Slope Stability

Table of contents

Slope stability analysis asseses the safety of natural slopes, embankments, cuttings, and tailings dams.

Slope stability is concerned with the resistance of an inclined soil/rock mass to sliding or collapse under gravitational and other loads.

Factor of Safety

$$ FS = \frac{\text{Sum of resisting forces (shear strength)}}{\text{Sum of driving forces (shear stress)}} $$
FS Value Interpretation
FS < 1.0 Failure — slope is unstable
FS = 1.0 Limit equilibrium — on the verge of failure
FS = 1.0–1.3 Marginally stable — may fail under adverse conditions
FS = 1.3–1.5 Acceptable for temporary slopes
FS = 1.5–2.0 Acceptable for permanent slopes
FS > 2.0 Highly conservative

Types of Slope Failure

Failure Type Description Typical Soil/Rock
Rotational (circular) Slip surface is curved Homogeneous clay, fill embankments
Translational (planar) Slip surface is approximately planar Bedded rock, thin soil over rock
Wedge failure Two intersecting discontinuities Rock slopes
Toppling Blocks rotate forward Steep rock slopes with vertical joints
Flow Soil behaves as viscous fluid Loose saturated sands, debris
Compound Combination of circular and planar Layered soils, weak seam at base

Factors Affecting Slope Stability

Factor Effect Mechanism
Gravity Driving force increases with slope height and angle Increased shear stress
Water Reduces effective stress, increases weight Pore pressure reduces strength
Rainfall infiltration Rapid increase in pore pressure Transient positive pore pressure
Earthquake Inertial forces, strength reduction Cyclic loading, liquefaction
Excavation Removes support at toe Stress relief, unloading
Fill placement Increases driving force Additional weight
Weathering Reduces shear strength over time Loss of cohesion, increased permeability
Vegetation removal Removes root reinforcement Loss of apparent cohesion

Slope Stability Analysis Methods

Infinite Slope Analysis

For shallow, planar failures where the failure surface is parallel to the ground surface:

Dry slope:

$$ FS = \frac{\tan\phi'}{\tan\beta} $$

Seepage parallel to slope:

$$ FS = \frac{\gamma' \tan\phi'}{\gamma_{sat} \tan\beta} $$

Where $\beta$ = slope angle.

Method of Slices (Ordinary / Fellenius)

The slope is divided into vertical slices. The factor of safety is:

$$ FS = \frac{\sum[c' l + (W\cos\alpha - ul)\tan\phi']}{\sum W\sin\alpha} $$

Where:

  • $W$ = weight of slice
  • $\alpha$ = inclination of slice base
  • $l$ = length of slice base
  • $u$ = pore pressure at base of slice

Bishop's Simplified Method (Circular Failure)

$$ FS = \frac{\sum\frac{1}{m_\alpha}[c'b + (W - ub)\tan\phi']}{\sum W\sin\alpha} $$

Where:

  • $b$ = slice width
  • $m_\alpha = \cos\alpha + \frac{\sin\alpha\tan\phi'}{FS}$

Since $FS$ appears on both sides, this method requires iteration (typically 3–6 cycles).

Bishop's method is the most commonly used limit equilibrium method in Australian practice and is widely accepted by regulatory authorities.

Janbu's Simplified Method (Non-Circular Failure)

For non-circular failure surfaces (often appropriate for layered soils):

$$ FS = f_0 \frac{\sum[c'b + (W - ub)\tan\phi']/\cos\alpha}{\sum W\tan\alpha} $$

Where $f_0$ is a correction factor depending on the depth/length ratio of the slip surface.

Spencer's Method

Satisfies both force and moment equilibrium with inter-slice forces assumed parallel. Considered one of the most rigorous limit equilibrium methods.

Morgenstern-Price Method

The most rigorous limit equilibrium method — satisfies both force and moment equilibrium with a prescribed inter-slice force function.

Comparison of Methods

Method Force Equilibrium Moment Equilibrium Slip Surface Accuracy
Ordinary (Fellenius) No Yes Circular Underestimates FS by 5–20%
Bishop's Simplified No Yes Circular Very good (±2–5%)
Janbu's Simplified Yes No Any ±5–10% (needs correction)
Spencer's Yes Yes Any Excellent
Morgenstern-Price Yes Yes Any Excellent

Determination of Critical Failure Surface

Search Methods

Method Description Use
Grid search Systematic grid of centres Simple circular surfaces
Pattern search Derivative-based optimisation Non-circular surfaces
Random search Monte Carlo approach Complex geology
Genetic algorithm Evolutionary optimisation Very complex conditions

Critical Circle Location

For homogeneous clay slopes (Taylor's stability charts):

Slope Angle $\beta$ Critical Circle Location
< 53° (1:0.75) Toe circle — passes through toe
> 53° Base circle — deep-seated
Unlimited (vertical) Face circle — passes above toe

Influence of Water

Steady-State Seepage

Ru coefficient method:

$$ r_u = \frac{u}{\gamma H} $$

Where $u$ = pore pressure and $H$ = height of slice above slip surface.

