Strength Reduction Stability

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
www.geo-slope.com
Strength Reduction Stability

1
Introduction
Stability by strength reduction is a procedure where the factor of safety is obtained by weakening the soil
in steps in an elastic-plastic finite element analysis until the slope fails. The factor of safety is deemed
to be the factor by which the soil strength needs to be reduced to reach failure (Dawson et al., 1999;
Griffiths and Lane, 1999).
Numerically, the failure occurs when it is no longer possible to obtain a converged solution. The finite
element equations for a stress-strain formulation are in essence equations of equilibrium. Not being able
to obtain a converged solution therefore infers the system is beyond the point of limiting equilibrium.
An alternative way to define failure is the point at which the deformations become excessive. This is a
much more subjective criterion than the non-non-convergence criterion put one which comes into play
with the Strength Reduction method.
SIGMA/W can be used to do a Strength-Reduction stability analysis by using the Stress Redistribution
analysis option. The Stress Redistribution type of analysis in SIGMA/W, is a special algorithm for
redistributing stresses due to perhaps some overstressing in some zones. A Linear-Elastic analysis may,
for example, give some zones where the computed stresses are greater than the available shear strength.
The Stress Redistribution option can be used to alter the stresses so that there is no overstressing.
In the Strength Reduction method, the soil strength is artificially reduced, and so there is a need to
redistribute the stresses. This can be done by the Stress Redistribution algorithm, and so this option can be
indirectly used to do a Strength Reduction stability analysis.
This example illustrates how a Strength Reduction stability analysis can be done with SIGMA/W. In
addition, the results are discussed in the context of an alternate and preferred procedure whereby the
SIGMA/W results are used in conjunction with a SLOPE/W analysis to compute a safety factor.
Analysis procedure
The analysis procedure is presented in Figure 1. The first step is to do an insitu analysis to establish the
state of stress in a 2h:1v slope 10 m high, as shown in Figure 2. This step uses Linear-Elastic soil
properties. The factor of safety is then computed by using the finite element results in a SLOPE/W
analysis. The soil strength is then reduced in steps. For each strength case, the SLOPE/W factor of safety
is computed. Each strength reduction analysis uses the previous or Parent analysis as its initial
conditions.
SIGMA/W Example File: Strength reduction stability.docx (pdf )(gsz)
Page 1 of 9
www.geo-slope.com
Figure 1 Analysis procedure
20
18
16
10 m
Elevation - m
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-2
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
Distance - m
Figure 2 Slope configuration
Strength reduction factor
The strength reduction factor (SRF) is defined as,
tan c
SRF
tan c
f
f
where f and cf are the effective stress strength parameters at failure, or the reduced strength.
The strength reduction approach generally uses the same SRF for all material and for all strength
parameters, so that the stability factor reduces to one number in the end. This means c and are reduced
by the same factor.
Page 2 of 9
www.geo-slope.com
Conventional factor of safety
The SIGMA/W computed stresses can be used by SLOPE/W to calculate a factor of safety. The resulting
factor of safety based on the insitu stresses is shown in Figure 3.
1.564
2
1
10 m
Figure 3 Factor of safety based on insitu stresses
Figure 4 presents the distribution of the resistance and driving or mobilized shear along the slip surface.
Note that the shear resistance or shear strength is locally greater than the mobilized shear along the entire
slips surface. The overall factor of safety is the area under the resistance curve divided by the area under
the mobilized shear curve. From the computed factor of safety the area under the resistance curve is
1.564 times greater than the area under the mobilized shear curve.
40
kPa
30
Resistance :
Shear
Strength
20
Driving :
Shear
Mobilized
10
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
X (m)
Figure 4 Shear strength and mobilized shear along the slip surface
Page 3 of 9
www.geo-slope.com
Reduced strengths
The reduced strengths used here are as follows:

Case
SRF
Base
28.00
5.00
1.00
23.90
4.17
1.20
22.24
3.85
1.30
20.80
3.57
1.40
19.52
3.33
1.50
18.78
3.20
1.564
The following figures show the resistance and mobilized shear distributions for each of the five cases.
Notice how the resisting shear and mobilized shear essentially become identical as the factor of safety
migrates towards unity.
30
25
kPa
20
Resistance :
Shear
Strength
15
10
Driving :
Shear
Mobilized
5
0
-5
10
15
20
25
30
35
X (m)
Figure 5 Case 1 resisting and mobilized shear distributions; F of S = 1.302
Page 4 of 9
www.geo-slope.com
30
25
kPa
20
Resistance :
Shear
Strength
15
10
Driving :
Shear
Mobilized
5
0
-5
10
15
20
25
30
35
X (m)
30
25
kPa
20
Resistance :
Shear
Strength
15
10
Driving :
Shear
Mobilized
5
0
-5
10
15
20
25
30
35
X (m)
Page 5 of 9
www.geo-slope.com
30
Resistance :
Shear
Strength
kPa
20
Driving :
Shear
Mobilized
10
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
X (m)
30
25
Resistance :
Shear
Strength
kPa
20
15
Driving :
Shear
Mobilized
10
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
X (m)
Page 6 of 9
www.geo-slope.com
Factors of safety versus Strength Reduction Factors
The following table compares the SLOPE/W computed safety factors with the Strength Reduction Factors
(SRF). Ideally, when the SRF is equal to the original factor of safety, the computer safety factor should
be 1.00. The actual computed factor of safety is 0.988 which is remarkably close to the ideal 1.00 value.
Case
SRF
F of S
Base
28.00
5.00
1.00
1.564
23.90
4.17
1.20
1.302
22.24
3.85
1.30
1.196
20.80
3.57
1.40
1.098
19.52
3.33
1.50
1.015
18.78
3.20
1.564
0.988
Use of the SRF method in isolation
It can be rather arbitrary to determine the factor of safety of a slope when the Strength Reduction method
is used in isolation. In this case converged solutions can be obtained for SRF values greater than the
original factor of safety. Also there is no distinct sharp break in the crest settlement curve as shown in
Figure 10. The rate of settlement increases as the SRF increases but there is no distinct break to help
with deciding on the point of failure.
This illustrates the difficulty of using the SRF method in isolation.
Page 7 of 9
www.geo-slope.com
Crest settlement
0
Y-Displacement (m)
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
-0.08
-0.1
-0.12
0
Time (sec)
Figure 10 Crest settlements as the SRF increases
Concluding remarks
This example demonstrates that SIGMA/W can be used to do a Strength Reduction method of stability
analysis.
While it is possible to do a Strength Reduction stability analysis with SIGMA/W, we recommend that you
combine this with the SIGMA/W-SLOPE/W strength summation approach inherent in GeoStudio.
Combining the results from the two methods greatly helps with understanding the stability analysis.
Due to the numerical difficulties that can arise with the Strength Reduction method, we recommend and
prefer using the SIGMA/W computed stress in SLOPE/W to compute margins of safety. Even LinearElastic stresses, although not perfect, give acceptable factors of safety as point out by Krahn (2003).
Other independent studies such the one by Stinson, Chan and Fredlund (2004) arrived at the same
conclusion.
Using Linear-Elastic analyses to establish the stress state is very appealing from a practical point of view,
since there are no convergence issues.
Also, in an integrated environment like GeoStudio it is easier and more reliable to use SIGMA/W
together with SLOPE/W than to take the Strength Reduction approach in isolation.
Page 8 of 9
www.geo-slope.com
References
Dawson, E.M., Roth, W.H. and Drescher, A. (1999). Slope Stability Analysis by Strength
Reduction, Geotechnique, 49(6), 835-840
Griffiths, D.V. and Lane, P.A. (1999). Slope Stability Analysis by Finite Elements, Geotechnique,
49(3), 387-403
Krahn, John 2003. The 2001 R.M. Hardy Lecture: The Limits of Limit Equilibrium Analyses.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 40, pp. 643-620.
Krahn, John (2007). Limit Equilibrium, Strength Summation and Strength Reduction Methods for
Assessing Slope Stability. Proceeding, 1st Canada-U.S. Rock Mechanics Symposium,
Vancouver, B.C. May 27-31
Stianson, J. R., Chan, D. and Fredlund, D.G. (2004). Comparing Slope Stability Analysis Based
on Linear-Elastic or Elasto-Plastic Stresses using Dynamic Programming Techniques.
Proceeding, 2004 Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
Page 9 of 9

Strength Reduction Stability

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strength Reduction Stability

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada