International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435

A general analytical solution for the required anchor force

in rock slopes with toppling failure
C. Sagaseta*, J.M. Sa! nchez, J. Canizal
*
Department of Ground Engineering and Material Sciences. University of Cantabria. Avda. de Los Castros, s/n. 39005 Santander, Spain
Accepted 5 February 2001

Abstract

A general analytical solution is presented for the limit equilibrium of block toppling failure in rock slopes. The method follows
the well-known solution of Goodman and Bray, but with innitesimal thickness of blocks. This leads to a set of ordinary dierential
equations that can be integrated in cases of simple geometry. The case of a uniform slope is analysed in detail. Two main failure
modes have been identied: sliding toe (ST), and tension toe (TT), depending on the relative values of the dip, cut slope and friction
angle. The solution can be considered as accurate enough for slopes higher than 2030 times the average block thickness. For thicker
blocks, a linear reduction of the force is proposed. The method has been applied to a number of actual cases and a particular
example is presented in detail. # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction delimited by bedding planes and transverse joints is

Toppling failure of rock slopes is associated with rock
masses with a dominant discontinuity set (usually
bedding or foliation) with strike nearly parallel to the
slope, dipping inwards. This mode of failure has been
observed at dierent scales either in natural slopes or in
open cuts for mining or civil engineering works.
The most frequent corrective measures to increase the
stability are the installation of anchors or bolts, or
lowering the slope angle by excavation. The determina-
tion of the necessary anchor force to stabilise the slope is
required (even in the cases where the second solution is
chosen), for the evaluation of the relative costs involved.
For this purpose, the limit equilibrium method proposed
by Goodman and Bray [1] is often used, although
numerical analyses based on the distinct element method
have also an increasing application.
2. Limit Equilibrium of blocks
In the limit equilibrium method, the unstable mass is
assumed bounded by a basal plane, at some angle y with
the horizontal (Fig. 1). The equilibrium of the blocks
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +34-942-20-18-22; fax: +34-942-20-
18-21.
E-mail address: sagasetac@unican.es (C. Sagaseta).
analysed from the top of the slope downwards. The
force transmitted by each block to the next one (P, Q) is
determined from the conditions of stability against
toppling and sliding, with the maximum of these two
values dening the mode of instability of the block. At
the toe of the slope, the force required to maintain the
equilibrium, F, is obtained. This anchor force can be
applied at some angle d to the horizontal.
The analysis is performed in two dimensions (plane
strain). All the forces, denoted in the following with
uppercase letters, are in fact line loads in the direction
perpendicular to the slope. Their values are understood
as loads per unit length of slope.
The features of the solution in a typical case are
shown in Fig. 1. The rst few upper blocks are usually
stable (the forces required for stability are negative),
until the toppling condition is reached for a given block.
The toppling zone can extend to the entire slope, or
change to sliding near the toe, as in the case of Fig. 1.
Kinematical constraints mean that once a block slides, it
forces the sliding of all the blocks situated below it.
Since its publication, this method has been generalised
by dierent authors to include factors such as oblique
joints, seismic forces, water pressures in the joints or
probabilistic analysis for random distribution of some of
the involved parameters [2]. Zanbak [3] has used the
method to produce non-dimensional design charts.

1365-1609/01/$ - see front matter # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 1 3 6 5 - 1 6 0 9 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 1 1 - 9
422 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435

Nomenclature

h height of individual blocks g unit weight of the rock mass

t block thickness d inclination of the anchor force
F anchor load per unit length of slope Z dip of the strata
H height of slope l slenderness ratio ( H=t)
kT coecient for anchor load per unit lcr critical slenderness ratio for insta-
length of slope (Eq. (24)) bility
L total length of the unstable mass fb friction angle along transverse joints
along OX (abscissa of the toe) fi friction angle between bedding
P normal force per unit length of slope planes
transmitted between blocks r angle of the anchor load with the line
PT normal force per unit length of slope normal to dip ( d  a)
transmitted to the toe wedge c angle of the slope with the line normal
WT weight of the toe wedge per unit to dip ( b  a)
length of slope s; t normal and shear stresses at the base
xB abscissa of the slope crest of the blocks
xT abscissa of the toe wedge y inclination of the basal plane
a inclination of the line normal to dip x angle of the basal plane with the line
( 908  Z) normal to dip ( y  a)
b slope angle o angle of the natural ground with the
bg slope of the natural ground above the line normal to dip ( bg  a)
crest f0b , f0i , c0 , o0 see Eq. (6)

