CHAPTER 13

Stability of Earth Slopes

QUESTIONS AND PRACTICE PROBLEMS

Section 13.1 Terminology

13.1 Define, with the help of a sketch if appropriate, the following terms as related to slope
stability:

(a) Natural slope

(b) Cut slope
(c) Fill slope
(d) Top of slope
(e) Toe of slope
(f) Slope face
(g) Terrace
(h) Slope ratio
(i) Slope height

Solution
(a) A natural slope is part of the natural terrain where the ground surface is sloping
(see Figure 13.3 in text).
(b) A cut slope is formed by excavating materials from the ground surface to form a
slope, exposing natural ground once buried (see Figure 13.3 in text).
(c) A fill slope is formed by placing a fill with a sloping surface (see Figure 13.3 in
text).
(d) The top of a slope is the point where the slope intersects flatter ground near the
top (see Figure 13.4 in text).
(e) The toe of a slope is the point where the slope intersects flatter ground at the
bottom (see Figure 13.4 in text).
(f) The slope face is the ground surface between the top and toe of the slope (see
Figure 13.4 in text).
(g) A terrace is a narrow level area created in cut and fill slopes to accommodate
surface drainage facilities (see Figure 13.4 in text).
(h) The slope ratio describes the steepness of the slope and is always expressed as
horizontal-to-vertical (see Figure 13.4 in text).
(i) The slope height is the height of the slope measured vertically between the top
and toe of the slope (see Figure 13.4 in text).

13-1

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-2 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

Section 13.2 Modes of Slope Instability

13.2 Define the following types of slope instability:

(a) Falls
(b) Topples
(c) Slides
(d) Spreads
(e) Flows

Solution
(a) Falls are slope failures consisting of soil or rock fragments that drop rapidly down
a slope, bouncing, rolling and even becoming airborne along the way.
(b) Topples are similar to falls, except that a topple begins with a mass of rock or stiff
clay rotating away from a vertical or near-vertical joint or fissure.
(c) A slide is a slope failure that involves one or more well-defined blocks of earth
that move downslope by shearing along well-defined surfaces or thin shear zones.
(d) A spread is a slope failure that involves one or more well-defined blocks of earth
that move outward along a layer of weak soil.
(e) Flows are downslope movements of earth that resemble the movement of a
viscous fluid.

13.3 Explain the difference between a flow and a slide. Which one often travels farther, and
thus can be a hazard to sites far from the slope?

Solution
According to Varnes’ classification system, a slide is a slope failure that consists of one
or more blocks of earth that move downslope along well-defined shear surfaces or thin
shear zones. A flow differs from a slide in that it has no well-defined blocks of earth, and
moves downhill as a viscous fluid.
Flows typically travel farther than slides, and thus can be a hazard to sites much
farther from the slope.

13.4 Cut slopes in bedded sedimentary rocks can be very problematic. What mode of failure
do you think would be most common in these rocks, and how could we evaluate the
potential for such a failure before construction?

Solution
Bedded sedimentary rocks, like many discontinuous rock masses, are much weaker along
the bedding planes than across these planes. Their behavior is controlled by the
discontinuities in them. Therefore, when the bedding planes are oriented in such a way
that they are inclined out of the slope, a slide may occur along these planes. We could
evaluate the potential for such a failure by measuring the orientations (strikes and dips) of
the bedding planes, and evaluating how the bedding planes are oriented with respect to
the slope face. A simple kinematic check would be to compare the apparent dip of a
bedding plane to the slope face inclination in a two-dimensional section through the slope.

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-3

We also need to assess the shear stress and strength along the bedding planes and perform
a slope stability analysis. In general, rigorous analyses of discontinuous rock mass
stability require three-dimensional methods in rock mechanics and are beyond the scope
of this book.

Section 13.4 Quantitative Analysis of Slides

13.5 Describe the limit equilibrium analysis method.

Solution
In a limited equilibrium analysis, we evaluate the slope as if it were about to fail by
sliding, with a well-defined body of the slide at limiting equilibrium, and determine the
resulting shear stresses along the well-defined failure surface. Then, these equilibrium
shear stresses are compared to their corresponding shear strengths to determine the factor
of safety.

