Comparison of slope stability methods of analysisr

D . G . F n p o l u N D A N DJ . K n e s N
(Jnit'ersity o.fSaskatchev'an, Saskatoon, Sask., Canada 57N 0W0
Received October 12, 1976
Accepted April 4,1977

T h e p a p e r c o m p a r es s i x m e t h o d s o f s l i c es c o m m o n l y u s e df o r s l o p e s t a b i l i t y a n a l y s i s .T h e f a c t o r
of safety equations are written in the same form, recognizing whether moment and (or) force
e q u i l i b r i u m i s e x p l i c i t l y s a t i s f i e d .T h e n o r m a l f o r c e e q u a t i o n i s o f t h e s a m e f o r m f o r a l l m e t h o d s
w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e o r d i n a r y m e t h o d . T h e m e t h o d o f h a n d l i n g t h e i n t e r s l i c ef o r c e s d i f f e r e n -
t i a t e st h e n o r m a l f o r c e e q u a t i o n s .
A n e w d e r i v a t i o n f o r t h e M o r g e n s t e r n - h i c e m e t h o d i s p r e s e n t e da n d i s c a l l e d t h e ' b e s t - f i t
r e g r e s s i o n ' s o l u t i o n . I t i n v o l v e s t h e i n d e p e n d e n ts o l u t i o n o f t h e f o r c e a n d m o m e n t e q u i l i b r i u m _
faitors of safety for various values of tr. The be st-fit regression solution gives the same factor of
safety as the'Newton-Raphson'solution. The best-fit regression solution is readily com-
p r e h e n c l e dg, i v i n g a c o m p l e t e u n d e r s t a n d i n go f t h e v a r i a t i o n o f t h e f a c t o r o f s a f e t y w i t h t r .

L ' a r t i c l e p r 6 s e n t e u n e c o m p a r a i s o n d e s s i x m 6 t h o d e s d e t r a n c h e s u t i l i s 6 e sc o u r a m m e n t p o u l '
I ' a n a l y s e d e l a s t a b i l i t 6d e s p e n t e s . L e s 6 q u a t i o n sd e s f a c t e u r s d e s 6 c u r i t 6 s o n t 6 c r i t e s s e l o n l a
m6me forme, en montrant si les conditions d'dquilibre de moment ou de force sont satisfaites
e x p l i c i t e m e n t . L ' d q u a t i o n d e l a f o r c e n o r m a l e e s t d e l a m 6 m e f o r m e p o u r t o u t e s l e s m d t h o d e si r
I ' e x c e p t i o n d e l a m 6 t h o d e d e s t r a n c h e so r d i n a i r e s . L a f a g o n d e t r a i t e r l e s f o r c e s i n t e r t r a n c h e se s t
c e q u i d i f f 6 r e n c i e l e s 6 q u a t i o n sd e f o r c e n o r m a l e .
"best-fit regression" de la m6thode de Morgens-
Une nouvelle d6rivation appel6e solution
tern-Price est pr6sent6e. Elle consiste i r d 6terminer ind6pendemment les tacteuls tle secu-
r i t € s a t i s f a i s a n ta u x 6 q u i l i b r e s d e f o r c e e t d e m o m e n t p o u r d i f f 6 r e n t e s v a l e u r s d e t r . L a s o l u -
"best-fit
tion r e g r e s s i o n " d o n n e l e s m e m e s f a c t e u r s d e s 6 c u r i t 6d e l a s o l u t i o n d e N e w t o n - R a p h -
"best-fit
son. l-a solution regression" est plus facile ir comprendre et donne une imaged6taill6e
d e l a v a r i a t i o n d u f a c t e u r d e s 6 c u r i t 6a v e c I " .
lrraduit parla revuel
c a n . G e o t e c hJ.. . r 4 . 4 2 g ( | g 1 7 \

