Sarma,S. K. (1987).

GCotechnique
37, No. 1, 107-l I1

TECHNICAL

NOTES

The aim of Technical Notes is to bring to the notice of readers current topics which are not directly related
to recent papers or letters already published in Giotechnique.
The articles should not only be original and
topical but also essentially short and concise. Each Technical Note should be limited to 1000-2000 words,
together with only essential equations and illustrations. The content of Notes should be of interest to the
general reader and might comprise such information as
(a) details of new experimental techniques of direct interest to other workers
(b) reports of novel geotechnical investigations not sufficiently complete or extensive to warrant a full
paper
(c) field measurements and observations
(d) examples of the application of new ideas or of techniques developed in other disciplines to the consideration of particular geotechnical problems.

A note on the stability analysis of slopes

S. K. SARMA*

KEYWORDS:

s=qL

analysis; earthquakes; slopes; stability.

in which A, B and S depend on the method of

solution.
For example, for a circular arc slip
surface of radius R, Bishops (1955) simplified solution is

In the stability analysis of slopes, Sarma (1973,

1979) has shown that for a given slip surface the
determination
of the critical acceleration
factor
K, involves a straightforward
and easy procedure
and that K, is a measure of the static factor of
safety. He suggests the iterative
technique
of
determining
the factor of safety by first reducing
the shear strength parameters by a known factor
F and then by computing the corresponding
K,
value for the reduced strength. The appropriate
choice of three or four values of F is generally
suflicient to allow the determination
of the shape
of the grafih of factor of safety F versus K as
shown in Fig. 1. Sarma & Bhave (1974) suggest a
starting value of F, given by
F = 1 + 3.3K,

F + Bi

F = x{[cb

+ w(1 - r,) tan 41 set a

x [l + (tan z tan @)/F]-}/xw

This equation
where

sin a

takes the form given in equation

(3)
(2)

A = [cb + w(1 - r,) tan 4) set a

(4)

B = tan CItan 4

(5)

s=c

w sin a

(6)

If a horizontal
load Kw which acts at the
centre of gravity of each slice is included in the
problem, the resulting equation will be similar to
equation (2) except that

(1)

The subsequent
values of F can be obtained by
linear interpolation.
However, the determination
of the factor of
safety involves overcoming
some computational
difficulties which arise from the method of slices.
Whether the slip surface is a circular or a noncircular arc and whether the method of solution is
a simplified or a rigorous method, except for the
simplified solutions of Fellenius (1936) or Skempton & Hutchinson
(1969), the determination
of
the factor of safety requires the solution of an
equation of the kind

S=zwsincr+Kw(cosor-i)

(7)

where h is the height of the centre of gravity of

the slice from the slip surface.
With Sarmas (1973) method rewritten to be
solved for F rather than for K, or with Janbus
(1957) equation, the form of the equation for F
will remain the same as equation (2), but these
methods now involve
A = [cb + w(1 - r,) tan 4

Discussion on this Technical Note closes on 1 July

1987. For further details see p. ii.
* Imperial College of Science and Technology.

- DX tan 41 set a
B = tan a tan 4
107

(8)
(9)

108

TECHNICAL

NOTES

The first curve is a straight line and the second is

a discontinuous
curve of several segments
as
shown in Fig. 2. This has singularities at

KC

F=

/(--

0
1

---

Fs

Fig. 1. Variation in factor of safety F with horizontal

acceleration factor K

S = c (w - DX) tan CI+ Kw

(10)

The presence of the interslice shear force differential DX does not make any difference to the
form of the equation but the final solution will
depend on its values. The following discussion is
therefore valid for all methods of stability analysis
that use the method of slices which involves an
equation of similar form to equation (2).
The solution to equation (2) can be represented, graphically,
as the points of intersection
of
two curves, plotting F versus Y, where Y is given
by
Y=S
(11)
Y=4L
F + Bi

(12)

-B,

(13)