13.6 Define the factor of safety as used in limit equilibrium-based slope stability analysis
methods.

Solution
The factor of safety is the ratio of the available shear strength to the equilibrium shear
stress (required or mobilized shear strength).

Section 13.5 General Procedures in a Limit Equilibrium Analysis of a Slide

13.7 Most limit equilibrium analysis methods include one or more simplifying assumptions.
Why are these assumptions necessary? Give an example of one of the methods and its
assumptions.

Solution
Most slope stability problems are statically indeterminate. The simplifying assumptions
in the analyses are necessary to overcome this problem and thus make the problem
solvable. For example, the ordinary method of slices permits the analysis of circular
failure surfaces by neglecting the effects of the normal and shear forces acting on the
sides of each slice.

13.8 You are writing a computer program to perform slope stability computations. This
program will consider only circular failure surfaces. What procedure might you use to
locate the critical failure surface? Provide a detailed explanation.

Solution
There are several ways to do this, including the following:
1. Ask the user to specify the center and radius of the first trial circle.
2. Increases and decreases the radius until finding the radius that produces
the lowest factor of safety.

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-4 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

3. Try “centers” a certain distance above, below, right and left of the
previous center and repeat step 2 at each of these centers.
4. Compare the results of the computations from steps 2 and 3. If the lowest
factor of safety is at one of the centers from step 3, then try new centers
above, below, left, and right of this center. Continue this process until the
critical center is located (i.e., the one at which centers above, below, left
and right produce higher factors of safety).
5. The factor of safety at the critical center, or the lowest factor of safety, is
the factor of safety of the slope.

Section 13.6 Planar Failure Analysis

13.9 State the assumptions in the planar failure analysis.

Solution
The slide body slides on a planar failure surface.
The shear stress and strength on the failure surface are uniform.
The slope extends for an infinite distance perpendicular to the cross-section.

13.10 The proposed slope in Example 13.1 had an unacceptable factor of safety. We plan to
remedy this situation by using a flatter slope. What slope ratio would be required to
produce a factor of safety of 1.5?

Solution

u = 29 kPa

c' l + [(W / b ) cos α − ul ] tan φ '

F=
(W / b )sin α
1.5 =
(15 kPa )(88.4 m ) + [(W/b )cos16° − (29 kPa )(88.4 m )]tan20°
(W/b )sin16°

Solve for W/b :

W/b = 6179.5 kN/m

6179.5 kN/m =
1
2
(
(85.0 m ) 20.1 kN/m 3 h )
h = 7.23 m

From geometry,

20 − 20 x sin 16° = 7.23

x = 2 .3

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-5

At a minimum the slope has to have a slope ratio of 2.3:1.

Section 13.7 Infinite Slope Analysis

13.11 State the assumptions in the infinite slope analysis.

Solution
The slope face is planar and of infinite extent.
The failure surface is parallel to the slope face.
Vertical columns of equal dimensions through the slope are identical.

13.12 A 2.25:1 natural slope is underlain by a residual soil derived from the underlying gneiss.
Compute the factor of safety for a failure surface 4 ft below the ground surface using a
total stress infinite slope analysis with su = 1000 lb/ft2, φT = 0, and γ = 118 lb/ft3.

Solution

α = tan −1 (1 / 2.25) = 24°

su 1000 lb/ft 2
F= = = 5.7
( )
γ D sin α cos α 118 lb/ft 3 (4)(sin 24°)(cos 24°)

13.13 A 2:1 natural slope is underlain by a 3-m-thick (measured vertically) soil cover over
bedrock. Compute the factor of safety using an effective stress infinite slope analysis
with c′ = 0 and φ′ = 35° for the soil, assuming the following:

(a) The soil cover is totally dry and γ = 18 kN/m3.

(b) The soil cover is totally saturated and γ = 20 kN/m3.

