3.

SLOPE STABILITY

3.1 Circular failur e m e c h a n i s m s

When slope failures are investiga t e d it is often found that failure occurs by
a rotation al slip along an approxim a t ely circular failure surface, as shown
below. This observ a tion provides a basis for sever al metho d s used to
ass es s the stability of slopes.

Shallow failure
Deep- sea t e d failure

3.1.1 Factor of Safe t y

When perfor min g stability analys e s we gen e r ally are not inter e s t e d in
failure as such, failure is a final limiting stat e that we do not want the soil
to reac h. We are usu ally more inter e s t e d in the sta bility of the unfailed
soil, and in det er mi nin g a factor of safet y, F, for the unfailed soil. Factors
of safet y nee d to be consid er e d carefully in soils. For exa m pl e, in the
design of retainin g walls for active condition s, as the factor of safet y
incre a s e s so will the force that ne e d s to be provide d.

To det er mi n e the factor of safet y we ass u m e that only som e part of the
friction al and cohe siv e forces hav e bee n mobilised, so that on the
ass u m e d failure plan e the soil is not at a stat e of failure.

At failure the stres s e s are given by the Mohr- Coulo mb criterion as

τ = c + σ tan φ

At stre s s stat e s re mo t e from failure the mobilised she a r stre s s , τmob , is

ass u m e d to be given by

c  tan φ 
τ mob = + σ 
F  F 
or
τ mob = c m + σ tan φ m
 c
wher e cm (= ) is known as the mobilised cohe sion
F
−1  tan φ 
φm (= tan   ) is known as the mobilise d friction angle
 F 

Note that it is ass u m e d that both comp o n e n t s of stre n g t h are divide d by

the sa m e factor F.

3.1.2 Short ter m stability of soils with φu = 0

For clayey soils that remain undraine d in the short term, and that have
stren gt h para m e t e r s c = c u , φ = φu = 0, the analysis is straightforw ar d.
Consider the slope shown below and assu m e that the she ar strengt h has
been reduce d by a factor F, so that c = c u /F. Failure will then occur along a
circular arc of radius R as indicate d in the figure.

θ
R x

W τ = cu

If the soil is homo g e n e o u s , then by considering mom e n t equilibrium about

the centre of the assu m e d slip circle it can be seen that

R θ cu
2
Wx =
F
where θ is the angle subt e n d e d by the failure circle at its centre
W is the weight of the rotating body
x is the centre of mas s of the rotating soil body.

rearra n ging we obtain

R θ cu
2
Resisting Moment
F = =
Wx Disturbing Moment

• The factor of safety of the slope can then be deter min e d by considering
a rang e of failure surfaces (slip circles) with different centr es and radii to
find the slip circle that gives the minimu m value of F.
• Becaus e this analysis is an undrain e d, total stres s analysis, the possibility
that tension cracks may form, and that thes e cracks may fill with water
must be consider e d. Water in a tension crack will provide an additional
disturbing mom e n t and can significantly reduc e the factor of safety.

• The analysis can be easily modified to account for non- homog e n e o u s soil
deposits.

• To obtain the minimu m value of F compu t e r metho d s are gener ally used.
These metho d s require the soil to be split into a series of slices. This
appro ac h is also used for the more gener al analysis discuss e d below.

3.1.3 The Method of Slices

For soils which have φ ≠ 0 a more elabora t e analysis is required. The sam e
gener al metho d can be used for both undraine d (total stress) and effective
stress analysis.

Let us consider the effectiv e stres s analysis of the slope shown below

θ
R
Wi

Ti

Ni

The forces acting on the i th slice are as shown below

 R sin θ i

θi

∆ xi

Xi

U ii E ′i E ′i + 1 U ii + 1
Xi + 1
∆ li
Ti

N ′i

Ui

Noting that the intern al forces betw e e n the slices will cancel when taking
mom e n t s we obtain

n
Restoring moment = R ∑
i=1
Ti

Assuming a Mohr- Coulomb failure criterion the restoring mom e n t can be

written

c′i ∆ li  tanφ ′i 
n
= R ∑ [ + N′i   ]
i=1 F  F
 n
Overturning moment = R ∑ Wi sin θ i
i=1
The factor of safety F is then given by

Re sisting Moment ∑ [ c ′ ∆l
i i + N ′i tan φ ′i ]
F = = i =1
n
Overturning Moment
∑ W sin θ
i =1
i i