The singularity corresponding

to the maximum
value of F occurs in conjunction
with the largest
value of -tan CItan c#/, i.e. F, is the largest value
of -tan a tan 4.
The artificial cases such as when 1 AJ(F
+ Bi) is a negative quantity, which implies that
the slipped mass will move uphill, or when S < 0
which implies a negative driving moment, may be
disregarded.
Therefore, the sections of the curve
below the Y = 0 line in Fig. 2 are to be completely discarded.
For values of F > F, the curve defined by
equation (12) is entirely positive and asymptotic
to Y = 0. This part of the curve is a higher order
rectangular
hyperbola. For values of F that are
smaller than the smallest value of -B, the curve
is entirely negative and is again a higher order
rectangular
hyperbola
which is asymptotic
to
Y = 0. The line Y = S therefore intersects
the
curve for equation (12) at n different points which
correspond
to the n different solutions of F in
equation (2), n being the number of distinctly different values of tan a tan 4 on the slip surface.
It can be seen that solutions of F which are
to shear stresses at
smaller than F, correspond
the base of the slip surface which are in the same
direction as the slip movement in one or more
segments. This condition
is kinematically
inadmissible because it violates the principle of limit

I\
i\
i\

Fig. 2. Graphical solution for the factor of safety

TECHNICAL

equilibrium
and is therefore unacceptable.
The
only solution which is acceptable
is the largest
value of F which exceeds F,. The value of S
changes with the applied horizontal load Kw; the
critical acceleration
factor K, is obtained from
the value of S corresponding
to a factor of safety
of unity.
For realistic failure surfaces, the value of F, is
usually significantly less than unity and therefore
the solution of K,, i.e. the critical acceleration
factor, is physically meaningful. This implies that,
if a horizontal load larger than K, w is applied, a
slide should occur. However, when F, > 1, the
critical acceleration factor for F = 1, as obtained
from Sarma (1973) or by using any other method
of slices, is physically meaningless. The solution
may correspond
to the discarded
portion
of
Fig. 2, i.e. Y < 0 or, if the solution corresponds
to
Y > 0, an acceleration factor greater than K, on
these assumed
slip surfaces will not produce
failure. The reason for this is that for the same
acceleration factor there is another solution of F
which is greater than F, and therefore greater
than unity. The surface is therefore safe. Slip surfaces which have F, very close to but less than
unity will yield large values of K, but will be
found to produce solutions which are unacceptable from other criteria. From the stress conditions, the exit angle at the toe end of a slip surface
close to the free horizontal ground surface should
be equal to x = -(45 - &/2) which gives a value
of F, = tan 4 tan (45 - 412) which is very
much smaller than unity.
With Sarmas (1979) solution, which cannot be
written in the form of equation (2), the use of
F = F, to reduce the shear strength properties on
the slip surface may not produce a large value of
K, but instead will yield results which will be
unacceptable
from considerations
of the directions of the interslice forces.
The function S varies linearly with the horizontal load factor K. Therefore, the curve of F versus
K as shown in Fig. 1 is also a rectangular hyperbola of higher order for values of F > F,. This
hyperbola has an asymptote at F = F, and the
rectangular
asymptote at K = K,. The value of
K, will depend on the kind of function S which in
turn depends
on the method
of solution.
In
Sarmas and in Janbus method
(14)
while in Bishops method

c w sin a
K = - 1 w(cos a - h/R)
The value of K, is a negative

number.

(15)

109

NOTES

negative, there is no stability problem.

The higher order rectangular hyperbola
expressed as
F-F,,,=-

K - K, + (K - K,)
P
+ (K _ K,)3 + ...

(16)

where M, N and P are defined later. It is found

that only three terms on the right-hand
side are
usually sufficient to define the curve.
To use this solution in Sarmas (1973, 1979)
methods to find the factor of safety for any value
of K, including K = 0, F, and K, are first determined. There are then two situations.
Case 1
In case 1, F, < 1. This is the usual situation.
Step I. Assume F = F, = 1; derive K, = K, .
Step 2. Compute
M = (F, - F,)(K,

- K,)

(17)

Assume N = 0 and P = 0 which gives

F, = F, + &
0

Step 3. Reduce the shear strength properties by

the factor F, and determine
K, = K, for the
reduced strength.
Step 4. Compute new values of M and N
M = (F, - F,J(K,

- K,)

- (f, - Fn,MK,- Ko)*

KI - K,
N = (F, - FJK,

(19)