Solution
a.

tan φ ' tan 35°

F= = = 1.40
tan α tan 26.6°

b.

⎛ γ − γ w ⎞ tan φ ' ⎛ 20 kN/m 3 − 9.8 kN/m 3 ⎞ tan 35°

F = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = 0.71
⎝ γ ⎠ tan α ⎝ 20 kN/m 3 ⎠ tan 26.6°

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-6 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

Section 13.8 Swedish Slip Circle Method

13.14 State the assumptions in the Swedish slip circle method.

Solution
The failure surface is circular.
The shear strength of the soil in the slope is independent of σ and is defined solely by the
parameter su.

13.15 Prepare a spreadsheet to implement the Swedish slip circle method and use it to compute
the factor of safety for the failure surface shown in Figure 13.51.

Solution
1. Divide into slices

2. Compute weights

⎛ 3.3 m ⎞
W1 / b = 6.5 m⎜ (
⎟ 16.5 kN/m = 177 kN/m
3
)
⎝ 2 ⎠

⎛ 8.5 m + 3.3 m ⎞
W2 / b = 4.9 m⎜ ⎟(16.5 kN/m ) = 447 kN/m
3

⎝ 2 ⎠

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-7

⎛ 10.0 m + 8.5 m ⎞
W3 / b = 1.2 m⎜ ⎟(16.5 kN/m ) = 183 kN/m
3

⎝ 2 ⎠

W4 / b = 3.8 m⎜
⎛ 3.7 m ⎞
2
(
⎟ 18.5 kN/m +
3
)
⎝ ⎠
⎛ 9.3 m + 10.0 m ⎞
3.8 m⎜
2
(
⎟ 16.5 kN/m = 735 kN/m
3
)
⎝ ⎠

⎛ 5.8 m + 3.7 m ⎞
W5 / b = 11.3 m⎜
2
(
⎟ 18.5 kN/m +
3
)
⎝ ⎠

11.3 m⎜
⎛ 9.3 m ⎞
(
⎟ 16.5 kN/m = 1860 kN/m
3
)
⎝ 2 ⎠

⎛ 5.8 m ⎞
W6 / b = 1.9 m⎜ (
⎟ 18.5 kN/m = 102 kN/m
3
)
⎝ 2 ⎠

3. Compute moment arms

d1 = −4.9 m − 6.5 m/3 = −7.1 m

d 2 = −4.9 m/2 = −2.45 m

d 3 = 1.2 m/2 = 0.6 m

d 4 = 1.2 m + 3.8 m/2 = 3.1 m

d 5 = 1.2 m + 3.8 m + 11.3 m/2 = 10.7 m

d 6 = 1.2 m + 3.8 m + 11.3 m + 1.9 m/3 = 16.9 m

4. Combine data and solve using Equation 13.20 and spreadsheet below

Slice su (kPa) θ (deg) suθ W/b (kN/m) d (m) (W/b)d

1 177 -7.1 -1257
2 477 -2.45 -1169
3 60 100 6000 183 0.6 110
4 735 3.1 2279
5 1860 10.7 19902
6 110 21 2310 102 16.9 1724
Σ= 8310 Σ= 21589

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-8 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

F=
πR 2 ∑s u

180 ∑ (W / b)d
π (18.8)2 8,310
=
180 21,589
= 2.37

Section 13.9 Method of Slices

13.16 State the assumption on the side forces on slices in the following methods of slices:

(a) Ordinary method of slices

(b) Modified Bishop’s method
(c) Spencer’s method

Solution
(a) Ordinary method of slices: The effects of the side forces are neglected.
(b) Modified Bishop’s method: The side shear forces are equal to zero.
(c) Spencer’s method: All resultant side forces are inclined at the same angle.

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-9

13.17 Prepare a spreadsheet to implement the ordinary method of slices and use it to compute
the factor of safety for the failure surface shown in Figure 13.52.

