Chapter4 PDF

4
HYPOPLASTIC DEGRADATION
MODELLING
OF
CYCLIC
SAND
STRENGHT
CHAPTER
Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

I
INTRODUCTION
The previous chapter, investigating the soil behaviour during undrained cyclic triaxial tests and constant volume direct simple shear (DSS) tests, pointed out the importance of the dilative and contracting behaviour on the soil strength degradation during cyclic shearing. During this investigation, the quantitative comparison between triaxial test and the DSS test was noted to be difficult, principally due to the difference of the types of deformation between these tests and the stress state that is not completely known during DSS tests. A better understanding of the observed phenomena could be provided by a model able to simulate these two types of deformation and to calculate the stress state of the specimen. On the other hand, one of the research objectives is to develop a model simulating the soil behaviour around a pile during its vibratory driving, and estimating the resulting pile penetration speed. For that purpose, there is a need for a constitutive equation able to simulate the soil strength degradation around the pile shaft and the pile base. The hypoplasticity and in particular the hypoplastic constitutive equation proposed by Bauer (1996) and Gudehus (1996) seem to satisfy these requirements. The tensorial formulation allows the simulation of each desired type of deformation and the stress state is continuously completely determined. Furthermore, the dependence of the calculated soil resistance on the dilative or contractive behaviour is
4-1
4-2
Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation
clearly defined. However, it seems that the comparison between such simulations of cyclic shearing with experimental measurement was never published. In that context, the objective of the present chapter is to compare the experimental results of cyclic triaxial and DSS tests (presented in Chapter 3) with simulations performed with the Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic constitutive equation. In addition, it aims at extending the ability of the constitutive equation to take into account the soil strength degradation during a cyclic shearing. The present chapter is divided in four sections. The first section introduces the concept of hypoplasticity and describes the hypoplastic constitutive equation developed by Bauer (1996) & Gudehus (1996). The second section strives, through simulations of monotonic and cyclic triaxial tests and DSS tests, to show how the constitutive equation is able to model the behaviour of cohesionless material, and to determine the influence of each parameter of the equation on the simulated results. The third section presents the calibration procedure followed to calibrate the Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic constitutive equation for the Brusselian sand. This section also presents the comparison between simulations and experiments of cyclic and monotonic triaxial tests and DSS tests. Finally the fourth section discusses some improvements to the hypoplastic constitutive equation in order to permit the modelling of the soil behaviour during cyclic shearing. To perform the different simulations presented in the following sections, the Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic constitutive equation was particularised in order to simulate some traditional laboratory tests (triaxial, DSS, oedometer, ...). These simplified formulations were programmed on different Excel sheets. All these sheets are available on the enclosed CD-rom. Table 4-1 provides the list of available tests, and the name of the corresponding Excel file.
Laboratory test File name Isotropic compression Hypoplastic isotropic compression.xls Oedometer test Hypoplastic oedometer test.xls Monotonic undrained triaxial test Hypoplastic monotonic CU triaxial test.xls Monotonic drained triaxial test Hypoplastic monotonic CD triaxial test.xls Cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial test Hypoplastic cyclic CU triaxial test Monotonic constant volume DSS test Hypoplastic monotonic CU DSS test.xls Cyclic strain controlled constant volume DSS test Hypoplastic cyclic CU DSS test.xls Table 4-1: Excel sheets developed to simulate the soil behaviour during some laboratory tests.
II. Description of the hypoplastic model
4-3
II
DESCRIPTION OF THE HYPOPLASTIC MODEL

General description of hypoplasticity
II.1
Hypoplasticity is an alternative method to simulate materials whose behaviour is not linear elastic and not reversible (i.e. anelastic). In contrast with the classic elastoplastic concept, the plastic strain rate is defined without explicit reference to any plastic potential surface or yield surface. These concept are directly taken into account in the hypoplastic constitutive equation itself. The model does not, in its formulation, distinguish explicitly the elastic deformations from the plastic deformations. The material behaviour is described by an unique equation able to consider loading and unloading. Many researchers in soil mechanic (e.g. Darve (1982), Kolymbas (1985), Chambon (1979), Valanis (1982), Bardet (1990), Bauer (1996), Gudehus (1996), ) have used this theory to propose constitutive equations of soil behaviour. These equations have different formulations but are generally described by an unique incremental equation expressing the stress increment (or stress rate) as a function of the current strain increment (or strain rate), the current stress state and, in the more recent equations, the current void ratio (Wu & Bauer, 1993). The type of constitutive hypoplastic model considered in the present research is oriented towards the basic concept of Kolymbas (1985), and the representation proposed by Bauer (1996) and Gudehus (1996). This model was deduced from observations of soil behaviour during traditional laboratory tests like oedometer, triaxial, biaxial and simple shear tests. Its formulation allows one to represent the asymptotical behaviour of proportional strain paths or stress paths, the reach of limit states, and the dependence of stiffness and shear strength on mean pressure and density.
II.2
Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic constitutive equation
This section presents the hypoplastic constitutive equation developed by Bauer (1996) and Gudehus (1996). The objective is to describe the principal components of soil behaviours modelled by the constitutive equation and to explain how these components are introduced into the equations. The first paragraph explains the conditions that have to be met by the model. The next paragraph explains the principal steps in the construction of the constitutive equation. The last paragraph introduces the additional approximation functions needed to describe completely the Bauer & Gugehuss formulation of the hypoplastic model.
4-4
II.3
General properties
The basis of the Bauer-Gudehus hypoplastic constitutive equation assumed that the soil is a continuous homogenous granular body (Kolymbas, 1985) whose state is fully described by the void ratio e and the stress tensor Ts (Gudehus, 1996). The objective of the desired constitutive equation is to express the objective rate of stress ! s 1 as a combination of the void ratio (e), the stress tensor ( T s ), and the strain tensor T ! s )( Eq. 4-1) rate tensor of granulate skeleton ( D
! s = F(e,Ts,D ! s) T
! s is the granulate stress rate tensor, where T e is the void ratio, Ts is the Cauchy stress tensor1 ! s is the strain rate tensor of the granulate skeleton1 . D
(Eq. 4-1)
In order to simulate properly the behaviour of granular materials, Gudehus (1996) proposes that Eq 4-1 has to cover the following properties : ! Hypoplasticity: the limit state surface is involved in the equation itself, F increases with the effective mean stress Ps( = ! Barotropy: tr(Ts)/3), F is a direct function of the void ratio e, ! Pyknotropy: ! Unit Invariance: F is not influence by a change of the unit sytem, Parameters defined by F can be determined separately. ! Separability: II.3.1 Construction of the constitutive equation A. Incremental non-linearity and limit state The first step in the construction of the constitutive equation was to introduce the incremental non-linearity of the stresses. Therefore, based on the hypoplasticity developed by Wu and Kolymbas (1990), Bauer (1996) proposed to decompose the ! s to function F into two terms (Eq.4-2). The first term A(e,Ts,D s) must be linear in D represent the particular case where the soil behaviour is hypoelastic (i.e. stresses reversible). The incremental non-linearity is introduced by the second term B(e,Ts). D s
! s. that is not linear in D ! s = A(e,T s,D ! s) + B(e,T s). D !s T
(Eq. 4-2)
! s is the Euclidian norm of the strain rate tensor i.e. D ! s = tr(D ! s2) >0. where D
The compressive stresses and shortening strains are defined as negative in accordance with the convention in continuum mechanics. Only the scalar of the effective mean stress P ( = - tr(T s). 13 ) is defined positive in compression.
4-5
The property of non reversibility of stresses introduced by Eq 4-2 is illustrated on Fig. 4-1 (Bauer, 1996). In an axisymetrical stress and strain distribution, it can be considered that, in the space of principal directions, the stress rate response envelope to a cylindrical strain rate is an ellipsoid. The cross section of this ellipsoid with the ! 11 vs 2T ! 33 plane is an ellipse, ! T t . The construction of this ellipse is divided in two ! s) that operations. The first operation is the application of the linear operator A(e,T s,D transforms the circle of strain rate into an ellipse of stress rate centred on the origin (dashed ellipse on Fig. 4-1). This response is characterised of an incrementally linear
! 3 and D ! 3 , are equal and behaviour. Indeed, the responses to two opposite strain rates, D ! and a ! . The effect of the application of the second operator in opposite directions, a ! s is to shift the ellipse independently of the strain rate direction of a vector B(e,Ts). D
! It results that the response vectors, ! b t and ! t , to the two opposite strain rates considered above have no longer the same lengths and directions.
Fig. 4-1: Stress rate response for axially symmetric unit strain (Bauer, 1996).
Eq 4-2 also provides the possibility to reach a limit state or critical state, i.e. a state where a zero stress rate and no volume variation are observed for non zero strain
! , the response ellipse crosses the origin rate. Indeed, for particular values of vector b of the axis (Fig. 4-2). The stress rate corresponding to that strain direction vanishes. Until the strain rate is kept constant, the stress state does not change.
4-6
Fig. 4-2: Stress rate response for limit state (Bauer, 1996).
B. Factorisation and pyknotropy In order to permit an easier separation and determination of the constitutive parameters during the calibration of the hypoplastic constitutive equation, the operators A and B of Eq 4-2 are factorised by introducing two dimensionless factors fd and fe depending only of the void ratio e (Eq. 4-3).
! s) = fe(e).L(T s,D ! s) A(e,T s,D
B(e,Ts) = fe(e). fd(e) . N(Ts)
(Eq. 4-3)
The factor fe controls the stiffness of the soil response by increasing proportionally the stress rate response envelope (Fig. 4-3). The factor fd controls the shear strength resistance by shifting the response envelope along the direction N(Ts) (Fig. 4-4). Therefore, the factor fd is the factor that controls the peak friction angle, the dilative behaviour and the transition to critical state.
4-7
Fig. 4-3: Influence of factor fe on the expansion and Fig. 4-4: Influence of factor fd on the translation of translation of the response envelope (Bauer, 1996). the response envelope (Bauer, 1996).
C. SOM state and critical state It is well known, experimentally, that the stress paths resulting from proportional strain paths tend to be also proportional (asymptotic behaviour). While the beginning of stress path is influenced by the initial stresses and initial soil density, the memory of the soil disappears during monotonic deformation. The soil behaviour becomes independent of the initial conditions. This phenomena is called SOM-state (Sweeping out of memory). Bauer (1996) demonstrated that the requirement to observe a such behaviour is to have a constitutive equation homogenous in Ts (Eq 4-4).
! s) + fd . N(b.Ts). D ! s = m ! ! L(b.Ts,D b L(Ts,D s) + fd . N(Ts). D s
(Eq. 4-4)
Where b is an arbitrary positive scalar m denotes the degree of homogeneity This equation can be normalised by replacing the parameter b by 1/tr(Ts). Introducing s = T s tr(T s) and considering a factor of s defined as T the stress ratio tensor T homogeneity of the first order, Eq 4-4 becomes:
! s) = f b(tr(T s)). fe.L(T ! s) s,D A(e,T s,D s) B(e,Ts) = fb(tr(T s)) . fe. fd . N(T
(Eq. 4-5)
s , the If the functions L and N are homogeneous of the first degree in T expansion is proportional to the mean effective stress ( P' = tr(T s). 13 ).
4-8
The construction of Eq 4-5 introduces the barotropic factor fb. This factor, only function of the mean stress, allows to take into account the increase of stiffness consecutive to an increase of stress. To introduce the critical state in the desired constitutive equation, Bauer (1996) pointed out that the operators N and L have to respect some conditions. If these conditions are respected, the critical state is included in the constitutive equation as an asymptotical state where the stresses and volume strain rates become simultaneously equal to zero. The transition to critical state is controlled by factor fd. As explained in paragraph B, it is the only parameter that allows the stress rate tensor Ts to vanish, by shifting the stress response envelope (Fig. 4-2). By definition, the critical state is reached when the factor fd is equal to 1. Since the factor fd controls the transition to the critical state, it has to depend on the critical void ratio ec. However, experiments have shown that this critical void ratio is not a material constant, rather a function of the effective mean pressure P. Therefore, parameter fd must be a function of the current effective mean stress and the current void ratio. D. Bauer & Gudehuss constitutive equation Taken into account the requirements defined above, Gudehus (1996) and Bauer (1996) proposed the following constitutive equation to represent the hypoplastic behaviour of soil:
! s = fe . fb . L(T ! s) + fd . N(T !s s,D s) . D T
(Eq. 4-6)
with
2 .D ! s = a1 ! s +T !s s, D s . tr T s .D LT s = a1 . T s +T * NT s
( ) ( ) (
)
(Eq. 4-7)
where a1 is a dimensionless scalar s = T s tr(T s) is the stress ratio tensor T s *s = T s 13 . 1 is the deviatoric part of T T This rate type equation allows to calculate the stress rate tensor as a function of the void ratio e, the current stress state (defined by the stress tensor Ts) and the strain ! s . The model does not separate explicitly the plastic strains from the rate tensor D elastic ones. The equation is able to consider the asymptotic behaviour and the critical state theory. With the proposed formulation, the behaviour of the grain skeleton is assumed to be rate-independent. The model is therefore unable to take the viscosity of the soil into account. However, this limitation has little impact on simulations of cohesionless
4-9
soil. Indeed, many laboratory soil tests have shown that, in a large set of situation and for a large range of strain velocity, the sand resistance is independent of the strain velocity.
! s calculated with Eq 4-6 does not only The time derivative of the stress tensor T express the part of the stress rate resulting from the strain rate tensor but also the part resulting from the material rotation induced during the shearing. However, a pure rigid body rotation does not change the soil behaviour, described by the objective stress tensor. Therefore, to eliminate the influence of the material rotation, the constitutive equation has to take into account a co-rotational stress rate. There exists several formulas proposed in the literature to calculate the objective stress tensor. These formulas were discussed by Bauer (2000).
For the types of shearing considered in the present research, the material rotation induced during the shearing is assumed to have a small influence on the objective stress tensor: the influence of the material rotation is neglected and the objective stress tensor is assumed to be equal to the time derivative of the stress tensor that is calculated with Eq 4-6. For triaxial tests, this assumption is correct because there is no rotation of the principal directions and then no material rotation. However, for DSS tests, the rotation of the principal directions calculated with Eq 4-6 is related to the material behaviour and to the material rotation. As a consequence the time derivative of the stress tensor is no longer objective. II.3.2 Approximation functions A. Critical state surface It can be shown (Bauer, 2000) that the equation of the critical state surface deduced from the hypoplastic constitutive equation presented in the previous paragraph (Eq. 4-6) is:
s2 tr T
( )
1 3
- a1 = 0
(Eq. 4-8)
In the principal stress space, this equation represents a cone with its apex at the origin (Fig. 4-5- a). The cross-section of this critical stress cone is defined by the parameter a1. For a unit deviatoric plane, parameter a1 is the radius of the critical stress points (Fig. 4-5- b) and it is equal to the magnitude of the deviatoric stress ratio tensor (Eq 4-9).
* a1 = T s
(Eq. 4-9)
4-10
Fig. 4-5 (a) Critical stress surface in the space of principal stress components. (b) Contour of the critical stress surface in the -plane (Bauer, 2000)
If we consider a constant value for parameter a1, the cross section of the cone is a circle. However, it is well known that for granular material, the critical state surface depends of the deviatoric tensor (e.g. triaxial compression, triaxial extension, simple shear, ). Therefore, a1 must be a function of the deviatoric stress direction. Bauer (1996) proposed the following equation where the direction of the deviatoric direction is introduced with the Lode angle (Fig. 4-5- b).
a" = " s* . (" + cos (3.! )) c" + c 2 . T
(Eq. 4-10)
3 tr T * s defines the Lode angle. where cos(3.!) = 6 . 3 2 2 tr * T s
C1 and C2 are dimensionless constants
Using Eq 4-10 combined with Eq 4-9; the critical states corresponding to a unit deviatoric stress is drawn on Fig. 4-6 as a function of the Lode angle. The soil conditions at critical state for the compression triaxial test, the extension triaxial test and the DSS test are also shown on the figure: ! During triaxial compression test, the intermediate effective principal stress 2 is equal to the smallest principal stress 3 (Fig. 4-6-b) and the cos(3) is equal to 1. The soil resistance at critical state is maximum (a1 max). ! During triaxial extension test, the intermediate effective principal stress 2 is equal to the greatest one 1 (Fig. 4-6-c) and the cos(3) is equal to 1. The corresponding soil resistance at critical state is minimum (a1 min). ! During DSS test, it will be shown further that the intermediate effective principal stress 2 is equal to the mean between the two other principal stresses (2=( 1+ 3)/2) (Fig. 4-6-d). The corresponding cos(3) is equal to zero. The critical state of the DSS test is embedded between the critical states of the triaxial extension and compression tests as a function of the parameters C1 and C2.

-60 285 TXT comp -45
4-11
Critical Stress Surface -30 DSS -15 0 Critical Stress Surface for C2 =0
270 255 240 225 TXT ext DSS
* a1 = T s
TXT ext
15
210 DSS 195 TXT comp 180 165

DSS = Direct Simple Shear T est T XT ext = T riaxial Extension T est T XT comp = T riaxial Compression T est
DSS 30 45 TXT comp 60
DSS 150 135
TXT ext
DSS 105 90
75
(a)
120
S hear S tress
TXT e xte nsion
S hear S tress
S hear S tress
TXT compression
DSS
2 '= 3 '
1'
3'
2 '= 1 '
3'
2'
1'
Effective Normal S tress '
(c) (d) (b) Fig. 4-6: critical stress states for triaxial and DSS tests according the hypoplastic constitutive equation.
B. Critical state point (factor fd) It was discussed previously that the asymptotic behaviour toward the critical state is regulated by the factor fd of the constitutive equation (Eq 4-6). By definition, the critical state is reached when factor fd is equal to 1. In this state, the current void ratio e is equal to the critical void ratio ec. On the other hand, Bauer (1996) remarks that observations of small shear strain amplitudes in resonant column tests suggest that the soil behaviour constitutive equation for the minimum void ratio ed should become nearly elastic. It was shown that the constitutive equation (Eq 4-6) can also describe an hypoelastic material behaviour when factor fd is equal to 0 (see paragraph II.2.2-A). Therefore, fd has to satisfy two conditions: ! fd = 0 if e = ed and ! fd = 1 if e = ec. where ec is the void ratio at the critical state (depending of the effective mean stress) ed is the minimum void ratio (depending of the effective mean pressure)
4-12
Based on these considerations, it was proposed to calculate the factor fd using an exponential expression of a relative void ratio (Eq 4-11).
fd =
) (ee-e e
d c d
(fd = 0, if e<ed)
(Eq. 4-11)
where e is the current void ratio ec is the void ratio at the critical state ed is the minimum void ratio is a dimensionless positive constant C. Stiffness factor fe It was shown that the density factor fb increases the response envelope of the hypoplastic model proportionally. Since the stiffness of the granular material increases when the void ratio decreases (i.e. the soil becomes denser), Bauer (1996) proposed to link the density factor fe to the ratio between the critical void ratio ec and the current void ratio e (Eq 4-12).
fe = ec e
()
(Eq. 4-12)
where e is the current void ratio ec is the void ratio at the critical state (depending of the effective mean stress) is a dimensionless positive constant D. Relationship between void ratio and mean stress Numerous experimental evidence indicate the existence of a relationship between the void ratio and the effective mean pressure P ( = - tr(T s). 13 ). The range of possible void ratios decreases with an increase of the mean pressure and is bounded by two limit void ratios: the maximum void ratio ei and the minimum void ratio ed. The model considers that the maximum void ratio ei follows an exponential relationship described by Eq. 4-13 during a perfect isotropic compression (without gravity or any non-mechanical effects).
n ei = ei0 . exp - 3.P' hs
(Eq. 4-13)
where ei is the maximum void ratio corresponding to a mean pressure P P is the mean effective stress ei0 is the maximum void ratio for a stress-free state n is a positive scalar hs is representative of the grain hardness and has the units of a stress The initial maximum void ratio ei0 corresponding to a stress-free state corresponds to a hypothetic state where the soil is in suspension. For high pressures, the maximum void ratio tends toward zero, which can be explained by the grain
4-13
plastification and crushing. Fig. 4-7 presents the influence of constants n and hs on the relationship. The factor n reflects the curvature of the compression curve. This parameter takes into account the pressure sensitivity of a grain skeleton. Factor hs affects the slope of the compression curve. Parameter n is dimensionless whereas parameter hs as the dimension of a stress. This parameter represents the grain hardness with respect to the grain assemble in the grain skeleton. It is not the reference of the hardness of a single grain but it takes also into account the influence of the contact points within the grain skeleton.
1 0.9 1 0.9
Critical Void Ratio ec [-]
0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 e c0 = 1.2 h s = 200 MPa n n n n = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.2
0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 e c0 = 1.2 n = 0.35 hs = 1000 MPa hs = 500 MPa hs = 250 MPa hs = 125 MPa
10
100
1000
10
100
1000
Effe ctive Mean Pre ssure P' [kPa]
Fig. 4-7: Relationship between maximum void ratio and mean pressure for different values (a) of parameter n and (b) parameter hs:
Gudehus (1996) postulates that the minimum, maximum, and critical void ratios decrease proportionally with the mean effective stress (Eq 4-14). The void ratios reach limit values ei0, ec0 and ed0 at vanishing effective mean pressure, and they approach zero for very high mean pressure (Fig. 4-8).
Fig. 4-8: Mean stress dependency on void ratios.
ei = ed = ec ei0 ed0 ec0
(Eq. 4-14)
where ei is the maximum void ratio ed is the minimum void ratio ec is the void ratio at the critical state ei0 is the maximum void ratio for a stress-free state ed0 is the minimum void ratio for a stress-free state ec0 is the void ratio at the critical state for a stress-free state
4-14
E. Barotropy factor fb The barotropic factor fb was introduced to take into account the increase of stiffness consecutive to an increase of the mean stress. To be consistent, the simulation of a perfect isotropic compression with the constitutive equation (Eq 4-6), must provide the same exponential relationship between the current void ratio e and the mean stress P as assumed in the previous paragraph (Eq 4-13). Therefore, barotropy factor fb is directly determined without additional assumptions. It results that the stiffness factor fs is defined as the product of the density factor fe and the barotropic factor fb and can be calculated using the following equation:
e . (3.P ) ( ) . "+ h e where h = 1 + 1 (e e ) . 1 C 3 e e 3.C fs = fe.fb = hs . ei n.hi e
i 2
1
"-n
(Eq. 4-15)
i0
d0
c0
d0
II.3.3 Conclusion
This section presented the equations and assumptions of the Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic constitutive model. The main constitutive equation of the model is the tensorial incrementally non linear equation (Eq 4-6) that allows to calculate the stress rate tensor as a function of the void ratio e, the current stress state (defined by the stress tensor Ts), and the ! s . The complete resolution of this system requires some additional strain rate tensor D functions related to: described by Eq 4-10 ! Critical state surface described by Eq 4-13 ! Maximum void ratio (ei) described by Eq 4-14 ! Minimum and critical void ratio (ed and ec) described by Eq 4-11 ! Density factor (fd) described by Eq 4-15 ! Stiffness factor (fs) To apply these equations, 9 constitutive parameters have to be determined:
! ! ! ! !
ei0, the maximum void ratio for a stress-free state ed0, the minimum void ratio for a stress-free state ec0, the critical void ratio for a stress-free state hs, the granular hardness C1, C2, n, , , constitutive dimensionless constants
III. Application of the model to Triaxial and DSS tests
4-15
III
APPLICATION OF THE MODEL TO TRIAXIAL AND DSS TESTS
III.1 Introduction
To allow the comparison of the sand behaviours during cyclic triaxial and direct simple shear (DSS) tests, the hypoplastic constitutive law is used to model the evolution of sand resistance during these tests. For each type of test, the constitutive equation is developed and the notations are adapted to be consistent with the notations used in Chapter 3. Parametric analyses are also performed for each test type in order to investigate the influence of constitutive parameters on the simulations results.
4-16
III.2 Application to undrained triaxial test

