1/21/2018

Lesson 5.3

PSEUDO STATIC ANALYSIS

of
SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY

3-1

Pseudo Static Stability Analysis

Limit equilibrium stability analysis using a
seismic coefficient, kS

1
 1/21/2018

What is the seismic coefficient, ks?

The seismic coefficient is:
• A lateral force coefficient used in
pseudo static limit equilibrium
analysis
• A means of representing the effect of
seismic loading on slopes and earth
retaining structures using limit
equilibrium analysis

What the seismic coefficient is not

The seismic coefficient is not:
The same as the peak ground acceleration
(PGA) [not usually]
A vertical force coefficient
Independent of the factor of safety

2
 1/21/2018

PGA vs. ks
ks is typically a fraction of the PGA because:
PGA occurs at one point, one time
• Acceleration elsewhere is less than PGA
ks is an average value over entire mass
• Average horizontal acceleration can typically exceed
ks (x g) multiple times
– Because some deformation is allowable
– Because soil is ductile

Exceptions: Brittle, sensitive slopes, short rigid walls

ks vs. MHA
ks does depend upon the MHA:
─ Maximum average horizontal acceleration of failure mass
─ Governs maximum horizontal inertia force on failure mass
PGA
Note:  a1 through a4
are less than the PGA

MHA ≤ PGA (so ks ≤ MHA ≤ PGA)

3
 1/21/2018

PGA ≥ MHA ≥ ks
Difference PGA and MHA depends upon:
Dimensions of failure mass
• Dimension , difference
Coherence of ground motion
• Coherence , > difference
Difference between MHA and ks depends:
Allowable displacement
• Allowable displacement , difference

Effect of Vertical Acceleration

Effect of vertical acceleration is ignored because:
• Negligible if c = 0, minimal for small c
• Cancels out over the course of an earthquake

4
 1/21/2018

Factors Influencing ks
The value of ks depends upon:
The associated factor of safety
The seismic performance criteria (allowable
displacement)
Design ground motion (PGA, Magnitude/Duration)
Slope dimension (ground motion coherence)

Dependence Upon Factor of Safety

Specifying ks without an associated FS is
meaningless
Specifying a “seismic FS” without specifying
an associated ks is meaningless
Different combinations of ks and FS can
describe equivalent performance
Increase FS, decrease ks

5
 1/21/2018

Factor of Safety
ks must be associated FS
[(ks)1,FS1]  [(ks)2,FS2]  [(ks)3,FS3]

Seismic Coefficient, ks
PGA/g
MHA/g

Equivalent seismic
performance

1.0 Factor of Safety, FS

Seismic Performance Criteria

Seismic performance criteria govern MHA – ks
relationship:
Unconditional stability: ks = MHA, FS = 1
• Exception: If soil is susceptible to progressive failure,
may want to use ks = PGA/g, FS ≥ 1

Allowable displacement > 0: ks< MHA, FS ≥ 1*

• Increase allowable displacement, decrease ks or FS

* Assuming use of large displacement strengths

6
 1/21/2018

Seismic Performance Criteria

Different performance criteria correspond to
different ks, FS combinations

Seismic Coefficient, ks
PGA/g
MHA/g (unconditional stability)

Negligible permanent displacement

15 cm permanent displacement
1 m permanent displacement

1.0 Factor of Safety, FS

Ground Motion Coherence

PGA – MHA relationship impacted by spatial
and temporal coherence (or incoherence)
Maximum acceleration at all other points is less
than PGA
Maximum acceleration at other points occurs at
different time than PGA

Maximum average acceleration

(MHA) is less than PGA

7
 1/21/2018

Spatial Incoherence
Effect of height recognized by Makdisi and
Seed (1978)

MHA / PGAcrest

Influence of Duration, Frequency

Increased duration, larger displacement
potential, smaller reduction in ks from MHA
Higher frequency, more cycles of loading, but
shorter cycles – impact unclear
Both duration and frequency effects on MHA-
ks relationship traditionally captured as
magnitude dependence

8
 1/21/2018

Influence of Magnitude, M
Makdisi and Seed, 1978

(ks for FS = 1) / MHA

Historical Values of ks
Seed, 1979: For “acceptable” displacement of
earthen dams (displacement ≤ 1 m)
ks = 0.15, FS = 1.15 for PGA ≤ 0.75g, M ≤ 7.5
ks = 0.10, FS = 1.15 for PGA ≤ 0.75g, M ≤ 6.5
Notes:
Both ks and FS specified
Influence of earthquake magnitude on ks
ks/PGA = 0.167 for M 7.5, ks/PGA = 0.133 for M 6.5
Not valid for liquefiable soil, 15% strength reduction for soft
clay