Solution

1. Divide into slices

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-10 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

2. Compute weights

⎛ 5.2 m ⎞
W1 / b = 6.2 m⎜ ⎟18.2 kN/m = 293 kN/m
3

⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 0.9 m ⎞
W2 / b = 1.3 m⎜ ⎟17.9 kN/m +
3

⎝ 2 ⎠
(
1.3 m(5.2 m ) 18.2 kN/m 3 = 133 kN/m )
⎛ 0.9 m + 4.5 m ⎞
W3 / b = 6.0 m⎜ ⎟17.9 kN/m +
3

⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 5.2 m + 4.4 m ⎞
⎟18.2 kN/m = 814 kN/m
3
6.0 m⎜
⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 4.5 m + 8.6 m ⎞
W4 / b = 6.0 m⎜ ⎟17.9 kN/m +
3

⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 4.4 m + 1.6 m ⎞
⎟18.2 kN/m = 1031 kN/m
3
6.0⎜
⎝ 2 ⎠
W5 / b = 2.0 m(8.6 m )17.9 kN/m 3 +
⎛ 1.6 m ⎞
⎟18.2 kN/m = 337 kN/m
3
2.0 m⎜
⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 8.6 m ⎞
W6 / b = 7.1 m⎜ ⎟17.9 kN/m = 546 kN/m
3

⎝ 2 ⎠

3. Compute average pore water pressure at base of each slice

( )
u1 = (0.5 m ) 9.8 kN/m 3 = 5 kPa
u2 = (1.8 m )(9.8 kN/m ) = 18 kPa
3

u3 = (2.3 m )(9.8 kN/m ) = 22 kPa

3

u4 = (2.3 m )(9.8 kN/m ) = 22 kPa

3

u5 = (1.2 m )(9.8 kN/m ) = 12 kPa

3

u6 = 0

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-11

4. Solve using Equation 13.28 and spreadsheet below

c' l +
W/b c′ [(W/b)cos α
Slice (kN/m) α (Deg) (kPa) φ′ (Deg) u (kPa) l (m) – ul]tan φ' (W/b) sinα
1 293 -12 10 32 5 6.3 222 -61
2 133 -1 10 32 18 1.3 81 -2
3 814 8 10 32 22 6.0 481 113
4 1031 22 10 32 22 6.5 573 386
5 337 35 10 32 12 2.4 178 193
6 546 54 30 28 0 12.1 534 442
Σ= 2069 1071

F = 2069/1071 = 1.93

13.18 Prepare a spreadsheet to implement the modified Bishop’s method and use it to compute
the factor of safety for the failure surface shown in Figure 13.52.

Solution
Use slices, weight, and pore water pressures from Problem 13.17 and spreadsheet below:

First iteration – try F =2.00

= numerator in Equation 13.30

(W/b) sin α = denominator in Equation 13.30

W/b α c′ u m Try F = 2.00

φ'
Slice (kN/m) (Deg) (kPa) (Deg) (kPa) (m) (W/b) sinα ψ  
1 293 -12 10 32 5 6.2 -61 1.043 216
2 133 -1 10 32 18 1.3 -2 1.005 81
3 814 8 10 32 22 6.0 113 1.034 470
4 1031 22 10 32 22 6.0 386 1.044 596
5 337 35 10 32 12 2.0 193 0.998 216
6 546 54 30 28 0 7.1 442 0.803 627
Σ= 1,071 Σ= 2,206

2206
F= = 2.05
1076

Second iteration – try F =2.10

= numerator in Equation 13.30

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-12 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

(W/b) sin α = denominator in Equation 13.30

W/b α c′ u m Try F = 2.10

φ'
Slice (kN/m) (Deg) (kPa) (Deg) (kPa) (m) (W/b) sinα ψ  
1 293 -12 10 32 5 6.2 -61 1.040 217
2 133 -1 10 32 18 1.3 -2 1.005 81
3 814 8 10 32 22 6.0 113 1.032 471
4 1031 22 10 32 22 6.0 386 1.039 599
5 337 35 10 32 12 2.0 193 0.990 218
6 546 54 30 28 0 7.1 442 0.793 635
Σ= 1,071 Σ= 2,221

2221
F= = 2.07
1076

The computed F of 2.07 is less than the assumed 2.10

Final answer: F = 2.07

Section 13.10 Chart Solutions

13.19 An 8.5-m-tall, 2:1 fill slope is to be made of soil with c′ = 35 kPa, φ′ = 23°, and
γ = 19.5 kN/m3. The groundwater table will be well below the toe of this slope. Using
Cousins’ chart, compute the factor of safety. Does this slope meet normal stability
standards?