by a slenderness parameter (l H=t, where H is the

Fig. 1. Limit equilibrium of blocks (Goodman and Bray [1], adapted
notation).
Fig. 2 shows a parametric study of a particuglar case.
A 508 slope is analysed for two values of the dip of the
dominant discontinuity set, 658 and 808. The angles of
friction are 308 along the bedding planes (fi ) and 358
along the transverse joints (fb ). The basal plane forms
an angle of 58 with the line normal to the dip. The
necessary anchor force in non-dimensional form is
plotted against the thickness of the strata, t, represented
height of the slope). There is a threshold value of H/t of
about 10, below which the slope is stable without an
anchoring force. The necessary force increases with
decreasing block thickness, and for slenderness of 2030,
it reaches about 80% of the asymptotic value for t ! 0.
But the most striking result is perhaps the existence of
peaks in the curve for a dip of 808, in contrast with the
smooth variation of the force in the other case.
These results illustrate the practical interest calculat-
ing the asymptotic force for H=t ! 1. It is an upper
bound, but in many cases it is not too far from the
actual value. It can also be useful for identifying some
features of the solution and the role of the dierent
governing parameters (for instance, to determine the
reason and range of the two behaviours depicted in
Fig. 2).
This sort of calculation was undertaken by the writers
a few years ago, and the results were presented in a form
suitable for practical use, in equations and design charts
[4]. Since then, the method has gained some diusion in
Spain, and it has been applied to a number of actual
cases. Working independently, Bobet [5] has recently
published a similar analysis, but the results cover only a
group of cases, namely: (i) the slope angle is lower than a
given critical value (b5a fi ) (see Figs. 1 and 4 for
notation), and (ii) the basal plane is normal to the strata
(y a).
 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435 423

dierential slices of width dx (Fig. 3), and hence the

equilibrium equations in the Goodman and Bray [1]
method lead to ordinary dierential equations that can
be easily integrated in many cases.
The geometry and the forces acting on a dierential
block are given in Fig. 3. The slope surface and the base
line can have any irregular shape, dened by ys x and
yb x, respectively. In any case, the base of each block is
always normal to dip, at an angle a with the horizontal
(the base line has an innitesimally stepped nature).
The axes OX and OY are taken normal and parallel to
dip.
The analysis retains the basic assumptions in Good-
man and Bray [1] method about the transmitted forces
(full mobilisation of friction fi , point of force applica-
tion at the top of the blocks). The equilibrium of the
dierential block (forces and moments about M) gives,
Fig. 2. Inuence of block thickness in a typical case.
after solving for the normal force, P, and base stresses,
s and t:
* For toppling:
The rst of these restrictions is linked to diculties in
the analytical solution and this is commented below in

dP 1 dys 1
detail. A literature survey of actual cases of toppling tan fi P gh sin a 1
dx h dx 2
slopes shows that about half of them are above this
limit. This justies the extension of the solution to cover dP
s gh cos a  tan fi
also this case. dx
With respect to the second restriction and the basal
dP
plane, its observed inclination y (or its selected design t gh sin a  2
value) is usually steeper than a, typically at 35458 to the dx
horizontal. This means a considerable deviation from * For sliding:
the normal to the strata, especially in cases with high
value of the dip angle. In any case, the base of each dP tan a  tan fb
block is always inclined an angle a with the horizontal, gh cos a 3
dx 1  tan fb tan fi
and hence the base plane is in fact a stepped surface, as
in Fig. 1. This limits the modes of failure to toppling and 1  tan a tan fi
s gh cos a
sliding of blocks, in contrast with the plane base line 1  tan fb tan fi
case, in which many other mechanisms are possible, as
1  tan a tan fi
discussed by Goodman and Bray [1]. A signicant t s tan fb gh cos a tan fb 4
reduction of the necessary anchor force at the toe is 1  tan fb tan fi
observed when the angle x y  a increases. As it will In all the formulation, all the forces, denoted with
be shown later (Fig. 11), the force calculated for the uppercase letters (P, Q, F, W) are in fact line loads in
design value of x in some selected cases is signicantly the direction perpendicular to the slope. Their values are
less than the value for x 0. Hence, the inclusion of y as understood as loads per unit length of slope.
an additional independent variable, dierent from a, is The ordinary dierential equations (1) and (3) are
justied. easy to integrate from top of the slope downwards for
For these reasons, and given that the publication [4] any given geometry (functions ys x and yb x), starting
was only of National scope, the general solution is from the initial condition P 0 for x 0.
presented here. When dierent failure modes are possible in a given
system, it is usual to analyse all of them in parallel, and
to select the one giving the maximum force. However,
3. Continuum approach this must be done with caution, even in apparently
simple cases. In fact, only one of the possible modes
3.1. General assumptions satises all the kinematic and static constraints [6]. So, in
cases like the present one, in which an innite series of
When the spacing of discontinuities t decreases unstable blocks is analysed, it is better to assume that
indenitely (H=t ! 1), the blocks transform into the failure mode of each block is the same as of the
424 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435

Fig. 3. Continuum approach. Basic assumptions. (a) Denition of geometry; (b) Forces on a dierential block.

upper precedent block, and to check all the kinematic
and static conditions. Only when some of these
conditions can not be fullled, a change of failure
mechanism is considered.
The above equations must be solved not only for P,
but also for the base stresses, s and t, to check the
limiting conditions for friction with no tension at the
base:
s50
t 5
4 tan fb
s
3.2. Basic case
The method is applied to the basic case of a slope of
height H shown in Fig. 4. The strata dip at an angle Z,
and the base line passes through the toe of the slope at
an angle y. The friction angle is fi between the bedding
planes and fb at the base of the blocks (between the
transverse joints). It is convenient to use a system of
coordinate axes aligned with the bedding planes, with
OX downwards in the direction normal to dip,
a 908  Z, and to measure all the inclinations with
respect to this line: cut slope (c b  a), natural
ground (o bg  a), base line (x y  a) and the
applied anchor force, F (r d  a). Furthermore, it is
convenient to use the following auxiliary angles, denoted
with a prime (0 ):
tan c0 tan c  tan x
tan o0 tan o  tan x note that o0 is always negative
tan f0i tan fi  tan x
tan f0b tan fb  tan x 6