Introduction (iii) Spencer'smethod

The geotechnical engineer frequently uses
limit equilibrium methods of analysis when
studying slope stability problems. The methods
of slices have become the most common
methods due to their ability to accommodate
complex geometrics and variable soil and
water pressure conditions (Terzaghi and Peck
1967). During the past three decades ap-
proximately one dozen methods of slices have
been developed (Wright 1969). They difier
in (i) the statics employed in deriving the
factor of safety equation and (ii) the assump-
tion used to render the problem determinate
(Fredlund 1975).
This paper is primarily concerned with six
of the most commonly used methods:
(i) Ordinary or Fellenius method (some-
times referred to as the Swedish circle method
or the conventional method)
(ii) Simplified Bishop method
'Presented at rhe 29th Canadian
Conference, Vancouver, B.C., October
(iv) Janbu'ssimplifiedmethod
(v) Janbu'srigorousmethod
(vi) Morgenstern-Price method
The objectives of this paper are:
( 1) to compare the various methods of
slices in terms of consistent procedures for
deriving the factor of safety equations. All
equations are extended to the case of a com-
posite failure surface and also consider partial
submergence, line loadings, and earthquake
loadings.
(2) to present a new derivation for the
Morgenstern-Price method. The proposed
derivation is more consistent with that used
for the other methods of analysis but utilizes
the elements of statics and the assumption
proposed by Morgenstern and Price (1965).
The Newton-Raphson numerical technique is
not used to compute the factor of safety
and )..
(3) to compare the factors of safety ob-
Geotechnical tained by each of the methods for several
13-15, 1976. example problems. The University of Sas-
 CAN. GEOTECH.J. VOL. 14,1977

.-?,0
WATER

WATER,
Ap tional elen
must be in
\-- minate. Al
BEDROCK use the I
giving rise
Frc. 1. Forces acting for the method of slices applied to a composite sliding surface.
For comp
katchewan SLOPE computer program was E :
horizontal intersliceforces derived u:
used for all computer analyses (Fredlund L :subscriptdesignatingleft side equations
1 9 74 ) . R :subscriptdesignatingright side Ordinary ,
(4) to compare the relative computational X :
vertical intersliceforces The or
costs involved in usine the various methods t- : S eismic
l S m l C coeffici ientto accountfor a dynam- simplestc
of analysis. ic horizontal force the onll'
e : vertical distancefrom the centroid ofeach factor of t
Definition of Problem sliceto the center of rotation that the it
Figure I shows the forces that must be de- A uniform load on the surface can be taken cause the
fined for a general slope stability problem. into account as a soil layer of suitable unit slice (Fe
The variables associated with each slice are weight and density. The following variables are principler
defined as follows: required to definea line load: fied betsc
W : total weight of the slice of width 6 and L : line load (force per unit width) changein
height ft u) : angle of the line load from the horizontal force frot
P : total normal force on the base of the slice d : perpendicular distance from the line load factor of
over a length / to the centerofrotation as 60% (
S- : shear force mobilized on the base of the The effect of partial submergenceof the slope The no
slice. It is a percentage of the shear or tension cracks in water requires the definition is derive
strength as defined by the Mohr-Coulomb o f a d d i t i o n a vl a r i a b l e :s perpendi
equation.That is, S- : / {c' + lPll - ul A : resultant water forces mation ol
tan $'|lF where c' : effective cohesion a : perpendicular distance from the resultant direction
parameter, 0' : effectiveangle of internal water force to the center ofrotation
friction, -F : factor of safety, and u : tI] IF
porewater pressure Derivations for Factor of Safety
: The elements of statics that can be used to
w-
R radius or the moment arm associatedwith
the mobilized shear force S. derive the factor of safety are summations of T2] IF
f : perpendicular offset of the normal force forces in two directions and the summation
from the centerofrotation of moments. These, along with the failure S-(
x : horizontal distance from the slice to the criteria, are insufficient to make the problem Substi
center of rotation determinate. More information must be known normal fr
c( : angle betweenthe tangent to the center of about either the normal force distribution or
the baseofeach sliceand the horizontal the interslice force distribution. Either addi- t3l

rr,
r1*fffififiiiilffi|#ffiffi#l$,
 FREDLUNDAND KRAHN 431

O = R E S U L T A N TI N T E R S L I C E
FORCE

NOTE:Q^.IS NOT EQUAL

A N O O P P O S I T ET O
o L,O ^

P
o

Ftc. 2 Intersliceforces for the ordinary method.

tional elementsof physics or an assumption The factor of safety is derived from the
must be invoked to render the problem deter- summation of moments about a common point
minate. All methodsconsideredin this paper (i.e. either a fictitious or real center of rotation
use the latter procedure, each assumption for the entire mass).
giving rise to a different method of analysis.
For comparisonpurposes,each equation is l4l l,vro : o
derived using a consistentutilization of the
equationsof statics. Lw*- Is-R -Lpf +lkwe +Aa
Ordinary or FelleniusMethod
+Ld--o
The ordinary method is considered the Introducingthe failure criteria and the
simplestof the methods of slices since it is normal force from [3] and solving for the
the only procedure that results in a linear factor of safety gives
factor of safetyequation.It is generallystated
that the intersliceforces can be neglectedbe- - _-
r < - l IE _ f{c'lR + (P - ul)R tan $'}
causethey are parallel to the base of each LJr -Lpf + -r Aa + Ld
Lw* \kwe
slice (Fellenius 1936). However, Newton's
principleof 'actionequalsreaction'is not satis-
SimplifiedBishopM ethod
fied betweenslices(Fig. 2). The indiscriminate The simplifiedBishop method neglectsthe
changein direction of the resultantinterslice intersliceshearforcesand thus assumesthat a
force from one slice to the next results in normal or horizontalforce adequatelydefines
factor of safety errors that may be as much the intersliceforces(Bishop 1955). The nor-
as 60Vo (Whitmanand Bailey 1967). mal force on the baseof each slice is derived
The normal force on the baseof each slice by summingforcesin a verticaldirection(as in
is derived either from summation of forces
perpendicularto the base or from the sum- tll).Substituting the failure criteria and
solvingfor the normal force gives
mation of forcesin the verticaland horizontal
directions. c'l sina 4i1l {' sin!lt^,,
i6l p
_ :f w-
I +F
tll lru: o F I '