III.2.1 Assumptions and notations In order to simulate triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive equation, it is assumed that the distributions of stresses and strains are uniform. Therefore, the sample can be considered as one unique element whose stress and strain distribution is fully described by stress and strain tensors whose behaviours are described by the hypoplastic constitutive equation (Eq 4-6). During a triaxial test, an axial deformation 1 is applied on the sample while the resulting axial effective normal stress, 1, and the radial normal stresses, 2 and 3 are measured (see Chapter 3). Since there is no shear stress applied on the vertical and horizontal faces of the sample, the axial and the radial directions can be considered the principal directions (Fig. 4-9). Therefore, if the axis of the model corresponds with the axial and radial directions, the tensors of the ! s, Ts, D !s hypoplastic constitutive equation T become diagonal matrixes.
Shear Stress
2 '=3 '
1 '
Effective Normal Stress '
During a triaxial test, it is commonly assumed that the stress and strain distributions have a cylindrical symmetry (i.e 2=3 and 2=3). It results that the second and third diagonal terms of the stress and strain tensors are equal:
! s 22 = T ! s 33, Ts 22 = T s 33, D ! s 22 = D ! s 33 T
Fig. 4-9: Assumed stress distribution during triaxial test
(Eq. 4-16)
The triaxial tests performed during this research are undrained i.e. there is no ! = 0 ). This condition is satisfied if the trace of the strain rate tensor volume variation ( e ! s) ): ! = (1+e). tr(D is equal to 0 (because e
! s 33 = D ! s 22 = - 1.D ! s 11 D 2
(Eq. 4-17)
4-17
Taking these assumptions into account and using an incremental notation, the different tensors of the hypoplastic constitutive equation can be simplified as follow:
1' 0 0 1 ! Ts = . 0 3' 0 t 0 0 3' 1' 0 0 T s = 0 3' 0 0 0 3'
1 0 0 ! s = 1 . 0 1 1 0 (Eq. 4-18) D 2 t 0 0 1 1 2
As defined in Chapter 3, the effective mean stress P, the deviator q and their incremental form used in the next paragraphs are defined using Cambridges definition (Eq 4-19 and Eq 4-20). For triaxial tests, these equation can be simplified by assuming that the second and the third principal stresses are equal (2=3)
P ' = "1' + "2' + "3' = "1' + 2."3' 3 3
2 2
and Ps' = "1' + 2."3'

3
2
(Eq. 4-19) (Eq. 4-20)
q= 1 . ("1' "2') +( "1' "3' ) +("2' "3) = "1' "3' 2
and q = "1' - "3'
During the laboratory investigation, two types of stress paths were used: constant total mean stress (P=cst) or constant total radial stress (3=cst). However, the calculation of the stress rate tensor with the hypoplastic constitutive equation is not influenced by the choice of the stress path. Indeed, the hypoplastic constitutive law is expressed as a function of the effective stress tensor and does not consider the total stress tensor. The stress path of total stresses is only considered in the evaluation of the excess pore pressure. Indeed, the excess pore pressure is calculated by the difference between the initial and current effective mean stress if the total mean stress is constant (P=cst), or by the difference between the initial and current effective lateral stress if the total lateral stress is constant (3=cst). Therefore, the simulations of triaxial test presented in the following test will prefer a presentation of the results as a function of the effective mean stress P instead of the pore pressure u. With this representation, the simulation results are independent of the selected type of stress paths. III.2.2 Development of the hypoplastic constitutive equation Based on the notations and assumptions of the previous paragraph, the hypoplastic constitutive equation can be developed, and the stress rate during a triaxial test can be expressed as a function of the effective mean stress P and the deviator q:
q . sign(#$1 ) + fd . 3 . a1 #P' = fs . #$1 . 1 . 2 3 3.P' 2 3 q 2 . sign(#$" ) + fd . 6 . a". q #q = fs . #$" . .a" + 3.P' 3.P' 2
(Eq. 4-21) (Eq. 4-22)
4-18
Based on Eq 4-11 and 4-15, density factor fd and stiffness factors fs can be expressed as a function of the effective mean stress P and the current void ratio e (Eq 4-23 and Eq 4-24).
fd = e-ed ec ed
( )
3.P' n e e d0 . exp n hs = fct(e,P') = exp 3.P' . hs ec0 - ed0
( )
i
( )
(Eq. 4-23)
fs = hs . ei n.hi e
e . (3.P ) ( ) . "+ h e
i s
"-n
= fct(e,Ps' ) 3.C1
(Eq. 4-24)
Where h i = 1 + 1 ei0 ed0 . 1
C1
(e e )
(
c0 d0
ei = ei0 . exp - 3.Phs ei0 = . ec0

n
It can be shown that the cos(3.) of the Lode angle is equal to 1 for a triaxial compression and is equal to 1 for triaxial extension. Therefore, parameter a1, defined by Eq 4-10, is constant when the deviator is positive (compression) whereas it is depending of the ratio q/p when the deviator is negative (extension) (Eq 4-25).
" " C " s* C" + 2.C2. T
a" =
if q 0 (compression) if q 0 (extension)
(Eq. 4-25)
where
s* = 2 . q T 3 3.P'
III.2.3 Analysis of undrained monotonic triaxial test simulations A. Introduction The following paragraphs aim to show the different types of behaviour simulated by the hypoplastic constitutive law during monotonic and cyclic undrained triaxial tests. Parametric analyses of the 9 parameters of the model are also presented in order to identify the influence of each parameter on the results of simulations of monotonic and triaxial tests. The parametric analyses are based on a reference case whose parameters are described in Table 4-2, and investigate the influence of each parameter with respect to this reference case. Test Parameters = 0.7 e P0 = 200kPa
4-19
Parameters of equation ec0 = 0.88 ed0 = 0.52 ei0 = 1.2 hs = 200 MPa n = 0.35
hypoplastic C1 C2
constitutive = 0.25 = 1.10 = 3.06 = 2.60
Table 4-2: Reference parameters considered for simulations with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
B. Simulation of monotonic triaxial tests Similarly to the general form of the constitutive equation, the hypoplastic equations applied to the triaxial test (Eq 4-21 and 4-22) are divided in 2 terms. The first term is linear in strain 35 increment, 1, whereas the second term is not. This 30 Starting Point second term provides the characteristic of non 25 reversibility to the model. 20 Since the strain increment, 1, appears as an independent Dilation State 15 factor in the equation, the C ontractive Dilative Be haviour stress increments, P and q, 10 Be haviour are independent of the strain 5 velocity. Only the direction of Critical State the deformation influences the 0 stress path. -30 -20 -10 0 10
Deviator Increment q [kPa] Mean Stress Increment P' [kPa]
Fig. 4-10 to Fig. 4-12 Fig. 4-10: Relationship between the effective mean present the evolution of the stress increment and the deviator increment during mean stress increments (p) monotonic undrained triaxial test simulation. and of the deviator increments (q) corresponding to the soil and test parameters presented above. Since the hypoplastic constitutive law is expressed as a function of the effective stresses and does not consider the total stresses, this result is identical for the two stress paths defined in Chapter 3 (P=cst or 3=cst). The evolution of the stress increments is divided in two different parts as functions of the soil behaviour. During the first part, the soil has a contractive behaviour. This part is characterised by relatively high values of the increments that lead the soil to the dilative phase which transfer is characterised by a mean stress increment p equal to 0. During the second part, the mean stress p and deviator q increments decrease asymptotically toward zero. The zero increment correspond to the critical state.
The evolution of the two terms of the stress increment equations (Eq 4-21 and Eq 4-22) is also drawn on Fig. 4-11 & Fig. 4-12. The red line represents the evolution
4-20
of the first term and the green line represents the evolution of the opposite of the second term. The increment is then equal to the distance between these lines.
90 900 180 160 1800 1600 1400
P' [kPa]
q [kPa]
70 50
700
Mean stress P' [kPa]
140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Deviator Increment First T erm Second T erm (opposite) Deviator
Mean Stress Increment
500
Deviator Increment
1000 800 600 400 200 0 -200 0 20 40 60
30 10 Mean Stress Increment First T erm Second T erm (opposite) Mean stress 0 20 40 60
300 100
-10 -30
-100 -300
-20
Maximum Shear Strain [% ]

80
180 160
P' [kPa]
70
q [kPa]
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Mean Stress Increment Second T erm (opposite) First T erm
140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 -20 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Deviator Increment First T erm Second T erm (opposite)
Mean Stress Increment
Deviator Increment
Effective Mean Stress P' [kPa]
Fig. 4-11: Evolution of the effective mean stress increment during monotonic undrained triaxial test simulations.
Fig. 4-12: Evolution of the deviator increment during monotonic undrained triaxial test simulations.
Deviator q [kPa]
1200

3000 3000
4-21
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0
2500 2000 1500

c
Maximum Shear Stress
e=1 e = 0.9 e = 0.85 e = 0.8 e = 0.7 e = 0.6 e = 0.5 e = 0.46
Po' = 5000 kPa Po' = 2000 kPa Po' = 1000 kPa Po' = 500 kPa Po' = 200 kPa Po' = 100 kPa Po' = 50 kPa Po' = 20 kPa
[kPa]
[kPa]
20 40 60 80 100
1000 500 0

e=1 e = 0.9 e = 0.85 e = 0.8 e = 0.7 e = 0.6 e = 0.5 e = 0.46

20
40
60
80
100
6 5.5
6 5.5
3' [-]
4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 20 40 60
3' [-] Stress Ratio 1'

100
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1
Stress Ratio 1'

e=1 e = 0.9 e = 0.85 e = 0.8 e = 0.7 e = 0.6 e = 0.5 e = 0.46
250
80

Po' = 5000 kPa Po' = 1000 kPa Po' = 200 kPa Po' = 50 kPa
20
40
60
80
100
5000 4500 4000
5000 4500 4000
Po' = 2000 kPa Po' = 500 kPa Po' = 100 kPa Po' = 20 kPa
3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0
Deviator q [kPa-]
Deviator q [kPa-]
3500
3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 Critical State
200 150 100 50 0 0 200
500 0 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
1000
2000
3000
4000
Fig. 4-13: Influence of the void ratio e on simulations of undrained triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
Fig. 4-14: Influence of the initial effective mean stress P0 on simulations of undrained triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
4-22
Fig. 4-13 and Fig. 4-14 present the results of monotonic undrained triaxial tests simulations performed with different void ratios e and different initial mean stresses P0. The figures present the evolution of the maximum shear stress , the ratio of the principle stresses 1/3 as a function of the maximum shear strain and the stress path. The maximum shear stress is defined as the radius of the larger Mohr circle (=(1-3)/2) and is equal to the half of the deviator q. The maximum shear strain is defined as the maximum shear strain of the plan of strains (=1-3). The void ratio (e) has a strong influence on the simulation results. This parameter, and particularly its value relatively to the limit void ratios (minimum, maximum and critical void ratios ed, ei, ec) corresponding to the initial effective mean stress P0, determine the type of soil behaviour and the position of the critical state (Fig. 4-13). As illustrated on Fig. 4-15, three types of undrained soil behaviour relative to three ranges of void ratios can be observed: 1. If the void ratio is between the minimum void ratio and the critical void ratio (ed<e<ec - zone I of Fig. 4-15), the specimen starts the shearing by a contractive phase (i.e. decrease of the mean stress) followed by a dilative phase, until the effective mean stress P is equal to the critical effective mean stress Pcr (i.e. the stress where the stress rate tensor vanishes) corresponding to the selected void ratio. The closer the void ratio to the minimum void ratio, the higher the ultimate mean stress and the maximum shear stress at critical state. For the particular case where the initial void ratio is situated on the minimum void ratio line, no contractive behaviour are observed. The specimen has directly a dilative behaviour. 2. When the void ratio becomes higher than the critical void ratio ec but smaller than the free-stress critical void ratio ec0 (ec<e<ec0 - zone II of Fig. 4-15), the specimen generally has a contractive behaviour and the means stress decreases toward the critical mean stress corresponding to the void ratio. However, depending of the initial mean stress Po, it is possible that the mean stress P decreases below the critical mean stress (Zone IIa on Fig. 4-15). This contractive phase is then followed by a dilative phase during which the mean stress increases toward the critical value. The lower limit of the zone IIa is defined by the critical void ratio line. On the other hand, the upper limit is defined by the line formed by the set of initial conditions (e0,P0) for which the mean stress at dilative point Pdil is equal to the mean stress at critical state Pcr under constant volume (e=cst) loading conditions. Unfortunately, there is no analytical equation for this line. It was drawn on Fig. 4-15 based on simulations with the constitutive hypoplastic equation using the parameters defined in Table 4-2.
4-23
3. Finally, if the void ratio is between the free-stress critical void ratio ec0 and the maximum void ratio (ec0<e<ei - zone III of Fig. 4-15), the specimen also has a contractive behaviour only, but the critical state is reached for a zero mean stress and zero deviator. This situation corresponds to a monotonic soil liquefaction (= flow liquefaction defined in Chapter 2). Fig. 4-13-b and c show that, even if the void ratio influences strongly the peak stress ratio, it has no impact on the determination of the residual stress ratio, neither on the slope of the critical state line. Therefore, since -as explained above- the critical mean stress is determined based on the void ratio, the deviator at critical state (qcr) is directly determined as a function of the critical mean stress and the slope of the critical state line.
Fig. 4-15: Types of soil behaviour based on the effective mean stress and the void ratio
Modifications of the initial effective mean stress P0 (Fig. 4-14) do absolutely not modify the ultimate soil resistance. Indeed, the critical mean stress Pcr, the critical deviator qcr (or maximum shear stress) and the residual stress ratio 1/2 are independent of the initial effective stress Po. This observation is in accordance with the concept of SOM (Sweeping Out of Memory) that was introduced in the model (see paragraph II.3.1). Inversely, the initial mean stress Po influences significantly the stress path followed to reach the critical state. Indeed, two types of soil behaviour can be observed based on the difference between the initial mean stress Po and the critical mean stress corresponding to the void ratio Pcr (Fig. 4-15):
4-24
1. If the initial mean stress is larger than the critical mean stress (Pcr< P0) zone II on Fig. 4-15), the simulated soil behaviour is only contractive and the effective mean stress only decreases from the initial value to the value corresponding to the critical state (case of simulation starting with a P0=5000kPa on Fig. 4-14). 2. If the initial mean stress is lower than the critical mean stress (0<P0< Pcr zone I on Fig. 4-15), the simulated shearing starts with a contractive behaviour. The mean stress decreases until a certain stress called dilation stress Pdil. For larger strains, the behaviour becomes dilative and the mean stress increases toward the critical mean stress, Pcr, (case of simulations starting with a P0%2000kPa on Fig. 4-14).
0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 Critical Void Ratio Pdil' P0 ' P'o = 50 P'o = 200 P'o = 1000 P'o = 5000
Void Ratio e [-]
0.7 0.65 Critical State 0.6 0.55 Dilation Point 0.5 0.45 0.4 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Minimum Void Ratio Starting Point
Mean Effective Sress P' [kPa]
Fig. 4-16: Relationship between the dilation point, the initial mean stress p0and the void ratio during simulation of undrained triaxial test with hypoplastic model.
Fig. 4-16 investigates the relationship between the initial mean stress Po, the dilation mean stress Pdil and the void ratio e. For a constant void ratio (e=cst), the ratio between dilative mean stress Pdil and initial mean stress Po is constant. This observation results from the observation that the distance between the initial mean stress Po and the dilative one Pdil corresponding to simulations performed with the same void ratio is constant in the semi-logarithmic graph of Fig. 4-16.
4-25
For a given initial mean stress (Po= cst), the ratio between the initial and dilative mean stresses is equal to 1 for a void ratio equal to the minimum void ratio ed (no contraction phase). When the void ratio increases, the ratio grows progressively following a nearly semi-logarithmic equation. The relationship between void ratio and dilative state during compression triaxial test simulations can be expressed by Eq 4-26 deduced from the developed constitutive equation (Eq 4-21) taking into account that, at the dilative state, the mean stress rate vanishes (P=0).
1 n 3.Pdil qdil 2 ' e = ed0 + . .C1 . (ec0 ed0 ) . exp- hs ' 3 Pdil
(Eq. 4-26)
is the deviator corresponding to the dilative point where qdil Pdil is the mean stress corresponding to the dilative point is the void ratio e , n, hs, C1, ec0 and ed0 are the parameters of the hypoplastic constitutive law. A similar equation can be developed for simulation of triaxial extension tests. Eq 4-26 does not depend directly on the initial mean stress, P0, but its influence is embedded in the value of the deviator at dilative state, qdil. Eventually, it will be shown that parameter is the main parameter controlling the position of the dilative state and the slope of the semi-logarithmic relationship on Fig. 4-16. This influence is illustrated on Fig. 4-17.
0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 Critical Void Ratio line Initial mean stress P0 ' = 200 kPa
Void Ratio e [-]
0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 10 100 1000 Minimum Void Ratio line
= 0.10 = 0.20 = 0.30 = 0.50
= 0.15 = 0.25 = 0.40
Mean Effective Sress P' [kPa]

Fig. 4-17: Influence of parameter on the relationship between the dilation point, the initial mean stress p0and the void ratio during simulation of undrained triaxial test with hypoplastic model.
4-26
C. Parametric analysis of monotonic triaxial test simulations Different simulations of monotonic undrained triaxial tests were performed in order to investigate the influence of each parameter on the hypoplastic constitutive equation. The parameters of the reference case were presented in Table 4-2. The simulation results are presented on Fig. 4-18 to Fig. 4-23. The analysis is based on the evolution of the maximum shear stress as a function of the maximum shear strain (Fig. 4-18 & Fig. 4-19), the evolution of the ratio of principal stresses 1/3 as a function of the maximum shear strain (Fig. 4-20 & Fig. 4-21), and on the evolution of the stress path (mean stress P vs deviator q Fig. 4-22 & Fig. 4-23). Since the role of parameter C2 is to introduce the difference of behaviour between triaxial compression and extension tests, this parameter has no influence on simulations of triaxial compression tests. Therefore, the simulations investigating the parameter C2 presented in the following parametrical analysis are simulations of triaxial extension test. The results of the parametric analysis is also available in appendix on the enclosed CD-rom. The parameter values investigated in this parametric analysis cover a large range and also explore values outside the range generally proposed by authors (Bauer 1996, Herle 1999). The parameter ranges commonly proposed in the literature are presented in Table 4-3. Parameters Range ec0 ed0 ed0 n hs C1 C2 Proposed range around 0.8 around 0.5 around 1.2 between 0.1 and 0.3 between 1 and 2 between 0.3 and 0.5 between 200 and 1000 MPa around 3.06 around 2.625 Investigated range between 0.55 and 1.1 between 0.1 and 0.75 between 0.6 and 1.3 between 0.1 and 0.6 between 0 and 5 between 0.1 and 0.8 between 100 and 1400 MPa between 1 and 5 between 0 and 5
Table 4-3: Comparison of the range of parameters proposed in the literature for the hypoplastic constitutive law (Bauer 1996, Herle 1999)with the investigated range.