Solution

λcφ =
γH tan φ
=
(19.5 kN/m )(8.5 m )tan23° = 2.0
3

c 35 kPa

λcφ ≥ 2.0 ∴ can use Cousin’s chart

β = tan −1 (1 / 2) = 27°

Per Cousin’s chart, NF = 13.2

c 35 kPa
F = NF = 13.2 = 2.79
γH (
19.5 kN/m 3 (8.5 m ) )

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-13

Section 13.11 Miscellaneous Issues

13.20 The slope shown in Figure 13.53 has recently failed. A geotechnical investigation
indicates the failure surface was as shown. Assuming the failure occurred while
undrained conditions prevailed in the slope, back-calculate the value of su. Use the
Swedish slip circle method with the cross-section that existed immediately before it failed.
Use γ = 119 lb/ft3.

Solution
1. Divide into slices

2. Compute weights

⎛ 8 ft ⎞
W1 / b = 6 ft ⎜ ( )
⎟ 119 lb/ft = 2860 lb/ft
3

⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 8 ft + 36 ft ⎞
W2 / b = 25 ft ⎜
2
( )
⎟ 119 lb/ft = 65,450 lb/ft
3

⎝ ⎠
⎛ 36 ft + 24 ft ⎞
W3 / b = 15 ft ⎜
2
( )
⎟ 119 lb/ft = 53,550 lb/ft
3

⎝ ⎠

W4 / b = 13 ft⎜
⎛ 24 ft ⎞
( )
⎟ 119 lb/ft = 18,560 lb/ft
3

⎝ 2 ⎠

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-14 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

3. Compute moment arms

d1 = −6 ft/3 = −2 ft
d 2 = 25 ft/2 = 12.5 ft
d 3 = 25 ft + 15 ft/2 = 32.5 ft
d 4 = 25 ft + 15 ft + 13 ft/3 = 44 ft

4. Combine data and solve using Equation 13.20

Slice W/b (lb/ft) d (ft) (W/b) d

1 2,860 -2 -5,000
2 65,450 12.5 818,000
3 53,550 32.5 1,740,000
4 18,560 44 817,000
Σ= 3,370,000

F=
πR 2 ∑s θ u

180 ∑ (W / b )d
π(56 ft ) su (78°)
2
1=
180 3,370,000
su = 789 lb/ft 2

Section 13.12 Seismic Stability

13.21 Describe the pseudostatic method used to evaluate the seismic stability of a slope.

Solution
In the pseudostatic method of seismic slope stability analysis, a constant pseudostatic
horizontal acceleration is applied to each slice at the centroid of the slice. This horizontal
acceleration is assumed to continue indefinitely, and thus is idealized as a constant
horizontal static force in a direction that destabilizes the slope. This static force is equal
to (a/g)W/b, where a is the pseudostatic acceleration, g is the acceleration due to gravity,
and W/b is the weight of the slice. With the pseudostatic forces applied at the slices, the
factor of safety is calculated using any static slope stability analysis method. Empirical
criteria based on the combination of the pseudostatic acceleration used and the resulting
factor of safety is used to evaluate the seismic stability of the slope.

13.22 Describe the Newmark’s method used to estimate permanent slope displacements caused
by an earthquake.

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-15

Solution
The Newmark’s method first establishes the yield acceleration, ay, that corresponds to
F=1 in a conventional pseudostatic analysis. By double intergrating the acceleration in
the zones in which a>ay, we obtain the associated permanent slope displacement, which is
then compared to some maximum allowable displacement.