When an undrain e d (total stress) analysis is being perform e d there are

ess en tially the sam e forces acting on the slices. However, in a total stress
analysis the forces due to the water press ur e s U i, Uii are not required and
only the total forces E i, Ni need to be consider e d. The shear force on each
slice is given by the total stress failure criterion and the restoring mom e n t
can be written

n
c ui ∆ li  tanφ ui 
= R∑ [ + Ni  ]
i=1 F  F 

To calculat e the factor of safety the norm al force must be known. By

considering the force equilibrium of the slice it can be seen that the force N
´ i will depe n d on the interslice forces Xi and E´ i. Unfortun a t ely N cannot be
simply deter min e d from consider a tion of equilibrium (the slice is statically
indeter min a t e ) and it is neces s a r y to make an assu m p tion. There are
sever al metho d s of deter mining the factor of safety, each meth o d involving
different assu m p tion s. The two simples t and most com mo nly used meth o d s
and their assu m p tion s are consider e d below.

3.1.3.1 The Swedish met ho d of slices

In this metho d it is assu m e d that the resultan t of the interslice forces acts
in a direction perpe n dicular to the normal force N.

Then resolving parallel to N we obtain

N i = N ′i + Ui = Wi cos θ i
where the force U i = u i ∆li and u i is the pore press ur e at the centre of the
slice on the assu m e d failure circle

Substitution of the expres sion for N i into the equ ation for the factor of
safety gives
n

∑
i=1
[ c ′i ∆ l i + (Wi cos θ i - U i ) tan φ ′i ]
Effective stress analysis F = n

∑ i=1
Wi sin θ i
Undraine d analysis
 n

∑
i=1
[ c ui ∆ l i + Wi cos θ i t an φ ui ]
F = n

∑i=1
Wi sin θ i
Exam pl e – Sw e d i s h m e t h o d

Deter min e the short term stability of the slope shown below, given that the
slope was initially subm e r g e d with water and that the water level has now
been drawn down to the level of the top of the sand.

Initially the centre and radius of the failure plane must be assu m e d . The
calculations pres e n t e d below are for one such assu m p tion. However, to find
the factor of safety of the slope, a numb e r of centre s and radii will need to
be consider e d to find the combin ation that gives the minimu m factor of
safety.

θ
R = 5.83

1m

6 7 8 Clay
φu = 0
c u = 25 kPa
γsat = 15
kN/m 3
1 2 3 4 5
z
∆l Sand
φ´ = 30 o
c´ = 0
γsat = 20
kN/m 3
Example calculations for slice 6

1. ∆li = 1.11 m me a s u r e d from figure

2. x i = 2.5 m me a s u r e d from figure
3. θi = sin (2.5/5.83) = 25.4 o
-1
or me a s u r e from figure. Not e that θ is
positiv e for slic e s givin g positi v e
ov er t ur ni n g mom e n t s
4. W i = A γ = 1 × 2 × 15 + 1 × 0.268 × 20 = 35.36 kN/m
5. Ni = W i cos θi = 35.36 cos (25.4) = 31.94 kN/m
6. Ui = γw z ∆li = 9.81 × 0.268 × 1.11 = 2.92 kN/m
7. N´ i = Ni - Ui = 29.02 kN/m
8. W i sin θi = 35.36 sin (25.4) = 15.17 kN/m
9. Ti = C´ i + N´ i tan φ´ i = 0 + 29.02 tan (30) = 16.75 kN/m
The results for all the slices can be similarly evaluat e d and tabulat e d as
shown below

θ ∆l u U W N N´ C Wsin T
()
ο
(m) (kPa) (kN/m (kN/m (kN/m (kN/m (kN/m θ (kN/m
) ) ) ) ) (kN/m ) )
1 -25.4 1.10 2.62 2.91 5.35 4.84 1.93 - -2.30 1.11
7 8 0 7 5
2 -14.9 1.03 6.22 6.64 12.7 12.2 5.82 - -3.77 3.36
5 7 6 0 7 2 2
3 -4.93 1.00 7.94 7.97 23.6 23.6 15.6 - -2.03 9.02
4 2 4 9 0 3 4
4 4.93 1.00 7.94 7.97 38.6 38.5 30.5 - 3.317 17.6
4 2 4 9 4 7 5
5 14.8 1.03 6.22 6.64 42.7 41.2 34.8 - 10.98 20.1
9 5 7 6 0 6 1 0
6 25.4 1.11 2.62 2.92 35.3 31.9 29.0 - 15.17 16.7
8 6 4 2 5
7 36.8 1.25 - - 24.9 19.9 - 31.2 14.98 31.2
7 0 6 6 5 5
8 50.5 1.57 - - 10.6 6.75 - 39.3 8.20 39.3
3 2 2 5 0 0

where

U = u ∆l N = W cos θ N´ = N - U

C = c´ ∆l in the sand (Effective stres s analysis)

