Now, tell us what you are trying to do?
Do you need the complexities of several program modules, such as the GeoStudio Suite or are your projects less complicated?
Who are you doing this for?
Are you do reports Planners & Reviewers who know just enough to be dangerous or are you dealing with those who ask the right questions and are really looking for answers. The need for graphics needs to be thought out.
The best program depends on your circumstances. I wonder how much you have really considered what you are doing and therefore, what you need.
emmjild of course is right in that it kind of depends on your requirements.
Slide, for example, has a good random number generator, it uses the Latin Hyopercube algorithm to carry out sophisticted Montecarlo simulations so if you think you might use probabilistic slope analyses that wuould be a reccomended choice.
No I been using Gstbl7 and Slide 5 a lot for last 2 years. In slide I know that you can do many more things, but the only problem with slide 5 is there are no limitations of things you can possibly do to make structure safe.. I run the sections with modifying buttress n I got FOS more than 1.5 ( which was my requirement) but then I got errors too, I got errors like 111, 108, 112, If you keep minimising the error , you need to run that section for 10-15 times. to get errors "Zero" so my concern was, Is there any more sophisticated program available for Slope Stability Analysis of slope
Goestudio (Slope/W) is the defacto slope stability program to use when dealing with slopes.
I wonder any geotechnical engineer would miss such a well designed tool ? The student's version is free with well documented manuals . Gstbl7 can not be compared to Geostudio .It just like comparing a Huyndae to a Mercedes !
I agree with ifhamsi.
Soil parameters are the most important factor. What ever program or what ever method you used, it will not affect much the resulting safety factors
I recently spoke to the author of GSTABL7 who voiced basically the same opinion. He did not discredit any other programs and did not tout his own. He said that different slope stability programs have different bells and whistles but the bottom line is that any program should calculate a safety factor similar to those calculated by other programs when using the same input data. I have seen program manuals that have compared their results for a sample analysis to those of other programs. Usually the safety factors are reasonably close to the second decimal place. There's not much sense in arguing over second decimal place safety factor accuracy when the soil values are not known to the same accuracy. As ifhamsi said, GIGO!
I'm not familiar with GSTABL7 but do know that Slope/W and SLIDE can solve stability using differing methods or procedures. A general recommendation would be to use a procedure that solves all conditions of static equilibrium (i.e. Spencer or Morgenstern). If GSTABL7 incorporates either of those procedures then that issue goes away. Agree that shear strength parameters are the most important aspect but there can be significant differences in computed FS between methods for certain situations.
I have used GSTABL7, Slope/W and Slide. When it comes down to which one is the best software package, I found that Slide was just ahead (and not by much). I found its soil parameter inputs to be ahead of the others - gives one more choice in terms of the parameter selection and enables one to model different geotechnical situations that the others cannot do to the same level. The soil parameter selection function is impressive when one really gets to grips with it. AND it has a finite element package that goes hand-in- hand - one must always remember that garbage in is certainly garbage out.
