6/30/2022

Chapter Six: Stability Analysis Under Steady

Seepage and Draw Down Conditions
6.1 Methods of Analysis
6.2 Limit Equilibrium Method
6.2.1 General
6.2.2 Failure Surfaces
6.2.3 Factor of Safety
6.2.4 Ordinary or Fellenouis Method
6.2.5 Bishop Simplified Method
6.2.6 Janbu’s Simplified Method
6.2.7 Spencer’s Method
6.2.8 Morgenstern‐Price Method

Chapter Six: Stability Analysis Under

Steady Seepage and Draw Down Conditions
6.2.9 LE Commercial Software
6.3 Finite Element Method
6.4 Selection of Shear Strength for Design
6.4.1 General
6.4.2 Shear Strength of Partially Saturated Soils
6.5 Examples
6.6 Foundation Stress
6.7 Stability Modeling Assignment
References

1
 6/30/2022

6. Stability Analysis under Steady Seepage

and Draw down Conditions
The quantitative determination of the stability of slopes is
necessary in a number of engineering activities including the
design of earth dams and embankments, the analysis of stability
of natural slopes, analysis of the stability of excavated slopes,
analysis of deep-seated failure of foundations and retaining
walls.
6.1 Methods of Analysis
In slope stability analysis, the limit equilibrium method (LEM)
and finite element method (FEM) are the two basic types.
The following table provides the major difference in these two
methods.

6.1 Methods of Analysis

2
 6/30/2022

6.2 Limit Equilibrium Method (LE)

The first LE method for a round slip surface was presented by
Fellenius (1936)
Bishop (1955) later developed a revised method of circular slip
analysis
Janbu (1954) presented a technique for non-circular failure
surfaces that isolated a potential sliding mass into a few vertical
cuts
Morgenstern-Price (1965), Spencer (1967), Sarma (1973) and a
few others make further advances with regards to the various
assumptions about inter-slice forces.

6.2 Limit Equilibrium Method (LE)

LE methods are based on the method of slices and can be
divided broadly into four categories, depending on the number
of equilibrium equations to be satisfied:
(1) methods that satisfy overall moment equilibrium,
(2) methods that satisfy overall moment and overall force
equilibrium,
(3) methods that satisfy force equilibrium of each slice, and
(4) methods that satisfy moment and force equilibrium of
each slice

3
 6/30/2022

LEM Load Combinations

Illustration of Spencer’s method

LEM Load Combinations

4
 6/30/2022

6.2 Limit Equilibrium Method (LE)

The two general categories method of stability analysis for
embankment and foundation are:
• sliding surface method, and
• unit shear stress method
Sliding surface method: Continuous potential failure surface in
embankment and foundation are assumed. Calculations are
made of the shear stress along the failure surface that would be
necessary for equilibrium and the strength forces that can be
developed in the same surface.
F = factor of safety,
f = shearing resistance,
 = shear stress generated

6.2 Limit Equilibrium Method (LE)

Unit shear stress method: This includes estimating unit shear
using elastic or plastic theory. Then, the factor of safety is
evaluated comparing the computed unit shear stress in the area
analyzed with the shear strength.

5
 6/30/2022

Sliding Surface Method

Generally, the following procedure can be followed in dealing
with stability analysis using the sliding surface method.
• The problem is considered to be two dimensional.
• A continuous surface of potential shear failure passing
through the dam foundation and/or embankment is needed.
• The shear stress on the potential sliding surface that would be
necessary to prevent movement is computed.
• The shear strength force available to resist movement is
computed.
• The margin of safety is obtained by comparison of the shear
stress needed for equilibrium with shear strength available.
Several methods of determining F are available.
• The procedures are repeated for other potential failure
surfaces until a “critical” is found which gives a minimum
factor of safety.

Sliding Surface Method

Note that:
The above steps have to be repeated for various loading
(reservoir operation) conditions.
6.2.2 Failure Surfaces
The stability analysis must be made on all conceivable failure
surfaces
The form of critical failure surface for a minimum factor of
safety (Fmin) is controlled by various factors including soil types
and presence of discontinuities and interface.