3.3. Modes of failure

The integration starts from point A with P 0 for

x 0. Unlike the nite block analysis, there is no stable
zone, because the blocks of innitesimal width can never
be stable against toppling except on a horizontal base.
In the case of toppling, the solution in the region AB
(above the slope crest) is
1 tan2 o0
P g sin a x2 7
2 tan f0i  3tan o0


tan a tan fi tan o0
s  g cos a tan o0 1 x
tan f0i  3tan o0


0 tan o0
t  g sin a tan o 1 x 8
Fig. 4. Denition of the basic case. tan f0i  3tan o0
 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435 425

The conditions (5), in particular the sliding limit, imply

an upper bound for a, dened by
1  tan fi tan fb
tan a  tan fb tan o0 tan a 9
tan f0i  3tan o0
The right-hand side of Eq. (9) is always positive, so
the range of a for toppling extends beyond the apparent
limit (a fb ).
If this condition is not satised, sliding occurs. Then
the whole wedge ABC slides, and the solution is trivial.
This mode is called general sliding (GS). The trans-
mitted force from A to C is in this case:
1 tan a  tan fb 2
P g cos a tan o0 x 10
2 1  tan fi tan fb
At the slope crest (point B), the normal force is given
either by Eqs. (7) or (10) for x xB , where
cos c cos o sin c0
xB L  H H 11
sin b sin b sin o0
Beyond this point (and excluding the trivial case of
general sliding) the solution for the slope face BC in the
case of toppling is:
"

1 tan2 c0 2 Lx 2
P g sin a L  xB
2 tan f0i  3tan c0 L  xB
Fig. 5. Transmitted forces and base stresses. (a) Sliding toe (ST)
0 0

tan f0i =tan c0 1 # (c5fi ); (b) Tension toe (TT) (c > fi ).
tan c  tan o Lx
3 0 0
12
tan fi  3tan o L  xB

dP sliding condition imposed by the base stresses (13):

s g cos a tan c0 L  x  tan fi
dx
 0 0
L  xT tan fi =tan c 3
dP L  xB
t g sin a tan c0 L  x  13
dx
2tan f0i  3tan o0 tan c0
  
The variation of the transmitted forces and the base 3 tan c0  tan o0 tan f0i  tan c0
stresses is shown in Fig. 5. Two dierent situations arise

depending of the sign of the exponent in the last term 3tan c0  tan f0i tan fb  tan a
1
14
of Eq. (12). This condition, (c5fi ) or (c > fi ), coin- tan a tan c0 1  tan fi tan fb
cides with the so-called kinematic criterion by Goodman
and Bray [1]. In the present analysis, it does not PT is then given by (12) with x xT .
dene a limit for stability but the transition between Equilibrium below this point can be analysed using
two dierent mechanisms of failure, as described the dierential equation for sliding (3), with the result:
below. 1 tan fb  tan a
P PT  g cos a tan c0
2 1  tan fb tan fi
3.3.1. Case 1 (c5fi ) sliding toe (ST)  
L  xT 2 L  x2 15
The exponent is positive, and the force tends to zero
at the toe (x ! L) (Fig. 5a). The ratio t/s increases from Alternatively, the force at the toe (x L) can be
B to C, reaching the sliding condition (t=s tan fb ) at obtained from the global equilibrium of the sliding
some point M. Hence, the lower part of the slope slides. wedge below xT . This leads to the same result as Eq. (15)
In the following, this case is called sliding toe (ST). with x L.
The position of the transition point M, xT , and the There is a slope angle for which the force at the toe is
corresponding normal force, PT , are dened by the zero, and hence the slope is stable. This condition is
426 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435

given by 3.3.3. Singular cases

tan f0i
tan c0
1  tan fb tan fi
3 tan a
tan fb  tan a
It will be noted that this is a relatively at slope, with
an angle less than fi =3 above the normal to dip (a) line.
In the case of base line normal to the strata (y=a), the
above results coincide with the expressions given by
Bobet [5].
3.3.2. Case 2 (c > fi ) tension toe (TT)
The exponent of (L  x) is negative, and the toppling
force tends to innite at the toe (x ! L) (Fig. 5b). In the
solution presented by Bobet [5], this case is not analysed
further. However, an innite force is unrealistic, and in
There are two singular cases, evident from the
16 structure of expression (12). The rst one (tan f0i =
tan c0 1) corresponds to the limit between ST and
TT cases, when the limit points for base sliding and
tension are both located precisely at the toe of the slope
(xT L). The force at this point is given by
3 tan f0i  tan o0
PT g sin a tan f0i L  xB 2 18
4 tan f0i  3tan o0
The second case (tan f0i =tan c0 3) falls within the
range for ST, and it has no particular interest. Solving
for the limit, Eq. (14) leads to
L  xT
L  xB

tan c0 1 tan fb  tan a 1

practice it must be possible to stabilise the slope with the exp 

tan f0i  3tan o0 tan a 1  tan fi tan fb 2
action of some nite force. A possible way of solving
this diculty could be to stop the integration at some 19
point before reaching the toe and to consider the force at and PT is then given by (12) as in the general case.
this point. However, this would mean unacceptable The above results explain the dierences found
dierences in the resulting load depending on the precise between the two cases presented in Fig. 2. The case
position of the selected point. with 658 dip is of ST type (c0 108, f0i 268), and the
The analysis of the base stresses throws some light 808 dip is of TT type (c0 378, f0i 268). The existence
into the problem (Fig. 5b). The shear stress decreases of peaks in the load variation is always associated with
towards the toe, and it even becomes negative, so the TT cases, while the sliding toe condition produces a
friction condition is never violated (the shear stress is smooth variation of load.
not bounded in the upward direction, due to the stepped Laboratory tests have provided evidence of both the
nature of the base line). However, the normal stress also ST and TT modes of failure. Fig. 6 shows the initiation
decreases and before reaching the toe it becomes zero of failure in a slope in a base friction apparatus with
and then negative from a given point M. As the rock c > fi (tension toe) [7]. A zone is clearly visible near the
mass can not sustain these tensile stresses, the obtained toe in which the blocks are ejected outwards, indicating
solution (with the force tending to innity) is not valid
below this point, thus the equilibrium condition must be
reformulated for this zone. This case is denoted as
tension toe (TT). The position of the point of tensile
failure M, xT , and the corresponding force, PT , are
obtained by imposing the limit condition (s 0) to the
base stresses (13):

 0 0
L  xT tan fi =tan c 3 2 tan f0i  3tan o0 tan c0

L  xB 3 tan c  tan o0 tan f0i  tan c0

0

3tan c0  tan f0i

1 17
tan a tan c0 tan fi
and then PT is given by (12) with x xT .
There is no possibility of self-equilibrium below the
tension point without the action of the external anchor
force, which must be distributed along that part of the
slope. As a result, the blocks below the tension point
move together as a monolithic wedge. The global
equilibrium of this wedge against either sliding or
toppling gives the necessary force. These two sub-cases
are called tension toe-sliding wedge (TTSW) and
tension toe-toppling wedge (TTTW), depending on
the critical mode for the toe wedge. Fig. 6. A case with tension toe in a scale model test [7].
 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435 427

The minimum occurs if the force is applied at the top of

the wedge (xF xT ):
FTWmin
 
Fig. 7. Denition of the toe wedge.
tensile failure. Aydan et al. [8] present some examples
of sliding and toppling slopes, although all the
photographs shown correspond to late stages of
the failure, and the details of incipient failure mode
are lost.
3.4. Equilibrium of the toe wedge
In all the cases a wedge is found at the slope toe
(Fig. 7), between x xT and x L. The wedge moves
monolithically, either sliding or toppling, under the
action of the force exerted by the upper blocks, PT , and
its own weight, WT :
1 0 2
WT 2 g tan c L  xT
The external anchor force, F, required for equilibrium
is:
* For stability against sliding:
   
PT 1  tan fi tan fb WT sin a  cos a tan fb
FSW
cos r  tan fb sin r
This force is zero if the slope angle is lower than the
critical value for a stable slope (16).
* For stability against toppling, the force depends on
its point of application xF (xT 4xF 4L):
L  xT
FTW FTWmin : 22
L  xF
PT tan c  tan fi 13 WT sin atan c tan x  2cos a
:
cos r tan c  sin r
23
The highest of the two values FSW and FTWmin denes
the mode of failure of the toe wedge. It can be proved
that in both cases all the equilibrium conditions are
fullled, with all the forces applied within their
respective valid ranges.
4. Application procedure
4.1. Continuous solution
The application of the above solution to the general
basic case of Fig. 4 takes the following steps:
Step 1. Selection of the relevant mode of failure:
* If (9) does not hold, general sliding (GS) along the
transverse joints
* If (9) holds, then:
* If c5f , sliding toe (ST),
i
* If c > f , tension toe (TT),
i
* If c f , transition STTT (singular case).
i
Step 2. Denition of the toe wedge:
* Dimension xT : xT L in GS mode; Eq. (14) or (19)
in ST mode; Eq. (17) in TT mode; xT L in
transition STTT.
* Force exerted by the upper blocks, PT : Eq. (10) with
x L in GS mode; Eq. (12) with x xT in ST and
TT modes; Eq. (18) in transition STTT.
* Weight, WT : Eq. (20) in all cases
20
Step 3. Determination of anchor force:
* In GS, ST or transition STTT modes: F FSW from
Eq. (21)
* In TT mode, F is the highest value of FSW from
Eq. (21) (mode TTSW) and FTWmin from Eq. (23)
(mode TTTW).
The continuum approach has proven to be a very
21 useful tool in the past few years. Stability charts, such as
the ones presented in Fig. 8, have been given [4]. The
anchor load per unit length of slope is scaled to the slope
height H as a non-dimensional factor, kT :
F 12 gkT H 2 : 24
This factor is similar to an earth pressure coecient,
and its value in actual cases is in the range 0.050.20. It
is more meaningful than other previously proposed
428 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435

