Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DavidMuirWood
UniversityofDundee,Scotland
SouthEastAsia
OctoberNovember2010
1. Introductiontomodelling:soilbehaviour(SBCSSM1,GM1,2)
2. Elasticmodelling(SBCSSM2,GM3)
3. Themostwidelyusedsoilmodel:MohrCoulomb(GM3)
4. ApplicationofMohrCoulombmodel(exercise)(GM7)
5. Camclay(SBCSSM5,GM3)
6. Camclaygraphicalcalculations(exercise)(SBCSSM5)
7. Camclay:complianceformulation(GM3)
8. Stiffnessformulation:MohrCoulomb,Camclay(GM3)
9. Selectionofsoilparameters(exercise)(GM3)
10. MohrCoulombimproved:strength,criticalstates,particlebreakage
11. Camclayimproved:nonlinearity,structure
12. Conclusion
CUP (1990)
Spon (2004)
CUP (2009)
1.Introductiontomodelling:
soilbehaviour
(SBCSSM1,GM1,2)
Soilmodelling:SouthEastAsia:OctoberNovember2010
1. Introductiontomodelling:soilbehaviour
DavidMuirWood
d.muirwood@dundee.ac.uk
Models:
Scientific understanding proceeds by way of constructing and
analysing models of the segments or aspects of reality under study.
The purpose of these models is not to give a mirror image of reality,
not to include all its elements in their exact sizes and proportions, but
rather to single out and make available for intensive investigation
those elements which are decisive. We abstract from non-essentials,
we blot out the unimportant to get an unobstructed view of the
important, we magnify in order to improve the range and accuracy of
our observation. A model is, and must be, unrealistic in the sense in
which the word is most commonly used. Nevertheless, and in a
sense, paradoxically, if it is a good model it provides the key to
understanding reality.
(Baran and Sweezy, 1968)
geological model
theoretical model
empirical model
numerical model
model of dock with
free field boundaries
behind walls
dock structures under seismic loading
numerical modelling
for example, finite element, finite difference
equilibrium
compatibility of deformations
stresses
strains
stress:strain relationship
constitutive model
shear
stress
shearstrain
p = a + 2 r
axial strain
increment
radial strain
increment
Wp = p' p
q = 'a ' r = F / A
area A
q = 2( a r ) / 3
distortional work work done in changing shape is:
Wq = q q
q = a for constant volume deformation p = 0
p 1
2 a
q = 2 / 3 2 / 3
r
'a 1 2 / 3 p'
=
'r 1 1 / 3 q
1 p
a 1 / 3
r 1 / 3 1 / 2 q
' a ' r
3
=
sin 'm =
' a + ' r 6 +
6 sin 'm
=
3 sin 'm
for conditions of triaxial compression
Soil behaviour
particle continuum duality
laboratory element testing
stiffness
Particle-continuum duality
particle-continuum
duality
particle-continuum
duality
photoelastic discs
force chains
fabric
Drescher and de Josselin de Jong (1972)
particle-continuum duality
we may calibrate models using triaxial test data but soil elements in
the ground and in numerical modelling will certainly break away from
axial symmetry
beware of unintended responses in uncalibrated regions of stress space
axial symmetry
triaxial apparatus
centreline of circular loaded area
widely available source of data of stress:strain response
Stiffness
Stiffness
progressive yielding of steel cantilever as analytical illustration
of distinction between tangent and secant stiffness
deflection line
stiffness good compliance bad!
load line limited by collapse load of cantilever
deflection line unlimited (ignore geometry changes)
many to one mapping we can always map from deflection
to load but not always from load to deflection
stiffness
Stiffness
secant stiffness
Summary
modelling is all around us
care in selection of strain increment and stress variables
pore pressure parameter as a variable
particle-continuum duality
laboratory element testing not just axial symmetry
but more general stress states not easily accessible
tangent and secant stiffness
stiffness/compliance formulation?
2.Elasticmodelling
(SBCSSM2,GM3)
Soilmodelling:SouthEastAsia:OctoberNovember2010
2. Elasticmodelling
DavidMuirWood
d.muirwood@dundee.ac.uk
Elasticity
Hooke's law
elastic behaviour in triaxial compression:
drained/undrained
measurement of elastic properties with different devices
elastic anisotropy
elastic nonlinearity hyperelasticity
worked example
IfIhaveseenfurtheritisonlybystandingontheshouldersofgiants.(Newton)
HookewasNewtonspredecessorattheRoyalSocietyofLondon.
Hookewasaverysmallman.
Hookes law
A description of helioscopes and some other instruments. London 1676.
Tofillthevacancyoftheensuingpage,Ihavehereaddedadecimateofthecentesmeof
theInventionsIintendtopublish,thoughpossiblynotinthesameorder,butasIcan
getopportunityandleasure;mostofwhich,Ihope,willbeasusefultoMankindasthey
areyetunknownandnew.
2.ThetrueMathematicalandMechanichalformofallmannerofArchesforBuilding,
withthetruebutmentnecessarytoeachofthem.AProblemwhichnoArchitectonick
Writerhatheveryetattempted,muchlessperformed.
abcccddeeeeefggiiiiiiiillmmmmnnnnnooprrsssttttttuuuuuuuux.
3.ThetrueTheoryofElasticityorSpringiness,andaparticularExplicationthereofin
severalSubjectsinwhichitistobefound:Andthewayofcomputingthevelocityof
Bodiesmovedbythem.
ceiiinosssttuu
Hookes law
Tofillthevacancyoftheensuingpage,Ihavehereaddedadecimateofthecentesmeof
theInventionsIintendtopublish,thoughpossiblynotinthesameorder,butasIcan
getopportunityandleasure;mostofwhich,Ihope,willbeasusefultoMankindasthey
areyetunknownandnew.
2.ThetrueMathematicalandMechanichalformofallmannerofArchesforBuilding,
withthetruebutmentnecessarytoeachofthem.AProblemwhichnoArchitectonick
Writerhatheveryetattempted,muchlessperformed.
abcccddeeeeefggiiiiiiiillmmmmnnnnnooprrsssttttttuuuuuuuux.
Utpendetcontinuumflexile,sicstabitcontiguumrigiduminversum.
(Ashangstheflexiblechain,so,inverted,standstherigidarch.)
Utpendetcontinuumflexile,sic
stabitcontiguumrigiduminversum.
(Ashangstheflexiblechain,so,
inverted,standstherigidarch.)
StPeters:Poleni:1748
Hookes law
Tofillthevacancyoftheensuingpage,Ihavehereaddedadecimateofthecentesmeof
theInventionsIintendtopublish,thoughpossiblynotinthesameorder,butasIcan
getopportunityandleasure;mostofwhich,Ihope,willbeasusefultoMankindasthey
areyetunknownandnew.
3.ThetrueTheoryofElasticityorSpringiness,andaparticularExplicationthereofin
severalSubjectsinwhichitistobefound:Andthewayofcomputingthevelocityof
Bodiesmovedbythem.
ceiiinosssttuu
Uttensiosicvis.(Astheextensionsotheforce.)
stress
force
extension
strain
Hookes law
principal stresses and strain increments:
x
1 'x
y = 1 ' y
E 1 '
z
symmetric
x
' x
1
E
y
' y =
1
' (1 + )(1 2 )
1
z
Hookes law
uniaxial tension
Youngs modulus E = (P/A)/(l/l)
Poissons ratio = (d/d)/(l/l)
direct observation of elastic constants
Hookes law
axial symmetry:
a 1 1 2 'a
r E 1 'r
'a
1 2 a
E
1 r
'r (1 + )(1 2 )
Hookes law
separate change of size and change of shape
work conjugate stress and strain variables
p 1 / K
0 p'
q = 0 1 / 3G q
bulk modulus:
E
K=
3(1 2 )
p' K 0 p
q 0 3G q
shear modulus:
E
G=
2(1 + )
Hookes law
only 2 independent elastic properties for isotropic material
9KG
E=
G + 3K
3K 2G
=
2(G + 3K )
p = ( a + 2 r ) / 3
if
r = 0 then
q = a r
q
=3
p
p 1 / K
0 p'
=
q
0 1 / 3G q
p' K 0 p
q 0 3G q
G
=
q K
p
a
= 1 2
q = a
hence
q
q
=
= 3G
q a
0 p
p 1 / K u
=
q
1 / 3G u q
0
distortional stress q = a r = 'a 'r and hence Gu = G
q = 0
1 / 3G u q
p = 0 (undrained)
p arbitrary (external change of total stress)
hence Ku =
Eu
1
= u =
Ku =
3(1 2 u )
2
q = 0
1 / 3G u q
Eu
E
Gu =
=G=
E u = 3G
2(1 + )
2(1 + u )
u = 1/2
drained and undrained elastic properties
cannot be chosen independently
oedometer
one dimensional compression
E oed
(
'z
1 )
=
=E
= K + 43 G
(1 + )(1 2 )
z
and Ko = /(1-)
pressuremeter
direct measurement of shear modulus G
4G
=
R (1 )
elasticity
simple models assume isotropic linear elasticity
two parameters: E, or G, K
convenient but not necessary
explore possibility of anisotropy
and nonlinearity
anisotropic elasticity
many soils deposited over areas of large lateral extent
implied symmetry: all horizontal directions equivalent:
B, C, D, E
cross anisotropy transverse isotropy
(anisotropy of real soils, after real stress/strain histories
will be more complex)