6
 6/30/2022

Stability analysis: failure surface schematics

Failure Surface
For most initial analysis involving relatively homogeneous and
uniform cohesive soils, circular failure surfaces are assumed.
The parabola locus of the centre of the critical circle in such
cases with ru < 0.3 [ru = Uw/(z)] can be approximated by
Zc = H*cot*(0.6 + 2*tan’)
Yc = H*cot*(0.6 - tan’)
Where Zc and Yc are co-ordinates with respect to the toe,
measured positive upwards and into the slope respectively, and
 is the slope angle.
Where ru > 0.3, the location of the critical centre is less
dependent on tan’ and influenced to a greater degree by c’ such
that deeper critical circle prevail.

7
 6/30/2022

Failure Surface

Failure Surface
According to Fellenious (1936), the suggested line of locus of
the critical slip circle is given by line PQ

8
 6/30/2022

Failure Surface
In drawing the critical slip circle, keep in mind the following
points.
• Except for small, the critical arc passes through the toe/heel.
• Critical arc passes hard stratum at the shallow depth
tangentially.
• For small  (00 - 150), the critical circle passes below the
toe/heel; for  < 530 (which is a common case for small).
The critical circle in such cases falls as shown below

6.2.3 Factor of Safety

The stability analysis has to be assessed in relation to changing
conditions of loading and seepage regime. The recommended
minimum factors of safety, Fmin, for these different loading
conditions are:

9
 6/30/2022

6.2.3 Factor of Safety

To start with, Terzaghi gives the following preliminary
dimensions of earth dams.

6.2.4 Ordinary or Fellenouis method

(Swedish circle (Fellenius) solution)
Fellenouis (1936) was developed this method and is sometimes
referred to as “Fellenouis method.”
The Ordinary method 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 (F),
since the equation does not require an iteration process. The (F)
is based on moment equilibrium and computed as: Abramson et
al. and Nash as cited in

10
 6/30/2022

6.2.4 Ordinary or Fellenouis method

(Swedish circle (Fellenius) solution)

Stresses and Forces Acting on a Typical Slice

11
 6/30/2022

Stresses and Forces Acting on a Typical Slice

Calculations for Ordinary Method of Slice

12
 6/30/2022

6.2.5 Bishop Simplified Method

(Bishop semi-rigorous solution: Circular arc surface)

OR

Where b is the width of the slice

In applying this equation, first F is assumed and then iteration

procedure is followed. It can be applied to non-circular surface.

6.2.5 Bishop Simplified Method

(Bishop semi-rigorous solution: Circular arc surface)

13
 6/30/2022

6.2.6 Janbu’s simplified method

This method is based on a composite shear surface (i.e.
non‐circular) and the (Ff) is determined by horizontal force
equilibrium. As in (Bishop Simplified Method), and this method
does not satisfy moment equilibrium and considers inter slice
normal forces (E) but neglects the shear forces (T). Janbu, 1954,
Ff is computed by:

6.2.7 Spencer’s method

This method is the same (Morgenstern-Price) methods except
the assumption made for inter slice forces. A constant inclination
is assumed for inter slice forces and the (F) is computed for both
moment and force-equilibriums .According to this method, the
inter slice shear force (T) is related to Spencer as cited in

14
 6/30/2022

6.2.8 Morgenstern‐Price method

This method satisfies both force and moment equilibriums and
assumes the inter slice force function. According to method
Morgenstern-Price method, the inter slice force inclination can
vary with an arbitrary function (f(x)) as:

6.2.9 LE Commercial Software

The commercial LE software includes the following.
- SLOPE/W is a software product that uses theories and
principles of the limit equilibrium methods to compute the
factor of safety of earth slopes
- The comprehensive formulation of SLOPE/W makes it
possible to easily analyze both simple and complex slope
stability problems using a variety of methods to calculate the
factor of safety.
- Slide2, from Rocscience, is a 2D slope stability analysis
program using limit equilibrium method; and Slide3 is a 3D
slope stability analysis software based on Slide2 software.
- HYDRUS: HYDRUS is a limit equilibrium methods based,
to use slope software system for Stability of embankments,
dams, earth cuts and anchored sheeting structures.

15
 6/30/2022

6.3 Finite Element Method

Unlike LE methods, there is no presumption regarding the shape
and location of the failure slip surface. This is considered an
advantage of this method over the traditional LE methods where
the FOS are calculated for a pre-determined failure surface.
Since there is no concept of slices in FE analysis, there is no
need for assumptions about the lateral inter-slice forces between
adjacent slices.
The FE method preserves global equilibrium until failure is
reached, and is able to monitor progressive failure up to and
including overall shear failure.
The FE approach divides the model into a number of pieces or
elements of a mesh. Stresses and strains are calculated using the
constitutive laws for materials comprising of the slope stability
model.