Fig. 8. Design charts [4]. Horizontal ground surface (o a); horizontal anchors (r a); base line: x y  a 58.

formulations. For instance, Zanbak [3] uses the thick-
ness of strata, t, instead of the height of the slope,
resulting in very high factors (range 0200), which are
then multiplied by a very small number 1=2gt2 .
The charts in Fig. 8 correspond to the case of
horizontal ground surface (o a), base line 58 above
the normal to dip line (x 58), horizontal anchors
(d 0), and friction angle along the transverse joints 58
higher than along the bedding planes (fb fi 58). All
the modes of failure (GS, ST, TTSW and TTTW) are
considered. As the dip angle increases, the mode of
failure passes from general sliding to sliding toe and
then to tension toe. The range for sliding toe decreases
with the slope angle, and for relatively steep slopes
(b > 558 for a friction angle of 258) it vanishes, and only
tension toe modes are possible.
4.2. Inuence of nite block thickness
The continuum approach is a reasonable upper
bound, close enough to the exact solution in most
practical cases. However, in order to assess the degree of
 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435 429

Fig. 9. Critical slenderness for stability.

accuracy, the inuence of nite block thickness can be
investigated with the GoodmanBray method (Fig. 1).
As shown in Fig. 2, there is always a threshold value
for the slenderness (l H=t) for stability without
external anchor forces, lcr . Fig. 9 shows the results for
the same basic cases studied in Fig. 8. Excluding extreme
situations (almost vertical dip, or very gentle slopes), the
threshold slenderness lcr shows very small variations,
being always in the range 510.
A number of calculations have been run for a wide
range of cases, with values of l above lcr , with the result
shown in Fig. 10. The force increases linearly with l and
for a slenderness between 2 and 3 times lcr it is very
close to the asymptotic value. Hence, a linear reduction
of the force determined by the continuum approach can
be applied for this intermediate range of l.
4.3. Some possible extensions
The solution presented can be easily extended to cover
other situations dierent from the basic case considered,
such as water pressures (Bobet [5] has considered the
case of seepage parallel to the slope), seismic actions
(quasi-static body forces), or forces and distributed
pressures on the slope face (anchors, bolts, wire meshes).
The consideration of all these factors requires only a
slight modication of the equilibrium diagrams in Fig. 3,
with some additional terms in the resulting Eqs. (1)(5).
430 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435

Reference

[4]
[4]
[4]
[1]
[1]
Comparison
kT (comp)a

0.076

0.019
0.035
0

0
kT (corr)

0.005
0.080

0.020
0.070
Block thickness correction

0
6.5
lcr

9
8
9

6
10.56
9.25
9.25
24
39
l

0.005
0.080
0.017
0.048
0.116
Fig. 10. Inuence of block thickness. Relative variation.

kT
L  xT
L  xB
0.184
0.328
0.281
0.344
0.371
5. Actual cases

Continuum approach

Mode of failure
5.1. Basic examples

Table 1 summarises the data and results from

TTTW

TTSW
application of the procedure to ve documented cases.

ST

ST
ST
These cases were the basis for the development of the
solution [4], and cover all the described modes of failure.
d (8)

20
0

0
0
0
In all of these ve cases, the continuum method has been
used, with the additional correction for block thickness.
fi (8)

38.15

21.45
The nal result is compared with the GoodmanBray [1]
39
25

analysis. 33
fb (8)

The rst case, El Haya, is a cut in a section of

38.15

21.45
39
35

33

motorway A-8 from Santander to Bilbao in Northern

Spain. The rock was Cretaceous limestone. The average
y (8)

35.8
35.8

slope was 558. There was a local toppling failure during

42
35

45

construction, and a mass of 1000 m3 fell from the slope

Z (8)

crest. The inclination of the basal plane (428) was

65
80
60
60
70

derived from the position of the upper tension crack.

bg (8)

The data included in Table 1 show the back-calculation

15
0
4
4
0

of the friction angle (398) from the condition of incipient

Basic examples of application: data and results

failure with no anchor load. The remedial measure

b (8)

56.6
56.6
55
65

60

adopted was to lower the slope to the basal plane (408

458), with no anchors.
g (t/m3)

From GoodmanBray method.

The slope at Derio was a cut in a motorway near

2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5

Bilbao airport, in interbedded marl and sandstone layers

from lower Cretaceous. The potential toppling condi-
t (m)

tion was investigated during the design phase. A friction

10
10
10
2
1

angle of 258 was adopted for the bedding planes and 358
H (m)

105.6
92.5
92.5
Data

along the transverse joints from qualitative analysis of

48
39

joint roughness. Due to the presence of buildings near

the slope crest, the solution of anchoring was consid-
El Haya
Table 1

G-B.1b
G-B.1a

G-B.2

ered, resulting in a nominal load of 145 t/m in ve rows.

Derio
Case

However, after a comparative analysis, the decision was

 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435 431

Reference
taken of lowering the slope to 3(H) : 2(V), with no
anchoring.