xx 1 / E h
yy hh / E h
/ E
zz = vh v
yz
0
0
zx
0
xy
hh / E h
1/ Eh
vh / E v
vh / E v
vh / E v
1/ Ev
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 / G vh
0
0
1 / G vh
0
0
5 elastic properties
triaxial can only find 3: Ev, vh, Eh/(1-hh)
hh? Gvh? could use bender elements
xx
yy
zz
0
yz
0
zx
2(1 + hh ) / E h xy
0
0
0
xx
1/ 2
yy
* / 2
*/
1
zz
yz E *
0
0
zx
xy
* / 2
1/ 2
*/
0
0
*/
0
*/
1
0
0
2(1 + *) /
0
0
0
0
0
0
xx
yy
zz
yz
2(1 + *) /
0
zx
0
2(1 + *) / 2 xy
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3G * J p'
1
= 3K * G * J 2 J K * q
coupling of compression
and distortion
xx
1/ 2
yy
* / 2
*/
1
zz
yz E *
0
0
zx
xy
* / 2
1/ 2
*/
0
0
0
0
*/
0
*/
1
0
0
2(1 + *) /
0
0
0
0
xx
yy
zz
yz
2(1 + *) /
0
zx
0
2(1 + *) / 2 xy
0
0
0
0
q J
0
0
0
0
J p
3G * q
coupling of compression
and distortion
experimental techniques
laboratory geophysics
bender elements
shear wave velocities: time, distance
Vvh = Vhv ? (elastic, symmetry)
alternatively:
small undrained
unload-reload cycles
during drained test
slope of effective
stress path indicates
elastic anisotropy
vertical Eh = Ev, = 1
anisotropy evolves
with stress ratio
Eh 0 at critical state
Hostun sand (Gajo)
Gault clay
evidence of stiffness
anisotropy from bender
elements
V
hence stiffnesses
i =
i
1
1 q
n +1
+
V = p'
(n + 1)K1 6G1 p'
n (1 n )(2 n ) 2
+
p
6G1
= p'n 1 K1
1
3G1
3G1 p'
1
q
3G1
p 'o
K1 2
= 1 (1 n )
p'
6G1
q p 'o
=
q o p'
n 1
p /
[ +
p'
= p'
3
2
q2
p
q
q 2 = 6p'i (p'p'i )
= 3 / 2
Summary
generalised Hookes law one-to-one link between
stress and strain
elastic matrices symmetric with work-conjugate
variables
two independent elastic properties for isotropic
material
deduction of elastic properties from standard tests
evolving anisotropy - nonlinearity
z z
x
x
y=0
y
y=0
y
x
x
z z
x = z
y=0
y
y=0
y
x = z
z z
x = (1 + )([1 - ] - ) z/E
x = z
x
x = z
x
y=0
y=0
z z
3.Themostwidelyused
soilmodel:MohrCoulomb
(GM3)
Soilmodelling:SouthEastAsia:OctoberNovember2010
3. Themostwidelyusedsoilmodel:MohrCoulomb
DavidMuirWood
d.muirwood@dundee.ac.uk
q 0 3G q q 0 1 / 3G q
stiffness
compliance
= M * or
=
p
p
q
1
q
pp
e
e
p
p
p
'
K
0
p
'
K
p
'
0
K
0
K
K
0
0
K
p p p p p p p 0 M *
= = =p =e = e p
G q3G
q q3G
q
q
q 0q 3G 0
0 q 30G03
q 0q 3G 1
K 0 p
( M 1)
0 3G q
=
K 0 M *
( M 1)
0 3G 1
3M * GK p
9G
q
M * p
1
3GK
q KMM * +3G M MM * q
M * p
p'
1
3GK
q KMM * +3G M MM * q
confirm that q = Mp'
asymmetric unless M = M* (associated flow)
plastic work Wp = p'pp + qqp =(M M*)p'qp
plastic work Wp = 0 for M = M* (associated flow)
physically unreasonable
(but basis of bearing capacity calculations etc)
standard elastic-perfectly
plastic Mohr-Coulomb model
non-associated plastic flow
M* M
simplicity
sharp stiffness changes
tangent stiffness either
elastic or zero
continuing volume change
Summary
elastic-perfectly plastic Mohr-Coulomb model is most
widely available constitutive model for soils
associated plastic flow is not physically reasonable
choice of soil parameters requires engineering
judgement (exercise)
active: x = Ka z
z
x = z
z > x
x > z
passive: x = Kp z
x
Mohr-Coulomb failure
x = Ka z
z
x = z
stress path: x = z
x = Kp z
x
initial stress state: Ka < Ko < Kp
general stress path: x = z
(z constant)
x = Ka z
x = z
zo + z
stress path: x = z
x = Kp z
zo
Ko zo
x = Ka z
x = z
stress path: x = z
x = Kp z
zo
Ko zo
x = Ka z
x = z
stress path: x = z
x = Kp z
zo
Ko zo
4.Applicationof
MohrCoulombmodel
(exercise)(GM7)
numerical modelling
compatibility of deformations
stresses
strains
stress:strain relationship
constitutive model
lectures primarily concerned with introduction to various aspects
and possibilities of constitutive modelling
a.