6.3 Finite Element Method

Failure occurs naturally through the zones in which the soil
shear strength is unable to sustain the applied shear stresses.
Ultimately, a reduction factor (RF) can be calculated for finite
element methods using the ‘c-φ reduction’ procedure. This
approach requires incrementally reducing the soil strength
parameters until the failure occurs.
The shear strength reduction technique enables the FE method
to calculate FOS (equivalent RF) for slopes.
FE method includes the probabilistic FE method, the
perturbation method, and Monte Carlo simulation and Direct
Coupling Approach.

16
 6/30/2022

6.3 Finite Element Method

Generally, there are two approaches to analyze slope stability
using FE method.
• one approach is to increase the gravity load, and
• the second approach is to reduce the strength characteristics
of the soil mass.
There are a number of commercial FE software utilized for
slope stability analysis of embankment dam.
• PLAXIS 2D: PLAXIS 2D is a geotechnical FE software to
perform 2D analysis of deformation and stability in
geotechnical engineering and rock mechanics.
• GEO5 FEM: GEO FEM is a FE package specifically
intended for the 2D analysis of deformation and stability in
geotechnical engineering projects.

6.4 Selection of Shear Strength for Design

In the design of embankment dams, stability analysis of slopes
is usually conducted for the following four typical loading
conditions.
i. End of construction condition: Upstream and downstream
slopes stability analyses immediately after the end of
construction.
ii. Reservoir full and half condition: Downstream slope
stability analysis at the first filling of the reservoir, and at
water level about half full reservoir level.
iii. Rapid drawdown condition: Upstream slope stability
analysis under reservoir rapid drawdown condition.
iv. Seismic condition: Upstream and downstream slopes
stability analyses under earthquake condition with full (and
intermediate) reservoir level.

17
 6/30/2022

6.4 Selection of Shear Strength for Design

Selection of the appropriate shear strength parameters for the
embankment fills and foundation materials are important.
In particular, selection of the relevant drainage and pore water
conditions including undrained strengths (total stress analysis)
or drained strengths (effective stress analysis), and pore water
pressure is critical for safety and structural integrity of the
embankment.
In selecting the shear strengths, pore pressures and unit weights
for stability analysis, the following points should be underlined.
• For low permeability zones under end of construction, rapid
drawdown and staged construction conditions, it is
challenging to predict the pore pressures with reasonable
accuracy. Therefore, the total stress analysis (Su, ϕu) should
be used.

6.4 Selection of Shear Strength for Design

• For contractive soils, undrained strengths should also be
used.
• In any doubt, check both undrained and drained conditions
and adopt the results from the lowest strength case.
Undrained conditions can occur even in relatively slow rates
of change of reservoir levels.
• Annual cycles of rise of reservoir level were sufficient to
induce undrained loading conditions in the downstream of
poorly compacted (contractive) clay zone of the concrete core
wall embankment dam (Cooper et al. 1997).

18
 6/30/2022

6.4 Selection of Shear Strength for Design

6.4.2 Shear strength of partially saturated soils

A number of shear strength equations have been formulated for
unsaturated soils in terms of different state variables. Some of
them are proposed Bishop (1959), Fredlund et al. (1978), Zhan
and Ng (2006), Lamborn (1986), Peterson (1988), Satija (1978)
Karube (1988) and Toll (1990).
In general, for partially saturated soil, the shear strength can be
computed by:

19
 6/30/2022

6.6 Foundation Stress

Foundation stress in earth dam is not usually critical except
when the foundation material consists of unconsolidated clay or
silt with low shear strength.

6.6 Foundation Stress

Consider a dam with a homogenous unconsolidated earth
foundation of thickness t.
Assuming the foundation loading above, Leo Jungeuson
suggests the following maximum stress.
If t > L, max = 2.56*f*H
Where: f = surface weight of the fill
H = fill height
If t < L (usually t < L), max = (t*f*H)/L
Where: Shear strength, f = c + *tan
Factor of Safety, F.S. = f/max
A minimum factor of safety of 1.5 is recommended.

20