[10]

[11]
[9]
The last three cases in Table 1 are not actual slopes,
but the three examples (1a, 1b and 2) presented by
Goodman and Bray [1] to illustrate the applicability of

Anchors: F 1202155 t/m

the limit equilibrium method.

Anchors: F 34 t/m

(kT 0:14020:190)
Anchors: F 15 t/m
As can be seen, the slenderness in the two actual cases
is well above the critical value, and hence the continuum

(kT 0:024)

(kT 0:071)
Slope b 458.
solution is valid. Only in the three last illustrative
examples the ratio l=lcr is in the range 13, justifying

corrective
measures
Applied
the correction for block thickness. The agreement with
the block analysis is good. The largest dierences are in
the last case (example GB.2), associated to the strong
variations of the load with the particular block

0.104
0.020

0.049
0.089

0.070
0.134
distribution in cases with tension toe (TT), and

kT
slenderness ratio l=lcr in the range 23 (Fig. 2).
In all these cases, the inclination of the basal plane

Continuum approach

L  xT
L  xB

0.262
0.910

0.266
0.196

0.444
0.508
(either observed or assumed) is well above the normal to
dip line. A sensitivity analysis of the inuence of this
inclination is presented in Fig. 11. The force decreases
signicantly as the angle x y  a increases. The force

Mode of

TTTW
TTSW

TTSW
failure
calculated for the design value of x ranges between 70%

ST
ST

ST
and 50% of the value for x 0.

d (8)

15

0
5.2. Further applications

fi (8)
As stated above, the outlined method has been used

28

25

35
by dierent designers in a number of actual slopes in the
last four years. Three cases were presented in a National
fb (8)

Symposium on Slopes and Landslides in Spain and these

30

35

35
are summarised in Table 2.
The rst case [9], Cereixal, is a cut in a motorway
y (8)

section in North-western Spain, in Cambrian shale,

40

30

47
37
schist and sandstone, dipping at 558 with an average
joint spacing of 1 m parallel to the slope. The slope was
Z (8)

55

65
76

70
80
bg (8)

12

15

30
b (8)

62
45

45

72
g (t/m3)

2.2

2.5

2.6
Further applications to actual cases

t (m)

0.2
1

1
H (m)
Data

36

13

25
Paracuellos

viaduct
River Sil
tunnel
portal
Cereixal
Table 2

cut
Case

Fig. 11. Basic cases. Inuence of the inclination of the base line on
anchor force.
432 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435
excavated with an angle 1(H) : 2(V) (b 628), and a
toppling failure was observed. The inclination of the
basal plane was inferred from the tension crack at the
crest. The required anchor load was evaluated as a
factor kT of 0.104, that was reduced to 0.024 if the slope
was lowered to 1 : 1. This solution was nally adopted,
with rock bolts 125 mm, length 5 m, with a density of
one bolt every 12 m2, with a total anchor load per meter
of slope of 34 t/m.
The second case [10] is the North portal of the
Paracuellos tunnel (length 4670 m) in the high-speed
railway under construction between Madrid and Barce-
lona. Some cracks appeared in the front slope, in
metamorphic schist, indicating incipient toppling fail-
ure. Further site investigation with exploration test pits
showed a discontinuity set parallel to the slope, with
variable dip from 658 to 768. The solution adopted was
to install horizontal anchors, 25 m long, with a total
force of 15 t/m, corresponding to a factor kT 0:071,
average of the values calculated for the two extreme
values of the dip. No further movements were recorded.
The last case [11] involved the design provisions for
the open excavation with very steep slopes (b 728) for
the foundations of a viaduct over the River Sil, in
Northwestern Spain, in slightly weathered granite.
There is a family of sub-vertical joints (J4), parallel to
the slope and dipping 70808, that could lead to toppling
failure, favoured by the presence of a transverse set (J3),
orthogonal to it. The inclination of the potential basal
plane was inferred as 478 from the analysis of the
spacing of the two families J3 and J4 involved. The
angle of friction (358) was determined from tilt tests of
rock cores. Several distributions of anchors and bolts
were considered, with a force per unit length of
slope between 120 and 155 t/m, corresponding to kT
between 0.140 and 0.190, above the calculated values
(0.0700.134).
Fig. 12. San Antol!n cut. General front view.
5.3. A particular case
Fig. 12 shows a front view of the San Antol!n cut in
the motorway A-8 in Northern Spain [12]. There was
already a cut, 70 m high, for the existing road, running
parallel to the shore. The enlargement to four lanes
implied that a further excavation, with a maximum
height of 110 m with ve intermediate berms would be
required. The rock consists of Ordovician quartzite,
with a dip direction of 1608 and a dip of 808 in the upper
part of the slope, decreasing to 608 in the lower part.
There is a fault, parallel to the bedding, clearly visible in
the upper part of the slope. Above the fault the rock is
massive, with bedding planes spaced at more than 5 m.
However, below the fault, the spacing between open
bedding planes is less than 1 m, and there are some
interbedded layers of shale.
The road alignment is N708W, forming an angle of
408 with the strike of the bedding planes. It is usually
considered that this obliquity is enough to prevent the
possibility of toppling failure. However, the present case
has some particular features in this respect. Due to the
dierences in rock mass quality, dierent slope angles
were adopted, decreasing from the upper part to the toe,
and also decreasing longitudinally from East to West.
The average angle was 418 in the western part of the
slope, and 528 in the eastern end (see Fig. 12). The
transition between these two zones resulted in an
unfavourable orientation, with an obliquity of less than
208 with the bedding strike.
During the excavation, several local toppling
failures were observed in the transition zone, below
the fault. This led to a detailed analysis of the failure
mechanisms.
The analyses were performed by the consultant [12]
using the Goodman and Bray [1] method, taking into
account the presence of the fault, and the particular
 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435 433