C = c u ∆l in the clay (Undraine d, Total stres s analysis)

For sand T = C´ + N´ tan φ´ but c´ = 0 therefor e T = N´ tan φ´

For clay T = C + N tan φu but φu = 0 therefor e T = C

F =
Re sisting Moment
=
∑T =
138.56
= 311
.
Disturbing Moment ∑W sin θ 44.54

If a load of 100 kN/m is placed on top of slice 6, only the calculations for
slice 6 are affect e d and thes e beco m e

W = 35.36 + 100 × 1 = 135.36 Slice is 1 m wide

N = W cos θ = 122.47

N´ = N - U = 119.36
W sin θ = 58.06

T = N´ tan φ´ = 68.9

F =
∑T =
190.7
= 2.18
∑W sin θ 87.44
3.1.3.2 Bishop's simplified m eth o d of slices

In this metho d it is assu m e d that the vertical interslice forces, X i, Xi+1 , are
equal.

R sin θ i

θi

∆ xi

Xi

U ii E ′i E ′i + 1 U ii + 1
Xi + 1
∆ li
Ti

N ′i

Ui

Then resolving vertically we obtain

Wi = Ti sin θ i + N ′i cos θ i + u i ∆ x i
We know that the mobilised strengt h T i is given by
c ′i ∆ l i N ′i tan φ ′i
Ti = +
F F
substituting this into the previous expres sion, noting that ∆x i = ∆li cos θi
and rearra n ging gives

Wi - u i ∆ x i - (1/ F) c ′i ∆ x i tan θ i
N ′i =
 tan φ ′ tan θ i 
cos θ i  1 + i 
 F 
 tan φ′i
Let M i (θ) = cos θ i [ 1 + tan θ i ]
F
Then substitution of the expres sion for N´ i into the equ ation for the factor
of safety, F, that is

Re sisting Moment ∑ [ c ′ ∆l
i i + N ′i tan φ ′i ]
F = = i =1
n
Overturning Moment
∑ W sin θ
i =1
i i

gives
n
 1 
∑ ( c ′i ∆ x i + ( Wi - u i ∆ x i ) tan φ ′i )  
i=1  M i (θ ) 
F = n

∑i=1
Wi sin θ i

Note that in the Bishop's simplified metho d the factor of safety app e a r s in
both sides of the equa tion, as it is included also in the M i (θ) term. Thus to
obtain solutions an iterative approac h is need e d. This mea n s that you
need to assu m e a value for the factor of safety before evaluating the
sum m a tion s to give a new factor of safety. It is found that the factor of
safety converg e s rapidly.

A chart is shown below (p 183 in Data Sheet s) which simplifies hand

calculation by giving values for Mi for a rang e of values of θ and φ. Note that
the sign of θ is import a n t, as noted above θ is positiv e for slic e s givin g
positiv e ov er t ur ni n g mo m e n t s .
 1.6
Note: θ is + when slope of failure arc is
in same quadrant as ground slope
1.0
1.4
0.8
Values of Mi (θ)

1.2
_ 0.6
--------φ
-tan --
F 0.4
1.0
0 0.2
0.2
0.8
0.4 _ 0
tan φ
0.6 -----------
F
0.6
0.8

1.0
0.4
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Values of θ

GRAPH FOR DETERMINATION OF M i (θ)

For undraine d (total stres s) analysis the proced ur e is similar and the factor
of safety beco m e s

n
 1 
∑ ( c ui ∆ x i + Wi tan φ ui )  
i=1  M i (θ ) 
F = n

∑i=1
Wi sin θ i
where
tan φ ui
M i (θ ) = cos θ i [ 1 + tan θ i ]
F

When φu = 0, Mi (θ) = cos θi and Bishop’s simplified meth o d gives an

identical answ er to the Swedish metho d. However, in gener al the metho d s
give different answ ers. Both meth o d s tend to under e s ti m a t e the factor of
safety estima t e d by more accurat e analys e s . Bishop’s meth o d is the more
(theore tically) accura t e and is more widely used.

3.1.4 Important points

• Numerical analys e s are required to deter min e the most critical slip circle

• Both the Swedish and Bishop’s metho d s can be used for undraine d (total
stres s) analysis, and for effective stress (usually draine d) analysis. In
many situations the slope analysis requires combin ations of draine d and
undrain e d analys e s . For instanc e, the short term stability of a slope
containing layers of clay and sand would require a total stres s
(undraine d) analysis in the clay and an effective stres s (drained) analysis
in the sand.