W-Pcosd-S-sina:0 wheremo= "o, o * (sin a lan6') /F

o The factor of safety is derived from the

1 2 )I F ' : summation of moments about a common
S-cosa-Psina-kW:0 point. This equation is the same as [4] since
the interslice forces cancel out. Therefore, the
Substituting[2] into [1] and solvingfor the
factor of safety equation is the same as for the
normal force gives
ordinary method ([5]). However, the defini-
t3l P:Wcoso.-kWsina tion of the normal force is different.
 cAN. GEOTECH. J. VOL. 14, 1977
The cor
Spencer's Method Spencer's method yields two factors of
Spencer's method assumes there is a con- safely for each angle of side forces. However, tlsl
stani relationship between the magnitude of the at some angle of the interslice forces, the two
lanbu's
interslice shear and normal forces (Spencer factors of safety are equal (Fig. 3) and both
Janb
1967) . moment and force equilibrium are satisfied.
point a
The Corps of Engineers method, sometimes
t a 0
n : + : 5 be defi
l7l referred to as Taylor's modified Swedish
EL ER used ar
method, is equivalent to the force equilibrium -
I t.> .lt
where d = angle of the resultant interslice portion of Spencer'smethod in which the direc-
slice to
force from the horizontal. iion of the interslice forces is assumed,generally
sides ol
Spencer (1967) summed forces perpendic- at an angle equal to the average surface slope'
between
ular to the interslice forces to derive the
J anbu's Simplified Method a slice z
normal force. The same result can be ob-
and Janbu's simplified method uses a correction The r
tained by summing forces in a vertical
factor lo to account for the effect of the inter- is derir
horizontal direction.
slice shear forces. The correction factor is forces.
t8l lru : o related to cohesion, angle of internal friction,
and the shape of the failure surface (Janbu [16] P =
W - (X* - Xt) - Pcoso - S- sina :0 et at. 1956). The normal force is derived from
summation of vertical forces ([8])' with
tel IF' : o the
the intersliceshear forces ignored.
-(E* - EL) + P sina - S-cos'z * kW : O

The normal force can be derived from [8] r r 3Pl : l r - + : +

ul tan I sin
T / m" 1l The
from th
and then the horizontal interslice force is ob-
The horizontal force equilibrium equation llll). I
tained from [9]. the sim
is used to derive the factor of safety (i'e'
must are kept
tl I I ) . The sum of the interslice forces
il01 p : I w - ( E * - E r ) t a n o cancel and the factor of safety equation The fac
becomes Spence
a ul tan 6' sin q'l ,
- c'l sin-+ -----7-)rm" f { c ' l c o s o c* ( P
- ul) tan {'cos a}
(i.e.lt2
F In on
U4l Fo :
tion. ll
Spencer(1967) derived two factor of safety
Fn is used to designate the factor of safety evaluat
equations.One is based on the summation of
moments about a common point and the other uncorrected for the interslice shear forces'
on the summation of forces in a direction
parallel to the interslice forces. The moment
equation is the same as for the ordinary and
the simplified Bishop methods (i.e. [4]). The
factor of safety equation is the same as [5]. T--
l.,
F
The factor of safety equation based on L
<
,
l
force equilibrium can also be derived by L
summing forces in a horizontal direction. o
h l
o r t''
nll IFn : o s l
L(EL
- ER) +
IP sin a
-
ls-
+LkW+A-I-cos<,.':0
cos o