geometry of the slope. The average block thickness was slope can be considered by imposing the condition of
taken as 0.50 m. The inuence of the ground water level zero transmitted force at the fault location (this is
was introduced as a normal pressure between the blocks common to the block analysis and to the continuous
and at their bases. Six transverse proles in the dip solution). This represents a slight modication of the
direction, numbered T0 to T5, were studied in the resulting expressions. In particular, the general law for
critical zone (Fig. 13). For each prole, local failures transmitted force (12) transforms to
aecting one or more benches between berms were
1 tan2 c0
considered. P g sin a L  xB 2
The friction angle along the bedding planes was
2 tan f0i  3tan c0
"

 0 0 #
measured by tilt tests in the eld and in the laboratory. Lx 2 L  x tan fi =tan c 1
A peak value of 408 was found for the quartzite,  25
L  xB L  xB
decreasing to 378 due to the inuence of the interbedded
shale layers. A safety factor of 1.2 was adopted, leading The toe wedge for the ST case is (instead of Eq. (14)),
to a mobilised friction of 328. dened by
In parallel with these analyses, the preceding con-
 0 0
L  xT tan fi =tan c 3 2tan c0
tinuous solution was also applied. The inuence of the
fault, limiting the unstable zone to the lower part of the L  xB tan f0i  tan c0


3tan c0  tan f0i tan fb  tan a
1
26
tan a tan c0 1  tan fi tan fb
For the TT case (instead of Eq. (17)), it is dened by:

 0 0
L  xT tan fi =tan c 3 2tan c0

L  xB tan f0i  tan c0


3tan c0  tan f0i
1 27
tan atan c0 tan fi
The rest of the formulation remains unchanged.
The calculations are summarised in Table 3. For each
case studied, the average slope and dip angles are
shown, together with the base line inclination adopted.
Provided the high slenderness (20100) is maintained, no
Fig. 13. San Antol!n cut. Typical transverse prole. correction for block thickness is required. The results