• In undraine d (total stress) analys e s the undraine d para m e t e r s c u , φu must

be used in the expres sions for the factor F, and the pore press ur e term is
ignored.

• The effect of vertical surface loads can be include d in the analysis by

adding the vertical force on a slice to the weight of that slice.

• For sub m e r g e d slopes, such as shown below, the water must be include d
in the analysis

Water
There are two basic options

1. Treat the water as a mat erial with no streng t h, but having a unit
weight γw . Effectively the water is providing a vertical load onto the
underlying slices.

2. Use the sub m e r g e d unit weight γ´ (= γsat - γw ) for all the soil below the
surface of the water. This appro ac h can only be used in a total stres s
analysis if φu = 0.

• The factor of safety is very sensitive to pore press ur e s in the ground. The
pore press ur e s may be deter min e d from

1. A piezo m e t ric surface. The pore press ur e s are deter min e d assu ming
that u = γw z, where z is the distanc e below the piezom e t ric surface.
This is exact when there is no flow and when the flow is horizontal.

2. A flow net. In num erical analys e s a grid of pore press ur e values can be
set up.

Exam pl e – Bish o p ’ s sim plifi e d m e t h o d

For the same slope and slices as used before the calculations for slice 6
beco m e

∆x i = 1.0 m me a s u r e d from figure

xi = 2.5 m me a s u r e d from figure
θi = sin (2.5/5.83) = 25.4 o
-1
or me a s u r e from figure. Not e that θ is
positiv e for slic e s givin g positi v e
ov er t ur ni n g mom e n t s
Wi = A γ = 1 × 2 × 15 + 1 × 0.268 × 20 = 35.36 kN/m
W i sin θi = 35.36 sin (25.4) = 15.17 kN/m
ui = γw z = 9.81 × 0.268 = 2.628 kN/m
c i∆xi + (Wi – ui∆xi) tan φi = 0 × 1 + (35.36 - 2.628 × 1) tan 30o = 18.9 kN/m Note that it is
φ the friction angle, not θ in this
calculation
Now assume a factor of safety, say F = 3
Mi = cos θi (1 + tan θi tan φi /F) = cos(25.4)×(1+tan(25.4)×tan(30)/3) = 0.986
Or read Mi off the chart for θ = 25.4 and (tan φ)/F = tan(30)/3 = 0.19

The results for all the slices can be similarly evaluat e d and tabulat e d as
shown below

θ ∆x u W Wsin c∆x T* = c ∆x M T*/M

()
ο
(m) (kPa) (kN/m θ (kN/m + (W-
) )
(kN/m u∆x)tan φ
) (kN/m)
1 -25.4 1.0 2.62 5.35 -2.30 - 1.58 0.821 1.92
8 7
2 -14.9 1.0 6.22 12.7 -3.77 - 3.74 0.917 4.08
7 0
3 -4.93 1.0 7.94 23.6 -2.03 - 9.09 0.980 9.28
2 9
4 4.93 1.0 7.94 38.6 3.31 - 17.75 1.013 17.52
2 9 7
5 14.8 1.0 6.22 42.7 10.9 - 21.06 1.016 20.73
9 7 0 8
6 25.4 1.0 2.62 35.3 15.1 - 18.9 0.986 19.17
8 6 7
7 36.8 1.0 - 24.9 14.9 25.0 25 0.800 31.26
7 6 8
8 50.5 1.0 - 10.6 8.20 25.0 25 0.636 39.30
3 2

F =
∑T * M =
143.3
= 3.22 . Then using the updat e d
∑Wsinθ 44.54
F=3.22 re- evaluat e M and T*/M until the solution converg e s . In this proble m
this gives F = 3.25.
3.2 Multipl e w e d g e failur e m e c h a n i s m s

If the soil profile cont ain s weak, usu ally clay, layers the failure plan e ma y
coincide with the weak layer, and an alysis of circular failure mec h a ni s m s
may be inappr o p ri a t e . In this situa tio n it is often ass u m e d that the failure
mec h a nis m consists of wedg e s of soil moving relative to one anot h e r . For
exa m pl e , with a weak horizont al layer the 2 wedg e mec h a nis m show n
below is a possible failure mec h a ni s m :

Weak layer

In som e cas e s mor e compl ex mec h a ni s m s ne e d to be consid e r e d

involving 3 or more wedg e s , for exa m pl e

Consid er the two wedg e mec h a nis m shown below

2
1

When the slope fails the stre n g t h mobilise d b e t w e e n the two wedg e s is
given by the failure criterion of the soil. Howev er, when the slope is
remo t e from failure the mobilise d stre n g t h betw e e n the two wedg e s is
likely to be differe n t from the mobilised stre n g t h on the bas e of the
wedg e s . The mobilise d stre n g t h betw e e n the wedg e s may rang e from
zero to that given by the par a m e t e r s c m , φm , giving the mobilised stre n g t h
on the bas e of the wedg e s .