2000 2000
4-27
[kPa]
1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 50 100 150 eco eco eco eco = 1.1 = 0.9 = 0.8 = 0.6 eco eco eco eco =1 = 0.88 = 0.7 = 0.55
[kPa]
1800
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
edo edo edo edo
= 0.75 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.2
edo = 0.7 edo = 0.52 edo = 0.3 edo = 0.1
50
100
150

2000 eio eio eio eio = 1.3 = 1.1 = 0.9 = 0.7 eio eio eio eio = 1.2144 =1 = 0.8 = 0.6
[kPa] Maximum Shear Stress
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
50
100
150
Fig. 4-18: Influence of free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0 and ei0 on simulated maximum shear stress of undrained triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
4-28
2000

2000 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.25 = 0.15 = 0.5 = 0.3 = 0.2 = 0.1
[kPa]
1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
[kPa]
1800
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
50
100
150
=5 = 2.5 = 1.1 = 0.5
= 3.5 = 1.5 =1 =0
50
100
150

2000 2000
[kPa]
1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 50 100 150 n n n n = 0.8 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.25 n n n n = 0.7 = 0.5 = 0.35 = 0.1
1800
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 50 100 150 hs = 1400 MPa hs = 1000 MPa hs = 600 MPa hs = 200 MPa hs = 1200 MPa hs = 800 MPa hs = 400 MPa hs = 100 MPa

2000 0

C2 C2 C2 C2 =5 =3 = 1.5 = 0.5 C2 C2 C2 C2 =4 = 2.6 =1 =0
[kPa]
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 50 100 150 C1 C1 C1 C1 =5 = 3.5 = 2.5 = 1.5 C1 C1 C1 C1 =4 =3 =2 =1
-100 -200 -300 -400 -500 -600
Triaxial extension -700 0 50 100 150
Fig. 4-19: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated maximum shear stress of undrained triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.

4.5 4 4.5 4
4-29
[-]
3'
1'
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 eco eco eco eco 20 = 1.1 = 0.9 = 0.8 = 0.6 40 eco eco eco eco =1 = 0.88 = 0.7 = 0.55 60
1'
3'
3.5
[-] Stress Ratio
3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 edo edo edo edo 0 20 = 0.75 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.2 40 edo = 0.7 edo = 0.52 edo = 0.3 edo = 0.1 60
Stress Ratio
4.5 4
[-]
1' 3'
3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 eio eio eio eio = 1.3 = 1.1 = 0.9 = 0.7 40 eio eio eio eio = 1.2144 =1 = 0.8 = 0.6 60
Stress Ratio
20
Fig. 4-20: Influence of free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0 and ei0 on simulated stress ratio of undrained triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
4-30
4.5 4

4.5 4
[-]
3'
1'
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 = 0.6 = 0.3 = 0.15 = 0.5 = 0.25 = 0.1 = 0.4 = 0.2
1'
3'
3.5
[-] Stress Ratio
3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 =5 = 1.5 = 0.5 = 3.5 = 1.1 =0 = 2.5 =1
Stress Ratio
20
40
60
20
40
60
4.5 4
4.5 4
[-]
3'
1'
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 n n n n = 0.8 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.25 n n n n = 0.7 = 0.5 = 0.35 = 0.1
1'
3'
3.5
[-] Stress Ratio
3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 hs = 1400 MPa hs = 1000 MPa hs = 600 MPa hs = 200 MPa hs = 1200 MPa hs = 800 MPa hs = 400 MPa hs = 100 MPa
Stress Ratio
20
40
60
20
40
60
4.5 4
1 0.9 Triaxial extension
[-]
3'
3'
3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 C1 C1 C1 C1 =5 = 3.5 = 2.5 = 1.5 C1 C1 C1 C1 =4 =3 =2 =1
[-]
0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 C2 C2 C2 C2 =5 =3 = 1.5 = 0.5 C2 C2 C2 C2 =4 = 2.6 =1 =0
1'
Stress Ratio
20
40
60
Stress Ratio
1'
20
40
60
Fig. 4-21: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated stress ratio of undrained triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.

2000 1800 1600 eco eco eco eco eco eco eco eco
250 200 150
4-31
2000 = 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.88 = 0.8 = 0.7 = 0.6 = 0.55 1800 1600
1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 1000 2000
Deviator q [kPa-]
Deviator q [kPa-]
1400
1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 edo = 0.75 edo = 0.7 edo = 0.6 edo = 0.52 edo = 0.4 edo = 0.3 edo = 0.2 edo = 0.1
100 50 0 0
200
200 0 3000 0 1000 2000 3000

2000 1800 1600
Deviator q [kPa-]
1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 1000 2000 3000 eio eio eio eio eio eio eio eio = 1.3 = 1.2144 = 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.8 = 0.7 = 0.6
Fig. 4-22: Influence of free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0and ei0 on simulated stress path of undrained triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
4-32
2000 1800 1600

2000 1800 1600
Deviator q [kPa-]
1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 1000 2000 3000 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.25 = 0.15 = 0.5 = 0.3 = 0.2 = 0.1
Deviator q [kPa-]
1400
1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 1000 2000 3000 =5 = 2.5 = 1.1 = 0.5 = 3.5 = 1.5 =1 =0

2000 1800 1600 2000 1800 1600
Deviator q [kPa-]
1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 1000
Deviator q [kPa-]
1400 n n n n n n n n = 0.8 = 0.7 = 0.6 = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.35 = 0.25 = 0.1
1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 hs = 1400 MPa hs = 1200 MPa hs = 1000 MPa hs = 800 MPa hs = 600 MPa hs = 400 MPa hs = 200 MPa hs = 100 MPa
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000

2000 1800 1600 0
Triaxial extension -200
Deviator q [kPa-]
1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 1000
Deviator q [kPa-]
1400 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 =5 =4 = 3.5 =3 = 2.5 =2 = 1.5 =1
-400 -600 -800 -1000 -1200 -1400 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 =5 =4 =3 = 2.6 = 1.5 =1 = 0.5 =0
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000
Fig. 4-23: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated stress path of undrained triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
4-33
The critical free-stress void ratio eco is one of the main parameters influencing the simulation results of monotonic undrained triaxial tests. Similarly to the void ratio e, this parameter is predominant in the determination of the soil behaviour and mean stress at critical states. Indeed, this parameter is used in the definition of the line of critical void ratios. As shown on Fig. 4-15, this line is the boundary between three types of soil behaviour and determines the value of the critical mean stress Pcr. A decrease of critical free-stress void ratio eco moves this limit downward. Therefore, the soil behaviour defined by the void ratio e and the initial mean stress P0 (Fig. 4-15) changes progressively, from zone I (contractive and dilative behaviour) to zone II (only contractive behaviour with stresses at critical state different of zero) and finally to zone III (static liquefaction). On the other hand, the critical free-stress void ratio eco has no influence on the slope of the critical state line. Therefore, the variation of the deviator at the critical state resulting from different values of eco is the consequence of the variation of the critical mean stress. The minimum free-stress void ratio edo influences particularly the stress path followed during the shearing before the dilation behaviour. The position of the dilation point is principally controlled by this parameter. The mean stress at dilation state Pdil increases slightly when edo increases. However, it does not modify the value of residual stress ratio, neither the value of mean stress and deviator at critical state. The maximum free-stress void ratio eio has a little influence on the simulation results. This parameter does not modify the position of the critical state neither the stress path followed during the shearing, but modifies slightly the shear strain corresponding to the maximum stress ratio (1/(3)max. This shear strain increases when the maximum free-stress void ratio eio increases. Parameter was introduced as an exponent in the definition of density factor fd that controls the evolution of the soil behaviour toward the critical state. This parameter has an influence similar to the free stress minimum void ratio edo on the peak stress ratio, and on the position of the dilative point (pdil,qdil). The mean stress of dilative state Pdil decreases when parameter increases. This influence was already mentioned in the previous paragraph during the analysis of the dilation point (Fig. 4-17). On the other hand, this parameter has no impact on the critical state: the residual stress ratio, the critical mean stress, and the critical deviator are independent of parameter . Parameter enters as an exponent in the definition of the stiffness factor fs introduced to take into account the stiffness increase consecutive to a soil densification. Since the parameter appears only in the calculation of the stiffness factor fs (Eq 4-24), its influence is limited to modifying the soil stiffness. Indeed, this parameter does not modify the stress path, neither the value of the peak stress ratio. Inversely, it changes the shear strain corresponding to peak stress ratio. The values of parameter proposed in the literature vary between 1 and 1.1 (see Table 4-3), the parametric analysis showed that in this range, parameter has a negligible influence
4-34
on simulation results of monotonic undrained triaxial test. A significant influence is observed in a range between 0 and 5. Similarly to the free-stress critical void ratio eco, parameters n and hs define the line of critical void ratios and the limit between the different types of soil behaviour (Fig. 4-15). The effect of parameter n is to change the curvature of the line, whereas the parameter hs affects the slope of the line. Therefore, it is not surprising that these parameters determine the type of soil behaviour (zone I, II or II) and the position of the critical mean stress Pcr. On the other hand, these parameters do not influence the residual stress ratio, neither the slope of the stress path. Therefore, the variation of the critical deviator results from the variation of the critical mean stress but is not directly influenced by parameters n and hs. The analysis also shows that the relative influence of the parameter n is more important than the influence of parameter hs. The comparison of stress paths performed with increasing values of n shows that, during the dilative phase, the stress path crosses the critical state line, continues above the critical state line during the increase of the mean stress and deviator, and returns to the critical state line when the mean stress is equal to the critical mean stress. Parameters C1 and C2 were introduced in the definition of the critical state surface (Eq 4-10). These parameters are the only parameters that control the slope of the critical state line (or similarly the residual stress ratio). Parameter C1 decides of the slope in compression and in extension. This slope decreases when the value of the parameter increases. Parameter C2 has no impact on simulation results during triaxial compression. Due to this observation, the simulations investigating the parameter C2 presented in the parametric analysis are triaxial extension instead of triaxial compression. Parameter C2 only modifies the slope of the critical state line in extension. This parameter allows to introduce the difference of soil behaviour between the triaxial compression and extension. Indeed, when C2 equals zero, the steady state line in compression and extension have the same slope but opposite. On the other hand, parameters C1 and C2 do not modify the critical mean stress, Pcr neither the type of soil behaviour (zone I, II or III of Fig. 4-15). Only the critical deviator depends on these parameters.
4-35
D. Parameter determination based on monotonic triaxial test results Based on the developed constitutive equations (see paragraph III.2.2), it is possible to determine parameters hs, n C1, C2 and directly on the stress path curve of a triaxial test result. The stress path of a dilative soil is characterized by three particularities (Fig. 4-24): the critical state point (Pcr, qcr), the slope of the critical state line (Mcomp in a compression triaxial test and Mext in a extension triaxial test) and the dilation point (Pdil, qdil), i.e. the point where the behaviour of the soil changes from contractive to dilative.
Fig. 4-24: Typical stress path during triaxial test.
At the critical state, the effective mean stress increment ps and the deviator increment q have to vanish simultaneously. Taking into account, in addition, that at critical state, the density factor fd is equal to 1, the value of the parameter a1 can be deduced from Eq 4-21 and 4-22 and has to be equal to:
2 . Mcomp 27 2 . Mext 27 if q 0 (compression) if q 0 (extension)
a1 =
(Eq. 4-27)
Using Eq 4-25, parameters C1, C2 can be directly determined as functions of the slope of the critical state line (Eq 4-28).
C1 = 27 . 1 2 Mcomp M ext C2 = 27 . M comp 2 . M comp 4 M ext
(Eq. 4-28)
4-36
If the value of the critical free-stress void ratio, eco, is known, the value of parameter n can be calculated based on the critical means stress, Pcr, the void ratio e and parameter hs using Eq 4-23 which define the critical void ratio line (Fig. 4-15). If the value of parameter hs is not determined, a value equal to 200MPa can be used in first approximation.
ln ln ec0 e n= 3.P ln cr' hs
( ( )) ( )
(Eq. 4-29)
Parameter can be evaluated based on the position of the dilation point (Pdil, qdil). Indeed, when the soil changes its behaviour from contractive to dilative, the mean stress increment P (Eq 4-21) has to be equal to 0. Therefore, parameter can be calculated with the Eq 4-30 obtained after simplification of Eq 4-21.
qdil ln .1 3.Pdil' . 2 3 a1 = n 3.Pdil' e e d0 . exp n hs dil ' 3.P ln exp . hs ec0 - ed0
( )
( )
(Eq. 4-30)
4-37
E. Conclusion The previous paragraphs investigated the different types of soil behaviour that can be simulated with the hypoplastic constitutive equation applied to undrained monotonic triaxial tests. A parametric analysis was also performed in order show the influence of each parameter of the model on simulations results. Four types of soil behaviour can be observed during simulations of undrained triaxial test. Each type is function of the combination between the void ratio e and the initial mean stress P0 relatively to the critical void ratio line. Indeed, as shown on Fig. 4-25, 4 zones can be identified on the graph of void ratio versus mean stress and each zone corresponds to a type of behaviour: ! ZONE I: Contractive then dilative behaviour with a critical mean stress higher than the initial mean stress. Contractive then dilative behaviour with a critical mean ! ZONE IIa: stress smaller than the initial mean stress. ! ZONE II: Contractive behaviour with a non zero critical mean stress. Contractive with a zero critical mean stress (corresponding ! ZONE III: to static liquefaction). ! ZONE IV: Inaccessible zone
Fig. 4-25: Different types of soil behaviour considered by the hypoplastic constitutive equation
4-38
The influence of each parameter of the constitutive equation was also analysed based on a systematical parametric analysis. The results of this investigation are summarised on Fig. 4-26 and Table 4-4. Parameter Influence
Behaviour type Pcr qcr (1/3)res (1/3)peak Stiffness e high high high no high high P0 high no no no low high ec0 high high high no med high ed0 no no no no med high ei0 no no no no no low no no no no med med no no no no no med n high high high no high high hs med med med no med med C1 no no high high high high C2 no no med med med med
Low: the parameter has a low influence on the results Med: the parameter has a medium influence on the results
High: the parameter has a high influence on the results No: the parameter has no influence on the results
Table 4-4: Results of the parametrical analysis of the hypoplastic constitutive equation during simulations of monotonic undrained triaxial tests.
As illustrated on Fig. 4-26, one can consider that the principal influence of parameters eco, n and hs is to define the position of the critical state along the critical state line. The slope of this line is only function of parameter C1 and parameters C2 (for triaxial extension test). Parameters ed0 and have no influence on the critical state but act principally on the position of the dilation state. Parameters and eio are controlling the soil stiffness of the loading curve without modifying the stress path. It results from the analysis that parameter ei0 has little impact of the simulation results. The same low influence was observed during the analysis of parameter in the range proposed in the literature. To have a significant influence, higher values of parameter must be used.
(b) (a) Fig. 4-26: Principal influence of hypoplastic constitutive equation parameters (a) on the stress path and (b) on the stress ratio during simulations of monotonic undrained triaxial tests.
4-39
III.2.4 Analysis of undrained cyclic triaxial tests simulations A. Introduction One of the main objectives of this research is to investigate the soil degradation and liquefaction (or cyclic mobility) consecutive to a cyclic deformation. This analysis concerns principally medium and dense sands (0.55<e<0.8) in a relatively low range of mean stresses (P<400kPa). These situations are related to soil behaviours of the zone I described in the previous paragraph (Fig. 4-25). Therefore, the subsequent analysis of cyclic triaxial tests is restricted to soil and stress conditions of the zone I. The next paragraphs present the results of simulations of cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial tests, using the hypoplastic constitutive equation. After a presentation of typical simulation results and a description of the principal types of behaviour considered by the hypoplastic model, a parametric analysis is presented in order to analyse the influence of nine constitutive parameters on simulation results. Since the hypoplastic constitutive law is expressed as a function of the effective stresses and does not consider the total stresses in the evaluation of the stress rate, the results presented in the following paragraphs are identical for the stress paths defined in Chapter 3, i.e. total mean stress constant (P=cst ) or total lateral stress constant (3=cst). B. Simulation of cyclic triaxial tests Fig. 4-27 shows the simulation results of a cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial test. The parameters used for this simulation are identical to the parameters used in the previous paragraphs and are summarised in Table 4-2.
4-40
20

35 30
[kPa]
15
25
Maximum Shear Sress
Deviator q [kPa]
10 5 0 -5 -10 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 0 10 20 30 40 50
Effective Mean Stress p' [kPa]
(a)
4 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 1
(b)
3'
[-]
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Secant Shear Modulus Gs n [MPa]
3.5
Stress Ratio
1 '/
10
Cycle Number N [-]
(c) (d) Fig. 4-27: Simulation results of cyclic strain controlled triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive equation: (a) hysteresis loops; (b) stress path; (c) stress ratio loops; (d) degradation of the secant shear modulus
The shape of the hysteresis loops of the shear stress versus the shear strain is similar to the shape that was observed during tests performed on a dense specimen (see Chapter 3). The same dependence between the curvature of the curves with the dilative or contractive behaviour is observed. It results in this typical banana shape. The evolution is also similar as for the experimental observations where two phases of dilation and two phases of contraction are observed during each loop. The stress path follows also the critical state line during the dilation phase independently of the cycle
4-41
number. Similarly to the laboratory test, the loops of the stress ratio2 are constant during the different cycles excepted for the first cycle. After a very few number of cycles, no more degradation is observed and the hysteresis loops reach an equilibrium where the stress state is the same at the start and end of the same cycle. This equilibrium results from a compensation between the dilation phases and contraction phases: the increase of the effective mean stress during the dilation phases is equal to the decrease during the contraction phases. This observation is in contradiction with all the results of laboratory tests. Indeed, even for the laboratory tests performed with very large strain amplitudes where large dilation phases were observed, the soil liquefaction was always observed after a few cycles. The simulated hysteresis loops at equilibrium are independent of the initial effective mean stress P0 and it is possible, under certain conditions, to observe an increase of the soil resistance instead of a reduction. Since the constitutive equation does not consider the soil degradation and the hysteresis loops tend rapidly to an equilibrium, the following paragraphs investigate the influence of each parameter of the model on the shape of the hysteresis loops, the stress ratio loops, and the stress path corresponding to the equilibrium cycles, i.e. the cycles for which the stress state at the end of the cycle is identical to the stress state at the beginning of next cycle. All graphs of the following analysis are also available in appendix on the enclosed CD-rom.
The term hysteresis loops in the text designates the loops of the shear stress versus the shear strain . The terms stress ratio loops designates the loops of the ratio between the principal stresses 1/3 versus the shear strain .
4-42
400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -2

500 e = 0.8 e = 0.75 e = 0.7 e = 0.65 e = 0.6 e = 0.55 e = 0.5 e = 0.48
[kPa]
[kPa]
400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300

e = 0.8 e = 0.75 e = 0.7 e = 0.65 e = 0.6 e = 0.55 e = 0.5 e = 0.48
-1
a = 10 % a = 8 % a = 4 % a = 2 % a = 1 % a = 0.5 % a = 0.25 % a = 0.125 %
-20

a = 10 % a = 8 % a = 4 % a = 2 % a = 1 % a = 0.5 % a = 0.25 % a = 0.125 %
-10
10
20
6 5
6 5
3' 1'
[-]
3'
4 3 2 1 0 -2
[-]
4 3 2 1 0 0 1 2
Stress Ratio
1'

e = 0.8 e = 0.65 e = 0.5 e = 0.75 e = 0.6 e = 0.48
-1
Stress Ratio
-20

a = 10 % a = 8 % a = 4 % a = 2 % a = 1 % a = 0.5 % a = 0.25 % a = 0.125 %
-10
10
20
1000 800 600 e = 0.7 e = 0.55
1000 800 600
Deviator q [kPa-]
400 200 0 -200 -400 -600 0 200 400 600
Deviator q [kPa-]
400 200 0 -200 -400 -600 0
200
400
600
Fig. 4-28: Influence of the void ratio on simulations of undrained cyclic triaxial test.
Fig. 4-29: Influence of the shear strain amplitude on simulations of undrained cyclic triaxial test.
4-43
Fig. 4-28 presents the influence of the void ratio e on simulation results of cyclic triaxial tests. As discussed during the analysis of simulated monotonic triaxial tests, the void ratio plays an important role in the determination of the soil resistance. When the void ratio decreases, an increase of the maximum shear stresses is observed. It entails an increase of the corresponding secant shear modulus Gsn (defined in Chapter 3). However, the width between the loading and the unloading curves of the hysteresis loops seems to decrease. This observation is explained by the reduction of the void ratio that tends toward the minimum void ratio ed for which an hypoelastic behaviour is observed. The hypoelastic behaviour is characterised by the stress reversibility i.e. the same curve is followed during the loading and the unloading (no hysteresis). The void ratio influences strongly the stress ratio loops. When the void ratio decreases, the maximum stress ratio increases, and the corresponding strain increases. On the other hand, the void ratio does not change the slope of the critical state lines of the stress path (in extension and in compression). The stress path keeps the butterfly shape characteristic of a dilative soil. When the void ratio e increases and becomes close to the critical void ratio ec, the soil resistance decreases and becomes close to zero for void ratios close to the critical void ratio ec. The range of mean stresses covered during the cyclic simulations is drawn on Fig. 4-30 as a function of the void ratio. The minimum mean stress corresponds to the end of the contraction phase, i.e. the inflection points of the hysteresis loops whereas the maximum mean stress occurs at the end of the dilative phases in compression corresponding to the shear strain reversal. When the void ratio increases, the range of mean stresses decreases but the ratio between the maximum and minimum mean stress stays constant. Fig. 4-29 presents the influence of the shear strain amplitude a on the simulated equilibrium cycles during cyclic undrained triaxial tests.
4-44
0.9
Critical Void Ratio Line 0.85 0.8 0.75
e = 0.8 e = 0.75 e = 0.7 e = 0.65 e = 0.6 e = 0.55 e = 0.5 e = 0.48
Void Ratio e [-]
0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 Minimum Void Ratio Line 0.45 0.4 1 10 Minimum Me an Stre ss during cycle
Maximum Me an Stre ss during cycle
100
1000
10000
Fig. 4-30: Evolution of the minimum and maximum effective mean stresses observed on the stable cycle during simulations of cyclic undrained triaxial test.
C. Parametric analysis of cyclic triaxial tests simulations A parametric analysis was performed in order to investigate the influence of the 9 parameters of the hypoplastic constitutive equation on the simulated results of a cyclic triaxial test. The analysis focuses on the shape of the cycle when the stable cycle is reached (ultimate cycle). A large range of the parameters is investigated and covers values outside the range generally proposed in the literature. However, in contrast with the parametric analysis performed on the monotonic triaxial test, the type of behaviour analysed is limited to the behaviour type of zone I (i.e. contractive and dilative behaviour). The results of the parametric analysis are available in appendix on the enclosed CD-rom.

