ReSSA, ReSlope, MSEW: Comparative Summary

For complete details, see features of each program posted at www.GeoProgram.com

Applicable Maximum
Reinforce-
Program to MSE Slope Geometry Number of Water
ment
Structure: Angle Soils
Simple, two- Reinforced Phreatic
1 Geosynthetic tiered, bridge soil, retained surface used
MSEW Walls 70-90
or Metallic abutment, soil, and 5 only in global
back to back other soils stability
Reinforced
Slopes & soil, retained Phreatic
ReSlope Walls2
10-90 Geosynthetic Simple
soil, foundation surface
soil
Phreatic
25 different surface or
soils; piezometric
Slopes, Walls
Geosynthetic Nearly any reinforcement lines;
ReSSA & 10-90
or Metallic geometry can be effective,
Embankments3
embedded in total or
several soils mixed stress
analysis

1
MSEW is strictly for MSE walls (following AASHTO or NCMA). A slope stability
module (Bishop) to check global stability is included. Reinforcement must be
embedded in a non-cohesive, prismatic shaped, homogeneous soil; the retained soil is
non-cohesive. Additional 5 layers of soil can be specified for global stability analysis.
Water is invoked only in global stability.
2
ReSlope is a design-oriented program that conducts local and global stability checks.
The local stability check is analogous with the one used in MSEW; however, rather than
using lateral earth pressures, log spiral analysis is employed. It does not deal with facia
(it assumes 100% connection strength). It also does not deal with eccentricity,
overturning, and bearing capacity (though deepseated failure is assessed). It inherently
assumes competent foundation.
3
ReSSA uses a global slope stability framework (i.e., it assumes that at failure all
reinforcement layers are fully mobilized). This means that if used in walls, the
reinforcement strength might be insufficient for local stability (experience shows that this
is not an issue with geosynthetics). It considers various failure mechanisms; however,
no overturning and bearing capacity are explicitly checked.
 Connection Unreinforced Stability
Program Surcharge Mechanisms
Strength Slopes/Walls Analyses2
Internal, direct
sliding,
eccentricity Planar, 2-part
Uniform and strip
(overturning), wedge
(live and dead),
MSEW 0 - 100%
horizontal, point,
No connection, (simplified),
pullout, Meyerhof,
and isolated
bearing Circular (Bishop)
capacity, and
global
Internal, Log spiral and
ReSlope 100%1 Uniform and strip No compound, circular (Bishop)
deepseated for deepseated
Circular
Rotational and
(Bishop), 2- and
translational
3-part wedge
using tangible
Yes (can run as a (Spencer);
search domain
ReSSA 0 - 100% Uniform and strip generic slope
to facilitate the
effects of
stability program) reinforcement s
capture of
included if
critical slip
intersects slip
surfaces
surface

1
ReSlope ignores surficial failure assuming 100% connection strength
2
Factor of safety in ReSSA is consistent regardless whether rotational or translational
analysis is used; this factor applies equally to all elements resisting failure (i.e., shear
strength parameters of soils and reinforcement resistance, if available); the factor for
pullout represents a ratio of resisting force and pullout force. In MSEW this factor is
applied only to the reinforcement strength in Internal Stability; it represents a ratio of
resisting force and driving force in direct sliding and pullout; it represents a ratio of
moments in overturning; it represents the ultimate foundation capacity over the actual
load, considering eccentric load and Meyerhof method. That is, in MSEW the factor of
safety is defined differently for each stability mode analyzed. In ReSlope the user can
specify different factor for the soil shear strength and for the reinforcement strength
when dealing with Internal Stability or Compound (thus making this approach adaptable
to conventional walls approach or to slopes); ratio of forces in pullout resistance and in
direct sliding; reduction of soils shear strength when deepseated failure (Bishop) is
used.