For practic al calculation s for soil struct ur e s that are remo t e from failure it
is often ass u m e d that a me di a n value betw e e n 0 and c m , φm is
appro pria t e , so that betw e e n the wedg e s

cm φm
c* = φ* =
2 2

Howev er, in the limit when F = 1, the mobilised stre n g t h mus t be the
sa m e everyw h e r e . It is ther efor e conve ni e n t an alytic ally to ass u m e that
the maxi m u m mobilised stre n g t h is the sa m e on all the ass u m e d failure
plan e s .

Now if a value of F is ass u m e d the forces acting on the two wedg e s are as
shown below

X1
C2
φ´ m
W2
C 12
W1
C 12
φ´ m
C1 φ´ m
R2
R1 φ´ mc X2

The force polygo n s can then be constru c t e d

X1
R2

X2
R1
C 12
W2
W1
C2

C1 C 12
To cons tr u c t thes e polygo n s a factor of safet y was ass u m e d . This
ass u m p tio n affects the ma g nit u d e of the cohe sion forces C 1 , C 12 , C 2 and
the mobilized angle s of friction.

If the chos e n value of the factor of safet y is correc t the inter- wedg e
result a n t forces (X 1 and X2 ) will be equ al and opposit e, as requir e d for
equilibriu m. Becau s e the initial value of F was a gues s , the inter- wedg e
forces are unlikely to be equ al. To det e r mi n e the correct factor of safety
the calculation s mus t be rep e a t e d with differe n t value s of F and
interp ol a tio n use d to det er mi n e the true factor of safet y, for the assu m e d
m e c h a nis m .

X1 - X2

Note:

• the calculat e d factor of safet y is not nec e s s a rily the factor of safet y
of the slope. To det er mi n e this all the possible mec h a ni s m s mus t
be consid er e d to det e r mi n e the mec h a ni s m giving the lowes t factor
of safet y.

• In any an alysis the appro pria t e para m e t e r s mus t be use d for c and
φ. In an undr ain e d an alysis (short ter m in clays) the par a m e t e r s are
c u , φu with tot al stres s e s , and in an effective stres s an alysis (valid
any time if pore pres s u r e s known) the para m e t e r s are c ′, φ′ use d
with the effectiv e stres s e s .

• In an effectiv e stre s s analysis if pore pres s u r e s are pres e n t the

forces due to the wat er mus t be consid er e d and if nec e s s a r y
includ e d in the inter- wedg e forces.

Exam p l e – w e d g e an al y s i s

The figure below shows a slope that has bee n cre a t e d by du mpin g a
claye y sand (γbulk = 18 kN/m 3 ) onto a soil whos e surfac e has be e n
softe n e d to crea t e a thin soft clay layer. If the she a r stre n g t h par a m e t e r s
of the claye y sand are c´ = 0, φ´ = 30 o , and the undr ain e d stre n g t h of the
softe n e d clay layer is 40 kPa, det e r mi n e the short ter m factor of safet y of
the slope. Assum e that the failure mec h a ni s m is as shown below.

2
1 15
2 m
1
60 o 50 o

20
m
1. Calculat e are a s :

A1 = 86.6 m 2 A2 = 115.6 m 2

2. Assu m e Factor of Safet y

F= 2

3. Calculat e c, φ para m e t e r s

Weak layer c m = c u /F = 40/2 = 20 kPa, φm = 0

Claye y san d c m = 0, φ’m =

4. Calculat e known forces

W 1 = 86.6 × 18 = 1558. 8 kN/m W 2 = 115.6 × 18 = 2080 kN/m

C 1 = 20 × 20 = 400 kN/m

5. Draw force diagr a m s

X1
16.1 W2
16.1
W1
16.1 R2
60 o
X2 60 o
50 o
 C1
R1

For Block 1: Resolving horizont ally gives X1 cos (16.1 + 3 0 ) =

C1
X1 = 576.9 kN/m

For Block 2: Resolving horizont ally gives X2 cos (16.1 + 3 0 ) =

R 2 cos (16.1 + 4 0 )
X2 = 0.80 R 2

Resolving vertically gives W 2 = X2 sin (46.1) + R 2 sin

(56.1)
X2 = 1 1 8 6 . 9 kN/m

Repe a t for F = 1.5 (c m = 26.67 kPa, φ´ m = 21.05 o )