80 80
4-45
[kPa]
60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -2
[kPa]
eco eco eco eco
= 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95 = 0.85
eco eco eco eco
= 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.8
60 40 20 0 -20 -40
edo = 0.7 edo = 0.6 edo = 0.5 edo = 0.4
edo edo edo edo
= 0.65 = 0.55 = 0.45 = 0.35
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5

80 eio eio eio eio = 1.3 = 1.2 = 1.1 =1 eio eio eio eio = 1.25 = 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95
60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -2 -1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
Fig. 4-31: Influence of the free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0, and ei0 on simulated ultimate hysteresis loops of undrained cyclic triaxial test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
The analysis of the simulated hysteresis loops of the shear stress versus shear strain (Fig. 4-31 & Fig. 4-32) shows, in the range investigated and for all the parameters, the hysteresis loops keep the same banana shape which curvature is function of the dilative or contractive behaviour of the soil. The maximum free-stress void ratio ei0 and parameters C1 and C2 have a relatively low influence on the shape of the loop compared to the other parameters. During the presentation of the laboratory investigation, the existence of fixed points crossed by each hysteresis loop was discussed. It was pointed out that these points correspond to the zero shear stress point (i.e. when the loop crosses the X-axis). The results of the parametric analysis show that only the maximum free-stress void ratio ei0 and parameters n, hs, C1 and C2 respect this property. Indeed, for these parameters, the intersection of the hysteresis loops with the X axes does not change when the value of the parameters changes.
4-46
80 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.25 = 0.15 = 0.5 = 0.3 = 0.2 = 0.1
80
60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -2 -1.5
= 3.5 = 2.5 = 1.5 = 0.5
=3 =2 =1 =0
[kPa]
[kPa]
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5

80 80 n n n n = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.2 n n n n = 0.45 = 0.35 = 0.25 = 0.15

hs = 1400 MPa hs = 1000 MPa hs = 600 MPa hs = 200 MPa hs = 1200 MPa hs = 800 MPa hs = 400 MPa hs = 100 MPa
[kPa]
60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -2

1 1.5 2
60 40 20 0 -20 -40
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5

80 80 C1 C1 C1 C1 =5 = 3.5 = 2.5 = 1.5 C1 C1 C1 C1 =4 =3 =2 =1

C2 C2 C2 C2 =5 =3 = 1.5 = 0.5 C2 C2 C2 C2 =4 = 2.5 =1 =0
[kPa]
60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -2 -1.5
60 40 20 0 -20 -40
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
Fig. 4-32: Influence of parameters , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated hysteresis loops of undrained cyclic triaxial test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.

6 5 eco eco eco eco = 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95 = 0.85 eco eco eco eco = 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.8 6 5
3'
4-47
[-]
3'
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
[-]
edo = 0.7 edo = 0.6 edo = 0.5 edo = 0.4
edo edo edo edo
= 0.65 = 0.55 = 0.45 = 0.35
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
1'
Stress Ratio

6 5
3'
Stress Ratio
1'
[-]
eio eio eio eio
= 1.3 = 1.2 = 1.1 =1
eio eio eio eio
= 1.25 = 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Stress Ratio
1'
Fig. 4-33: Influence of the free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0, and ei0 on simulated stress ratio loops of undrained cyclic triaxial test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
Fig. 4-33 & Fig. 4-34 present the stress ratio loops simulated in the framework of the parametrical analysis of cyclic triaxial test simulations. The main parameters modifying the loops are parameters C1 and C2. This influence results from the main influence of these parameters on the positioning of the residual stress ratio, i.e. the stress ratio at critical state (see paragraph III.2.3). On the other hand, parameter hs does absolutely not modify the stress ratio loop. Indeed, for each value of the large range investigated, the simulated loops are perfectly identical. Parameter n and ei0 have a negligible influence on stress ratio loops. The other parameters , , ec0 and ed0 have a significant impact on the shape of the stress ratio loops due to their influence on the positioning of the peak stress ratio. The fixed point can also be identified on the stress ratio loops. Indeed, this point corresponds to the point where the stress ratio equal 1. It results the same conclusion than performed during the hysteresis loops analysis. Parameters n, hs, C1 and C2 do not influence the shear strain corresponding to the zero shear stress.
4-48
6 5

6 5
3'
[-]
3'
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
[-]
= 0.6 = 0.3 = 0.15
= 0.5 = 0.25 = 0.1
= 0.4 = 0.2
= 3.5 =2 = 0.5
=3 = 1.5 =0
= 2.5 =1
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
1'
Stress Ratio

6 5 n n n n = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.2 n n n n = 0.45 = 0.35 = 0.25 = 0.15 6 5
3'
Stress Ratio
1'

[-]
3'
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
[-]
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5
1'
Stress Ratio
Stress Ratio
1'
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5

6 5 C1 C1 C1 C1 =5 = 3.5 = 2.5 = 1.5 C1 C1 C1 C1 =4 =3 =2 =1 6 5
3'

C2 C2 C2 C2 =5 =3 = 1.5 = 0.5 C2 C2 C2 C2 =4 = 2.5 =1 =0
[-]
3'
[-]
4 3 2 1 0
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
1'
Stress Ratio
Stress Ratio
1'
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
Fig. 4-34: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated stress ratio loops of undrained cyclic triaxial test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.

150 150
4-49
100
100
Deviator q [kPa-]
50
eco eco eco eco eco eco eco eco
= 1.15 = 1.1 = 1.05 =1 = 0.95 = 0.9 = 0.85 = 0.8
Deviator q [kPa-]
50
edo = 0.7 edo = 0.65 edo = 0.6 edo = 0.55 edo = 0.5 edo = 0.45 edo = 0.4 edo = 0.35
-50
-50
-100 0 20 40 60 80 100
-100 0 20 40 60 80 100

150
100
Deviator q [kPa-]
50
eio eio eio eio eio eio eio eio
= 1.3 = 1.25 = 1.2 = 1.15 = 1.1 = 1.05 =1 = 0.95
-50
-100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Fig. 4-35: Influence of the free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0, and ei0 on simulated stress path of undrained cyclic triaxial test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
The stress paths simulated with the hypoplastic constitutive equation during cyclic triaxial tests are showed on Fig. 4-34 & Fig. 4-35. The different values of the parameters do not modify the butterfly shape of the stress path. All the cycles are situated inside the area defined by the two critical state lines. The slope of these lines is only function of parameter C1 and C2. Parameter C1 controls principally the slope during compression whereas parameter C2 only impacts the slope in extension. A first analysis seems to show the stress paths followed during all the cycles are homothetic. However, only the stress paths simulated with parameters n, hs, C1 and C2 are really homothetic. This conclusion results from the analysis of the stress ratio loops. Indeed, considering the close link between the stress ratio, the mean stress and the deviator, the non variability of the stress ratio loops is a good evidence of the homothetic shape of the stress path.
4-50
150

150
100
100
= 3.5 =2 = 0.5
=3 = 1.5 =0
= 2.5 =1
Deviator q [kPa-]
Deviator q [kPa-]
100
50
-50
= 0.6 = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.25 = 0.2 = 0.15
50
-50
-100 0 20 40 60 80
-100 0 20 40 60 80 100

150 n = 0.5 n = 0.35 n = 0.2 n = 0.45 n = 0.3 n = 0.15 n = 0.4 n = 0.25 150
100
100
Deviator q [kPa-]
50
Deviator q [kPa-]
50 hs = 1400 MPa hs = 1200 MPa hs = 1000 MPa hs = 800 MPa hs = 600 MPa hs = 400 MPa hs = 200 MPa hs = 100 MPa
-50
-50
-100 0 20 40 60 80 100
-100 0 20 40 60 80 100

150 30 25 100 20
Different Scale
Deviator q [kPa-]
50
C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1
=5 =4 = 3.5 =3 = 2.5 =2 = 1.5 =1
Deviator q [kPa-]
15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 =5 =4 =3 = 2.5 = 1.5 =1 = 0.5 =0
-50
-100 0 20 40 60 80 100
-20 0 5 10 15 20
Fig. 4-36: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated stress path of undrained cyclic triaxial test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
4-51
D. Conclusion The previous paragraphs investigated how the hypoplastic constitutive equations simulate the results of a cyclic undrained triaxial test. The investigation was limited to the behaviour type of zone I identified during the analysis of monotonic triaxial test simulations. It was pointed out that, even if the model represents correctly the different phases of a cycle during cyclic strain controlled triaxial tests, the model is not able to simulate the systematic pore pressure build-up (or mean stress decrease) observed at the end of each cycle. Indeed, an equilibrium cycle is rapidly reached. For this cycle, the increase of mean stress during the dilation phases is equal to its decrease during the contraction phases. The resulting hysteresis loops remain identical. The parametric analysis showed the general shape of the hysteresis loops, the stress ratio loops, and the stress paths remain similar for all the parameter ranges investigated. The results of this analysis are summarised in Table 4-5. Parameter Influence
e high Hysteresis loop high Fixed point high Stress ratio loop Critical state lines no high Stress path P0 no no no no no ec0 high high high no high ed0 high high high no high ei0 low no low no low high high high no high high high high no high n high low low no high hs high no no no high C1 med no high high med C2 low no high med med
Low: the parameter has a low influence on the results Med: the parameter has a medium influence on the results
High: the parameter has a high influence on the results No: the parameter has no influence on the results
Table 4-5: Parametrical analysis results of hypoplastic constitutive equation during simulations of cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial tests.
4-52
III.3 Application to DSS test

III.3.1 Assumptions and notations During a simple shear test, a plane shear strain is imposed in the horizontal direction to a cylindrical soil specimen (see Chapter 3). While the test is a constant volume test, there are no radial neither axial deformations, only shear strain is allowed in the horizontal direction. The imposed horizontal shear strain induces variations of effective axial stress V, horizontal shear stress and radial normal effective stress L. The lateral stresses in the direction of the shearing and in the perpendicular direction are assumed to be equal. In order to simulate constant volume direct simple shear test (DSS) tests with the hypoplastic constitutive equation, the stress and strain distributions are assumed homogenous. Therefore, the sample can be considered as one unique element which stress and strain distributions are fully described by the stresses and strains tensors. The hypothesis of homogeneity assumes the horizontal shear stress applied on the specimen is balanced by a vertical shear stress on the perpendicular face. However, many authors (e.g. Degroot - 1992) mentioned that the boundary conditions of the DSS apparatus prevent the creation of this reactive stress on the border of the specimen. It results a non homogeneity of the strain and stress distributions in the specimen. This non homogeneity is not considered in the present investigation. Considering a system of coordinates (X,Y, Z) whose axis corresponds to the radial (X-Y) and the axial (Z) directions, the previous assumptions allow to simplify the ! s, T s, D ! s using the incremental notation, as follow: stresses and strains tensors T
#"L' 0 #&H ! s = 1 . 0 #"L' 0 T t #&H 0 #"V' " L' 0 & H T s = 0 " L' 0 & 0 " ' V H 0 0 #' H ! s = 1 . 0 0 0 (Eq. 4-31) D t #' H 0 0
Where L V
is the normal effective lateral stress, is the normal effective axial stress, is the horizontal shear stress, is the horizontal shear strain increment.
III.3.2 Simplification of the constitutive equations Based on the notations and the assumptions of the previous paragraph, the general hypoplastic constitutive equation can be developed and simplified in order to simulate constant volume DSS tests. It results that the stress increments during a DSS test can be expressed with the following equations:
III. Application of the model to Triaxial and DSS tests 2 . &2 2 .&H H2 2 #&H =fs . #'H . a1 + (" '+2." ')2 . sign(#'H ) + fd . 2 . a1 . .("V'+2."L') V L 2 . & H . " V' (5."V'2."L') #"V'=fs . #' H . . sign(#'H ) + fd . 2 . a1 . 2 3.(" V'+2." L') (" V'+2." L') 2 . & H . " L' .(4." V'" L') ( ) d #"L'=fs . #'H . 2 . sign #' H + f . 2 . a1 . 3.(" V'+2." L') (" V'+2." L')
4-53
(Eq. 4-32)
(Eq. 4-33)
(Eq. 4-34)
The characteristics of the general hypoplastic constitutive equation appear clearly on Eq 4-32, 4-33 and 4-34. The equations are divided in two terms of which the first one is linear in shear strain, whereas the second one is not, allowing the non reversibility of stresses. The influence of the horizontal shear strain increment is to increase the stress response proportionally, but it does not modify the stress path. Hence, the calculation of the soil resistance is independent of the velocity of the deformation. Fig. 4-37 presents the evolution of the horizontal shear stress increment H and the effective vertical normal stress increment V during constant volume DSS tests. The evolution of the two terms of the developed equations are also drawn. Since it is the opposite of the second term that is drawn (green curve), the value of the increment is the difference between the two curves. As discussed in paragraph II.3D, during shearing simulations where a rotation of the principal directions is observed (as for DSS test), the time derivative of the ! s calculated with Eq 4-6 does not only express the part of the stress rate stress tensor T resulting from the strain rate tensor but also the part resulting from the material rotation induced during the shearing. To eliminate the influence of the material rotation, the constitutive equation has to take into account a co-rotational stress rate (Bauer, 2000). However, in the present research, the effects of the material rotation are neglected and the objective stress tensor is assumed to be equal to the time derivative of the stress tensor that is calculated with Eq 4-6.
4-54
25

140 120 Vertical Normal Stress Increment First T erm Second T erm (opposite) 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Effective Normal Stress Increment V' [kPa]
20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10
Horizontal Shear Strain H [% ]

35 Horizontal Shear Stress Increment 30 First T erm Second T erm (opposite) 0
Horizontal Shear Stress H [kPa] Increment
25 20
-40 -60 -80
15 -100 10 5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 -120 -140 -160
The expressions of density factor fd and stiffness factors fs are the same as in the equations presented for the triaxial test. These equations depend only on the effective mean stress and the void ratio.
3.Ps n d0 . exp e e ( n hs = fct(e, Ps') fd = e-ed = exp 3.Ps . ec ed hs ec0 - ed0 ) 1- n = fct(e, Ps') fs = h s . ei . 1+ei . 3.Ps n.h i e ei hs
Fig. 4-37: Evolution of the horizontal shear stress increment H and of the effective vertical normal stress increment V during constant volume DSS tests.
( )
( )
(Eq. 4-35)
( ) where h = 1 + 1 (e e ) . C 3 e e
i i0 d0 ( 1 n ei = ei0 . exp - 3.Ps h s
()
(Eq. 4-36)
c0
d0
1 3.C1
ei0 = * . ec0
Terms of the incremental equation [kPa]
-20
Terms of the incremental equation [kPa]
4-55
The equation that calculates the parameter a1 cannot be easily simplified and will not be re-written in the present document. Similarly to the triaxial tests, the equations presented above do not consider the total stresses. Therefore, the assumption that the total vertical normal stress v stays constant during a constant volume DSS test has no influence on the simulation, and has to be considered only in the calculation of the pore pressure. III.3.3 Analysis of monotonic constant volume DSS tests simulations A. Introduction The following paragraphs describe the simulation results of a monotonic constant volume direct simple shear (DSS) test. The first explains in detail how the hypoplastic model is able to simulate the DSS test, and how the different stresses are evoluting. This paragraph also investigates the influence of the test parameters (void ratio and initial stress) on the simulation results. The next paragraph presents the result of a parametric analysis similar to the analysis performed for the triaxial test simulations. The purpose is to analyse the influence of the different parameters of the hypoplastic constitutive equation on the simulation results. The input parameters used as reference case in the following analysis are identical to the parameters used for the undrained triaxial test simulations. The values of these parameters are summarised in Table 4-2. However, an additional parameter must be defined for the DSS test in order to completely define the initial soil conditions. As described in Chapter 3, during a DSS test, the sample is consolidated under anisotropic conditions with a constant vertical stress. Since the membrane prevents any lateral strain, a lateral stress is induced as a function of the coefficient of earth pressure at rest k0. To evaluate this coefficient, it is assumed this factor can be calculated based on the friction angle with the following simplified equation (Jaky - 1944):
k 0 =1-sin(')
(Eq. 4-37)
In the next paragraphs, the friction angle is assumed to be equal to 30, i.e. k0=0.5. Therefore, the lateral stress during the consolidation of a DSS test is equal to the half of the applied vertical stress (Eq 4-38). It is also assumed that the initial horizontal shear H stress is equal to 0.
" L0' = k 0." V0' = (1-sin(')) ." V0'
(Eq. 4-38)
where L0 is the initial effective lateral normal stress V0 is the initial effective vertical normal stress is the friction angle k0 is the coefficient of earth pressure at rest
4-56
Eq 4-38 is not really necessary to determine the initial lateral stress. Indeed, the initial lateral stress can be evaluated directly using the hypoplastic equation. However, it can be shown that the use of the initial lateral stress calculated with Eq 438 instead of the constitutive equation has no significant effect on the results of DSS test simulations. B. Simulation of monotonic DSS tests Fig. 4-38 presents the simulation results of a constant volume DSS test which parameters correspond to the reference case presented above. Fig. 4-38-a compares the evolution of the maximum shear stress max, defined as the radius of the Mohrs circle corresponding to the stress state, and the shear stress in the direction of the shearing H (= horizontal direction). Fig. 4-38-b compares the evolution of the vertical and the lateral stresses, L and L, whereas Fig. 4-38-c & d shows the stress plot L vs H and the evolution of the ratio between the lateral and the vertical effective normal stresses. For the void ratio and the initial stresses considered, the soil behaviour starts the shearing by a contractive behaviour characterised by a reduction of effective stresses until the dilation state. This state is reached for a horizontal shear strain H of 0.75%. From the dilation state to the critical state, the soil has a dilative behaviour. This behaviour is characterised by a proportional increase of the effective stresses V & L and the horizontal shear stress H. Fig. 4-38-d shows the evolution of the ratio between the effective normal stresses L/V. Starting from a value of 0.5 resulting from the assumption about the initial state, this ratio increases rapidly and is equal to 1 for a shear stress of about 2.5%. This evolution provides information about the rotation of the principal directions and about the principal stresses. During the consolidation, the zero shear stress condition indicates the vertical and lateral effective normal stress V & L are the principal stresses (Fig. 4-39-a). The equality between the vertical and lateral stresses observed during the shearing shows the horizontal shear stress H is the maximum shear stress max, as illustrated on Fig. 4-38-a. This observation implies that the principal directions make an angle of 45 with the horizontal direction (Fig. 4-39b). During the beginning of the shearing, a rotation of the principal directions occurs from an angle of 0 with the horizontal, up to 45. The horizontal shear stress H becomes equal to the maximum shear stress max, and the vertical normal stress V becomes equal to the mean stress P (and also to the intermediate principal stress 2). This behaviour is similar to the experimental measurements performed by Dyvik (1985) who measured the evolution of the lateral stress during a DSS test, using a special membrane equipped of strain gauges. This result is also in accordance with the analytical solution determined by Bauer (2000) who integrated the hypoplastic constitutive equation combined with a co-rotational stress rate. The co-rotational stress rate, that is neglected in the present
4-57
research, takes into account the material rotation resulting from the rotation of the principal directions. This observation seems to indicate that the influence of the stress rotation is limited during simulations of DSS test.
600
max [kPa]
1200
400
100
V'
800
250 200 150 100 50 0 0 1 2 3%
Effective Normal Stresses
L'
75 50 25 0 0 1 2 3%
500
[kPa]
Maximum Shear Stress Horizontal Shear Stress
1000
300
600
Shear Stresses
200
400
100
200
Lateral Normal Stress Vertical Normal Stress
0 0
0 0 20 40 60 80
20
40
60
80
(a)
600 1.2
V'
(b)
[-]
[kPa]
500 400
Effective Normal Stress Ratio

