## 5 Slope Reinforcement Analysis  
To prevent landslides during and after slope excavation, according to the selected safety factor, the sliding force was calculated by the transfer coefficient method, and according to the magnitude of the sliding force, we planned to reinforce the slope by setting the anchor cable frame. The length of the anchor cable was 25 m, the length of the anchorage section was 10 m, the design load was 600 kN, the inclination angle was 25\({}^{\circ}\), and two anchor cables were set for each grade of the slope. Considering the anchor cable structure, this paper used the contact between the rock and anchor cable and the method of assigning value to truss to simulate the reinforcement effect of the anchor cable, and used the embedded truss element in the software to simulate the anchor cable. For the frame structure, the beam element was used to simulate the frame, and the reinforcement effect was realized by the rigid connection between the frame and the rock mass. The elastic model was adopted for the constitutive model of the anchor cable frame. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Elastic Modulus** & **Cohesion** & **Internal Friction Angle** & **Unit Weight** \\ \hline Model No.1 & 1.03 & 0.78 & 0.85 & 1.04 \\ Model No.2 & 1.04 & 1.04 & 1.04 & 1.04 \\ Model No.3 & 1.04 & 1.32 & 1.31 & 1.03 \\ Model No.4 & 1.04 & 1.70 & 1.50 & 1.02 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: The stability coefficient is the calculation result after the slope excavation in Scheme No.2.  
\end{table} 
Table 13: Slope stability coefficient with different material parameters. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Model No.1** & **Model No.2** & **Model No.3** & **Model No.4** \\ \hline Internal friction angle/(\({}^{\circ}\)) & 13 & 18 & 23 & 28 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 12: Different unit weight value models. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Model No.1** & **Model No.2** & **Model No.3** & **Model No.4** \\ \hline Unit weight (kn/m\({}^{3}\)) & 22 & 23 & 24 & 25 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 11: Different internal friction angle value models. A reasonable anchor cable frame-setting scheme can not only enhance the stability of the slope and prevent the slope from collapsing, but also save on cost. Based on the relevant engineering experience, and referring to the analysis results in Section 4.2, two anchor cable schemes were proposed to treat the slope, as shown in Table 15. The first scheme was the traditional reinforcement method combined with engineering experience, which involved excavating the slope step by step and strengthening it step by step. The advantage of this method is that it can greatly improve the stability of the slope after construction and completion, and the disadvantage is that when the slope length is too large, the engineering requirements will be greatly increased. The second scheme refers to the analysis results in Section 4.2 and considers that the slope collapsed mining face is the main reason for the instability of the slope after excavation. Therefore, only the third-class and fourth-class slopes near the slope collapsed mining face were reinforced. The finite element models of the two reinforcement schemes are shown in Figure 10, and the numerical simulation results are shown in Figure 11.  
In Scheme No.1, in the process of slope excavation, the slope was excavated and reinforced step by step. Compared with the unreinforced slope after excavation, the stability coefficient of each slope was improved as follows: the stability coefficient of the first-class slope increased by 1.4. The stability coefficient of the second-class slope increased by 1.14. The stability coefficient of the third-class slope increased by 1.25. The stability coefficient of the fourth-class slope increased by 1.79. The stability coefficient of the fifth-class slope increased by 2.03. The stability coefficient of the sixth-class slope increased by 1.64.