v
h
h
h
v
b.
single element
equilibrium
kinematic compatibility
stress:strain response
p. 1/1
active failure
v > h
single element
=0
=1
vertical
stress v
initial stress h = Kov
h = v
passive failure h > v
horizontal stress h
stress path characterised by = h /v
p. 2/1
single element
=0
= /(1) = 1
= /(1),
h
= 1,
h = v
v
vertical
stress v
= 0, h
= 0, v
= /(1),
v
a.
horizontal stress h
stress paths
b.
0 strain increment
p. 3/1
two-element model
Mohr-Coulomb
failure
=
A
vertical
stress v
=0
a.
h
P
b.
P
Mohr-Coulomb
failure
hA = -hP
hP
horizontal stress h
kinematic compatibility
equal & opposite horizontal strains in elements A, P
p. 4/1
kinematic compatibility
equal & opposite horizontal strains in elements A, P
element P: v = 0; equivalent to compression element
loaded horizontally P = 0
for element P, h /h = E/[(1 + )(1 )]
we can deduce the stress path direction A for element
A
A v /h = E/[(1 + )(1 )] =
A E/(1 + )[A (1 ) ]
A = /[2(1 )] (which is half the elastic Ko value)
p. 5/1
Mohr-Coulomb
failure
=
A
vertical
stress v
=0
a.
h
P
b.
P
Mohr-Coulomb
failure
hA = -hP
hP
horizontal stress h
p. 6/1
v
A
element A
yields
element P
yields
P
h
p. 7/1
element P
yields
v
element A
yields
p. 8/1
element P
yields
v
element A
yields
p. 9/1
p. 10/1
Introduction
A two element box model (Fig 1a) provides a simple analogue of a foundation. We can use this simple
model to demonstrate the three constraints that have to be satisfied in any boundary value problem:
equilibrium, kinematic compatibility, and constitutive response. Equilibrium is straightforward: forces
must balance. Kinematic compatibility means that gaps should not open up in our model. Constitutive
response indicates the relationship between stress changes and strain changes for the material: we will
assume an isotropic elastic response up to Mohr-Coulomb failure. But first we will analyse the response
of a single element - like a laboratory test - and present the response graphically.
All stresses are effective stresses.
1. Single element: elastic response: plane strain
Plane strain testing in the laboratory is not particularly common but this is what we need for our single
element test (Fig 1b). The nearest equivalent to the standard triaxial test will be a plane strain test in
which the lateral stress is kept constant but we will look more generally at tests in which the vertical
stress and lateral stress are increased in constant proportion: h = v (Fig 2).
Hookes Law for the plane strain direction of zero strain tells us that:
1
[y (v + h )]
E
(1)
y = (v + h ) = (1 + )v
(2)
y = 0 =
so that:
1
1
[v (y + h )] = (1 + )(1 )v
E
E
(3)
1
1
[h (y + v )] = (1 + )( )v
E
E
(4)
Then for any value of not only can we plot the stress paths in the h : v effective stress plane, but we
can also plot the horizontal and vertical strain increments for the several paths (Fig 3b). Evidently = 0
corresponds to a test with constant lateral stress; = 1 is a sort of isotropic plane strain compression
test; = /(1 ) corresponds to one-dimensional compression h = 0.
Mohr-Coulomb failure implies a limiting ratio of vertical and horizontal effective stresses. We know the
values of this limiting ratio as the active and passive earth pressure coefficients - depending on whether
the vertical or the horizontal stress is the greater.
v > h :
v
1 + sin
= Kp =
h
1 sin
(5)
a.
v
h
h
h
v
b.