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
L'/
Horizontal Shear Stress
0.8
300 200 100 0
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 0 1 2 3 4 5
Effective Vertical Normal S tress V' [kPa]
(c) (d) Fig. 4-38: monotonic constant volume DSS test simulation.
4-58
[kPa]
100
Point Measured during laboratory test
[kPa]
400 (V', H') 200 max 0 0 3 ' 200 2 ' 400
Point Measured during laboratory test
Shear Stress
50 max 0 0 2 '=3 =L' 50 100 150 1 '=V'' 200 250
Shear Stress
1 ' 600 800 1000
Effective Normal Stress ' [kPa]
a. during consolidation b. during shearing Fig. 4-39: Stress state during DSS test: (a) during consolidation; (b) during shearing
Since, unlike the laboratory experiments performed during this research, the simulation allows the evaluation of the lateral stress, the stress state of the sample is fully determined. Therefore, it is possible to draw a conventional stress path (P vs q), and the evolution of the principal stresses ratio 1/ 3 (Fig. 4-40). The calculation of the mean stress and the deviator must consider the second principal stress 2. Indeed, if the lateral stresses in perpendicular direction LX & LY can be considered equal, the second and third principal stresses are not equal as is the case for triaxial tests. The mean stress and the deviator are calculated using the following equations:
P'= "1' + "2' + "3' 3
2
(Eq. 4-39)
2 2
q= 1 . ("1' "2') +( "1' "3' ) +("2' "3) 2
(Eq. 4-40)
Due to the anisotropic consolidation, the deviator is not equal to zero at the beginning of shearing, but the succession of contractive and dilative phases leads the stress path along the critical state line. The ratio between the maximum and minimum principal stresses presents similar characteristics to those observed for the triaxial tests: a rapid increase to a peak value, and then followed by a progressive decrease to a residual value. Fig. 4-41 & Fig. 4-42 investigate the influence of the tests parameters (void ratio e and initial mean stress P0) on the simulation results of monotonic constant volume DSS tests.

1200 1000 4.5
4-59
Principal S tresses Ratio 1'/ 3' [kPa]

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 20 40 60 80
Deviator q [kPa]
800 600 400
200 0
Effective Mean S tress p' [kPa]
Horizontal S hear S train H [%]
Fig. 4-40: Principal stresses analysis of monotonic constant volume DSS test simulation.
As for triaxial tests, the void ratio e -and more precisely its value relatively to the critical and minimum void ratios- plays a predominant role in the determination of the soil resistance at critical state. However, this parameter does not change the slope of the critical state line, even if for very dense sand (which void ratio is nearly equal the minimum void ratio), the stress plot (H vs. V) crosses shortly the steady state line before returning asymptotically to the critical state line at critical state. The initial stress condition has a limited influence on the simulation. It does not modify the value of the critical state. This parameter determines the stress path to follow to reach the critical state The combination of the initial mean stress P0 and the void ratio e determine also the type of soil behaviour during the shearing. The same relationship described for the triaxial test simulations can be applied to DSS test simulations (Fig. 4-25). As a function of the limit void ratio lines (minimum, maximum and critical), 3 types of behaviour can be observed: contractive then dilative behaviour, only contractive behaviour with a non zero critical state and static liquefaction (only contractive behaviour to a zero critical state). C. Parametric analysis of monotonic DSS tests simulations Fig. 4-43 to Fig. 4-48 present the results of the parametric analysis performed to understand the influence of each parameter of the hypoplastic constitutive equation on the simulation results of monotonic constant volume DSS tests. This analysis investigates, in particular, the influence of the parameters on the horizontal shear stress H, the principal stress ratio 1/3, and the stress plot (V / ). The following analysis covers the same range of parameter values considered during the parametric analysis on monotonic triaxial tests Each graph of the parametric analysis is available in appendix on the enclosed CD-rom.
4-60
.
3000 3000
[kPa]
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60 80 100
[kPa]
H
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60 80 100
Horozintal Shear Stress
e = 1.1 e=1 e = 0.9 e = 0.8 e = 0.7 e = 0.6 e = 0.5 e = 0.47
Horizontal Shear Strain [% ]

6 5.5 6 5.5
[-]
4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 e = 1.1 e = 0.9 e = 0.7 e = 0.5 20 40 e=1 e = 0.8 e = 0.6 e = 0.47 60
[-]
3' 1'
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 Po' = 3333 kPa Po' = 666 kPa Po' = 133 kPa Po' = 33 kPa 20 Po' = 1333 kPa Po' = 333 kPa Po' = 66 kPa Po' = 13 kPa 40 60
Stress Ratio
1'
3'

e = 1.1 e = 0.9 e = 0.7 e = 0.5 e=1 e = 0.8 e = 0.6 e = 0.47
Stress Ratio

5000
5000
[kPa-]
[kPa-]
H
4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0
4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 1000
Horizontal shear stress
Critical State
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Effective Vertical Normal Stress V' [kPa]
Fig. 4-41: Influence of the void ratio e on Fig. 4-42: Influence of the initial mean stress P0 on simulations of constant volume DSS tests with the simulations of constant volume DSS tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law. hypoplastic constitutive law.
4-61
3000
3000
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 eco eco eco eco eco eco = 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.88 = 0.8 = 0.7
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60
[kPa]
[kPa]
80
100

3000 eio eio eio eio eio eio eio eio = 1.3 = 1.2 = 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.8 = 0.7 = 0.6
[kPa]
H
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60
80
100
Fig. 4-43: Influence of free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0 and ei0 on simulated horizontal shear stress during constant volume DSS tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
The influence of parameters of the hypoplastic constitutive equation on the horizontal shear stress evolution is summarised on Fig. 4-43 & Fig. 4-44. As discussed above, one can consider the horizontal shear stress H is equal to the maximum shear stress max after a horizontal shear strain H of about 1%. The final value of the horizontal shear stress is mainly function of the position of the critical void ratio line that is defined by the parameters ec0, n and hs. Parameters C1 and C2 also influence the limit shear stress resistance but in a lower range. On the other hand, parameters ed0, ei0, and do not modify the limit shear stress resistance, but determine the evolution of the soil stiffness during the shearing. It results from this analysis that different parameters have the same kind of influence on the simulations of DSS tests as they have on the simulation of triaxial tests.
4-62
3000

3000
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60
= 0.6 = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.25 = 0.2 = 0.15 = 0.1
[kPa]
[kPa]
=3 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 =2
= 2.5 = 1.5 =1 =0
= 1.1
= 0.5
80
100
20
40
60
80
100

3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 n n n n = 0.6 = 0.45 = 0.35 = 0.2 n n n n = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.1 3000
[kPa]
[kPa]
H
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60 80 100

3000 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 =5 = 4.5 =4 = 3.5 =3 = 2.5 =2 = 1.5 3000

C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 =5 =4 =3 = 2.6 = 1.5 =1 = 0.5 =0
[kPa]
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60
[kPa]
H
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0
80
100
20
40
60
80
100
Fig. 4-44: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated horizontal shear stress during constant volume DSS tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.

6 5.5 6 5.5
4-63
[-]
4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 eco eco eco eco 20 = 1.1 = 0.9 = 0.8 = 0.6 40 eco eco eco eco =1 = 0.88 = 0.7 = 0.55 60
[-]
3' 1'
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 edo edo edo edo 20 = 0.75 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.2 40 edo = 0.7 edo = 0.52 edo = 0.3 edo = 0.1 60
1'
3'
Stress Ratio
Stress Ratio
6 5.5
[-]
3' 1'
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 eio eio eio eio 20 = 1.3 = 1.1 = 0.9 = 0.7 40 eio eio eio eio = 1.2 =1 = 0.8 = 0.6 60
Stress Ratio
Fig. 4-45: Influence of free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0 and ei0 on simulated principal effective stress ratio during constant volume DSS tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
Fig. 4-45 & Fig. 4-46 analyse the evolution of the ratio between the maximum and minimum principal stresses 1/3. One must take into account the fact that the second principal stress 2is not equal to the third one 3 during a DSS test, as it is in the triaxial test. The parameter influence observed during DSS simulations is identical to their influence observed during triaxial simulations. The shear strain corresponding to the peak stress ratio is function of parameters ei0, , n and hs, whereas the value of this peak ratio is controlled by the parameter ec0, ed0, , n, hs, C1 and C2. The residual stress ratio is only influenced by C1 and C2.
4-64
6 5.5

6 5.5
[-]
4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.25 = 0.15 20 40 = 0.5 = 0.3 = 0.2 = 0.1 60
[-]
3' 1'
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 =3 = 1.5 = 0.5 20 = 2.5 = 1.1 =0 40 60 =2 =1
Stress Ratio
1'
3'
Stress Ratio
6 5.5
6 5.5
[-]
4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 n n n n 20 = 0.6 = 0.45 = 0.35 = 0.2 40 n n n n = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.1 60
[-]
3' 1'
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 hs = 1400 MPa hs = 1000 MPa hs = 600 MPa hs = 200 MPa 20 hs = 1200 MPa hs = 800 MPa hs = 400 MPa hs = 100 MPa 40 60
Stress Ratio
1'
3'
Stress Ratio
6 5.5
6 5.5
[-]
4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 C1 C1 C1 C1 20 =5 =4 =3 =2 40 C1 C1 C1 C1 = 4.5 = 3.5 = 2.5 = 1.5 60
[-]
3' 1'
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0 C2 C2 C2 C2 20 =5 =3 = 1.5 = 0.5 40 C2 C2 C2 C2 =4 = 2.6 =1 =0 60
Stress Ratio
1'
3'
Stress Ratio
Fig. 4-46: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated principal effective stress ratio during constant volume DSS tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.

2000 2000
4-65
[kPa-]
1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
[kPa-]
1800
eco eco eco eco eco eco eco eco
= 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.88 = 0.8 = 0.7 = 0.6 = 0.55
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
500
1000
1500
2000
500
1000
1500
2000

2000 eio eio eio eio eio eio eio eio = 1.3 = 1.2 = 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.8 = 0.7 = 0.6
[kPa-]
H
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
500
1000
1500
2000
Fig. 4-47: Influence of free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0 and ei0 on simulated stress plot during constant volume DSS tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
The parametric analysis also investigated the influence of parameters on the stress plot (Fig. 4-47 & Fig. 4-48). The stress plot is defined as the horizontal shear stress H versus the effective vertical stress V. The stress plot was preferred to the traditional stress path (P vs q) because it is the graph traditionally used to present the result of DSS laboratory tests. However, it can be considered that during the dilation phase, the stress plot and the stress path coincide, except that the deviator is equal to twice the horizontal shear stress. The analysis leads also to the same conclusions as for the parametric analysis performed on triaxial tests. Parameters eco, n and hs control the value of the effective vertical stress V at critical state, but do not change the slope of the critical state line. This slope is only function of parameters C1 and C2. These parameters determine the value of the horizontal shear stress H at critical state but do not modify the value of the effective vertical stress V. The other parameters (parameters ei0, ed0, , ) have no influence on the position of the critical state. They only have a limited influence on the shape of the stress plot during the beginning of the shearing.
4-66
2000

2000 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.2 = 0.1
[kPa-]
[kPa-]
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
= 0.6
= 0.5
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
=3 =2
= 2.5 = 1.5 =1 =0
= 0.25
= 0.15
= 1.1
= 0.5
500
1000
1500
2000
500
1000
1500
2000

2000 2000
[kPa-]
1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
[kPa-]
1800
n n n n n n n n
= 0.6 = 0.5 = 0.45 = 0.4 = 0.35 = 0.3 = 0.2 = 0.1
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
500
1000
1500
2000
500
1000
1500
2000

2000 2000
[kPa-]
1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
[kPa-]
1800
Horizontal Shear stress
Horizontal Shear stress
C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1
=5 = 4.5 =4 = 3.5 =3 = 2.5 =2 = 1.5
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2
=5 =4 =3 = 2.6 = 1.5 =1 = 0.5 =0
500
1000
1500
2000
500
1000
1500
2000
Fig. 4-48: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated stress plot during constant volume DSS tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
4-67
D. Conclusion The parametric analysis performed on simulation results of monotonic constant volume direct simple shear (DSS) tests indicates the influence of the model parameters is identical to that observed on simulations of undrained triaxial tests. The slope of the critical state line is only function of parameters C1 and C2. The position of the critical state on the critical state line is determined by the position of the critical void ratio line that is defined by parameters ec0, n and hs. Parameter ed0 and control principally the peak stress ratio, whereas parameters ei0 and modify the soil stiffness. III.3.4 Analysis of cyclic constant volume DSS tests simulations A. Introduction The following paragraphs investigate how the hypoplastic constitutive equation is able to simulate the soil behaviour during a cyclic strain controlled constant volume direct simple shear (DSS) test. The first paragraph discusses typical simulation results and compares the evolution of the vertical and horizontal stresses with the evolution of the principal stresses. The second paragraph presents the result of a parametric analysis that investigated the influence of the hypoplastic equation parameters on the hysteresis loops, the stress ratio loops3 and the stress path. Similarly to triaxial test simulations, the following investigation is limited to soil behaviour characteristics of the zone I: contractive and dilative behaviour. B. Simulation of cyclic DSS tests The simulation results of a cyclic constant volume DSS test is drawn on Fig. 4-49. The input parameters are identical to the parameters of the reference case defined in the previous paragraphs (Table 4-2) except that the initial mean stress P0 is equal to 50 kPa (V=80kPa & L=40kPa). The shape of the simulated hysteresis loops is similar to the observations performed during laboratory cyclic DSS tests. The loops are symmetric and the curvature is function of the dilative or contractive behaviour. During each cycle, 2 phases of dilation and 2 phases of contraction are observed. The stress plot presents also the classical butterfly shape. During each dilation phase, the stress plot is aligned with the steady state lines and the slopes of these lines are independent of the cycle number. Fig. 4-49-b & -d compares the evolution of the lateral and vertical stresses. As it was assumed previously, the lateral normal stress L at the beginning of the shearing is equal to the half of the vertical normal stress V. However, during the
The hysteresis loop is defined as the relationship between the shear stress as a function of the shear strain. The stress ratio loop is defined as the relationship between the ration of the principal stresses 1/3 as a function of the shear strain.
3
4-68
shearing, these stresses becomes equal (before the half of the first cycle), and remain equal during the rest of the shearing. This means that during the beginning of the shearing, the principal directions are rotating of an angle of 45. During the rest of the test, the angle of principal direction remains at 45 above the horizontal; the horizontal shear stress is equal to the maximum shear stress (Fig. 4-49-a) and the vertical normal stress V is equal to the mean stress P. As observed during the simulations of cyclic triaxial test, the hypoplastic constitutive equation does not simulate the cyclic soil degradation. Indeed, the simulation results tend rapidly (in 2 or 3 cycles) to an equilibrium cycle where the dilative phases compensate the contractive phases and where the systematic decrease of effective mean stress is no longer observed.
30 90
Effective Normal S tresses V' - L' [kPa]
Lateral Normal Stress Vertical Normal Stress
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
S hear S tresses max [kPa]
20
10
-10
-20
Maximum Shear Stress Horizontal Shear Stress
-30 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
(a)
30 1.2
L'/ V'
(b)
[-]
[kPa-]
20
10
Effective Normal S tress Ratio

0 20 40 60 80 100
0.8
0.6
-10
0.4
-20
0.2
-30
0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
(c) (d) Fig. 4-49: Cyclic strain controlled constant volume DSS test simulation with the hypoplastic constitutive equation(a) hysteresis loops; (b) evolution of the effective normal stress (c) stress plot; (c) evoluton of the ratio between the vertical and lateral normal stresses.
4-69
The stress path (P vs q) also has a shape similar to that observed for triaxial tests simulations (Fig. 4-50-a): the same butterfly shape and the same alignment with the critical state lines. The difference is that the deviator at the starting point (P0=50kPa and q0=40kPa) is not equal to zero. However, it can be showed that this initial state has no influence on the equilibrium cycle. The evolution of the ratio between the maximum and the minimum principal stresses 1/3 (Fig. 4-50-b) presents the same kind of loops as observed during the triaxial test simulations. These loops are characterised by a large variation of the stress ratio during the contraction phases and a quasi constant value during the dilation phases.
50 5
30
Principal S tresses Ratio 1'/ 3' [kPa]

0 20 40 60
40
4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Deviator q [kPa]
20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50
Effective Mean S tress p' [kPa]
(a) (b) Fig. 4-50: Principal stress analysis of a cyclic strain-controlled, constant-volume DSS test simulation with the hypoplastic constitutive equation: (a) stress path; (b) stress ratio loops.
Fig. 4-51, presenting the shape of the equilibrium cycle for different values of the void ratio e, illustrates the strong influence of the void ratio e on the simulations of cyclic DSS tests. As remarked previously, the simulation results are very sensitive to the value of the void ratio relatively to the minimum and critical void ratios. When the void ratio e tends toward the minimum void ratio ed, the amplitude of the horizontal shear stress increases significantly, and the width of the hysteresis loop decreases. The behaviour tends to a non linear elastic behaviour. On the other hand, when the void ratio e increases and becomes close to the critical void ratio ec, the soil resistance decreases and is close to zero for void ratios close to the critical void ratio ec .
4-70
1500

1500
[kPa]
1000 500 0 -500 -1000 -1500 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 e = 0.8 e = 0.7 e = 0.6 e = 0.5 e = 0.75 e = 0.65 e = 0.55 e = 0.45
[kPa]
H
1000 500 0 -500 -1000 -1500 -10 -5 0 5 10 a = 8 % a = 2 % a = 1 % a = 0.25 % a = 4 % a= 1.5% a = 0.5 % a = 0.125 %

7 6 e = 0.8 e = 0.7 e = 0.6 e = 0.5 e = 0.75 e = 0.65 e = 0.55 e = 0.45 7 6

a = 8 % a = 2 % a = 1 % a = 0.25 % a = 4 % a= 1.5% a = 0.5 % a = 0.125 %
[-]
3'
1'
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5
1'
3'
[-] Stress Ratio

