=
25kN/m2 and Φ>100. Similarly, 6m high
slopes of 2H:1V inclination are stable for
all values of c= 25 kN/m2 and Φ>150 and
1H:1V inclination are stable for all values
from c= 25 kN/m2 and Φ>200. 9m high
slope stays intact for all values of c= 25
kN/m2 and Φ>250; c= 50 kN/m2 and
Φ>100for 2H:1V inclination. For 1H:1V
inclination, for all values of c= 25 kN/m2
and Φ>300, c= 50 kN/m2 and Φ>100 slopes
are found to be stable. A slope of 0.5H:1V
inclination fails for all c=25kN/m2 and for
soil parameter combinations of Φ<200 for
c=50kN/m2.
Under 0.6g acceleration, 9 m slopes of all
soil parameter combinations with c=25
kN/m2 are not stable. As cohesion value
increases to 50kN/m2, only those 9m high
slopes having friction angle values
lessthan200 will fail for an inclination of
2H:1V. As the slope inclination steepens
to 1H:1V, for c=50 kN/m2, FOS is less
than 1 for Φ values less than 250. 6 m
slopes with inclination 2H:1V with c=25
kN/m2, Φ <250 and slopes with inclination
0.5H:1V with c=25 kN/m2, Φ <300 goes
unstable under given acceleration.
All slopes with c<=50 kN/m2 of 0.5H:1V
fails under 0.6g accelerations.
On analysis using PLAXIS software, it is
observed that the stability values of a slope
of all height and all soil parameters used in
this study for 2H:1V are similar to that of
1.5H:1Vinclination.
Only a slight decrease in FOS is observed
when the slope steepens from 2H:1V to
1H:1V where as the decrease is more when
the inclination is made to 0.5H:1V.
As the soil strength parameters, i.e.,
HBRP Publication Page 1-8 2020. All Rights Reserved
Volume 3 Issue 3
cohesion and friction angle increases, FOS
increases.
As slope height increases, its stability
decreases.
REFERENCES
1. Guo, M., Ge, X., & Wang, S. (2011).
Slope stability analysis under seismic
load by vector sum analysis
method. Journal of Rock Mechanics
and Geotechnical Engineering, 3(3),
282-288.
2. Maula, B. H., & Zhang, L. (2011).
Assessment of embankment factor
safety using two commercially
available programs in slope stability
analysis. Procedia engineering, 14,
559-566.
3. Choudhury, D., Basu, S., & Bray, J. D.
(2007). Behaviour of slopes under static
and seismic conditions by limit
equilibrium method. In Embankments,
Dams, and Slopes: Lessons From the
New Orleans Levee Failures and Other
Current Issues (pp. 1-10).
4. Park, S., Kim, W., Lee, J., & Baek, Y.
(2018). Case study on slope stability
changes caused by earthquakes—
Focusing on Gyeongju 5.8 ML
EQ. Sustainability, 10(10), 3441.
5. Song, K., Wu, S. G., Chang, T., & Luo,
C. (2019). Research on Landslide
Development Mechanism of Loose
Accumulation Slope under Earthquake
Condition. In IACGE 2018:
Geotechnical and Seismic Research and
Practices for Sustainability (pp. 566-
575). Reston, VA: American Society of
Civil Engineers.
6. PLAXIS 2D (2015) Reference manual,
Tutorial, Material models manual and
Scientificmanual
Page 8