X1 = 848.5 kN/m
X2 = 0.77 R 2
X2 = 1086.6 kN/m

Using linear interpola tion/ e x t r a p ol a tio n

F = 1.18

3.3 Infinite Slopes

For long slopes another potential failure mechanism is a failure plane, usually at relatively small
depths, parallel to the soil surface. This situation is demonstrated below.
 b Soil Surface
α
os
b/c Water Table

W
Assumed
d dw failure
surface
T
2
dwcos α
N’
dwcos α
U
α

If the failure surface is very long then the inter-slice forces must cancel out, and then considering
equilibrium we can write (assuming the unit weight is the same above and below the water table):
N = W cos α = γ b d cos α

a nd the norm al stress, σ isT given sin α

= W by = γ b d sin α
a
The normal and shear stresses on the assumed failure plane are thus given by

N
σ = = γ d cos 2 α
b
cos α

T
τ = = γ d sin α cos α
b
cos α

The water pressure can be determined from consideration of the flow (from the flow net)
u = γ w d w cos2 α

and the force due to the water pressure on the failure surface is

U = u  b cos α  = γ w b d w cos α
 

Because a flow net is being used an effective stress analysis is required and therefore the failure
criterion is given by
τ = c ′ + σ′ tan φ′

or in terms of forces by

T = C ′ + N ′ tan φ ′

and σ ′ = σ − u = ( γ d − γ w d w ) cos2 α

If we define a factor of safety F by

τf shear stress required for failure
F = =
τ actual shear stress
then
c ′ + ( γ d - γ w d w ) cos2 α tan φ ′
F =
γ d sin α cos α
It is usually appropriate to use the critical state parameters c' = 0, φ' = φ'cs, so that

( γ d - γ w d w ) tan φ ′cs  γ d  tan φ ′cs

F = = 1 − w w
γ d tan α  γ d  tan α

If the soil is dry above the assumed failure plane then the factor of safety becomes

tan φ′cs
F =
tan α

If the soil is failing F = 1 then

Dry
α = φ ′cs Sand

For dry slopes the friction angle is equal to the angle of repose. φ´ cs

If dw = d, that is the soil is saturated and water is flowing parallel to the slope then at failure (F=1)
 γ 
tan α =  1 − w  tan φ ′cs
 γ 

Typically for sand φ´ cs = 35 o and γsat = 20 kN/m 3 which gives α = 19.3 o at

failure.

Note that water reduc e s the stable angle by a factor of about 2.

3.4 Graphic al solu ti o n s

Solutions are available for some com mo n slope geo m e t ries and ground
water conditions.

3.4.1 Undrained (total stress) analys e s

The stability of homo g e n e o u s slopes can be expres s e d in terms of a

dimensionles s group known as the stability numb e r, N.
c
N =
γH

Where c = cohesion
γ = bulk unit weight
H = height of the cut

If two slopes are geo m e t rically similar they will have the sam e factor of
safety provided the stability numb e r s are the sam e, that is
c1 c2 i
i =
γ 1 H1 γ 2 H2
3.4.1.1 Taylors chart – Infinite soil layer

A Chart pres e n t e d by Taylor is shown below (see also p29 in Data Sheets).
The solutions assu m e circular failure surface s, and soil stren gt h given by
the Mohr- Coulomb criterion. They ignore the possibility of tension cracks.

0.35
H (A)

DH=H , D=1 Typical cross section

and failure arc in
Zone A Critical
0.30 nH
Case 1
Case 3
DH (Case 2) circle passes
through toe and
Case 2 (B) stability number
Typical cross section showing various cases represented in chart
considered in Zone B by full lines
Case 1: The most dangerous of the circles passing
through the toe, represented by full lines in chart.
0.25

Zone B
Where full lines do not appear, this case is not

Zone A
appreciably different from Case 2
Stability Number c /γHF

Case 2: Critical circle passing below the toe, represented

by long dashed lines in chart. Where long dashed lines
do not appear, the critical circle passes through the toe
Case 3: Surface of ledge or a strong stratum at the
elevation of the toe (D= 1), represented by short 0°
0.20 dashed lines in chart φ=

φ= 0 , D= ∞ 5

For φ = 0 and 1<D< ∞ 10

see companion Fig.
15
0.15 20
25
1
, D=
0
φ=
0.10
1
D=

0.05
1
,

D=
0°
φ=

,
5°
φ=

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Slope Angle i (degrees)

Exam pl e CHART OF STABILITY NUMBERS

A slope has an inclination of 30 o and is 8 m high. The soil properties are c u

= 20 kN/m 3 , φu = 5 o , γbulk = 15 kN/m 3 . Deter min e the short term factor of
safety if the clay deposit is infinitely deep.