Figure 1: (a) Two element box model as analogue of footing; (b) single plane strain element
active failure
v > h
=0
=1
vertical
stress v
initial stress h = Kov
h = v
passive failure h > v
horizontal stress h
v
1 sin
= Ka =
h
1 + sin
(6)
These limiting ratios can be plotted on the effective stress plane (Fig 2).
The elastic response is (assumed to be) independent of the initial stress state. We can characterise the
initial stress state by the coefficient of earth pressure at rest Ko (where Ka Ko Kp and hence deduce
the dependency of the vertical (or horizontal) strain at failure on the value of Ko and on the direction
of the stress path .
2. Two element box model: elastic response, Mohr-Coulomb failure
The two element model (Fig 1a) provides a simple analogue of the bearing capacity problem. There is an
initial surcharge stress b on the surface of both elements. The initial horizontal stress in each element
(which must from equilibrium be identical) can be chosen as h = Ko b where Ka Ko Kp .
The right-hand passive element P (Fig 1a) is just a single element being loaded horizontally with P = 0,
so we can plot (we have already plotted) the stress path for this element (but with vertical and horizontal
stresses interchanged) and indicate the strains in the horizontal direction of passive loading (which was
the vertical direction in the previous section) (Fig 4a, b).
The left-hand active element A (Fig 1a) is being loaded vertically by the footing. Equilibrium requires
that the horizontal stress in element A should always be the same as the horizontal stress in element P.
We can indicate this constraint in the stress plane (Fig 4a). Consideration of the nature of the problem
=0
= /(1) = 1
= /(1),
h
= 1,
h = v
v
vertical
stress v
= 0, h
= 0, v
= /(1),
v
a.
horizontal stress h
b.
0 strain increment
Figure 3: Single element: (a) stress paths and (b) stress:strain response
shows that the horizontal stress must increase as the footing load is increased so that A > 0.
Kinematic compatibility requires that no gap should open up between the two elements. The horizontal
compressive strain in element P resulting from the increase of horizontal stress must be equal to the
horizontal tensile strain in element A resulting from the increase of vertical stress. These two constraints
together allow us to deduce the relevant value of A for the loading of element A and hence the value of the
vertical strain in element A and the vertical stress: vertical strain response of our analogue foundation.
The logic is illustrated in Fig 4b. The value of A for the active element is unknown but it can be
calculated from (3) and (4), recalling that element P is being loaded horizontally. Equating appropriate
strains and noting that h /v = A we find that:
A =
(7)
2(1 )
which is exactly half the value for one-dimensional compression: for h /v = 0, h /v = /(1 ).
We are free to choose our initial value of Ko : its value will control which element reaches failure first.
Suppose the right-hand passive element reaches failure first so that h = Kp b (Fig 5a). The horizontal
stress cannot increase any further so that from this moment onwards the left-hand active element is
being loaded with A = 0 - and we can again use the stress path and strain information from the
previous section to deduce the overall footing response. The horizontal strain will continue to increase in
both elements. In the passive element, which has reached failure, there will be no further elastic strains
and the vertical and horizontal strains will be linked by the angle of dilation . Let us, for simplicity,
assume that the failure occurs at constant volume. Then vertical and horizontal strains will be equal
and opposite: the horizontal squeezing of the element will translate directly into a vertical stretching.
The three sections of the vertical stress:vertical strain response for element A are shown schematically
in Fig 6a, b.
Or suppose that the left-hand active element reaches failure first (Fig 5b). The ratio of stresses on this
element must then remain constant but the magnitude of the vertical stress will continue to increase
until the passive element also reaches failure. The stress path followed by the passive element does not
change direction so the continuing loading of the footing can be followed by applying the equilibrium
constraint of equal horizontal stresses in the two elements (Fig 5b). The active element will experience
both elastic strains (along a path with A = Ka ) and plastic strains sufficient to give a total horizontal
strain matching the strain in the passive element. Compatibility of horizontal strains requires that
Mohr-Coulomb
failure
=
A
vertical
stress v
=0
a.
h
P
b.
Mohr-Coulomb
failure
hA = -hP
hP
horizontal stress h
Figure 4: Box model: (a) stress paths and (b) relationship between vertical stress and horizontal strain between
the two elements
= Ka after
yield at A
v
= 0 after
yield at P
a.
b.
P
P
h
Figure 5: Box model: stress paths with (a) passive element P, and (b) active element A reaching failure first
element A
yields
element P
yields
a.
b.
P
v
element P
yields
v
element A
yields
d.
c.