L
I
ro 15 20
The interslice forces (Et, - -En) must cancel sr0EF O R C EA N G L EE, ( D E G R E E S )
out and the factor of safety equation with
Frc. 3 Variation of the factor of safety with
respect to force equilibrium reduces to respect to moment and force equilibrium- vs'- the
=^0'02;
angle of the side forces. Soil properties-:c'/1h
F{c'l cos a -t (P - uI) tan $' cos a}
Frc. 4.
V': lO"t r" = 0.5. Geometry: slope = 26'5'; rigorous r
L,LJ at - -Lcos <,, h e i g h t: 1 0 0 f t ( 3 0 m ) .
l f s i na + l k W + A
 FREDLUNDAND KRAHN
The corrected factor of safety is
l15l F = loFo
lanbu's Rigorous Method
Janbu's rigorous method assumes that the
point at which the interslice forces act can
'line of thrust'. New terms
be defined by a
used are defined as follows (see Fig. 4) :
tr, tn = vertical distance from the base of the
slice to the line of thrust on the left and right
sides of the slice, respectively; dt = angle
between the line of thrust on the right side of
a slice and the horizontal.
The normal force on the base of the slice
is derived from the summation of vertical
forces.
t-
tl6lP:lw-(X^-X,)
L
- c'l sina ul tan 6' sinal,
F-- +-i---lt^"
The factor of safety equation is derived
from the summation of horizontal forces (i.e.
[1]). Janbu's rigorous analysis differs from
the simplified analysis in that the shear forces
are kept in the derivation of the normal force.
The factor of safety equation is the same as
Spencer'sequation based on force equilibrium
(i.e. [12]).
In order to solve the factor of safety equa-
tion, the interslice shear forces must be
evaluated. For the first iteration. the shears
Frc. 4. Forces acting on each slice for Janbu's
rigorous method.
433
are set to zero. For subsequent iterations,
the interslice forces are computed from the
sum of the moments about the center of the
base of each slice.
u7l LM" : 0
XLbl2 + XRbl2 - Erlt, + (bl2) tanul
+ ER [/L + (bl2) tan a - b tan a,f - kwhl2 :0
After rearrangingI I 7], severalterms become
negligibleas the width b of the slice is reduced
to a width dr. Theseterms are (Xr, - XL) b/2,
(E', - Er.) (b/2) Ian a and (Er - EL)b
tan a1.Eliminating these terms and dividing by
the slicewidth, the shearforce on the right side
of a sliceis
il8l Xn : En tana, - (ER - E)tRlb
+ (kw/b)(h/2)
The horizontal interslice forces, required
for solving [18], are obtained by combining
the summation of vertical and horizontal
forces on each slice.
t19l (E* - Er) : lW - (X* - Xy)l tan a
-S./cosa*kW
The horizontal intersliceforces are obtained
by integration from left to right across the
slope. The magnitude of the interslice shear
forces in [19] lag by one iteration. Each
iteration gives a new set of shear forces. The
vertical and horizontal components of line
loads must also be taken into account when
they are encountered.
M o r genst ern-P r ic e M ethod
The Morgenstern-Price method assumesan
arbitrary mathematical function to describe
the direction of the intersliceforces.
t20l xf(x) = Yls
where ). = a constant to be evaluated in
solving for the factor of safety, and l(x) =
functional variation with respect to x. Figure
5 shows typical functions (i.e. l(x) ). For a
constant function, the Morgenstern-Price
method is the same as the Spencer method.
Figure 6 shows how the half sine function
and ), are used to designate the direction of
the interslice forces.
Morgenstern and Price (1965) based their
solution on the summation of tangential and
 C A N . G E O T E C H J. VOL. 14. t977

f(x) =CONSTANT f (x)=HALF- SINE variation of the factor of safety with respect
to .
I The normal force is derived from the
x vertical force equilibrium equation ( [ 16] ) . Two
factor of safety equations are computed, one
o with respect to moment equilibrium and one
with respect to force equilibrium. The moment
- SINE equilibrium equation is taken with respect to
f (x)"CLIPPED f(x)= TRAPEZOID
a common point. Even if the sliding surface
x x
is composite, a fictitious common center can
be used. The equation is the same as that ob-
n tained for the ordinary method, the simplified
Bishop method, and Spencer's method ([4]
and [5]). The factor of safety with respectto
I
f ( x )= S P E C I F I E O force equilibrium is the same as that derived
x for Spencer's method (1121). The interslice
shear forces are computed in a manner similar
to that presented for Janbu's rigorous method. iteratio
U
On the first iteration, the vertical shear forces factors
are set to zero. On subsequent iterations, the values
Frc. 5. Functional variation of the direction of the horizontal interslice forces are first computed
side force with respectto the r direction. Thesef:
(t191) and then the vertical shear forces are similar
computed using an assumed ), value and side (Fig. 7
force function. a SeCOI}
l21l Xy: El.xf(x) point o
momen
QL
The side forces are recomputed for each
-__,_l Compat
.eL
I Atl

