Contact US

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Spencer vs. Morgenstern Price Methods

Spencer vs. Morgenstern Price Methods

Spencer vs. Morgenstern Price Methods

I am in discussions with a consultant who likes to use Spencer's method for slope stability.  I know generally about the method (uses force and moment equilibrium), but I've never used it in practice.  I am however quite familiar with Morgenstern-Price methods.  Has anyone compared the methods?  Can you provide a comparison or reference material that compares the two methods?


RE: Spencer vs. Morgenstern Price Methods

Here is some language on this topic from an ASCE/SCEC document which was created to be a guideline for landslide analysis in Southern California:

"The methods of Morgenstern and Price, Spencer, Sarma, Taylor, and Janbu's generalized
procedure of slices satisfy all conditions of equilibrium and involve reasonable assumptions.
Bishop's modified method does not satisfy all conditions of equilibrium, but is as accurate as
methods that do, provided it is used only for circular surfaces. Duncan (1996) has found all of
these methods to provide answers within 5% of each other.

Considering the foregoing statements regarding accuracy, the methods of Morgenstern and Price,
Spencer, Sarma, and Janbu's generalized procedure of slices probably will yield reasonable
estimates of the factor of safety for failure surfaces of any shape. However, because of the
difficulty associated with selecting an appropriate force function for use with the Morgenstern
and Price, and Sarma methods, and the frequent numerical instability problems associated with
Janbu's generalized procedure, those methods may not be suitable for general engineering
practice. As a result, the Committee recommends that Spencer's method be used for analyses of
failure surfaces of any shape. In addition, we also recommend that the Taylor and Bishop
modified methods be allowed for the analysis of circular failure surfaces. If a stability analysis
has been performed using a method other than the Spencer, Taylor, or Bishop methods, it is
recommended that the factors of safety for critical surfaces be checked using one of those three

You can download the doc from here:

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close