P
Figure 6: Box model: (a)(c) stress paths and (b)(d) stress:strain response for (a) (b) element P reaching yield
first; (c) (d) element A reaching failure first
elastic compression of element P should be equal and opposite to combined elastic and plastic extension
of element A:
hA = ehA + phA = ehP
(8)
so that phA = ehP ehA . Then the constant volume condition at failure implies that:
vA = evA + pvA = evA phA = evA + ehP + ehA
(9)
We can discover the dependence of the strain to yield (when the first element reaches the Mohr-Coulomb
failure condition) and the strain to eventual perfectly plastic failure (when the second element has also
reached the Mohr-Coulomb failure condition) on the initial stress state Ko . The three sections of the
vertical stress:vertical strain response for element A are shown schematically in Fig 6c, d.
3. Graphical and calculation exercise
1. Choose a normalised Youngs modulus E/b = 200, Poissons ratio = 0.25 and angle of friction
= 30 .
5.Camclay
(SBCSSM5,GM3)
5. Cam clay
David Muir Wood
d.muirwood@dundee.ac.uk
Py2
load
P
Py1
a.
b.
l
P
extension l
c.
l1
l2
p. 2/2
Py2
load
P
Py1
a.
b.
l
P
extension l
c.
l1
l2
p. 3/2
Py2
Py1
l2
p. 4/2
q
elastic region
p'
Cam clay
elastic-plastic model for soil
first question: are plastic strains occurring?
assume elliptical yield locus bounding elastic region
p. 5/2
Cam clay
effective stress plane
q
p'
v
unloading-reloading line
compression plane
p'
p. 6/2
p'
p'o
p. 7/2
q
B
A
p'oA
p'
p'oB
iso-ncl
v
url A
pp
po
v po
url B
p'
p. 8/2
isotropic normal
compression line: p = po
B
A
p'oA
p'
p'oB
p
po
p
p = v po = v p
elastic volumetric
strains:
ep = v p
p
iso-ncl
v
v = vp =
url A
v(ep
+ pp )
p
p
url B
p'
p. 9/2
=M
yl B
yl A
p'
oA
p'
p'oB
p. 10/2
=M
=0
N
v
yield loci
always pass
through origin
p'
N
v
iso ncl
iso ncl
slope
v
=0
url
url
=0
=M
slope
=M
p'
geometric
similarity
of
intersection
points
of
paths
with
q/p = =
constant
p'=1
ln p'
p. 11/2
=M
=0
p'
N
v
N
v
iso ncl
iso ncl
slope
v
=0
url
url
=0
=M
slope
=M
p'
p'=1
anisotropic
consolidation
lines slope
in semilogarithmic
compression
plane
unloadingreloading
lines
have
slope in
ln p , v plane
ln p'
p. 12/2
qp
p
pp
M
p'o
p'
p. 13/2
Cam clay
p. 14/2
B
A
graphical construction
of the Cam clay
stress:strain response
p'
iso-ncl
A
B
p'
increment AB in
drained compression
test q/p = 3
stress increment
defines intersection
with new yield locus
and po
project
down
to
unloading-reloading
line in compression
plane
p. 15/2
iso-ncl
A
-vp
p'
p. 16/2
1
q
A
p'
normality to yield locus gives D = pp /pq and hence
plastic distortional strain
p. 17/2
qe
3G
qp
B
p. 18/2
=M
p'
as stress ratio = q/p increases, so ratio of plastic
strain increments pp /pq reduces
yield locus can only expand if plastic volumetric strain
occurs
as M , soil tends to state of perfect plasticity
critical state: continuing shearing with no further
change in stresses or volume
p. 19/2
q : end of test!
elastic: q > 0
Q-R-S-T: slope of yield locus becomes flatter:
ratio distortional/volumetric strain becomes larger:
T: no plastic volumetric strain (normality)
q : end of test!