n
(+)c(
: ren I t.?o momen
i
o R Ts same fo
r.r5 f
l22l

All n
t.to rium ha
F
UJ
u
safetye
a
L
123) r
E
for the Morgenstern- o
Frc. 6. Sideforcedesignation
F The
Pricemethod. I
f visualiz
ponent!
normal forces to each slice. The force equilib-
rium equations were combined and then the o.95
Newton-Raphson numerical technique was
used to solve the moment and force equations
o.90
for the factor of safety and ),. o.2 o.4 o.6 o.8 LO Cohesio
In this paper, an alternate derivation for A Friction
the Morgenstern-Price method is proposed. Weight
Frc. 7. Variation of the factor of safety with re- Normal
The solution satisfies the same elements of
spect to moment and force equilibrium vs. tr for the Earthqua
statics but the derivation is more consistent Morgenstern-Price method. Soil properties: c'/7h = Partial
with that used in the other methods of slices. O.o2:,o' : 40'; r" : 0.5. Geometry: slope = 26.5'; subme
It also presents a complete description of the height : 100 ft (30 m). Line loa<

iiiqfrWlffiffiffi
 F R E D T - U N DA N D K R A H N

Y =tzo pc,r
@'= 2C" C O N D I T I O 2N ( w e o k
c' =600 psf

z---- j
c'=O, /t 19o

P I E Z O M E T R ILCI N E 4

80 loo t20 t40'

FIc. 8. Exampleproblem.

iteration. The moment and force equilibrium From a theoretical standpoint, the derived
factors of safety are solved for a range of )" factor of safety equations differ in (i) the
values and a specifled side force function. equations of statics satisfied explicitly for the
These factors of safety are plotted in a manner overall slope and (ii) the assumptionto make
similar to that used for Spencer's method the problem determinate.The assumptionused
I
I
(Fig. 7). The factors of safety vs. ), are fit by changes the evaluation of the interslice forces
I
a second order polynomial regressionand the in the normal force equation (Table l). All
point of intersection satisfies both force and methods, with the exception of the ordinary
1 moment equilibrium. method, have the same form of equation for
the normal force.
I
Comparison ol Methods of Analysis
AII methods of slices satisfying overall
moment equilibrium can be written in the l 2 4 lr : I w - ( x s . - Xt)
same form. c'l sin- o- + u l t a n 6 '- -s- i- n- - a l ,| l n
- ul)R tan $' "'"
fc'lR f ItP F F
^-
122) F_: )'
lwx - LPf + lkwe * Aa-r Ld whete mo = cos cY* ( sin a tan 6') / F .
All methodssatisfyingoverall force equilib- It is possible to view the analytical aspects
rium have the followins form for the factor of of slope stability in terms of one factor of
safetyequation: safety equation satisfying overall moment
- ul)tan{'cosa equilibrium and another satisfying overall
^ - --Lr'l cosa * IfP force equilibrium. Then each method becomes
L ' J J 'E t -
r12-l
-Lcos<', 'best-fit regression' solu-
lrsin a+lkw+ A a special case of the
The factor of safety equations can be tion to the Morgenstern-Price method.
visualizedas consistingof the following com- Tasrn l. Comparison
of factorof safetyequations
ponents:
Factor of safety basedon
Moment Force
equilibrium equilibrium Moment Force Normal
equili equili- force
Cohesion Zc'lR 2c'l cosu Method brium brium equation
Friction Z(P-ul)R tan $' 2(P-ul)tan$'cos c
Weight 2l4tx Ordinary or Fellenius x t31
Normal LPf !P sin a Simplified Bishop x t6l
Earthquake Zklte >ktv Spencer's x X t10l
Partial Janbu's simplified X t13l
submergence Aa A Janbu's rigorous x t16l
Line loading Ld I cos <o Morgenstern-Price x I24l
436 CAN. GEOTECH. J. VOL. 14, 1977