8 m
30 o
From the stability chart above for i = 30 o and φ = 5 o we obtain

c
= 0.11
γHF
 c 20
hence F = = = 15
.
γHN 15 × 8 × 0.11

For the correct solution a factore d φ∗ = tan-1[(tan φ)/F] should be used. So having
determined F an iterative procedure is required using the updated φ* to determine the correct
factor of safety.

Regions on the chart indicate the mode of failure; wheth er it will be shallow
or deep- seat e d. In this exa m ple the failure is in zone B, indicating a deep-
seat e d failure mech a nis m The zone on the chart has no influenc e on the
factor of safety deter min e d provided that the soil layer is sufficiently deep
for the implied mech a nis m to occur.

3.4.1.2 Taylor’s chart - soil layer of finite depth and φu = 0

The influence of a finite depth below the bas e of the slope can be
deter min e d from a second chart produc e d by Taylor shown below (also on
p29 in Data Sheets). This chart is limited to the cas e of φu = 0.

0.19
For i > 54 ° use Companion Fig. with Zone A φ= 0
i= 53 °
0.18
°
45

0.17 30
°
n=
3
°
.5
22

0.16
Stability Number c /γHF

2
°
15

0.15
1

0.14
5°
7.

nH
0.13
H
DH
0

0.12 Case A. Use full lines of chart,

short dashed lines give n values

0.11
H
DH

0.10 Case B. Use long dashed lines of chart

0.09
1 2 3 4
Depth Factor D

CHART OF STABILITY NUMBERS FOR

THE CASE OF ZERO FRICTION ANGLE
AND LIMITED DEPTH
Exam pl e

A slope has an inclination of 30 o and is 8 m high. The soil properties are c u

= 20 kN/m 3 , φu = 0 o , γbulk = 15 kN/m 3 . Deter min e the short term factor of
safety if the clay deposit overlies rock which lies 2 m below the bas e of the
slope.

8 m
30 o

Calculat e depth factor D from DH = 10 m, H = 8 m. giving D = 1.25

From chart for D=1.25 and i = 30 o we obtain

c
= 0.155
γHF

and henc e F = 1.075

Note that if φ = 0 and D = ∞ then N = 0.181 and F = 0.92

This indicate s that for a deep seat e d failure reductions in the depth of soil
below the botto m of the slope result in increas e s in the factor of safety

3.4.2 Effective stress analys e s

A numb e r of charts have been publishe d for effective stres s analys e s but
they are usually limited to very specific conditions, such as for the
construction of large emb a n k m e n t s . One of the more useful charts has
been pres e n t e d by Hoek and Bray for a rang e of relatively commo n
groundw a t e r conditions. Thes e charts are in the Data Sheet s p 224 - 229
and some of the m are reproduc e d below. In deriving the solutions it is
assu m e d that:

• a circular failure occurs passing through the toe of the slope,

• the soil is homo g e n e o u s ,
• a vertical tension crack occurs either in the upper surface or in the
slope face,
• the soil streng t h is given by the Mohr- Coulomb criterion.

The approac h is very similar to that used by Taylor.

Charte d solutions are available for the following groundw a t e r conditions

Groundwater Flow Conditions Chart Number

Fully drained slope

Surface water 8 x slope

height behind toe of slope

Surface water 4 x slope

height behind toe of slope

Surface water 2 x slope

height behind toe of slope

Saturated slope subjected

to heavy surface recharge
For each groundw a t e r condition a separ a t e chart is available. Two are
shown below

.01

.02

.03

.04

.05
2.0

.06
CIRCULAR FAILURE CHART NUMBER 1

.07

.08
.09
.10
1.8

.11

2
.1

3
.1
c/ γH.tanφ

4
1.6

.1
5
.1

.1 6
.1
7
8
.1 9
1.4 .1 0
.2

1.2 .25
tan φ/F

.30
1.0
90
.35
(°)
gle .4 0
0.8
e An
op .45
Sl
.50
80
0.6 .60
70 .70
60 .80
0.4 .90
50 1.0
40
30 1.5
0.2 20 2.0
10 4.0
0 ∞

0.
0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.
30
00

02

04

06

08

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

32

34
c/ γ HF

0
.01

.02

.03

.04

.05

2.0
.06

CIRCULAR FAILURE CHART NUMBER 3

.07

.08
.09
.10

1.8
.11

2
.1

3
.1

c/ γH.tan φ
4

1.6
.1
5
.1

.1 6
.1
7

8
.1 9
1.4 .1 0
.2

1.2 .25
tan φ/F

90 .30
1.0
.35
(°)
le
ng .40
0.8
p eA
o .45
Sl
.50
80
0.6 .60
70
.70
60 .80
0.4 50 .90
40 1.0
30
20 1.5
0.2 2.0
4.0
0 ∞
0.
0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.
30
00