bifurcation of response
numerical ambiguity
yl B
yl A
P
p'
stress increment PQ
inside yield locus yA
purely elastic
url A Q
url B
ep = p /vp
P
iso-ncl
p'
p. 20/2
yl B
yl A
R
P
stress increment PR
p'
p = 0 ep = 0
url A
P
url B
R
iso-ncl
p'
p. 21/2
yl B
yl A
R
P
p'
stress increment PS
pP S = pP Q and
poP S = poP R
url A Q
url B
S
P
R
iso-ncl
project down to
unloading-reloading
lines in compression
plane
v = 0: undrained
p'
p. 22/2
yl B
yl A
R
P
p'
url A Q
url B
S
ep + pp = 0
P
R
p
vp
po
+ ( ) vpo
=0
iso-ncl
p'
p. 23/2
yl B
yl A
R
P
p'
url A Q
url B
S
plastic compression
po > 0
P
R
iso-ncl
p'
p. 24/2
q
B
yl A
yl B
A
p'o
p'
graphical construction of
Cam clay stress:strain
response
increment AB in
undrained compression
test v = 0
iso-ncl
v
url A
url B
volume constraint
defines intersection with
new unloading-reloading
line and po
A
B
p. 25/2
url A
iso-ncl
url B
A
-vp
B
p'
p. 26/2
B
yl A
A
D
yl B
p'
p. 27/2
qe
3G
qp
B
p. 28/2
yl B
yl A
-p'
B
esp
p
tsp
p'
p. 29/2
6.Camclaygraphical
calculations(exercise)
(SBCSSM5)
v p
=
v
(1)
The plastic distortional strain is then calculated from the condition of normality to the yield locus applied
at the current stress point in the effective stress plane (Fig 4). The direction of the dotted arrow, drawn
perpendicular to the yield locus at point A indicates the ratio of plastic distortional strain increment to
plastic volumetric strain increment, 1/D:
pq
1
=
D
pp
(2)
We can calculate the elastic distortional strain from the change in distortional, deviator stress, q (Fig
5):
eq =
q
3G
We can sum the plastic and elastic components to find the total distortional strain increment:
(3)
100
b.
150 p'
50
100
150
p'
d.
c.
2.1
Cam
clay: drained test
200
graphical construction
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.1
2.4
iso-ncl
2.5
v
2.4
2.5
v
200
50
50
50
100
a.
100
B
A
p'
iso-ncl
A
B
p'
Figure 2: Drained test: stress increment
iso-ncl
A
-vp
p'
Figure 3: Plastic volumetric strain increment
1
q
A
p'
Figure 4: Normality to yield locus
qe
3G
qp
B
q
Figure 5: Elastic and plastic distortional strain increments
q = eq + pq
(4)
and we can project across to the strain diagrams, Figs 1c, d, to plot the corresponding points on the
distortional stress:distortional strain plot (Fig 1c) and the volume:strain plot (Fig 1d).
(In fact, the inclusion of the elastic distortional strain is equivalent to imposing a skew or shear on the
distortional stress:distortional strain plot, since the elastic distortional strain is directly proportional to
q. So, for the purposes of this exercise, we can simply work in terms of plastic strain and recall that for
completeness we would need to add the elastic strains. Alternatively, we need to assume a value of shear
modulus: for example, G = 2MPa? All the other constitutive parameters for Cam clay are implicit in
the plots of Figs 1.)
points A and B at which it crosses two successive unloading-reloading lines. Direct vertical projection
up to the effective stress plane at the same values of mean effective stress then fixes the points A and B
on the effective stress path from the intersections with the corresponding yield loci.
The stress-strain response produces relationships which are unbounded: there is no limit, in principle, to
the shear strain that can be imposed. First we calculate the plastic volumetric strain. The vertical separation, at constant mean stress, of the unloading-reloading lines through A and B gives the irrecoverable
change in specific volume, v p (Fig 8). The plastic volumetric strain is then:
pp =
v p
v
(5)
The plastic distortional strain is then calculated from the condition of normality to the yield locus applied
at the current stress point in the effective stress plane (Fig 9). The direction of the dotted arrow, drawn
perpendicular to the yield locus at point A indicates the ratio of plastic distortional strain increment to
plastic volumetric strain increment, 1/D:
pq
1
=
D
pp
(6)
We can calculate the elastic distortional strain from the change in distortional, deviator stress, q:
eq =
q
3G
(7)
We can sum the plastic and elastic components to find the total distortional strain increment (Fig 5):
q = eq + pq
(8)
and we can project across to the strain diagram, Fig 6c to plot the corresponding point on the distortional
stress:distortional strain plot.
(In fact, once again, the inclusion of the elastic distortional strain is equivalent to imposing a skew or
shear on the distortional stress:distortional strain plot, since the elastic distortional strain is directly
proportional to q. So, for the purposes of this exercise, we can simply work in terms of plastic strain and
recall that for completeness we would need to add the elastic strains. Alternatively, we need to assume
a value of shear modulus: for example, G = 2MPa? All the other constitutive parameters for Cam clay
are implicit in the plots of Figs 6.)
