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 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
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
You can submit architectural design documents, floor plans, and project parameters to receive a comprehensive compliance analysis that cross-references IBC, local amendments, zoning ordinances, and ADA accessibility requirements. Claude identifies specific gaps, cites applicable code sections, explains why each gap matters, and provides concrete remediation strategies—all before formal design review submission when corrections are costly and schedule-impacting.
by az9713
You can rapidly review fire protection system designs by cross-referencing applicable NFPA codes, calculating system hydraulic demands, validating component selections, and identifying compliance gaps. The skill automates technical verification tasks—from pump sizing and sprinkler head spacing to water supply adequacy and backflow preventer specification—reducing manual review time and design errors during development and plan review phases.
by az9713
You can rapidly extract and organize evidence from complex historical property records, surveys, and legal descriptions to identify boundary inconsistencies and encroachment patterns. This skill helps you build litigation-ready documentation packages with established evidence hierarchies, gap identification, and defensible conclusions backed by specific source citations—accelerating the critical documentation phase that precedes field verification and expert testimony.
by az9713
You can audit BIM models across five critical domains: geometric accuracy and LOD consistency, information requirements and metadata, coordinate systems and project setup, element naming and classification standards, and documentation completeness. This skill generates detailed compliance reports that identify every gap and provide specific remediation guidance, enabling you to enforce consistent standards across projects, reduce rework, and ensure models are ready for handoff to downstream disciplines or coordination workflows.
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