Tasrt 2. Comparison of factors of safety for example problem

Morgenstern-
Price method
Simplified Spencer'smethod Janbu's Janbu's ,f(x) : constant
Case Ordinary Bishop simplified rigorous
no. ExampleProblem* method method method method**
Casc
2.080 2 . O 7 31 4 . 8 1 0 . 2 3 7 2.041 2.008 2.076 0.254 no.
Simple2:l slope,40 1.928
ft (12m) high, si4
6' :20",c' :600 hr
psf(29 kPa) (!
Sameas I with a thin, I .288 |.377 1 . 3 7 3 1 0 . 4 90 . 1 8 5 1.448 1 . 4 3 2 1 . 3 7 80 . 1 5 9
2 $d
weak layer with ht
6,:r0.,c,=0 r .708 1.765 0.244 J S.{
5 Sameas I excePtwith 1.607 | .766 1. 7 6 1 1 4 . 3 3 0 . 2 5 5 1.735
4 Sra
ru : 0'25 fr
^ Sameas 2 exceptwith 1.029 1.t24 1.118 7.93 0.139 I .191 1.162 1 . 1 2 40 . 1 1 6
5 Sr
ru : 0.25for both I
materials 6 SI
5 Sameas 1 exceptwith 1.693 1. 8 3 4 l .830 13.87 0.247 1.827 | .776 1. 8 3 3 0 . 2 3 4
I
a piezometricline
6 Sameas2 exceptwith l 171 1.248 1.245 6.88 0,121 1 333 | .298 1.2s0 0.097 .Co.{
ttToE
a piezometricline
for both materials t65-
*Width of slice is 0.5 ft (0.3 m) and the toleranc€ on the nonlinear solulions is 0 001
*tThe line of thrust is assumedat 0.333
l6C-
Figure 8 shows an example problem in- of safety based on overall force equilibrium
volving both circular and composite failure are far more sensitive to the side force |55-
surfaces. The results of six possible combina- assumption.
tions of geometry, soil properties, and water The relationship between the factors of
l5OF
conditions are presented in Table 2. This
is not meant to be a complete study of

i
F

225 U
the quantitative relationship between various L | 43F

methods but rather a typical example. U) !

The various methods (with the exception 2.20 co;t
b l
of the ordinary method), can be compared by ,/ (r U
plotting factor of safety vs. L The simplified 2.15 F l
i
U
35i-
Bishop method satisfiesoverall moment equi- STMPLTFTED /

Z|-.*'+-'-'-'-*-=-':
I
BISHOP i
librium with ,1,= 0. Spencer's method has tr 2.to t30-
equal to the tangent of the angle between the -
l!
horizontal and the resultant interslice force. 2.O5
I

/ | 25F
Janbu's factors of safety can be placed along a
t!
the force equilibrium line to give an indication o ,tJaNeu's RrGoRous
2.OO r20L
of an equivalent ), value. Figures 9 and 10 o
o
show comparative plots for the first two cases F(J ., +- SPENCER
shown in Table 2. u
t.95
.-MORGENSTERN-PRICE Frc. lO
The results in Table 2 along with thope
f(x)= CONSTANT safetl't
from other comparative studies show that the r90
whethe
factor of safety with respect to moment equi-
oRoTNARY = 1.928 posite.
librium is relatively insensitive to the inter-
method
slice force assumption. Therefore, the factors
very sit
of safety obtained by the Spencer and r.80
o o.2 0.4 0'6 Morger
Morgenstern-Price methods are generally
A small il
similar to those computed by the simplified
Frc. 9. Comparison of factors of safety for case 1'
on the
Bishop method. On the other hand, the factors
 AND KRAHN
FREDLUND 437

Tnslp 3. Comparison of two solutions to the Morgenstern-Price method**

University of University of Saskatchewan

Alberta program SLOPE program
side force function side force function

Constant Half sine Constant Half sine Clipped sine*

Case
no. Example Problem

I Simple2:1 slope,40ft (12m) 2 . 0 8 5 0 . 2 5 7 2 . 0 8 5 0 . 3 1 4 2 . O 7 60 . 2 5 4 2 . 0 7 6 0 . 3 1 8 2 . 0 8 3 0 . 3 9 0

high, {' :20",c' : 600'sf
(29 kPa)
2 Sameas I with a thin, weak 1 . 3 9 40 . 1 8 2 1 . 3 8 6 0 . 2 1 8 1 . 3 7 8 0 . 1 5 9 1 . 3 7 0 0 . 1 8 7 1 . 3 6 4 0 . 2 0 3
layerwith $' : l0', c' : O
3 Sameas I exceptwith r" : 0.25 1 . 7 7 20 . 3 5 1 1 . 7 7 00 . 4 3 2 1 . 7 6 5 0 . 2 4 4 1 . 7 6 4 0 . 3 0 4 1 . 7 7 9 0 . 4 1 7
4 Sameas 2 exceptwith r" : 0.25 1 . 1 3 70 . 3 3 4 r . l r 7 0 . 4 4 1 r . 1 2 4 0 . 1 1 6 1 . 1 1 80 . 1 3 0 1 . 1 1 30 . 1 3 8
for both materials
5 Sameas I exceptwith a Piezo- 1 . 8 3 8 0 . 2 7 0 1 . 8 3 7 0 . 3 3 1 1 . 8 3 30 . 2 3 4 1 . 8 3 2 0 . 2 9 0 1 . 8 3 2 0 . 3 0 0
metric line
6 Sameas 2 excePtwith a Piezo- 1 . 2 6 5 0 . 1 5 9 N o t c o n v e r g i n1g. 2 5 0 0 . 0 9 7 1 . 2 4 5 0 ' l 0 l 1.242 0.104
metric line for both materials
J : 0.5, and t : 1.0' y : o,21. - - ,
*coordinates x : 0,-Morgenstern-Price
**ioG.ince on both solutions is 0.001.