02

04

06

08

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

32

34

c/ γHF
Exam pl e

To demo n s tr a t e the use of the charts consider the case of a slope 10 m

high with a slope of 20 degre e s in a clayey soil with properties c u = 20
kN/m 3 , φu = 5 o , c ′ = 2 kN/m 2 , φ′ = 25 o , γsat = 16 kN/m 3 . In the long term the
water table is at the surface for distanc e s great e r than 40 m behind the toe
of the slope.

10
20 o m

When using Hoek and Bray charts it is import a n t that effective streng t h
para m e t e r s c´ and φ´ are used.

• Deter min e the appropriat e chart from the known position of the water
table. In this exa m ple it is Chart 3

c 2
• Calculate γ H tan φ = 16 ×10 × tan 25 = 0.027

• For slope angle 20 o read off chart

c
either = 0.0139
γHF
tan φ
or = 0.518
F

• Hence F ≈ 0.9 (The slope would fail)

Note that in practice it is likely in any detailed design that a compu t e r slope
stability progra m will be used. However, the spee d and simplicity of using
charts such as thes e make the m suitable for checking the sensitivity of the
factor of safety to a range of values of the soil para m e t e r s and slope
geo m e t ries.

For instanc e in the exa m pl e above if the water table is lowered and chart 2
is appropriat e the factor of safety will increas e to F ≈ 1.1

Note also that chart 1 which is shown for a fully draine d (dry) slope is
equivalent to Taylor’s charts. That is chart 1 can be used for a total stres s
(undrain e d) analysis. This is becau s e in the analysis of a dry slope the total
and effective stress e s are the sam e. The analysis is only concern e d with
the values of c, φ, γ. Solutions will be slightly different to thos e from
Taylor’s chart becau s e slightly different assu m p tion s are mad e in the two
analys e s.
 Tutorial Problems – Slope Stability

1. Use Taylor’s curves to determine the maximum height of a 70 o slope in homogeneous

soil for which γ = 16 kN/m3 and c = 20 kN/m2 if

a) φ = 25 o b) φ = 10 o c) φ=0

What would be the answer in each case using Hoek and Bray’s charts

2. Use Taylor’s curves to determine the factor of safety and depth of critical circle of a
wide cutting 12 m deep of 7.5 o slope in a clay for which φ u = 0, c u = 40 kN/m2 and γ =
16 kN/m3. Assume

a) The clay extends to a great depth

b) There is a hard stratum at 36 m below the top of the cutting

c) A hard stratum at 22 m

d) A hard stratum at 12 m

e) A hard stratum at 6 m

Repeat cases a to e for a narrow cutting where the toes of the two slopes coincide

3 Determine the factor of safety against immediate shear failure along the slip circle shown
in Figure 1 below:

(a) when the tension crack of depth z = 4.32 m is empty of water

(b) when the tension crack is full of water

The soil properties are cu = 40 kN/m2, φu = 0. The weight of the sliding mass of soil, W =
1325 kN/m, and the horizontal distance of the centroid of this mass from the centre of the
circle, d = 5.9 m. The radius of the slip circle, R = 17.4 m, and the angle θ = 67.4o. (You
do not need to use the method of slices).

Figure 1
4 A wide cutting of slope 45o is excavated in a silt of unit weight γsat = 19 kN/m3. When
the cut is 12 m deep a rotational slip occurs which is estimated to have a radius of 17 m
and to pass through the toe and a point 5.5 m back from the upper edge of the slope.
Shear tests on undisturbed samples give variable values for c u. Assuming φu = 10o
estimate an average value of cu round the failure surface by using

(a) the Swedish method of slices

(b) Bishop’s simplified method of slices

5 Shown in Figure 2 is the cross-section of a cutting that is to be made in a partially

saturated clayey sand which contains a weak clay seam that will be intersected by the face
of the cut.

Calculate the factor of safety that the slope would have against a wedge type failure by
using the two wedges that are shown in the figure.

Properties of the materials are as follows:

Clayey sand: γbulk = 18 kN/m3, c′ = 0, φ′ = 26o

Clay seam: cu = 45 kN/m2, φu = 0

Figur e 2

6 Determine the factor of safety of a long (infinite) slope as a function of the slope angle,
α, if the water flows horizontally out of the slope. Take c' = 0.

Calculate the limiting value of α if φ' = 30o, and γsat = 20 kN/m3.