13.23 Using the ordinary method of slices, compute the factor of safety for the failure surface
shown in Figure 13.54. Then, assume an earthquake occurs and the sand stratum
liquefies and loses nearly all its strength. Assume further that the shear strength of the
liquefied sand is zero (c′ = 0 and φ′ = 0). Compute a new factor of safety for the same
failure surface. According to this analysis, will the slope survive the earthquake?

Solution
Divide into slices

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-16 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

Compute weights

⎛ 29 ft ⎞ ⎛ 12 ft ⎞
W1 / b = 60 ft⎜ ⎟121 lb/ft + 60 ft ⎜
3
⎟119 lb/ft = 148,110 lb/ft
3

⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 29 ft + 43 ft ⎞
W2 / b = 26 ft ⎜ ⎟121 lb/ft +
3

⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 12 ft + 9 ft ⎞
26 ft ⎜
2
3
( )
⎟ 119 lb/ft = 145,700 lb/ft
⎝ ⎠
⎛ 43 ft + 46 ft ⎞
W3 / b = 28 ft ⎜
2
⎛ 9 ft ⎞
⎟121 lb/ft + 28 ft ⎜
3
( )
⎟ 119 lb/ft = 165,800 lb/ft
3

⎝ ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 46 ft + 30 ft ⎞
W4 / b = 30 ft⎜ ⎟121 lb/ft = 137,900 lb/ft
3

⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 30 ft ⎞
W5 / b = 29 ft⎜ ⎟121 lb/ft = 52,600 lb/ft
3

⎝ 2 ⎠

Compute average pore water pressure at base of each slice

( )
u1 = (13 ft ) 62.4 lb/ft 3 = 811 lb/ft 2
u2 = (20 ft )(62.4 lb/ft ) = 1248 lb/ft
3 2

u3 = (18 ft )(62.4 lb/ft ) = 1123 lb/ft

3 2

u4 = (7 ft )(62.4 lb/ft ) = 437 lb/ft

3 2

u5 = 0

Solve Equation 13.28 – Initial conditions

W/b c' u c'l+((W/b)cosα (W/b)sin

Slice (lb/ft) α (Deg) (lb/ft2) φ' (Deg) (lb/ft2) l (m) -ul)tanφ' α
1 148,100 -11 0 36 811 61 69,688 -28,260
2 145,700 6 0 36 1248 26 81,702 15,230
3 165,800 20 0 36 1123 30 88,719 56,707
4 137,900 31 600 20 437 35 58,455 71,024
5 52,600 50 600 20 0 45 39,306 40,294
Σ= 337,870 154,995

337,870
F= = 2.18
154,995

Solve Equation 13.28 – Liquefied conditions

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-17

W/b c' c'l+((W/b)cosα (W/b)sin

Slice (lb/ft) α (Deg) (lb/ft2) φ' (Deg) u (lb/ft2) l (m) -ul)tanφ' α
1 148,100 -11 0 0 - 61 0 -28,260
2 145,700 6 0 0 - 26 0 15,230
3 165,800 20 0 0 - 30 0 56,707
4 137,900 31 600 20 437 35 58,455 71,024
5 52,600 50 600 20 0 45 39,306 40,294
Σ= 97,761 154,995

97,761
F= = 0.63
154,995

The computed factor of safety in the liquefaction condition is much less than one.
Therefore, according to this analysis, liquefaction in the sand stratum will cause a
landslide in this slope.

Section 13.13 Stabilization Measures

13.24 A certain slope has a factor of safety of 1.15 according to a Swedish slip circle analysis.
To increase F to 1.50, you are considering the possibility of removing the upper portion
of this slope, then rebuilding it to the original grades using a lightweight fill. Assuming
the critical failure surface remains in the same location, how much must the weight of the
potential slide body be reduced to produce the required factor of safety? Assume su along
the failure surface remains unchanged. Express your answer as a percentage of the
existing weight.

Note: In reality, the critical failure surface would probably shift to a new location,
so this preliminary analysis would need to be followed by another search for the critical
surface.