0.5 1 1.5 2
5 4 3 2 1 0
Stress Ratio
-1
-0.5
-10
-5
10
1200
1200
[kPa-]
800 600 400 200 0 -200 -400 -600 -800 -1000 -1200 0 500 1000 1500 e = 0.8 e = 0.65 e = 0.5 e = 0.75 e = 0.6 e = 0.45 e = 0.7 e = 0.55
[kPa-]
H
1000
1000 800 600 400 200 0 -200 -400 -600 -800 -1000 -1200 0 a = 8 % a = 2 % a = 1 % a = 0.25 % 500 a = 4 % a= 1.5% a = 0.5 % a = 0.125 % 1000 1500
Fig. 4-51: Influence of the void ratio on simulations of cyclic constant volume DSS test.
Fig. 4-52: Influence of the shear strain amplitude on simulations of cyclic constant volume DSS test.
4-71
The range of mean stresses covered during the cyclic simulations is drawn on Fig. 4-53 as a function of the void ratio. The minimum mean stress corresponds to the end of the contraction phase, i.e. the inflection points of the hysteresis loops whereas the maximum mean stress occurs at the end of the dilative phases corresponding to the shear strain reversal. As observed for cyclic triaxial tests (Fig. 4-30), the average value of the effective mean stresses decreases when the void ratio increases and is higher than for the triaxial test. The ratio between the minimum mean stress simulated during the cyclic triaxial and DSS tests remains constant for the different values of the void ratio. Like for the triaxial test, the ratio between the maximum and minimum mean stress remains constant for the cyclic DSS tests simulations.
0.9 Critical Void Ratio Line 0.85 0.8 0.75 e = 0.8 e = 0.75 e = 0.7 e = 0.65 e = 0.6 e = 0.55 e = 0.5 e = 0.45
Void Ratio e [-]
0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 Minimum Void Ratio Line 0.45 0.4 1 10 100 Minimum Me an Stress during cycle
Maximum Mean Stre ss during cycle
1000
10000
Fig. 4-53: Evolution of the minimum and maximum effective mean stresses observed on the equilibrium cycle of simulations of cyclic constant volume DSS test.
The influence of the shear strain amplitude on the simulated shape of hysteresis loops and stress plots is presented on Fig. 4-52.
4-72
C. Parametric analysis of cyclic DSS tests simulations The objective of the following paragraph is to present the results of the parametric analysis performed in order to investigate the influence of the 9 parameters of the hypoplastic constitutive equation on the simulated results of cyclic constant volume DSS test. The analysis investigates principally the shape of the cycle when the stable cycle is reached. A large range of the parameters is investigated and covers values that are outside the range generally proposed in the literature. The type of behaviour analysed is limited to the behaviour type of zone I (i.e. contractive and dilative behaviour). The results of the parametric analysis are also available in appendix on the enclosed CD-rom.
4-73
200
200
[kPa]
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 eco eco eco eco = 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95 = 0.85 eco eco eco eco = 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.8
[kPa] Horozintal Shear Stress

H
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 edo = 0.7 edo = 0.6 edo = 0.5 edo = 0.4 edo edo edo edo = 0.65 = 0.55 = 0.45 = 0.35

200

H
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 eio eio eio eio = 1.3 = 1.2 = 1.1 =1 eio eio eio eio = 1.25 = 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95
Fig. 4-54: Influence of the free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0, and ei0 on simulated hysteresis loops of constant volume cyclic DSS test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
Similarly to the triaxial test simulations, the shape of the hysteresis loops remains always similar in the investigated ranges of values(Fig. 4-54 & Fig. 4-55). The banana shape typical of dilative granular material which curvature is function of the dilative or contractive soil behaviour is systematically observed. The same conclusions as for the triaxial test are coming out the parametric analysis of the DSS test: ! The hysteresis loops calculated with different values of the maximum free-stress void ratio ei0 and parameters n, hs, C1 and C2 present two fixed points. These points corresponds to the shear strain where the shear stress vanishes. ! The maximum free-stress void ratio ei0 and the parameters C1 and C2 have a relatively low influence on the shape of the loops compared to the other parameters.
4-74
200
200
[kPa]

H
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -2 = 0.6 = 0.3 = 0.15 -1.5 -1 -0.5 = 0.5 = 0.25 = 0.1 0 0.5 1 = 0.4 = 0.2
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 =3 = 1.5 = 0.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 = 2.5 = 1.1 =0 0 0.5 1 =2 =1
1.5
1.5

200 200
[kPa]
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 n n n n = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.2 n n n n = 0.45 = 0.35 = 0.25 = 0.1

H
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 hs = 1400 MPa hs = 1000 MPa hs = 600 MPa hs = 200 MPa hs = 1200 MPa hs = 800 MPa hs = 400 MPa hs = 100 MPa

200 200
[kPa]
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 C1 C1 C1 C1 =5 =4 =3 =2 C1 C1 C1 C1 = 4.5 = 3.5 = 2.5 = 1.5

H
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 C2 C2 C2 C2 =5 =3 = 1.5 = 0.5 C2 C2 C2 C2 =4 = 2.6 =1 =0
Fig. 4-55: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated hysteresis loops of constant volume cyclic DSS test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.

7 6 eco eco eco eco = 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95 = 0.85 eco eco eco eco = 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.8 7 6 edo = 0.7 edo = 0.6 edo = 0.5 edo = 0.4 edo edo edo edo = 0.65 = 0.55 = 0.45 = 0.35
4-75
[-]
3'
1'
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5
1'
3'
[-] Stress Ratio

1 1.5 2
5 4 3 2 1 0
Stress Ratio

eio eio eio eio = 1.3 = 1.2 = 1.1 =1 eio eio eio eio = 1.25 = 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95
-1
-0.5
0.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
7 6
[-]
1' 3'
5 4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5
Stress Ratio
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
Fig. 4-56: Influence of the free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0, and ei0 on simulated stress ratio loops of constant volume cyclic DSS test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
Fig. 4-56 & Fig. 4-57 present the loops of the ratio between the maximum and minimum principal stresses 1/3. The comparison of these figures with the equivalent figures presented during the cyclic triaxial tests parametric analysis shows the influence of the parameters influence is similar for the two test types. Since the residual stress ratio depends on parameters C1 and C2, these parameters are the most important parameters in the calculation of the stress ratio loops. On the other hand, parameter hs does absolutely not modify the stress ratio loop. Indeed, as observed during the cyclic triaxial tests analysis, for each value of hs investigated, the simulated loops are perfectly identical. Parameter n and ei0 have a negligible influence on stress ratio loops.
4-76
7 6

7 6
[-]
[-]
3'
1'
1'
3'
5 4 3 2 1 0 -2
= 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.25 = 0.15
= 0.5 = 0.3 = 0.2 = 0.1
5 4 3 2 1 0
=3 =2 = 1.1 = 0.5
= 2.5 = 1.5 =1 =0
Stress Ratio
Stress Ratio
-1.5

n n n n = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.2 n n n n = 0.45 = 0.35 = 0.25 = 0.1
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
-2
-1.5

hs = 1400 MPa hs = 1000 MPa hs = 600 MPa hs = 200 MPa
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
7 6
7 6 hs = 1200 MPa hs = 800 MPa hs = 400 MPa hs = 100 MPa
[-]
[-]
1' 3'
1'
3'
5 4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5
5 4 3 2 1 0
Stress Ratio

C1 C1 C1 C1 =5 =4 =3 =2 C1 C1 C1 C1 = 4.5 = 3.5 = 2.5 = 1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
Stress Ratio
-2
-1.5

C2 C2 C2 C2 =5 =3 = 1.5 = 0.5 C2 C2 C2 C2 =4 = 2.6 =1 =0
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
7 6
7 6
[-]
3'
1'
4 3 2 1 0 -2 -1.5
1'
3'
[-] Stress Ratio

1 1.5 2
5 4 3 2 1 0
Stress Ratio
-1
-0.5
0.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
Fig. 4-57: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated stress ratio loops of constant volume cyclic DSS test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.

200 200
4-77
[kPa-]
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 0 50 100 150 200 250 eco eco eco eco = 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95 = 0.85 eco eco eco eco = 1.1 =1 = 0.9 = 0.8
[kPa-] Horizontal Shear Stress

H
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 0 50 100 150 200 250 edo = 0.7 edo = 0.6 edo = 0.5 edo = 0.4 edo edo edo edo = 0.65 = 0.55 = 0.45 = 0.35

200

H
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 0 50 100 150 200 250 eio eio eio eio = 1.3 = 1.2 = 1.1 =1 eio eio eio eio = 1.25 = 1.15 = 1.05 = 0.95
Fig. 4-58: Influence of the free-stress void ratios ec0, ed0, and ei0 on simulated stress path of undrained cyclic triaxial test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
Fig. 4-58 & Fig. 4-59 analyse the influence of the parameters on the stress plots simulated with the hypoplastic constitutive equation during cyclic DSS test. In the range of values investigated, the parameters do not modify the butterfly shape of the stress path. All cycles are situated inside the area defined by the two critical state lines. The slope of these lines is only function of parameters C1 and C2. The influence of each parameter is also similar to the influence observed during cyclic triaxial test simulations. The main observation is that the analysis of the stress plot and the stress ratio loops concludes that the shapes of the stress plots followed during the equilibrium cycle are homothetic for simulations performed with parameters n, hs, C1 and C2.
4-78
200

200
[kPa-]

H
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 0 = 0.6 = 0.4 = 0.25 = 0.15 50 100 = 0.5 = 0.3 = 0.2 = 0.1 150 200 250
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 0 =3 =2 = 1.1 = 0.5 50 100 = 2.5 = 1.5 =1 =0 150 200 250

200 200
[kPa-]

H
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 0 50 100 150 200 250 n n n n = 0.5 = 0.4 = 0.3 = 0.2 n n n n = 0.45 = 0.35 = 0.25 = 0.1
150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 0 hs = 1400 MPa hs = 1000 MPa hs = 600 MPa hs = 200 MPa 50 100 150 hs = 1200 MPa hs = 800 MPa hs = 400 MPa hs = 100 MPa 200 250

80 80
[kPa-]
60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 0 20 40 60 C1 = 5 C1 = 3.5 C1 = 2 C1 = 4.5 C1 = 3 C1 = 1.5 C1 = 4 C1 = 2.5
[kPa-]
Different Scale
Different Scale 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 0 20 40 60 C2 = 5 C2 = 2.6 C2 = 0.5 C2 = 4 C2 = 1.5 C2 = 0 C2 = 3 C2 = 1
Fig. 4-59: Influence of parameters , , n, hs, C1 and C2 on simulated stress path of undrained cyclic triaxial test with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
4-79
D. Conclusion The objective of the previous paragraphs was to analyse how the hypoplastic constitutive equation is able to simulate the soil behaviour during cyclic-strain controlled, constant-volume DSS tests. The shapes of the simulated hysteresis loops and the stress plots are similar to the shapes observed during laboratory cyclic DSS tests. The loops are symmetric and the curvature is function of the dilative or contractive behaviour. During each cycle, 2 phases of dilation and 2 phases of contraction are observed. The stress plot presents also the classical butterfly shape. During each dilation phase, the stress plot is aligned with the steady state lines and the slope of these lines is independent of the cycle number. During the beginning of the cyclic shearing, the principal directions are rotating from and angle of 0 above the horizontal to an angle of 45. During the rest of the test, the angles of principal direction remain at 45 above the horizontal. Therefore, the horizontal shear stress is equal to the maximum shear stress whereas the vertical normal stress V is equal to the mean stress P. Similarly to the simulations of cyclic triaxial tests, the hypoplastic constitutive equation is not able to simulate the cyclic soil degradation. Indeed, the simulation results tend to an equilibrium cycle where the dilative phases compensate the contractive phases. The results of the parametric analysis of the hypoplastic constitutive equation on the equilibrium cycle concluded that the shapes of the hysteresis loops, the stress ratio loops and the stress plots remain similar for the complete range of parameters investigated. Each constitutive parameter has a monotonic influence on the curves and loops. Futhermore, these parameters influence the different curves of the simulated cyclic DSS tests in the same way, and more or less in the same proportions, as observed during the analysis of the simulated cyclic triaxial tests.
III.4 Comparison of triaxial test and DSS test simulations

III.4.1 Introduction The objective of the following paragraphs is to compare the simulation results of undrained triaxial compression tests with the simulation results of constant volume DSS tests simulated using the hypoplastic constitutive law. The first paragraph compares the results of monotonic tests and discusses the influence of the constitutive parameters. The second paragraph discusses the simulation results of cyclic tests.
4-80
III.4.2 Comparison of monotonic tests Simulations of monotonic constant volume DSS tests and of undrained triaxial tests were performed with the hypoplastic constitutive model, using the parameter of the reference case described in the previous section (Table 4-6). The results of the simulations are drawn on Fig. 4-60. Test Parameters P0 = 200kPa = 0.7 e Parameters of hypoplastic constitutive equation hs = 200 MPa ec0 = 0.88 = 1.10 n = 0.35 ed0 = 0.52 C1 = 3.06 ei0 = 1.2 C2 = 2.60 = 0.25
Table 4-6: Reference parameters considered for simulations with the hypoplastic constitutive law.
700
max [kPa]
4.5 4
600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 T riaxial T est Simulation DSS T est Simulation
Stress Ratio 1'/ 3' [-]
3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 T riaxial T est Simulation DSS T est Simulation
Maximum Shear Stresses
20
40
60
80
20
40
60
80
(a)
1200 1000 800
(b)
Deviator q [kPa]
600 400 200 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
T riaxial T est Simulation DSS T est Simulation
(c)
Fig. 4-60: Comparison between monotonic undrained triaxial test and constant volume DSS test simulated with the hypoplastic constitutive law: (a) evolution of maximum shear stress; (b) evolution of stress ratio;.(c) stress path
4-81
Fig. 4-60-a compares the evolution of the maximum shear stress as a function of the shear strain. The maximum shear stress max is defined as the radius of the larger Mohr circle (=(1-3)/2). During a triaxial test, the maximum shear stress max is applied on a face making an angle of 45 with the vertical direction. During a DSS test, the face where the maximum shear stress is applied turns during the shearing. It was showed, however, that this face rapidly becomes horizontal. After a shear strain of about 1% for dilative material, the maximum shear stress of a DSS test is equal to the horizontal shear stress H. Fig. 4-60-a points out that the simulated soil behaviour presents a higher stiffness (shear modulus) for the DSS test than for the triaxial test. The maximum shear stress at critical state is higher for the triaxial test. The ratio between the maximum shear stresses at critical state of the triaxial test and the DSS test is about 1.05. This value is very low regarding the values traditionally observed on experimental results that are about 3.5 for Brusselian sands. Fig. 4-60-b compares the simulated evolution of the ratio between the maximum and the minimum principal stresses 1/3 for the 2 test types. This evolution is characterised for the both tests by an important increase to a peak value followed by a progressive decrease toward a residual value. However, the simulated DSS test presents higher values of peak and residual stress ratios. The comparison between the triaxial test and the DSS test using the maximum shear stress or the stress ratio is convenient because this analysis is directly related to parameters that can be measured during a laboratory test (principal stresses in triaxial test, horizontal shear stress in DSS test, ). However, the conclusions resulting from this analysis do not consider the intermediate principal stress 2. Indeed, the value of this stress is different for the 2 test types. For the triaxial test, it is clearly accepted that the second principal stress is equal to the third one (2= 3). Hence, the analyses of the maximum shear stress and the void ratio are perfectly indicated to analyse the test. Unlike, during the analysis of the DSS test, even if the lateral stresses in the 2 perpendicular directions are assumed to be equal, the second and third principal stresses are not equal. Therefore, the stress path (p vs q) seems to offer a better representation to compare the simulated soil behaviours during triaxial and DSS tests. The mean stress P and the deviator are calculated using the following equations considering the three principal stresses:
P'= "1' + "2' + "3' 3
2
(Eq. 4-41)
2 2
q= 1 . ("1' "2') +( "1' "3' ) +("2' "3) 2
(Eq. 4-42)
Fig. 4-60-c compares the stress paths of triaxial and DSS tests simulated with the hypoplastic constitutive equation. Because the consolidation is isotropic for the triaxial test and anisotopic for the DSS test, the deviator of the initial point of the stress path is equal to zero for the triaxial test, and is positive for the DSS test. Since the initial condition corresponds to a behaviour type of zone I, in both test types, the specimen starts the shearing by a contractive behaviour (decrease of the mean stress)
4-82
to the dilation state and, for larger deformation, the behaviour becomes dilative (increase of the mean stress). During the dilative phase, the stress path is aligned with the critical state line until the critical state is reached. The mean stresses at dilation state and critical state are independent of the test type. This observation was discussed previously and it was shown that the mean stress at dilation and critical state are determined by the initial test conditions (e and P0) and the position of the minimum and critical void ratio lines (ed and ec). The difference in the slope of the critical state line results from the critical state surface, defined by the parameter a1 of the constitutive equation as a function of the deviator and the direction of the deformation (using the Lode angle) (see paragraph II.3.2). This parameter is function of the two parameters C1 and C2, with parameter C2 controlling the influence of the deviator on the critical state surface. If parameter C2 is set to 0, this influence is cancelled and, in addition if an isotropic initial state is assumed for the DSS test (hypothetically), the stress paths of the two simulated tests types are identical (Fig. 4-61-a). Fig. 4-61-b illustrates the importance of the second principal stress 2. Indeed, even if the stress paths are exactly identical, the simulated maximum shear stresses are different due to the second principal stress 2. For a same value of the deviator q (Point A and A on Fig. 4-61), the maximum shear stress max of the DSS test is higher than the maximum shear stress max of the triaxial because the intermediate effective principal stress 2 of the DSS test (equal to the mean between the highest and the lowest principal stresses (1+3)/2) is higher than for the triaxial test where the intermediate principal stress is equal to the minimum principal stress (3=2). This behaviour is illustrated on the Mohr circle corresponding to the stress state of the points A & A on Fig. 4-61-c & d. The importance of the intermediate effective stress 2 was pointed out on the comparison of the simulation results of the reference case analysed in the previous section. The parametric analysis demonstrated the influence of the constitutive parameters is monotonic, and identical for the two types of test. Therefore, the above conclusions can be extended to all values of the parameters that induce a soil behaviour of the zone I.

1400
max [kPa]
4-83
800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1500 0 20 40 60 80 T riaxial T est Simulation DSS T est Simulation Point A'
1200 1000
Deviator q [kPa]
800 600 400 200 0 0 500 1000 T riaxial T est Simulation DSS T est Simulation Point A & A'
Point A
(a)
[kPa] [kPa]
400 Point A P' = 500 kPa q = 600 kPa 400 Point A'
(b)
P' = 500 kPa q = 600 kPa
Shear Stress
200 max 0 0 200 2 '=3 ' 400 600 800 1 ' 1000
Shear Stress
200 max 0 0 3 ' 200 2 ' 400 600 800 1 ' 1000
(c) (d) Fig. 4-61: Comparison between the simulations of monotonic triaxial and DSS tests performed with parameter C2 set to 0: (a) stress path; (b) evolution of maximum shear stress max; (c) Mohr circle in triaxial test (point A); (d) Mohr circle in DSS test (point A).
III.4.3 Comparison of cyclic tests Fig. 4-62 compares the results of simulations of cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial test and of cyclic constant volume DSS test. The input parameters of these simulations are the parameters of the reference case defined previously (Table 4-6).
4-84
30

5 4.5 T riaxial T est Simulation DSS T est Simulation
Maximum Shear Stresses max [kPa]
20
[-]
10
1 '/ 3'
4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1
-10
-20
T riaxial T est Simulation DSS T est Simulation
Stress Ratio
0.5 0
-30 -2 -1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
(a)
50 40 30
(b)
Deviator q [kPa]
20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 0 20 40 60 T riaxial T est Simulation DSS T est Simulation
(c) Fig. 4-62: Comparison between cyclic undrained triaxial test and constant volume DSS test simulated with the hypoplastic constitutive law: (a) hysteresis loops; (b) stress ratio loops; (c) stress path.
Considering the quantitative comparison of the hysteresis loops and the stress ratio loops is not meaning full because these parameter do not take the second principal stress into account, it can be remarked that the shape the hysteresis loops from the DSS and triaxial tests are similar. The same banana shape which the curvature is function of the dilative or contractive soil behaviour. The main difference in the hysteresis loops is the non symmetry of the loops during the simulated triaxial test, whereas the loops are symmetrical during DSS test. For the 2 types of test, the equilibrium cycle is reached after 1 or 2 cycles. The stress paths for the 2 test types present the same butterfly shape which slopes of the limit lines are different. The non symmetry of the hysteresis loops of the
4-85
triaxial test and the differences in the slopes of the critical state lines between triaxial tests (extension and compression) and DSS tests and are the consequence of the dependence of the critical state surface to the direction of deformation (see paragraph II.3.2A). The range of mean stresses covered by the equilibrium cycle are quite different. Indeed, the mean stresses of the simulated cyclic DSS test cover a larger range (8kPa"36kPa against 2kPa"13kPa) with an higher mean value (7kPa against 22kPa). Simulation results show that no constitutive parameters can change this observation. It seems to derive directly from the hypoplastic constitutive equation, probably from the definition of parameter a1 that is function of the direction of deformation III.4.4 Conclusion The comparison between simulations of monotonic constant volume DSS tests with simulation of undrained triaxial tests showed the hypoplastic constitutive equation simulates similarly the both test types. The analysis pointed out the significant influence of the second principal stress 2 that has to be considered in the comparison between these two kinds of test. It results that the stress path (P vs q) seems to be the most appropriate relationship to compare these tests. The comparison of the simulated stress paths corresponding to the stable cycle concluded that the range of mean stresses which balances between the increase and the decrease of mean stress (equilibrium cycle), is about 3 times higher for the cyclic DSS tests than for the cyclic triaxial test. This behaviour can not be changed by adjusting the constitutive parameters. It seems to be linked to the formulation of the general constitutive equation.
IV
COMPARISON BETWEEN HYPOPLASTIC MODEL AND RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTS
IV.1 Introduction
The purpose of the following section is to compare the simulations of the hypoplastic model with the experimental tests results. The first paragraphs present the procedure followed to calibrate the hypoplastic constitutive equation for the Brusselian sand. The second paragraph compares the measured and simulated results of monotonic triaxial and DSS tests. Finally, the last paragraph discusses the comparison between simulations and experimental measurements of cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial tests and cyclic straincontrolled, constant-volume DSS tests. That paragraph discusses also the different strengths and weaknesses of the hypoplastic constitutive equation for the simulation of cyclic shearing.
4-86
IV.2 Calibration of hypoplastic equation parameters for Brusselian sand