r.65 equation. In the six example cases, the aver-

age difference in the factor of safety was
r.60 a p p r o x i m a t e l y0 . 1 % .

r55 Comparison of Two Solutions to the

Morgenstern-Price Method
t.50 Morgenstern and Price ( 1965) originally
solvedtheir method using the Newton-Raphson
numerical technique.This paper has presented
F
I r+s
U)
an alternate procedure that has been referred
SIMPLIFIE 'best-fit regression'method. The two
to as the
$ r + ol,/ methods of solution were compared using the
tr -
o I ./ University of Alberta computer program
(Krahn et al. 1971) for the original method
g + - SPENCER
. - M O R G E N S T E R NP-R I C E and the University of Saskatchewan computer
t.30
f ( x )= C O N S T A N T program (Fredlund 1974) for the alternate
solution. In addition, it is possibleto compare
1.25 the above solutions with Spencer'smethod.
ORDINARY Table 3 shows a comparison of the two
t.?o solutions for the example problems (Fig. 8).
o.2 o.4 o.6
Figures 1 I and 12 graphically display the
\
comparisons.Although the computer programs
Frc. 10. Comparison of factorsof safetyfor case2. use difierent methods for the input of the
safety by the various methods remains similar geometry and side force function and different
whether the failure surface is circular or com- techniques for solving the equations, the
posite. For example, the simplified Bishop factors of safety are essentially the same.
method gives factors of safety that are always The example casesshow that when the side
very similar in magnitude to the Spencer and force function is either a constant or a half
Morgenstern-Price method. This is due to the sine, the average factor of safety from the
small influence that the side force function has University of Alberta computer program
on the moment equilibrium factor of safety difters from the Universitv of Saskatchewan
438 CAN. GEOTECH.J. VOL, 14. 1977

o.t4
(l)
UJ ot2 method
F
:) in the
z
o.ro momen
:g plicitll-
(ts of the
r85 F
o.o8 except
-trJ U
tL I e.) o- of han
a IJJ o06 the nor
tL
= (2\
F
O rz<
can be
E
loo+ equatic
F /
I x
I