9
 1/21/2018

Modern Approach to ks
Displacement-based values for the
seismic coefficient (and factor of safety)
NCHRP 12-70 / FHWA 2011 (GEC-3)
Bray and Travasarou, 2009 / Bray et al,
2010
Note:
Both methods apply to slopes and walls

FHWA (2011) Method

ks = MHA x r
r = soil ductility factor [r ≤ 1]
MHA =  x PGA ( ≤ 1)
PGA is site-specific (captures amplification)
 = f(H, )
•  = f(S1), captures magnitude (i.e. frequency,
duration) effects

FS = f(performance criteria)
Allowable displacement

10
 1/21/2018

FHWA (2011)

MHA =  x PGA,  = 1 + 0.01H [0.5 - 1] (H ≤ 100 ft)

For rock sites (Site Class A and B), increase  by 20%

Slope Height, H (feet)

Influence of Seismic Environment

Seismic environment (magnitude, frequency,
duration) characterized by  = S1/PGA
• S1, PGA corrected for local site conditions
 = 1.5: Upper Bound, for large magnitude,
west coast earthquakes
 = 0.5: Lower Bound, for smaller magnitude
east coast earthquakes
 = 1: Intermediate value for intermediate
events

11
 1/21/2018

Limitations of Site Factor Approach

Limitations of Site Factors
Do not apply to special study sites
• > 10 ft. peat or OH soil, > 25 ft. soil w/PI >
75, > 120 ft. soft to medium stiff clay
Do not apply to sites with shallow impedance
contrasts
• Resonance at T0 = 4H/Vs
Use site response analysis when site factors
are not appropriate

MHA via Site Response Analysis

Site Response Analysis

H
Fmax = m x MHA
(base) max = Fmax/A
(base) max = [m x MHA] / A
Area = A (base) max = [(mxg)/A] x [MHA/g]
Mass = m
Weight = W (base) max = [W/A] x [MHA/g]
F
+ W=mxg (base) max = v x [MHA/g]
H C
MHA = [(base) /v] max x g
base

12
 1/21/2018

Soil Ductility Factor, r

For negligible permanent seismic deformations
r = 0.5, FS = 1.15
For permanent seismic deformations ≤ 2 in.:
r = 0.5 and ks = (0.5 x MHA) for FS = 1

Exceptions: For brittle or sensitive soils:

Use r = 1.0, ks = MHA and FS = 1.0 with residual
strength
Use r = 1.0, ks = PGA and FS = 1.0 with peak
strength

Other Factors Influencing ks

Shear strength
Peak vs. large displacement
Undrained shear strength
Multiple failure surfaces
Amplification of ground motions
Rock vs. soil site motions
Influence of topography

13
 1/21/2018

Peak vs. Large Displacement Shear

Strength
In a non-ductile soil, use large displacement shear
strength (by convention / conservative)

 Shear
strength  Peak shear
strength
Large
displacement
Ductile Non-Ductile shear strength

 

Undrained Shear Strengths

Reduce soft clay shear strength for cyclic
softening
Typically reduce Su by 10-20%
Use residual strength in liquefiable, sensitive
soils
Use lesser of drained and undrained strength
for granular soil
Use drained strength in dense soil where
cavitation limits negative pore pressure

14
 1/21/2018

Undrained Strength of Sand and

Gravel
Corps of Engineers composite shear strength
envelope for sand and gravel

Multiple Failure Surfaces

MHA decreases with depth
Stability (ky) also may decreases with depth
May need to check multiple surfaces
Ratio of ky (ks for FS = 1) to MHA critical

(MHA)H1 > (MHA)H2

(ky)1 > (ky)2
(ky/MHA)1 vs. (ky/MHA)2 ???

15
 1/21/2018

Pseudo Static Analysis Summary

1. Adjust ground motions (PGA, S1) for local
site conditions
• Use Site Factors or Site Response Analysis
2. Adjust PGA for slope height, ground motion
characteristics to get MHA
• Use  (NCHRP/FHWA) or Site Response
3. Find kh = r x MHA (/g) based upon ductility,
allowable displacement
• And associated FS
4. Check multiple failure surfaces

NCHRP 12-70 / FHWA (2011)

http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/Seismic_Analysis_and_Design_of_Retaining_Walls_Bur_160387.aspx

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/geotech/library_arc.cfm?pub_number=19

16
 1/21/2018

Lesson 5.3

Any Questions?

6-33

17