- K,)*

- M(K, - Ko)

(20)

Assume P = 0 and determine

F=F,=F,+-

N
M
K - K, + (K _ K,)*

(21)

Step 5. Reduce the shear strength properties

on the slip surface by the factor F = F, and
determine K, = K, for the reduced strength.
Step 6. Compute new values of M, N and P
M, = (F, - F,)(K,

- Ko)3

- (F2 - F,XK, - Ko13

If it is not

can be

K,--2

(22)

TECHNICAL

110

NOTES

EXAMPLE
Figure 3 shows a slope with a rock toe. A slip
surface ABCDEF
is also shown. The material
properties are given in the table. The point B of
the slip surface is chosen to give a value for F,
which is very close to unity. The point B is moved
slightly up or down to produce the following two
cases. Sarmas (1973) method is used for the solution.
Fig. 3. Cross-section of a slope and rock toe with an
assumed slip surface

M, = (F, - FJK,
-

(F,

F,,,XK,

Kd3

(23)
K,

M=

- Ko)3

K3

MI-M,
KI -

(24)
K3

N = M, - M(K, + K, - 2K,)
P = (F, - F,J(K,

(25)

- K,J3

- M(K, - K,) - N(K, - K,)

and determine

(26)

F given by
N

F=F,+&+

Case 1
In case 1, F, = 0.998. For a factor of safety of
unity, the critical acceleration factor is 12.33. The
factor of safety for zero acceleration
is 1.47 and
the variation in the factor of safety with other
acceleration
factors is shown in Fig. 4(a). A
detailed examination
of the solution shows that
the interslice forces are unacceptable
for the critical acceleration case.

(K - Kc,)

P
+ (K - K,J3

Case 2
In case 2, F, > 1. K, is not computed
F = 1. In step 1, an arbitrary value of
F=F,=F,+l

for
(28)

is assumed and the rest of the procedure

same as in case 1.

is the

Case 2
In case 2, Fm = 1.002. For a factor of safety of
unity, the critical acceleration
factor is - 10.08,
which is meaningless. The factor of safety for zero
acceleration level is 1.59 and the variation in the
factors of safety for other acceleration factors are
shown in Fig. 4(b). The differences in the factor of
safety for the two cases are considerable
even
though point B is moved by an insignificant
amount; this shows the approach to a singularity.
The solution to the problem was also obtained
by the Sarma (1979) method which gave a critical
acceleration
of 1.00 with vertical slices but the
resulting interslice forces were unacceptable.
No
acceptable solution was found with inclined slices.
In conclusion, the value of F, should always be
checked before any stability analysis is performed
on a slip surface and if this value is found to be
greater than or equal to unity the slip surface
should be rejected.

1 .o

0
1

(a)

1.5

(b)

Fig. 4. Variation in factor of safety with horizontal acceleration factor for two insignificantly
different positions of point B in Fig. 3

TECHNICAL

REFERENCES
Bishop, A. W. (1955). The use of the slip circle in the
stability analysis of slopes. Giotechnique 5, No. 1,
7-17.
Fellenius, W. (1936). Calculation
of the stability of earth
dams. Trans. 2nd Congr. Large Dams, Washington
DC 4,445-459.
Janbu, N. (1957). Earth pressures and bearing capacity
calculations
by generalized procedure of slices. Proc.
4th Int. Conf: Soil Mech. Fdn Engng, London 2,207212.
Sarma, S. K. (1973). Stability analysis of embankments

NOTES

111

and slopes. Gtotechnique 23, No. 3,423-433.

Sarma, S. K. (1979). Stability analysis of embankments
and slopes. .I. Geotech. Engng Div. Am. Sot. Cio.
Engrs 105,GT12, 1511-1524.
Sarma, S. K. & Bhave, M. V. (1974). Critical acceleration versus static factor of safety in stability
analysis of earth dams and embankments.
Gkotechnique 24, No. 4,661-665.
Skempton, A. W. & Hutchinson,
J. N. (1969). Stability
of natural
slopes and embankment
foundations.
Proc. 7th Int. Conf: Soil Mech. Fdn Engng, Mexico
City, State of the art volume, pp. 291-340.