z
ra
t.rw
/ / a and an(
/ x"z o02
.'/,{
'// for var
r.65 comes
o safetl'
oROINARY SIMPLTFIEOUNEUS JANBU,S SPENCERSMORGENSTERN
t60
BISHOP SIMPLIFIEORIGOROUS -PRICE
(3t
OF ANALYSIS
METHOD
the Ne
r55 facton
oo o.4 o6 Frc. 13. Time per stability analysis trial for all
manne
\ methodsof analysis.
utilized
Frc. I l Effect of side force function on factor of proximately 9Vo. However, as shown above, (4)
safety for case3.
this difference does not significantly affect the compn
t.45 final factor of safety. standin
u'ith n
M O R G E N S T E R-NP R I C E Comparison of Computing Costs
r.40 i-r(x) = coNSTANT
x - f ( x ) =S I N E
A simple 2: I slope was selectedto compare
t . 3 5 r - f ( x )= C L I P P E D S I N E the computer costs (i.e. CPU time) associated
with the various methods of analysis. The The
F slope was 440 ft long and was divided into of Sa
u r ? n
L '.vv
5-ft slices.The results shown in Fig. 13 were financi
a
obtained using the Univeristy of Saskatchewan ment
b t25 SLOPE program run on an IBM 370 model SLOPI
o 158 computer.
I rzo The simplified Bishop method required
fl 0.012 min for each stability analysis. The
il5 ordinary method required approximately 6O%
as much time. The factor of safety by Spencer's
method was computed using four side force
angles. The calculations associated with each
side force angle required 0.024 min. The factor
o.2 o.6 of safety by the Morgenstern-Price method was
computed using six ). values. Each trial required
Frc. 12. Effect of side force function on factor of 0.02 1 min. At least three estimatesof the side
safety for case4. force angle or ), value are required to obtain
the factor of safety. Therefore, the Spencer or
computerprogram by less than 0.7%. Using Morgenstern-Price methods are at least six
the University of Saskatchewan program, the times as costly to run as the simplified Bishop
Spencermethod and the Morgenstern-Price method. The above relative costs are slightly
method (for a constantside force function) afiected by the width of slice and the tolerance
differ by lessthan 0.2%. The average). values used in solving the nonlinear factor of safety
computedby the two programsdiffer by ap- equations.
 F R E D I - U N DA N D K R A H N
Conclusions
( 1 ) The factor of safety equations for all
methods of slices considered can be written
in the same form if it is recognized whether
moment and (or) force equilibrium is ex-
plicitly satisfied. The normal force equation is
of the same form for all methods with the
exception of the ordinary method. The method
of handling the interslice forces differentiates
the normal force equations.
(2) The analytical aspectsof slope stability
can be viewed in terms of one factor of safety
equation satisfying overall moment equilibrium
and another satisfying overall force equilibrium
for various tr values. Then each method be-
comes a special case of the best-fit factor of
safety lines.
(3 ) The best-fit regression solution and
the Newton-Raphson solution give the same
factors of safety. They differ only in the
manner in which the equations of statics are
utilized.
(4) The best-fit regressionsolution is readily
comprehended.It also gives a complete under-
standing of the variation of factor of safety
with respect to tr.
Acknowledgements
The Department of Highways, Government
of Saskatchewan, provided much of the
financial assistancerequired for the develop-
ment of the University of Saskatchewan
SLOPE computer program. This program
439
contains all the methods of analysis used for
the comparative study.
The authors also wish to thank Mr. R.
Johnson, Manager, Ground Engineering Ltd.,
Saskatoon, Sask., for the comparative com-
puter time study.
BrsHop, A. W. 1955. The use of the slip circle in the
s t a b i ift y a n a l y s i so f s l o p e s .G e o t e c h n i q u e5, , p p . 7 - 1 7 .
F r l r - r r l u s . W . 1 9 3 6 .C a l c u l a t i o n o f t h e s t a b i l i t y o f e a r t h
dams. Proceedings of the Second Congress on Large
Dams, 4, pp.445-at$.
F n r . o r - u N o , D . G . l 9 ' 7 4 .S l o p e s t a b i l i t y a n a l y s i s . U s e r ' s
M a n u a l C D - 4 , D e p a r t m e n t o f C i v i l E n g i n e e r i n g ,U n t v e r -
s i t y o f S a s k a t c h e w a n ,S a s k a t o o n ,S a s k .
- 1 9 7 5 .A c o m p r e h e n s i v ea n d f l e x i b l e s l o p e s t a b i l i t y
program. Presented at the Roads and Transportation
A s s o c i a t i o no f C a n a d a M e e t i n g , C a l g a r y , A l t a .
J,qNeu. N., Blennuv, L., and KlnenNsrr. B. 1956.
S t a b i l i t e t s b e r e g n i n fgo r f y l l i n g e r s k j a e r i n g e ro g n a t u r l i g e
skraninger. Norwegian Geotechnical Publication No.
1 6 ,O s l o , N o r w a y .
K n , c H N ,J . , P n t c e, V . E . , a n d M o n c e N s r e n N , N . R . 1 9 7 1 .
Slope stability computer program for Morgenstern-
P r i c e m e t h o d o f a n a l y s i s .U s e r ' s M a n u a l N o . 1 4 , U n i -
versity of Albena. Edmonton, Alta.
M o n c r r s l r . n N . N . R . a n d P n l c r - .V . E . 1 9 6 - 5T. h e a n a l y s i s
o f t h e s t a b i l i t y o f g e n e r a l s l i p s u r f i t c e s .G e o t e c h n i q u e ,
15,pp. 70-93.
S p e r c E n , E . 1 9 6 7 .A m e t h o d o f a n a l y s i so f t h e s t a b i l i t y o f
embankments assuming parallel inter-slice forces.
G e o t e c h n i q u e ,1 7 , p p . l l - 2 6 .
T e n z e c s t . K . , a n d P E c x , R . B . 1 9 6 7 .S o i l m e c h a n i c si n
e n g i n e e r i n gp r a c t i c e . ( 2 n d e t l . \ . J o h n W i l e y a n d S o n s ,
lnc.. New York. N.Y.
W H r r n e r , R . V . a n d B n t l s v , W . A . 1 9 6 7 .U s e o f c o m p u -
t e r f o r s l o p e s t a b i l i t y a n a l y s i s .A S C E J o u r n a l o f t h e S o i l
M e c h a n i c sa n d F o u n d a t i o n D i v i s i o n , 9 3 ( S M 4 ) .
W n r c H r , S . 1 9 6 9 .A s t u d y o f s l o p e s t a b i l i t y a n d t h e u n -
drained shear strengthof clay shales.PhD thesis' Uni-
versity of California,Berkeley, CA.