by Reginald Hammah, Ph.D.
Introduction
Seventeen years ago, in 2004, we wrote a RocNews article outlining our perspectives on the Shear Strength Reduction (SSR) technique of slope stability analysis. As you know, this technique allows numerical methods, such as the finite element method (FEM), to determine the factor of safety of a slope.
The article stated that “By examining the merits of finite element analysis and limit-equilibrium methods for slope design and analysis, it is our opinion that, for the foreseeable future, these two approaches will coexist. Together, they supply engineers with a more complete toolkit for tackling slope stability problems. The experience, amassed by the geotechnical engineering profession over the decades, with limit equilibrium methods is invaluable and cannot be readily displaced.
On the other hand, several types of geotechnical problems are not readily analyzed with limit equilibrium methods but can be handled by the SSR FE approach. Today’s technological advances, combined with the reduced costs of computing power, enable the SSR technique to solve these problems easily. In addition, the SSR technique can be used to resolve ambiguities in limit-equilibrium slope stability analysis.”
We were correct that the SSR method would coexist alongside limit equilibrium analysis and that traditional limit equilibrium methods would not be readily displaced. We were hoping, though, that by now, geotechnical engineers would use SSR analysis just as often as they perform limit equilibrium assessments. That has not happened yet. But we believe the time is ripe for this to happen. These are our reasons.
Stress Distribution and Speed (in some cases) – Two Key Challenges of Limit Equilibrium Methods
Determining the critical failure surface or failure mechanism of a slope and the associated safety factor are fundamental tasks of slope stability analysis. In the computer era, limit equilibrium methods have been the most popular for tackling these tasks. And they remain beneficial. However, a lot has also been written about their limitations and the dangers of applying them beyond their limits.
One of the main drawbacks of limit equilibrium analysis is the validity of force distributions. These methods use simplified assumptions regarding the type and magnitude of the internal and external forces acting on slices to make slope stability problems statically determinate. Typically, they limit forces to the weights of slices, arbitrary side forces between adjacent slices, and shear forces along slice bases. Since these assumptions do not consider the relationship between stresses and displacements, they do not always produce realistic stress distributions.
It seems well-accepted that limit-equilibrium methods that produce realistic stress distributions are to be more trusted. (This is particularly true of those that satisfy complete static equilibrium.) Morgenstern and Price, in support of this idea, advocated accepting “physically acceptable” solutions with no tension and containing thrust lines within sliding masses.
Limit equilibrium methods enjoy wide usage partly because of their fast computational speeds. However, in complex geometry problems, it sometimes becomes necessary to increase the number of slices to capture critical failure mechanisms correctly. This can drastically slow down computational speeds and put them even behind the speeds of SSR analysis.
Five ‘Open Secret’ Advantages of the SSR Method
The SSR technique has several open ‘secrets.’ We will outline five key ones.
Final Thoughts
Although SSR analysis is not the panacea to every slope stability problem, it offers advantages that must place it, at a minimum, on par with traditional limit equilibrium methods. We hope that the points briefly outlined above convince you to apply the approach much more regularly.
To facilitate the regular application of the method, Rocscience will integrate the SSR method more closely into the limit equilibrium methods. Plans are underway to implement an option in Slide2 for selecting the SSR method in addition to the limit equilibrium methods of slices. When selected, Slide2 will automatically generate an SSR equivalent of a slope for computation in RS2. Slide2 will also be able to display SSR results once the calculations are completed.
We look forward to revisiting this topic in another few years to see how far we have come as an industry with SSR analysis.
Source: ‘Open Secret’ Advantages of the Shear Strength Reduction Approach in Slope Stability Analysis
Assessing a slope’s stability is a challenging yet important aspect of civil engineering. In its...
The "gift that keeps on giving" is a famous English phrase that implies a gift that gives enjoyment...
Definition of Factor of Safety Slope stability is controlled by 2 main factors: the driving and...
By Thiago Bretas and Felipe Vilela, BVP Engenharia. Two-dimensional (2D) limit equilibrium analysis...
By Reginald Hammah and Frema Awuku-Asabere A lot has been written about 3D slope stability analysis...
Surface mining, whether you call it open pit, opencast, or open cut is a common method of extractin...
Slope Stability Analysis In this chapter of the Geoengineer.org series on Slope Stability, a s...
The Bishop Method of Slices The Bishop Method was introduced in 1955 by Alan Wilfred Bishop fro...
Looking for more information? Fill in the form and we will contact Rocscience Inc. for you.