Slope Stability Factor of Safety Analyzer
Verify slope stability factor of safety calculations and identify critical slip surfaces
What You Can Do
You can rapidly review and verify FS calculations from geotechnical software (SLOPE/W, SLIDE2D, Bishop, Janbu), evaluate multiple failure mechanisms across a single slope, and document assumptions and sensitivity drivers for regulatory submissions. Claude helps you interpret soil strength parameters, flag inconsistencies in geometry and water conditions, and build narrative justifications for FS thresholds—accelerating the critical interpretation and documentation steps that impact project liability and safety margins.
Features
cross-check FS calculations from slope stability software against limit equilibrium principles and validate input reasonableness
analyze multiple failure mechanisms (circular, non-circular, wedge, compound) to locate govering failure surfaces and assess sensitivity to input parameters
correlate lab testing results, SPT/CPT data, and published correlations to appropriate shear strength inputs (c, φ, cu, φ')
systematically record and justify pore pressure conditions, material property assignments, geometry constraints, and design safety factors for defensible reports
identify key drivers of FS variation and guide screening of design alternatives before committing to detailed numerical modeling
synthesize FS results, failure mechanism rankings, and design margins into coherent justifications for permanent (FS ≥ 1.3) and temporary (FS ≥ 1.15) slope classifications
organize and compare FS results across mine phases, pit walls, embankment sections, or construction stages with consistent methodology
detect conflicts between geometry, water table assumptions, material properties, and calculated FS values that warrant software re-entry or field verification
Example Output
Example 1: FS Verification & Critical Surface Identification
Input: SLOPE/W output showing FS = 1.42 for 45° pit wall in sandy silt with φ' = 32°, c' = 5 kPa, γsat = 19 kN/m³, steady-state pore pressure ratio ru = 0.25.
Clause output:
- ✓ FS value consistent with Janbu simplified method for 60 m wall height
- Critical slip surface: 38° curved failure plane initiating at crest, exiting at toe
- Sensitivity drivers: pore pressure ratio (±0.05 change = ±0.15 FS), φ' variation (±2° = ±0.12 FS)
- Design margin: 0.12 above permanent threshold; recommend intrinsic drainage or slope flattening if water conditions worsen
Example 2: Assumption Documentation
Input: Mine embankment design with mixed fill (weathered granite, clay), variable SPT N-values.
Output checklist:
- ✓ Clay lenses (N < 5): assigned φ' = 28°, c' = 8 kPa per USCS classification; source: lab triaxial (CID) or correlated estimate?
- ✓ Weathered granite (N = 15–25): φ' = 36°, c' = 0 kPa; assumes drained conditions and no cementing
- ✓ Pore pressure: assumed hydrostatic below water table (ru = 0.33 at 10 m depth); site history and seasonal fluctuations documented?
- ✓ Design FS = 1.3 (permanent); justifies long-term stability and creep resistance
- Flagged: Contact zones between fill and native foundation; recommend explicit interface friction or limiting angle analysis
Example 3: Regulatory Narrative
Output section for permitting submission: "The north pit wall (Phase 2) achieves FS = 1.38 under steady-state pore pressure conditions (Janbu simplified, non-circular slip surface). This margin of 0.08 above the regulatory minimum of 1.3 reflects conservative assignment of φ' = 30° to interbedded clay layers and assumes no active mine dewatering. Sensitivity analysis shows FS remains > 1.3 provided pore pressure ratio does not exceed 0.30; monitoring wells and depressurization drilling will maintain ru ≤ 0.25 during operations."