Solution
According to Equation 13.20, the factor of safety is inversely proportional to W/b.
Therefore:

1.15Wi =1.50W f
1.15
Wf = Wi
1.50
Wi − W f Wi − (1.15 / 1.50)Wi
=
Wi Wi
Wi − W f
= 0.23
Wi

Therefore, the weight of the slide body must be reduced by 23 percent.

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-18 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

13.25 The hydraulic conductivity of a buttress fill is sometimes smaller than that of the adjacent
natural ground. This is especially common when the natural ground is stratified, and
water seeps along the more pervious strata. Could this difference in hydraulic
conductivity cause any problems? Explain. If so, what might be done to remedy these
problems?

Solution
This condition could produce an accumulation of groundwater in the natural soils
immediately behind the buttress fill. The resulting hydrostatic pressures would reduce the
stability of the buttress, and could induce a failure. Therefore, it is important to install
subsurface drainage devices, such as perforated pipe drains, between the buttress and the
natural ground. These drains are intended to capture and discharge any excessive
groundwater.

13.26 The soil beneath a slope consists of alternating layers of sand and clay. These layers are
nearly horizontal, but vary in thickness such that no two boring logs found these layers at
the same elevations. This slope is to be stabilized by installing a series of horizontal
drains that are intended to lower the groundwater table. The drains will be drilled at 20 ft
intervals near the toe of the slope, and each one will be drilled at the same angle and to
the same length. Would you expect the same flow rate from each drain? Why or why
not?

Solution
The axes of the drains are approximately parallel to the strata boundaries. Therefore,
some of the drains will probably encounter the sand strata, and some will not. Those that
encounter sand will have a much higher flow rate than those that do not, and will be more
effective in drawing down the groundwater table.

Section 13.14 Instrumentation

13.27 In 1962, a developer purchased 100 acres of hilly land and subdivided it for use as a
housing tract. The subsequent construction included extensive cuts and fills to create
level building pads separated by 1.5:1 cut and fill slopes. Unfortunately, the building
codes in that county were much more lax than they are today, so the quality of the
earthwork was not as high as would now be required. As a result, some of the slopes in
this tract have experienced slides, especially during years with heavier-than-normal
rainfall.

One of the slopes is showing some signs of possible instability (i.e., tension
cracks, some surface evidence of small movements, etc.), so the current owner wishes to
stabilize it. You have designed a stabilization scheme that includes dewatering and
construction of a buttress fill. You also need to install appropriate instrumentation to
monitor the slope and thus determine if the stabilization is working. What type or types
of instrumentation would be appropriate and where should it be installed?

Solution

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-19

Inclinometers would be the best type of instrumentation because they detect movement at
various depths. These devices could be used to monitor the effectiveness of the
stabilization measures, and hopefully would detect potential problems before these
problems progressed too far. Observation wells also would be helpful, especially if the
stabilization measures include new drainage works. Both of these instruments should be
installed within the zones of potential instability.

Comprehensive

13.28 Some slides are large enough and move far enough to completely block a canyon or
valley and thus form a new lake. The Thistle slide in Figure 13.1 is an example. Why
are these slides especially dangerous, and what can be done to alleviate this danger once
the slide has occurred?

Solution
The primary problem with this scenario is that a lake will form behind the slide. Since
this lake has no outlet, the water level will continue to rise until it overtops the slide, thus
leading to rapid erosion, the formation of a gully, and ultimately causing rapid discharge
of the lake. This, in turn, can cause sudden flooding in the area downstream of the
landslide.
If such a landslide occurs, the engineers must develop a safe means of discharging
the lake water before it reaches the top of the landslide. This might consist of building an
erosion-resistant channel, as was done for the Madison Canyon Landslide in Montana, or
tunnel, as was done for the Thistle landslide in Utah.