As presented in paragraph II.2 and discussed in the previous sections, the hypoplastic constitutive equation developed by Bauer (1996) and Gudehus (1996) requires the evaluation of 9 material parameters: ! ei0, the maximum void ratio for a stress-free state ! ed0, the minimum void ratio for a stress-free state ! ec0, the critical void ratio for a stress-free state ! hs, the granular hardness ! C1, C2, n, , , constitutive dimensionless constants The following paragraphs present the procedure proposed by Bauer to evaluate each parameter. This procedure is then applied to determine the parameter values corresponding to the Brusselian sand that was used in this research. IV.2.1 Proposed calibration procedure Bauer (1996) and Herle (2000) proposed a method to determine the value of parameters hs, C1, C2, n, and based on four tests : 2 triaxial compression tests, a triaxial extension test, an oedometer test and an isotropic compression test. Parameters C1 & C2 are deduced from the critical state line of the triaxial compression (C1) and extension (C2) tests. However, if the same magnitude of the friction angle is assumed in compression and in extension, parameters C1 and C2 can be determined directly from the friction angle considering that, at critical state, the failure criteria of Coulomb (=.tan()) can be used (Eq 4-43 - Bauer, 1996). This relationship is drawn on Fig. 4-63.
3-sin(') C1= 3 . 8 sin(') 3+sin(') C2 = 3 . 8 sin(')
(Eq. 4-43)
It was shown during the parametrical analysis that hypoplastic constitutive equation calculates the slope of the critical state line as a function parameters C1 and C2 independently of the void ratio e and other constitutive parameters (, , n, hs, ec0, ed0 and ei0).
IV. Comparison between hypoplastic model and results of laboratory tests

7 Parameter C1 6 Parameter C2
4-87
Parameter C1 - C2 [-]
5 4 3 2 1 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Friction Angle ' []
Fig. 4-63: Relationship between the friction angle and parameters C1 and C2
Parameter is determined based on the position of the peak state in the triaxial compression. Parameters hs and n are calculated on oedometer test results. Generally, parameter is deduced from an isotropic compression test. Since it is difficult to reach large stresses during an isotropic compression test, parameter can also be determined by comparing the results of several oedometer tests performed with different initial void ratios. IV.2.2 Followed calibration procedure The following paragraph presents the procedure followed to calibrate the hypoplastic model for the Brusselian sand. This procedure is based on the procedure proposed by Bauer (1996) with small adaptations as a function of the available data. 10 oedometer tests, 9 monotonic undrained compression triaxial tests, 4 monotonic drained triaxial compression tests, and cyclic triaxial tests were used to calibrated the Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic constitutive equation for the Brusselian sand. The procedure descriptions and the results of these tests were presented in Chapter 3 (section II and III). Parameters C1 and C2 were the first parameters determined. This determination used Eq 4-43 and was based on the friction angle measured during the monotonic triaxial tests (=33). Parameters eco, n and hs were then evaluated based on the position of the critical states measured during the drained and undrained triaxial tests (Fig. 4-64). Parameters , ed0, ei0 were deduced from the series of oedometer tests (Fig. 4-65). Finally, parameters was adjusted on the stress ratio loops measured during cyclic triaxial tests (Fig. 4-66). The values of the parameters resulting from this analysis are summarised in Table 4-7. The values of these parameters are similar to the reference case used during the different analyses of the previous section.
4-88
Parameters of hypoplastic model ec0 = 0.88 n = 0.35 ed0 = 0.52 hs = 200 MPa ei0 = 1.21 = 0.3 C1 = 2.85 = 1.10 C2 = 2.50
Table 4-7: Parameters of the Bauer & Gugehuss hypoplastic constitutive equation calibrated for Brusselian sand.
Fig. 4-64 summarises the results of the triaxial compression tests (drained and undrained) performed in order to determine the position of the critical void ratio line (function of parameters eco, n and hs). The critical state of each test is marked by the blue dots. The line matches rather well the available set of data. As shown on the figure, all the measured critical states are situated in the range of 8% around the critical void ratio line. The distribution of the experimental data around the modelled curve results probably from the influence of the sample preparation that has a stronger influence on results of monotonic tests performed on dense sand than on results of cyclic tests. Fig. 4-64 points out the importance of determining correctly the void ratio during undrained tests. Indeed, a small deviation in the determination of the void ratio induces a large variation in the determination of the critical mean stress Pcr.
1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 Maximum void ratio
eco = 0.88 = 1.1 edo = 0.52 = 0.3 eio = 1.21 C1 = 2.85 C2 = 2.50 n = 0.35 hs = 200 MPa
Void Ratio e [-]
1 0.9 Critical void ratio 0.8 0.7 0.6 Mimimum void ratio 0.5 0.4 1 10 100 Critical state of drained tests Critical state of undrained tests 1000 10000
+8%
-8%
Fig. 4-64: Calibration of the Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic model for Brusselian sand based on monotonic triaxial tests
4-89
Fig. 4-65 compares the results of oedometer tests performed on the Brusselian sand with simulated results using the hypoplastic constitutive equation4. In the range of values investigated, the experimental data fit rather well the simulated results. The largest difference is observed between the tests and the simulation with a high initial void ratio (e0=1.05). The difference could be explained by the difficulties to perform a perfect oedometer test on loose cohesionless soil. Indeed, the soil structure corresponding to such void ratio is unstable and very sensitive to any imperfection in sample preparation and in the test procedure.
1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 Maxim um void
eco = 0.88 = 1.1 edo = 0.52 = 0.3 C1 = 2.85 eio = 1.21 C2 = 2.50 n = 0.35 hs = 200 MPa
T est result Simulation result
Void Ratio e [-]
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 1 10 100 1000
Mimim um void 10000
Fig. 4-65: Calibration of the Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic model for Brusselian sand based on 10 oedometer tests
The laboratory investigation showed that the loops of the ratio between the principal stresses 1/3 during a cyclic triaxial test provide a stable representation of the soil behaviour, irrespective of the number of cycles (see Chapter 3). On the other hand, the parametric analysis presented in the previous section demonstrated that the shape of the stress ratio can be adjusted with parameter . Therefore, this parameter was calibrated based on the stabilised stress ratio loops of cyclic triaxial tests instead of on the peak stress ratio of monotonic triaxial test, as proposed by Bauer (1996). The results of the calibration are presented on Fig. 4-66 for different values of relative densities Dr and initial mean stress P0. For each case, the simulated and measured results fit rather well.
An Excel sheet allowing the simulations of oedometer test is available on the CD-rom in annexe. The file name is Hypoplastic oedometer test.xls.
4-90
6

6 T est Results 5 Hypoplastic Model 5 T est Results Hypoplastic model Dr = 85 % P 0 ' = 200 kPa
[-]
Dr = 85 % P 0 ' = 200 kPa
3'
3' 1 '/
[-]
4
1 '/
Stress Ratio
Stress Ratio
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
3 2
1 0 -2.0
1 0 -2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
(a)
6 T est Results 5 Hypoplastic Model Dr = 70 % P 0 ' = 200 kPa 5 6
(b)
T est Results Hypoplastic Model Dr = 85 % P 0 ' = 50 kPa
[-]
[-]
1 '/ 3'
3'
4 3 2 1 0 -2.0
1 '/
Stress Ratio
1 0 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Stress Ratio Maximum Shear Strain [% ]
-1
(c) (d) Fig. 4-66: Comparison between simulated and measured stress ratio loops of cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial tests with different relative densities Dr and initial effective mean stresses P0: (a) a=1.5%, Dr=85% and Po=200kPa; (b) a=1.5%, Dr=86% and Po=200kPa; (c) a=1.5%, Dr=70% and Po=200kPa; (d) a=1.5%, Dr=70% and Po=200kPa
4-91
IV.3 Comparison between simulated and measured monotonic tests results

Fig. 4-67 and Fig. 4-68 compare the simulations with experimental measurements of respectively, stress paths of monotonic undrained triaxial compression tests and stress plots of monotonic constant volume DSS tests. In both cases, the hypoplastic constitutive equations simulate correctly the soil behaviour during monotonic shearing. The sequence of contractive and dilative phases, and the proportional progression towards the critical state are in very good agreement. However, the simulated and measured results do not fit during the contraction phase. The beginning of the stress path of experimental monotonic triaxial test (Fig. 4-67) is characterised by an increase of the deviator with a low decrease of the effective mean stress The same observation can be conducted on the stress plot of the experimental DSS test (Fig. 4-68) where the relationship between the horizontal shear stress and the effective vertical normal stress presents the same type of behaviour. This phenomenon results from the grain reorganisation that changes the orientation of their contacts due to the transition of the consolidation phase to the shearing phase. This transition occurs with a mild tendency to reduce the volume. The hypoplastic constitutive law is not able to simulate this kind of transition, and considers that the orientation of the directions of the grain contacts changes instantaneously when the loading conditions change. This problem is linked to the constitutive equation and can not be solved by adapting the values of the model parameters. Indeed, during the analysis of triaxial test simulations, an equation was established in order to be able to calibrate the value of parameter (Eq 4-30 of paragraph III.2.3) based on the values of the mean stress and the deviator at the dilation state (i.e. transition from contractive to dilative behaviour). This equation forces the stress path to cross the measured dilation state. It can be shown that the use of this relationship leads to the values of parameter that becomes in contradiction with the assumption of the soil behaviour during isotropic compression (exponential relationship between the void ratio and the mean stress under isotropic loading condition Eq 4-13 and Eq 4-14 of paragraph II.3.2.D). Indeed, the calculated values yield to impossible negative values of stiffness factor fb. This factor was deduced from the assumption that the void ratio during an isotropic compression decreases proportionally to the limit void ratio lines (i.e. critical, minimum and maximum void ratios). The difficulty to model the soil behaviour at the beginning of the shearing requires to use a more refined model which considers an elastic range at small strain. A such model was proposed by Niemunis and Herle (1997) by adding to the hypoplastic constitutive equation an additional state variable that represents the deformation of the interface layer between the grains.
4-92
1800

400
1400
[kPa-]
H
1600
350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50 Test Results Simulation Result
Deviator q [kPa]
1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Test Results Simulation Result
200
400
600
Fig. 4-67: Comparison between simulation and laboratory results of monotonic undrained triaxial compression test
Fig. 4-68: Comparison between simulation and laboratory results of monotonic constant volume DSS test
IV.4 Comparison between simulated and measured cyclic tests results

Fig. 4-69 and Fig. 4-70 compare simulations with laboratory results of cyclic undrained strain controlled triaxial test and cyclic constant volume strain controlled DSS test. The constitutive parameters considered for the simulations are equal to the calibrated values presented above (Table 4-7). The hypoplastic model is able to represent rather well the behaviour of a granular soil during cyclic triaxial and DSS tests performed with large shear strain amplitudes. The model simulates correctly the butterfly shape of the stress path included between the critical state lines. The slope determined based on the friction angle (parameters C1 and C2) takes correctly into account the differences resulting from the direction of shearing (triaxial compression, triaxial extension and DSS). The simulated hysteresis loops present also the typical shape that is observed during cyclic tests on dilative soil. The dependency on the curvature of each branch of the hysteresis loops is also well modelled as a function of the dilative or contractive behaviour. However, some discrepancies were observed during the comparison of the tests with the experimental results. The hypoplastic model is not able to simulate: ! The first loading curve ! The soil degradation during the cyclic test ! The soil behaviour during small strain amplitude cyclic tests
4-93
600
150
[kPa-]
H
500 400
100
Deviator q [kPa]
200 100 0 -100 -200 -300 0 100 200 300 400 Laboratory result simulation result
300
50
-50
-100
Laboratory result Simulation result
-150 0 50 100 150 200 250

300 150 Laboratory result
Laboratory result
[kPa-]
250 200 150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -2 -1.5
Simulation resultl
100
Simulation result
50
-50
-100
-150 -1
Shear Strain [% ]
-0.5
0.5
1.5
-4
-3
-2
-1
Fig. 4-69: Comparison between simulation and laboratory results of cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial test
Fig. 4-70: Comparison between simulation and laboratory results of cyclic strain controlled constant volume DSS test
As discussed previously, the hypoplastic model does not simulate the systematic reduction of shear resistance as observed during cyclic tests performed during the experimental investigation (see Chapter 3). Indeed, during the simulations of cyclic tests, the soil behaviour tends rapidly toward an equilibrium cycle for which the hysteresis loops remain constant. This phenomenon results from the equality between the mean stress reduction during the contractive phases and the mean stress increase during the dilative phase. As a result, when the equilibrium cycle is reached, the mean stress progresses between two constant limit values (Fig. 4-53), independently from the initial stress condition. Therefore, the shear resistance could even increase during the transient stage to reach the equilibrium cycle. This situation occurs on simulations presented on Fig. 4-70.
4-94
As observed during the comparison between simulated and measured monotonic tests, a difference between the measured and simulated stress paths is observed during the transition from the consolidation phase to the shearing phase. During the first loading of the sample, the hypoplastic model simulates a overly contractive soil behaviour because the model does not consider the grain reorganisation that occurs when the type of loading conditions changes. The equation considers the grains are already correctly oriented for the imposed deformation. This observation is confirmed by the initial slope of the stress path during the first loading, which seems to be parallel to the slope observed during the reloading of the sample (Fig. 4-69 and Fig. 4-70). As a consequence of this problem, the use of the hypoplastic model is limited to simulations of large strain amplitude cyclic tests. Indeed, as observed during the laboratory investigation (see Chapter 3), during large amplitude cyclic tests, the dilative phase of the first cycle reorganises strongly the soil structure and induces a loss of the memory of the initial test conditions. On the other hand, during small amplitude tests, where no dilation phase occurs, the grain reorganisation remains influenced by the initial conditions. The stress paths corresponding to such behaviour generally present a nearly vertical slope, as illustrated on Fig. 4-71. Since the hypoplastic model does not simulate this behaviour, the model overestimates the corresponding soil degradation (Fig. 4-71). Simulations of small strain amplitude tests require to use the more refined model proposed by Niemunis and Herle (1997) that takes into account the behaviour of the grain interfaces at small strain. The simulated stress path progresses to the equilibrium cycle and the slope of each reloading is equal to the slope observed during the reloading after a dilation phase (see large strain amplitude cyclic tests) without taking into account the history of the specimen.
100 80 60 15 10 20 40 200 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Laboratory result Hypoplastic Model 50 30 8 5 4 3 2 N =1
Deviator q [kPa]
40 20
Fig. 4-71: Comparison between simulation and laboratory results of cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial test performed with relatively small strain amplitude (a=0.15%).
4-95
Therefore, the bad simulation of the first loading curve and the lack of consideration for the specimen history induce a systematic degradation during cyclic simulation of small strain tests. This degradation results from the slope of the stress path during the reloading, which is equal to the slope observed during large strain amplitudes tests instead of being nearly vertical. This phenomenon is illustrated on Fig. 4-72 where the secant shear modulus of the first cycle is compared with the secant shear modulus of the equilibrium cycle during simulation of cyclic triaxial tests. The evolution of the secant shear modulus of the first cycle has the shape described by Vucetic (1991). The range of the lowest amplitudes is characterised by a constant secant shear modulus, characteristic of an elastic linear behaviour. For amplitudes higher than 0.015% on the example, the relationship between the shear stress and the shear strain becomes an hysteresis loop. However, for the raisons explained above, the secant shear modulus of the equilibrium cycle progressively decreases during the simulation, and is equal to zero after a number of cycles that becomes very large for very small amplitudes.
40 Initial shear modulus
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0.0001
Shear modulus at equilibrium cycle
e = 0.6 P0 ' = 200kPa 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
Shear Strain amplitude g a [% ]
Fig. 4-72: Comparison between the secant shear modulus simulated at the first cycle and at the equilibrium cycle resulting of hypoplastic simulation of cyclic strain controlled triaxial tests.
4-96
IV.5 Conclusion
The parameters of the hypoplastic model were calibrated successfully and easily for the Brusselian sand based on different monotonic drained and undrained triaxial compression, oedometer tests, and the stress loops of cyclic triaxial tests (Table 4-8). Parameters of hypoplastic model ec0 = 0.88 n = 0.35 ed0 = 0.52 hs = 200 MPa ei0 = 1.21 = 0.3 C1 = 2.85 = 1.10 C2 = 2.50
Table 4-8: Parameters of the Bauer & Gugehuss hypoplastic constitutive equation calibrated for Brusselian sand.
The comparison of simulations of cyclic large strain controlled triaxial and DSS tests with experiments showed the ability of the hypoplastic model to simulate the soil behaviour during the different phases of the cycle. On the other hand, the comparison pointed out some weaknesses of the model: ! The hypoplastic constitutive law is not able to simulate cyclic degradation. The soil resistance tends toward an equilibrium cycle where the increase of the mean stress during the dilative phases is equal to the reduction during the contraction phases. ! The considered hypoplastic constitutive equation does not simulate correctly the first loading curve because it does not consider the grain reorganisation consecutive to the transition from a consolidation phase to the shearing phase. ! The latter weakness restricts the use of the model to the simulation of large strain amplitude cyclic tests. Indeed, simulations of low amplitude cyclic tests presented a systematic degradation to reach the equilibrium cycle. The hypoplastic model does not consider the threshold of degradation introduced by Vucetic (1991), defining the range of amplitudes where an elastic behaviour is observed during cyclic shearing. A more refined constitutive equation (Niemunis and Herle 1997) is needed to model small strain amplitude tests.
4-97
EXTENSION OF HYPOPLASTIC MODEL TO CYCLIC SHEARING
V.1
Introduction
As it was remarked in the previous section, the constitutive equation proposed by Bauer (1996) and Gudehus (1996) is unable to simulate the shear strength degradation consecutive to a cyclic shearing. After a few cycles, the simulation reaches an equilibrium cycle where the decrease of the mean stress during the contractive phases is equal to the increase during the dilative phases. The purpose of the following section is to discuss the possibilities to introduce the phenomenon of cyclic degradation into the hypoplastic constitutive equation. On the other hand, the hypoplastic constitutive equation does not simulate correctly the transfer from the consolidation phase to the shearing phase. The model does not consider the influence of the grain structure history. During simulations of large cyclic strain controlled tests, this weakness only disturbs the simulation during the first loading. Its influence becomes significant during simulation of cyclic small strain amplitude test simulations. Since the range of strain amplitudes close to the pile during the vibratory driving concerns large amplitudes, the following section focuses on the problem of degradation. In order to avoid the influence of the second weakness, the comparison between the simulations and laboratory tests results will start at the end of the first loading.
V.2
Proposed method to introduce the cyclic degradation
In order to introduce the degradation into the hypoplastic constitutive equation, the principal idea was to degrade well selected constitutive parameters. Based on the comparison between the observations performed during the experimental investigation (presented in Chapter 3) and the results of the parametric analysis (presented in the previous section). The present paragraph discusses the choice of this parameter and analyses in which way it has to be modified to be able to simulate the degradation observed during cyclic triaxial and DSS tests. The choice of the parameter has to consider the three conditions observed during the experimental observations: ! During cyclic tests, the stress path is aligned on the critical state line during each dilative phase and the slope of these lines is constant during all the cycles. ! The stress ratio loops are independent of the cycle number.
4-98
! Any hysteresis loop of the shear stress presents two fixed points which shear strain corresponds to the point where the shear stress is equal to zero. Since the objective is to introduce the degradation in the constitutive law using one parameter, the selected parameter does not influence these 3 conditions. Based on the conclusions of the parametric analysis presented previously, the criteria related to the constancy of the slope of the critical state lines eliminates parameters C1 and C2. The two other requirements eliminate parameters ec0, ed0, and . Among the 9 parameters of the hypoplastic constitutive equation, only parameters ei0, n and hs satisfy the three conditions observed experimentally and can be considered to introduce the degradation in the model. It is experimentally demonstrated that the degradation of soil resistance during a cyclic shearing also affects the position of the critical states (Yasuda-1998). Indeed, the soil resistance at critical state after cyclic liquefaction is lower than observed for a normally consolidated sample. Therefore, parameters n and hs seem to be more appropriated to introduce the cyclic degradation. Fig. 4-73 shows the influence of parameters n and hs on the position of the critical void ratio line. Parameter n modifies the curvature of the line whereas the inflection point is equal to hs/3. The laboratory experiments (see Chapter 3) showed that an increase of void ratio increases the sensitivity of the soil to degrade during cyclic shearing. Therefore, parameter n which value affects principally the critical void ratio line in the range of high void ratio, is finally proposed to introduce the cyclic degradation into the hypoplastic constitutive equation.
1 0.9 0.8 n n n n = 0.35 = 0.3 = 0.25 = 0.2 1 0.9 0.8 hs = 200 MPa hs = 150 MPa hs = 100 MPa hs = 50 MPa
0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 e c0 = 1.2 h s = 200 MPa h s/3
0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 e c0 = 1.2 n = 0.35
100
10000
1000000
100
10000
1000000
Effe ctive Me an Pre ssure P' [kPa]
Effe ctive Me an Pre ssure P' [kPa]
(a) (b) Fig. 4-73: Influence of the degradation of (a) parameter n and (b) parameter hs on the critical void ratio line (P- ec)
V. Extension of hypoplastic model to cyclic shearing
4-99
V.3
Application to cyclic triaxial test
A cyclic triaxial test with a strain amplitude of 1.5% was simulated using the hypoplastic model. During the simulation, parameter n was modified at each cycle so that the calculated secant shear modulus Gsn fits with the measured values. Fig. 4-74 sows the evolution of parameter n during the simulation. The value starts from the calibrated value of 0.35 to a final value of about 0.24 corresponding to a liquefied state.
0.40 0.38 0.36
Parameter n [-]
0.34 0.32 0.30 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0 5 10 15
Cycle Number N [-]
Fig. 4-74: Degradation of parameter n in order to simulate the degradation of sand strength resistance during cyclic triaxial test.
Fig. 4-75-a compares the evolution of the measured and simulated stress paths. As explained above, since the hypoplastic model is not able to simulate correctly the soil behaviour during the first loading, the comparison between the test and the simulation starts at the end of the first loading (i.e. after the first quarter of the first cycle). The two curves fit rather well. During each dilative phases of the cycles, the same alignment along the critical state lines is observed. During the contractive phases, the stress paths presents the same curvature, and the same constancy between cycles of this curvature is observed. The measured and calculated hysteresis loops are compared on Fig. 4-75-b and the hysteresis loops of some specific cycles are also drawn on Fig. 4-76. The measured and simulated loops present the same shapes which curvature is function of the dilative and contractive behaviour. The hypoplastic constitutive equation is also able to simulate the difference of behaviour in extension and in compression during triaxial tests. The hysteresis loops presents also 2 fixed points. The main difference between the measured and calculated loops is the difference in the soil stiffness during each reloading phase. The stiffness is higher for the laboratory results than for the simulated ones. Different sets of the constitutive parameters were tried in order to reduce this difference but it was impossible to obtain a perfect fit of the stiffness without
4-100
modifying the other results of the simulation. A consequence of the difference in the soil stiffness is that the simulated and measured fixed points do not coincide. The evolution of the secant shear modulus Gsn of the simulation and the experiment (Fig. 4-75-c) fits perfectly because it was the criteria considered in the evaluation of parameter n at each cycle. The simulated relationship between the accumulated dissipated energy and the secant shear modulus follows a straight line parallel to the measured relationship. The difference between the 2 lines could be explained by the influence of the consolidation during the first cycle.
600 500 400 Laboratory result Simulation result 300 Laboratory result Simulation result