Table 3
San Antol!n cut: results for studied sections

Transverse prole Section H (m) b (8) Z (8) y (8) Mode of failure kT kT (comp)a

T0 (F below berm A) EDCBF 81 38 70 20 ST 0.018 0.023

DCBF 60 43 70 20 ST 0.032 0.041
CBF 40 49 75 15 TTSW 0.064 0.091
BF 21 52 75 15 TTSW 0.068 0.102
T1 (F below berm B) EDCF 60 43 70 20 ST 0.032 0.026
DCF 39 52 70 20 ST 0.064 0.057
CF 19 58 75 15 TTSW 0.069 0.092
T2 (F below berm C) EDF 40 46 70 20 ST 0.041 0.053
DF 19 54 75 15 TTSW 0.069 0.095
T3 (F above berm A) EDCBAF 102 33 70 20 ST 0.005 0.007
DCBAF 81 39 70 20 ST 0.020 0.012
CBAF 61 40 70 20 ST 0.023 0.018
BAF 41 42 70 20 ST 0.029 0.015
AF 21 45 75 15 ST 0.047 0.031
T4 (F above berm A) EDCBAF 107 36 67 23 ST 0.008 0.009
DCBAF 87 37 67 23 ST 0.010 0.012
CBAF 67 38 70 20 ST 0.018 0.018
BAF 47 40 70 20 ST 0.023 0.037
AF 26 37 75 15 ST 0.023 0.018
T5 (F below berm C) BF 24 47 75 15 TTSW 0.057 0.089
a
From GoodmanBray method for t 0:5 m and water pressure [12].
434 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435
Fig. 14. San Antol!n cut. Comparison of results.
Fig. 15. San Antol!n cut. Required anchor force vs. slope angle.
(a) Block analysis; (b) Continuous analysis.
are given in terms of the anchor force factor kT and the
relevant failure mode. Most of the cases are of ST type,
due to the relatively low values of the slope angle. Only
the analyses for the upper part of the slope, immediately
below the fault, result in a TTSW failure mode.
The results of the block analysis are also given for
each case. Both results are compared in Fig. 14. The
agreement is good, and the scatter is associated with the
simplication of the geometry of each case to a uniform
slope for the continuous solution. It must be noticed
that no water pressure was considered in the continuous
solution. The cases with tension toe give the highest kT
values, as expected, but in these cases, the block analysis
gives abnormally high values. The reason for this is that
in the cases of tension toe, the numerical analysis is
stopped when tension failure occurs at a given block,
and so the stabilising eect of the wedge of the toe
wedge is neglected, whilst in the case of sliding toe, the
analysis is continued to the toe. This is better under-
stood with the aid of Fig. 15, where the values of kT
obtained with both methods are plotted against the
slope angle, b. For the block analysis, there is a
discontinuity in the change from ST to TT modes, and
in the continuous analysis there is a smooth transition
between the two modes of failure.
The nal decision was to reinforce the slope with a
high strength steel wire mesh anchored with rockbolts,
12 m long, spaced on a 3 3 m pattern, pretensioned to
30% of the yield load. The average active force applied
corresponds to a value of kT of 0.040. No further
movements were observed after the corrective measures.
6. Conclusions
A general analytical solution has been presented for
toppling failure in rock slopes. The governing dier-
ential equations are integrated in the general case and
presented in terms of the slope geometry. For the basic
case of a uniform slope, explicit expressions are given,
covering the whole range of parameters: cut and natural
ground surface slopes, angle of friction along the
bedding planes and transverse joints, base line inclina-
tion, and orientation of anchors. Two main failure
modes have been identied: sliding toe (ST), and tension
toe (TT), depending on the relative values of the dip, cut
slope and friction angle. The solution can be considered
as accurate enough for slenderness greater than 20 or 30.
For thicker blocks, a linear reduction of the force is
proposed. The method has been applied to a number of
actual cases and a particular example is presented in
detail.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Mr. I. Garc!a-Arango,
! chief engineers
Mr. J.A. Herrero and Mr. C. Gascon,
for the works at San Antol!n, El Haya and Derio,
 C. Sagaseta et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 38 (2001) 421435
respectively, for their help and permission to publish
the data.
References
[1] Goodman RE, Bray JW. Toppling of rock slopes. In:
Proceedings, Spec Conference on Rock Engineering for
Foundations and Slopes, vol. 2. Boulder, CO: ASCE, 1977,
p. 201234.
[2] Scavia C, Barla G, Bernardo V. Probabilistic stability analysis of
block toppling failure in rock slopes. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
1990;27:46578.
[3] Zanbak C. Design charts for rock slopes susceptible to toppling.
ASCE J Geot Eng 1983;109:103962.
[4] Sagaseta C, S!anchez JM, Canizal * J. Dimensionamiento de
anclajes en taludes con vuelco de estratos (Calculation of anchor
force in slopes with toppling failure). In: Simposio sobre
Estructuras de Contencion ! de Terrenos. Santander. Sociedad
*
Espanola de Mec!anica del Suelo y Cimentaciones, 1996;15976
[in Spanish].
[5] Bobet A. Analytical solutions for toppling failure. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 1999;36:97180.
[6] Sagaseta C. On the modes of instability of a rigid block on an
inclined plane. Rock Mech Rock Eng 1986;19:2616.
[7] S!anchez JM, Celem!n M, Sagaseta C. Simulacion ! en modelo
reducido de taludes en rocas diaclasadas (Scale model simulation
of slopes in jointed rock). In: Simposio sobre Obras de
Supercie en Mec!anica de Rocas, vol. 1. Madrid. Sociedad
435
*
Espanola de Mec!anica del Suelo y Cimentaciones, 1982;636 [in
Spanish].
[8] Aydan O, . Shimizu Y, Ichikawa Y. The eective failure modes and
stability of slopes in rock mass with two discontinuity sets. Rock
Mech Rock Eng 1989;22:16388.
[9] Portillo E, Ferreiro E. An!alisis y soluciones constructivas para
rotura por vuelco de dos desmontes del tramo de Autov!a
Villartel!n-Cereixal de la Autov!a del Noroeste (Analysis and
constructive solutions for two toppling failures in cut slopes. . .).
In: Alonso E, Corominas J, Chacon ! J, Oteo C, P!erez J, editors.
IV Simposio Nacional sobre Taludes y Laderas Inestables, vol. 1.
Granada, Spain, 1997;12134 [in Spanish].
[10] Romana M, Almaz!an JF. Correccion ! del talud de la boquilla
Norte del tunel ! de Paracuellos en la nueva L!nea de Alta
Velocidad Madrid-Zaragoza (Tramo Calatayud-Ricla)
(Correction of the frontal slope of the North portal of
Paracuellos tunnel. . .). In: Alonso E, Corominas J, Chac!on J,
Oteo C, P!erez J, editors. IV Simposio Nacional sobre Taludes
y Laderas Inestables, vol. 2. Granada, Spain, 1997;45769
[in Spanish].
[11] Portilla R, De Juan P. Problem!atica de taludes excavados para la
cimentacion ! de las pilas de grandes viaductos (Problems of cut
slopes for the foundations of piers of large viaducts). In: Alonso
E, Corominas J, Chacon ! J, Oteo C, P!erez J, editors. IV Simposio
Nacional sobre Taludes y Laderas Inestables, vol. 2. Granada,
Spain, 1997;57381 [in Spanish].
[12] Norcontrol SA. Informe sobre la estabilidad al vuelco de estratos
en el desmonte de San Antol!n. Soluci!on propuesta. (Report on
the stability against toppling in San Antol!n cut. Proposed
solutions). Unpublished report. 1999 [in Spanish].