13.29 A national park visitor’s center has unfortunately been built on soils deposited by a series
of earth flows. The building is located near the base of a canyon where it meets a larger
valley. Ten years after construction, another earth flow occurred and deposited up to 3 ft
of mud and debris around the visitor’s center. Although the building was not seriously
damaged, it was expensive and time consuming to clean up the mess. Everyone now
recognizes that this building should have been constructed somewhere else, but there is
no funding available to move it or replace it. Suggest one or two ways of protecting the
building from future earth flows.

Solution
One solution would be to install surface drainage control devices, such as concrete-lined
ditches, in and above the earthflow source area. These devices would be designed to
divert surface water, thus reducing the amount of water that infiltrates into the ground.
This would reduce the risk of future mudflows from this area.
An alternative solution would be to build walls, earth berms, or other facilities
between the source area and the building. These facilities would be designed to deflect
future earth flows away from the building.

Since the site is in a national park, either of these solutions may be difficult to
implement because they involve significant changes to the landscape. Therefore, it may
be necessary to adopt a less intrusive solution, such as adopting a preparedness plan that

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 13-20 Stability of Earth Slopes Chap. 13

uses temporary sandbags placed around the building when future earthflows are likely to
occur.

13.30 A preliminary grading plan for a proposed highway shows a 50-ft-tall, 2:1 cut slope
ascending from each side of the highway with level land above both slopes. Following a
geotechnical study, it became necessary to change these slope ratios to 3:1. Assuming
the existing right-of-way barely accommodates the 2:1 slopes, how much additional
right-of-way must now be purchased because of this change?

Solution
Changing from a 2:1 slope to a 3:1 slope would require an additional 50 ft right-of-way
on each side of the highway. Therefore, the total width of the right-of-way would need to
increase by 100 ft.

13.31 The more rigorous limit equilibrium analysis methods, such as the modified Bishop’s and
Spencer’s methods, produce factors of safety that are within about 5% of the “true” value.
How does this error compare to the uncertainty in the soil properties (c′, φ′ and γ) and the
uncertainty in the design soil profile? In light of these other sources of uncertainty, is a
±5% error tolerable? Explain.

Solution
Most soil property data and most design soil profiles contain wide ranges of uncertainty,
typically on the order of ±20-40%. These uncertainties are due to the limited availability
of samples, questions on whether the samples are truly representative, sample disturbance,
natural variations in the subsurface conditions, and other factors. A ±5% error in the
analysis is substantially less than the errors from these other sources, and therefore is
tolerable.

13.32 A compacted fill slope is to be made of a soil with c′ = 200 lb/ft2, φ′ = 30° and γ = 122
lb/ft3. Using an infinite slope analysis and assuming a failure surface 4.0 ft below the
ground surface and a groundwater table 1.0 ft below the ground surface, determine the
steepest allowable slope ratio that will maintain a factor of safety of at least 1.5.

Note: This analysis considers only surficial stability. A separate analysis would
need to be conducted to evaluate the potential for a deep-seated slide in the fill.

Solution

c'+(γD − γ w z w ) cos 2 α tan φ '

F=
γ D sin α cos α

1.5 =
(( ) ( ) )
200 lb/ft 2 + 122 lb/ft 3 (4 ft ) − 62.4 lb/ft 2 (3 ft ) cos 2 α tan 30°
( )
122 lb/ft 3 (4 ft )sin α cos α

Solving this equation produces α = 31°

This translates to a slope ratio of 1/tan 31°=1.7:1

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
 Chap. 13 Stability of Earth Slopes 13-21

13.33 A 4-inch perforated pipe drain has been installed as part of a subsurface drainage system.
The pipe has been surrounded with a poorly-graded 1.5 inch gravel. The adjacent soils
are sandy silts. What is missing from this design? What mode of failure is likely to
occur? What should be done to improve this design?

Solution
This design will almost certainly have problems with soil migration. The sandy silts are
highly erodible, and will wash into the gravel layer and into the pipe, eventually clogging
them. However, this problem could be avoided by placing a filter fabric between the
gravel drain and the natural soils. The fabric would allow water to pass through, but
would prevent the soil from migrating.

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained
from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.