What's Included
- SKILL.md: detailed skill instructions covering limit equilibrium framework, when to invoke the skill, and how to structure geotechnical inputs
- FS Verification Checklist: systematic walkthrough for reviewing software output (geometry, material properties, water table, boundary conditions, FS computation)
- Failure Mechanism Comparison Template: structured format for evaluating circular, non-circular, wedge, and compound failure surfaces and ranking by govening FS
- Soil Parameter Correlation Worksheet: reference table linking SPT/CPT data, lab testing results, and USCS classification to published c' and φ' values with uncertainty ranges
- Regulatory Documentation Framework: section templates for embedding FS results, sensitivity findings, and design margin justifications into permit submittals and technical reports
Who It's For
- Geotechnical engineers — reviewing and documenting factor of safety calculations for mine pit walls, dam embankments, and cut/fill slopes
- Design engineers — screening slope stability alternatives and building defensible FS narratives for permitting and peer review
- Mining and civil contractors — validating slope geometry and material assumptions before construction and during dewatering operations
- Regulatory and compliance teams — preparing stability assessments and design margins for environmental and safety submissions
- Litigation and forensic engineers — reconstructing stability analyses and failure mechanisms for incident investigation and expert testimony
Best For
- Verification and interpretation of slope stability software output (SLOPE/W, SLIDE2D, Bishop, Janbu methods)
- Documentation of assumptions, soil parameters, and pore pressure conditions for regulatory and contractual defense
- Screening multiple failure mechanisms and design alternatives to guide detailed numerical modeling
- Synthesis of FS results across multiple slope sections, construction phases, or pit walls with consistent methodology
- Building narrative justifications for factor of safety thresholds (permanent 1.3, temporary 1.15) in permit and technical reports
You might also like
You can transform raw geotechnical field data into professional-grade site investigation reports that include soil classification using USCS standards, bearing capacity calculations, settlement predictions, and specific foundation design recommendations. The skill organizes stratigraphic information across multiple boring locations, cross-references laboratory test results, and produces defensible conclusions compliant with IBC, ASCE 7, and local building codes—suitable for building officials, structural engineers, and construction teams.
by az9713
You can conduct comprehensive safety impact assessments for any transportation design intervention—from intersection redesigns to speed reduction corridors. The skill guides you through hazard identification, risk quantification using established methodologies (conflict studies, crash prediction models), and evidence-based mitigation development. You'll produce defensible safety documentation suitable for audits, litigation, and project approvals.
by az9713
Quickly evaluate pavement design scenarios using AASHTO 1993 methodology to calculate required structural thickness for flexible (asphalt) and rigid (concrete) pavements. Analyze traffic loading by computing Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs), assess subgrade conditions through CBR interpretation, and compare multiple design alternatives with different material combinations to optimize cost and performance. Generate preliminary design documentation with technical justification for client presentations and design reports.
by az9713
This skill cross-references your residential design specifications against jurisdiction-specific building codes (IBC, IRC, local amendments) to identify code violations, ambiguous details inspectors will challenge, and compliance documentation gaps. You can validate designs across multiple jurisdictions, evaluate design trade-offs (fire-rating vs. acoustic performance), and generate compliance narratives that support permit applications—all before formal submission.
by az9713
You can input room dimensions, functional requirements, and design constraints to receive optimized furniture layouts with documented traffic flow patterns and compliance verification. Claude analyzes competing spatial demands—usable area, sightlines, egress, zoning—and produces data-driven plans that satisfy functional, regulatory, and aesthetic objectives simultaneously. This accelerates initial space planning and helps identify conflicts before costly revisions.
by az9713
This skill deconstructs your writing samples to identify the specific patterns, personality markers, emotional range, language quirks, and formatting habits that make your voice uniquely yours. You'll receive a detailed voice DNA profile that includes your core communication style, signature phrases, emotional tone, formality level, and what you actively avoid—creating a blueprint that AI systems can use to replicate your authentic voice consistently across projects, platforms, and content types.
by az9713
Design earth retention systems by inputting soil properties, site geometry, and regulatory requirements. Claude calculates lateral earth pressures using Coulomb, Rankine, and Mononobe-Okabe methods, verifies factors of safety for internal and external stability, compares competing retention concepts (gravity walls, cantilever, anchored, sheet-pile, soil-nail), and generates cost-benefit analysis and regulatory documentation packages ready for permit submission.
by az9713
Query your local Screenpipe instance to retrieve screen recordings, audio transcriptions, UI element accessibility trees, keyboard/mouse input logs, and productivity analytics. You can search by keywords, filter by content type (audio, OCR, accessibility, input), set time ranges, and extract structured data about your applications, meetings, and work sessions without sending data to external servers.
by az9713