300 400
250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
Deviator q [kPa]
300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300 0 100 200
-100 -150 -2 -1.5 -1
Shear Strain [%]
-0.5
0.5
1.5
(a)
14 Laboratory result 14
(b)
Laboratory result
10 8 6 4 2 0 1 10 100
12
Simulation result
12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 0.005 0.01
Simulation results
0.015
0.02
Cycle Number N [-]
Accumulated Dissipated Energy Wtot [MJ/m]
(c) (d) Fig. 4-75: Comparison between the measured and calculated results during cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial test: (a) stress path; (b) hysteresis loops; (c) degradation of the secant shear modulus; (d) relationship between the accumulated dissipated energy and the secant shear modulus.
4-101
300
max [kPa]
250 200 150 100 50 0 -50 -100
250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
-100 Cycle 2 -2 -1.5 -1 -150
Cycle 1 -150 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Shear Strain [% ]
Shear Strain [%]
-0.5
0.5
1.5
140
120 100 80 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 -2 -1.5
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
-10 -20 Cycle 10 -2 -1.5 -1 -30
Cycle 5 -1
Shear Strain [%]
-0.5
0.5
1.5
Shear Strain [%]
-0.5
0.5
1.5
Fig. 4-76: Comparison between the measured and calculated hysteresis loops during cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial test (cycle 1, 2, 5and 10).
The same kind of simulations was performed keeping parameter n constant and adapting parameter hs to simulate the soil degradation. The simulation presented the same kind of results and the comparison with the experimental data leaded to the same conclusions. Fig. 4-77 illustrates the different states followed by the specimen during a cyclic triaxial test, simulated with the hypoplastic constitutive equation which degradation is introduced by degrading parameter n. The initial state is characterised by the point A which void ratio equal the void ratio at the end of the consolidation, and the effective mean stress is equal to the effective lateral stress applied on the specimen during the consolidation. The critical effective mean stress resulting of a regular monotonic compression test is characterised by the point C. During the cyclic triaxial
4-102
test, the grain reorganisation causes a decrease of the effective mean stress at the end of each cycle, and a reduction of the shear strength resistance. During the degradation, the simulated states of the specimen move from point A in direction of point B. This reduction is modelled by the reduction of parameter n. During the degradation, the critical effective mean stress that is defined as a function of parameter n decreases from point C to point C. Therefore, if the simulation of the cyclic triaxial test would be followed by a monotonic triaxial compression, the corresponding critical effective mean stress corresponds to point C. The difference of soil resistance between a normally consolidated soil (A " C) and a degraded soil (A " B " C) is illustrated on Fig. 4-78. It presents the simulation results of monotonic triaxial compression tests performed on a degraded and non degraded specimens. The above method proposed to introduce the soil degradation into the hypoplastic constitutive equation needs to be verified by experimental tests for which the sample is monotonically sheared after few cycles. These test will allow also to quantify the expected decrease of the steady state. Analysis of the homogeneity of the specimen and of the uniformity of the stress and strain distribution have also to be performed to be certain that the observed behaviour are not consecutive of heterogeneities appearing in the specimens during the cyclic shearing.
0.9 0.85 0.8 Normally consolidated sample Sample after cyclic shearing 3000
max [kPa]
Normally consolidated sample Sample after cyclic shearing 2500 C
0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 Monotonic loading Cyclic degradation B A C' C
2000
1500
1000
C'
500
100
10000
Shear Strain [% ]
20
40
60
Fig. 4-77: Evolution of the critical void ratio line during simulations of cyclic triaxial tests with the hypoplastic constitutive law whose degradation is introduced by degrading parameter n.
Fig. 4-78: loading curves of monotonic triaxial compression tests after consolidation and after cyclic shearing.
4-103
V.4
Application to cyclic DSS test
A cyclic strain controlled constant volume DSS test was simulated with the hypoplastic model where parameter n was modified to obtain an equality between the simulated secant shear modulus Gsn of each cycle and the measured value. The evolution of parameter n is drawn on Fig. 4-79. The value of parameter n had to be modified to obtain a good fit between the measured and calculated hysteresis loops of the first cycle. The final value corresponding to a liquefied state is 0.04.
0.25
0.20
Parameter n [-]
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00 0 5 10 15
Cycle Number N [-]
Fig. 4-79: Degradation of parameter n in order to simulate the degradation of sand strength resistance during cyclic DSS test.
Fig. 4-80-a compares the simulated and measured stress plots. The 2 curves fit rather well. Similarly to the cyclic triaxial tests, both stress plots are aligned on the critical state lines during the dilation phases. The curvatures during the dilation phases are also very similar. The shape of the simulated and measured stress plots seems to be homothetic between each cycle. The comparison between the measured and simulated hysteresis loops is presented on Fig. 4-80-b. The simulated hysteresis loops present 2 fixed points and a shape of the same type as observed experimentally. However, the 2 curves do not fit. The simulated curve presents a to stiff behaviour and overestimates the soil resistance. Different trials where tried using different sets of the constitutive equation. No significant improvement was observed, however, until the constitutive parameters remained in a range similar to the values analysed during the parametric analysis. Different definitions of parameters a1 and fb of the general hypoplastic constitutive equation proposed by Bauer (2000) were also tried. The new simulations had a little impact on the simulated results, and no improvement in the mapping between the simulated and measured curves was observed.
4-104
Fig. 4-80-c compares the evolution of the measured and simulated secant shear modulus. Since the secant shear modulus was the criteria to determine the value of parameter n at each cycle, these curves fit perfectly. Fig. 4-80-d shows the relationship between the simulated and measured secant shear modulus as a function of the accumulated energy. As a consequence of the difference in the hysteresis loops, the simulated relationship is no more linear and does not match the experimental data. Since the simulations of the stress plot fit the measured stress plot, the problem in the simulation of the hysteresis loops could stem from a wrong evaluation of the soil stiffness. Therefore, the solution could be provided by a new, more flexible definition of the stiffness factor fb of the general hypoplastic constitutive equation.
120 100 Laboratory result 120 Simulation result 100 Laboratory result Simulatin result
[kPa]
80 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 -100 0
[kPa] Horizontal Shear Sress

150 200
80 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80
Horizontal Shear Sress
50
100
-100 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Effective Axial Normal Stress ' [kPa]
(a)
3.5 Laboratory result 3.5
(b)
Laboratory result
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 1 10
Simulation result
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0
Simulation result
100
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
Cycle Number N [-]
(c) (d) Fig. 4-80: Comparison between the measured and calculated results during cyclic strain controlled constant volume DSS test: (a) stress plot; (b) hysteresis loops; (c) degradation of the secant shear modulus; (d) relationship between the accumulated dissipated energy and the secant shear modulus.
Accumulated Dissipated Energy Wtot [MJ/ ]
4-105
V.5
Conclusion
The present section investigated the methodology that could be used to take into account the degradation of the soil strength during simulations of cyclic strain controlled triaxial and DSS tests in the hypoplastic constitutive equation. The main idea was to introduce the degradation of the soil resistance by degrading a well selected constitutive parameter. Considering the experimental observations, it was found that, among the 9 parameters of the hypoplastic constitutive equation, parameter n seems to be the most appropriate one. In addition to inducing the degradation during the simulations of cyclic shearing, the degradation of this parameter also simulates the degradation of the critical mean stress. Therefore, if a monotonic loading is simulated after a cyclic shearing, the calculated critical state will be lower than the critical state that would be obtained from the simulation of a monotonic loading on a normally consolidated specimen. Cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial tests and constant volume DSS tests were simulated with the hypoplastic law where parameter n was adapted at each cycle in order to obtain the equality between the measured and simulated secant shear modulus. The comparison of the laboratory test results with the simulation results showed that the simulated stress paths of DSS tests and of triaxial tests fit rather well with the measured data. The same alignment with the critical state lines and the same curvature of the unloading curve were observed. A good correspondence was obtained between the measured and simulated hysteresis loops during the cyclic triaxial tests. The principal difference was a small deviation during the reloading due to a too small calculated stiffness. On the other hand, the simulated hysteresis loops during the cyclic DSS tests overestimate largely the measured hysteresis loops. Since the measured and simulated stress paths fit, this difference is probably consecutive to a wrong evaluation of the soil stiffness. Therefore, better fit between the simulation results and the measured data could be obtained by modifying the stiffness factor fb of the general hypoplastic equation. Indeed, this factor affects directly the soil stiffness without modifying the stress path. Monotonic experimental tests on partially or totally degraded specimens (after cyclic shearing) have to be performed in order to verify the proposed method and to quantify the expected decrease of the steady state. The homogeneity of the specimen and the uniformity of the stress and strain distribution have to be performed in order to verify that the observed behaviour are not consequence of heterogeneities appearing in the specimen during the cyclic shearing.
VI. Conclusions and Perspectives
4-106
VI
CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVES
The present chapter investigated the ability to simulate the soil behaviour during cyclic large strain amplitudes shearing with an hypoplastic constitutive model. The first objective was to understand further the soil behaviour during cyclic strain controlled undrained triaxial tests, and constant volume direct simple shear (DSS) tests. The second objective was to analyse a constitutive equation able to simulate the soil behaviour around a pile during its vibratory driving, and to calculate the soil resistance around the pile shaft and the pile base taking into account the differences in the types of deformations. The constitutive equation analysed is the hypoplastic constitutive equation developed by Bauer (1996) and Gudehus (1996). This equation calculates the stress rate induced by a strain rate as a function of the current stress state and the current void ratio. The principal advantages of this equation are the following: ! As for all hypoplastic equations, only one equation is required to simulate the soil behaviour. ! Since the equation is written in a tensorial form, the stress state is completely defined, and all type of deformation can easily be simulated. ! The constitutive equation is able to simulate the different types of behaviour observed for a cohesionless material. The analysis showed that, as a function of the void ratio and the initial mean stress, the model distinguishes the thee types of soil behaviour observed during monotonic shearing: contractive and dilative behaviours, only contractive behaviours or monotonic soil liquefactions. ! The influence of each constitutive parameter is well identified. The general Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic constitutive equation was developed and particularised in order to simulate the soil resistance during undrained triaxial tests and constant volume DSS tests5. Among the series of assumptions introduced to apply the general constitutive equation to the triaxial and DSS tests, the main assumption was to suppose the homogeneity of the stress and strain distribution in the sample during triaxial and DSS tests. This assumption allowed one to model the tested sample by an unique element which state is described by the void ratio and the strain and stress tensor. Based on the developed equations, a parametric analysis was carried out in order to investigate the influence of each constitutive parameter on the simulation results of monotonic triaxial and DSS tests. This analysis showed that the influence of each parameters is monotonic and similar for the 2 test types. The principal influence of the different constitutive parameters on the simulations of monotonic shearings can be summarised as follow:
5
These simplified equations were programmed in Excel sheets made available on the enclosed CD-rom.
VI. Conclusions and Perspectives
4-107
! Parameters C1 and C2 determine the slope of the critical state line. ! Parameters ec0, n and hs determine the position of the critical state on the critical state line. ! Parameters ed0 and influence the position of the dilation state and the value of the peak stress ratio. ! Parameters ei0 and influence the soil stiffness. The hypoplastic constitutive equation was successfully calibrated for the Brusselian sand. A good accordance between the experimental data and the simulated results was obtained, with the same set of parameter, for oedometer tests, monotonic drained and undrained triaxial tests and on the stress ratio loops of different cyclic undrained triaxial tests. The comparison between simulations of cyclic large amplitude strain controlled undrained triaxial and constant volume DSS tests with experimental measurements showed the ability of the hypoplastic model to simulate the soil behaviour during the different phases of each cycle. The simulated hysteresis loops presents the typical banana shape which curvature depends on the dilative or contractive behaviour. During each cycle, two phases of dilation and two phases of contraction are observed. The stress paths also presents the classical butterfly shape. During each dilation phase, the stress paths are aligned with the steady state lines which slopes are independent of the number of cycles. On the other hand, the hypoplastic constitutive law is not able to simulate the cyclic degradation of the soil resistance. Indeed, the simulated soil resistance tends toward a equilibrium cycle where the diminution of the mean stress during the contraction phases is compensated by the increase during the dilative phases. This behaviour is in contradiction with the conclusions of the laboratory investigation. The latter pointed out that, even if large dilation phases are observed during each cycle, a systematic decrease of the mean stress is observed at the end of each cycle. The hypoplastic constitutive equation considered in this research does not simulate correctly the stress path between the beginning of the shearing and the first dilative phase. The model assumes that directions of the grain contacts are instantaneously orientated for current loading condition. The model does not consider the grain reorganisation consecutive to the transition from the consolidation phase to the shearing phase. The effects of this weakness are cancelled when the soil enters in the first dilative phase because the deformation of the grain skeleton during the dilation dissipates the effect of the initial conditions. During simulations of large cyclic strain amplitude tests, this weakness has a limited impact. Indeed, since for this range of deformation, dilative phases are observed during the first cycle, only the first loading curve will be influenced by not considering the initial state. However, during simulations of small strain amplitude cyclic tests, since no dilation phases are observed, the initial state plays a predominant role in the evolution of the soil resistance during several cycles. The hypoplastic model is not able to consider this influence and simulates a systematic degradation of the soil resistance. The model
4-108
does not consider a threshold of non linearity neither threshold of degradation (e.g. Vucetic-1993) defining the ranges of strain amplitudes where the soil behaviour is linear elastic or non linear elastic (as discussed in chapter 2). Simulations of small strain amplitude tests require to use the more refined model proposed by Niemunis and Herle (1997) that takes into account the soil behaviour at small strain by adding to the hypoplastic constitutive equation an additional state variable that represents the deformation of the interface layer between the grains. Parametric analyses were conducted in order to investigate the influence of the constitutive parameters on the equilibrium cycle of simulated cyclic triaxial and DSS tests. These analyses concluded that the hysteresis loops, the stress ratio loops and the stress paths keep a similar shape for all investigated values. Each constitutive parameters has a monotonic influence on the shape of the loops, and the same influence was observed for the simulation of cyclic triaxial tests and DSS tests. Since the stress state is not completely defined during laboratory cyclic DSS tests, due to the uncertainty on the lateral stresses, the hypoplastic constitutive equation was useful to determine the evolution of the stress distribution in the specimen. Based on the simulations results, it was found the principal directions are rotating of an angle of 45 during the beginning of the cyclic shearing. During the rest of the test, the angles of principal directions remain at 45 and 135 above the horizontal. Therefore, the horizontal shear stress H is equal to the maximum shear stress, whereas the vertical normal stress V is equal to the mean stress P. The comparison of simulations of cyclic triaxial and DSS tests showed that the direct comparison of the results of these tests is not a easy task and has to take the intermediate principal stress 2 into account. Therefore, the stress path (P vs q) seems to be most appropriate representation to compare the both test types. The last part of the chapter suggested a method to take into account the soil degradation during simulations of cyclic shearing using the hypoplastic constitutive equation. Based on the experimental observations and the parametric analysis, the proposed method suggested to introduce the degradation of the soil resistance by progressively decreasing parameter n. The degradation of this parameter allows to simulate the decrease of the soil resistance, as well as the resulting degradation of the critical mean stress. The comparison of the laboratory data with simulations results for the two kinds of tests showed a good agreement between the measured and simulated stress paths. However, some problems were met during the comparison of simulated and measured hysteresis loops. The differences probably result from a lack of flexibility in the calculation of the soil stiffness. The next step to integrate the cyclic soil degradation into the hypoplastic constitutive equation is to introduce a relationship that calculates the degradation of parameter n based on the characteristics of the current cycle. As discussed during the laboratory investigation, the soil degradation during cyclic shearing results from the strain reversals that induce a progressive reorganisation of the grain skeleton. It was

Chapter4 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter4 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

4

Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

II. Description of the hypoplastic model

DESCRIPTION OF THE HYPOPLASTIC MODEL

Bauer & Gudehuss hypoplastic constitutive equation

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

II. Description of the hypoplastic model

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

B(e,Ts) = fe(e). fd(e) . N(Ts)

II. Description of the hypoplastic model

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

II. Description of the hypoplastic model

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

3 tr T * s defines the Lode angle. where cos(3.!) = 6 . 3 2 2 tr * T s

C1 and C2 are dimensionless constants

II. Description of the hypoplastic model

270 255 240 225 TXT ext DSS

210 DSS 195 TXT comp 180 165

DSS 30 45 TXT comp 60

DSS 150 135

Effective Normal S tress '

Effective Normal S tress '

Effective Normal S tress '

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

II. Description of the hypoplastic model

Critical Void Ratio ec [-]

Critical Void Ratio ec [-]

Effe ctive Mean Pre ssure P' [kPa]

Effe ctive Mean Pre ssure P' [kPa]

ei = ed = ec ei0 ed0 ec0

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

III. Application of the model to Triaxial and DSS tests

APPLICATION OF THE MODEL TO TRIAXIAL AND DSS TESTS

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

III.2 Application to undrained triaxial test

Effective Normal Stress '

Fig. 4-9: Assumed stress distribution during triaxial test

III. Application of the model to Triaxial and DSS tests

and Ps' = "1' + 2."3'

(Eq. 4-19) (Eq. 4-20)

q= 1 . ("1' "2') +( "1' "3' ) +("2' "3) = "1' "3' 2

and q = "1' - "3'

(Eq. 4-21) (Eq. 4-22)

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

3.P' n e e d0 . exp n hs = fct(e,P') = exp 3.P' . hs ec0 - ed0

Where h i = 1 + 1 ei0 ed0 . 1

ei = ei0 . exp - 3.Phs ei0 = . ec0

III. Application of the model to Triaxial and DSS tests

constitutive = 0.25 = 1.10 = 3.06 = 2.60

Chap. 4. Hypoplastic Modelling of Cyclic Sand Strength Degradation

Mean stress P' [kPa]

Mean Stress Increment

1000 800 600 400 200 0 -200 0 20 40 60

Maximum Shear Strain [% ]

Maximum Shear Strain [% ]

Mean Stress Increment

Effective Mean Stress P' [kPa]

Effective Mean Stress P' [kPa]

III. Application of the model to Triaxial and DSS tests

2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0

2500 2000 1500