Condition Typical $r_u$
Dry slope 0
Normal seepage 0.25–0.50
Heavy rainfall 0.5–0.7
Fully saturated > 0.6

Rapid Drawdown

When water level drops quickly (reservoir, flood), the slope may become unstable:

  1. Upward seepage gradient reduces effective stress
  2. Saturated soil weight remains
  3. No strength gain from unloading

Rainfall-Induced Failure

Most slope failures in Australia occur during or after intense rainfall events:

  • Within 24–48 hours of heavy rain (> 100 mm)
  • Antecedent rainfall (7–14 days prior) weakens soil
  • Positive pore pressure develops in the zone of infiltration

Stabilisation and Remedial Measures

Geometric Measures

Measure How It Works Cost
Flatten slope Reduces driving force Moderate
Benching Creates intermediate flat areas Low-Moderate
Remove crest load Reduces driving force Low
Fill toe berm Increases resisting force Moderate
Relocate alignment Avoids problem area High

Drainage Measures

Measure How It Works Effectiveness
Surface drains Prevent infiltration Low-moderate
Horizontal drains Lower phreatic surface High
Trench drains / interceptor drains Intercept groundwater flow High
Vertical (relief) wells Depressurise deep aquifers High
Geotextile drainage layers Internal drainage Moderate
Gravity drainage adits Deep drainage Very high (expensive)

Retaining Structures

Structure Application Design
Gravity wall Moderate heights, competent foundation Sliding/overturning/bearing
Cantilever wall Heights 3–8 m Structural + geotechnical
Anchored wall Tall slopes, limited space Rock/soil anchors + wall
Pile wall / secant pile wall Deep-seated failures Passive resistance in stable stratum
Soil nailing Stabilise existing slopes Nail pullout + facing

Ground Improvement

Method How It Works Best For
Compaction Increased shear strength Fill slopes
Lime/cement stabilisation Increased cohesion Soft clays
Grouting Fill voids, increase strength All soils
Jet grouting Create in-situ columns Localised weak zones
Electro-osmosis Drain soft clays Very soft sensitive clays
Vegetation Root reinforcement, drying Shallow failures

Landslides in Australia

Landslide-Prone Areas

Region Common Landslide Types Triggers
Sydney Basin (Blue Mountains, Illawarra) Rock falls, debris flows, translational slides Rainfall, mining subsidence
NSW North Coast Cut slope failures, deep seated slides Heavy rainfall, cyclones
Victoria (Dandenongs, Yarra Ranges) Debris flows, cut slope failures Wet winters, bushfire aftermath
Queensland (Darling Downs, SEQ) Slips on steep terrain Rainfall, clearing
Tasmania Deep-seated landslides Wet periods, terrain
South Australia Minor slides in cuttings Rainfall
Western Australia (Darling Scarp) Rock falls, shallow slides Cleared slopes

Australian Landslide Databases

Database Organisation Coverage
National Landslide Risk Database Geoscience Australia National
NSW Landslide Inventory NSW Department of Planning NSW
VicLandslide Geological Survey of Victoria Victoria
QLD Landslide Susceptibility Geological Survey of QLD Queensland

Seismic Slope Stability

Pseudostatic Analysis

$$ FS_{eq} = \frac{\sum[c'b + (W - ub)\tan\phi']}{\sum(W\sin\alpha + k_hW\cos\alpha)} $$

Where $k_h$ is the horizontal seismic coefficient.

Typical $k_h$ values (Australia):

Seismic Zone PGA (g) $k_h$
Low (most of Australia) < 0.08 0.04–0.06
Moderate (Adelaide, Perth) 0.08–0.15 0.06–0.10
High (parts of WA, SA) 0.15–0.22 0.10–0.15

Newmark Sliding Block Analysis

Estimates permanent displacement rather than FS:

$$ D \approx \frac{V^2}{2A} \times \left(\frac{A}{\text{CRR}}\right)^{-b} $$

The approach is preferred for critical slopes where some deformation is acceptable.

Acceptable displacements:

Slope Type Acceptable Displacement
Critical slopes (dams, highways) < 100 mm
Moderate slopes 100–500 mm
Low-risk slopes 500–1000 mm

Monitoring and Instrumentation

Instrument Parameter Application
Inclinometer Lateral movement profile Detect sliding surface location
Piezometer Pore water pressure Drainage effectiveness
Survey monuments Surface movement Visual monitoring
Tiltmeter Rotation Wall rotations
Crack gauge Crack opening Tensile cracks at crest
TDR (Time Domain Reflectometry) Shear surface location Deep-seated movements
LiDAR / drone survey Surface deformation Large-scale monitoring

Monitoring frequency:

Risk Level During Construction Routine Operation During Heavy Rain
Low Monthly Quarterly After events
Medium Weekly Monthly Weekly
High Daily Weekly Daily

Australian Standards and Guidelines

Standard/Guideline Title Application
AS 4678 Earth Retaining Structures Excavation slope stability
AGS Landslide Risk Management Series Landslide Risk Management Risk-based approach
ANCOLD Guidelines on Tailings Dams Dam slope stability
AS 5100 Bridge Design Abutment slope stability
TfNSW QA R10 Earthworks Embankment slopes
TfNSW QA B80 Earth Retaining Structures Cut slopes and walls

Worked Example

Given: 10 m high clay slope, $\beta = 30°$, $\gamma = 19$ kN/m³, $c' = 10$ kPa, $\phi' = 25°$, no water table.

Searching for critical circle (using Bishop's simplified method):

Trial centre at coordinates producing a circular slip surface:

Slice $b$ (m) $h$ (m) $W$ (kN/m) $\alpha$ (°)
1 1.5 2.0 57.0 -10
2 1.5 5.5 156.8 5
3 1.5 8.0 228.0 18
4 1.5 9.0 256.5 30
5 1.5 7.0 199.5 42
6 1.5 3.5 99.8 55

Assume FS = 1.4 as initial guess, iterate:

$$ FS = \frac{\sum[c'b + W\tan\phi']/m_\alpha}{\sum W\sin\alpha} $$

After 4 iterations: FS = 1.78 (adequate for a permanent slope).