There is by definition no volume change during an undrained test. The fourth plot for this test is a plot
of pore pressure against distortional strain (Fig 6d). The increase in pore pressure is the increase in
separation of the total stress path (which is arbitrary, but might be a conventional triaxial compression
path imposed with constant radial stress and hence with slope q/p = 3) and the effective stress path
(which was deduced in Fig 7a). It is instructive to distinguish the components of pore pressure change
that result from the change in total mean stress and the change in effective mean stress (Fig 10):
u = p p0
(9)
and the plot of pore pressures can separate the development of the two components indicating clearly
the pore pressure that comes from suppressed volume change.
2.1
2.2
2.3
v
2.4
2.5
b.
50
iso-ncl
100
p'
150
50
100
p'
150
d.
c.
50
100
100
50
a.
50
100
100
a.
50
A
0
50
2.5
100
150 p'
200
iso-ncl
v
2.4
2.3
A
B
2.2
b.
2.1
50
100
150
200
p'
2.4
iso-ncl
2.3
-vp
B
2.2
50
100
p' 150
50
D
A
0
0
50
100
150
p'
-p'
B
50
esp
tsp
0
0
50
100
150
p'
200
Figure 10: Pore pressure generation: tsp = total stress path; esp = effective stress path
Calculation: drained test
Of course, we can perform analytically the same operations that we have done graphically: and having
the graphical experience allows us to see exactly how we should proceed with the analytical calculations.
We can set these up in a spreadsheet but can also perform the calculations by handand it is important
to use hand calculation in order to check that the spreadsheet is indeed doing what is intended.
1. We must evidently know the values of soil parameters: G, , , M , N .
2. We need initial conditions for the increment of the test: current effective stresses p0A , qA and specific
volume vA , and size of the yield locus (preconsolidation pressure) p0oA . In general the current effective
stress state can lie either on or inside the current yield locus: let us assume that our soil is normally
compressed so that the current stress state lies on the current yield locus. This implies that the current
conditions must satisfy the equation:
p0o = p0 +
q2 1
M 2 p0
(10)
In fact, the way that this volumetric hardening model is formulated means that Cam clay also imposes
a link between the current specific volume and the current effective stresses and size of the yield locus.
The geometry of the compression plane (Figs 1b, 11) gives:
v=N
ln p0o
p0o
+ ln 0
p
(11)
3. We will assume that we are conducting a conventional drained test with constant lateral stress (cell
pressure) so that:
iso-ncl
A
-vp
ln p'
Figure 11: Plastic change in specific volume: semilogarithmic compression plane
q
=3
p0
(12)
and we can start the calculation process by choosing a value for the increment q and hence the new
value of qB .
4. From (12) we can calculate the corresponding increment p0 and hence the new value of p0B .
5. From (10) we can calculate the size of yield locus p0oB required to accommodate this new stress state.
6. From (11) we can calculate the new specific volume vB . Through steps 4-6 we have established the
position of the new point in the effective stress and compression planes (Figs 1a, b) as was demonstrated
graphically in Fig 2.
7. Now we have to calculate the strain increments. We can divide the change in specific volume into two
parts: one due to the change in p0o , the plastic part; and one due to the change in p0 , the elastic part.
The plastic part, v p is the volume separation of the unloading-reloading lines at the start and end of
the increment: the geometry of the compression plane shows that this is (Figs 3, 11):
v p = ( ) ln (p0oB /p0oA )
(13)
v p
v
(14)
8. The plastic strain increment is normal to the yield locus at the current stress, so the plastic dilatancy,
D, is given by:
pq
1
2
=
p =
2
D
p
M 2
where stress ratio = q/p0 . Hence we can calculate the plastic distortional strain increment, pq .
(15)
p0
p0
= q/p0
p0o
v p
pp
1/D = pq /pp
pq
eq
eq
9. The elastic distortional strain increment, eq , is calculated using the shear modulus G for the soil:
eq =
q
3G
(16)
The plastic and elastic components are added to give the total distortional strain increment, q .
10. The calculation process is repeated for a new stress increment, starting at step 3. A table illustrating
the sequence of calculation steps may be helpful (Table 1).
p0
p0
p0o
= q/p0
v p
pp
1/D = pq /pp
q
=3
p
pq
eq
eq
p u
(17)
and we can calculate the increment in pore pressure from the known changes in total and effective mean
stress (9).
10. The calculation process is repeated for a new stress increment, starting at step 3. A table illustrating
the sequence of calculation steps may be helpful (Table 2).
7.Camclay:compliance
formulation
(GM3)
p'
M2
2
p'o M 2
flow
rule
yield
locus
pp
M 2 2
p
2
q
p', q p'o pp qp
hardening
rule
pp
p'o
v p 'o
p, q
p', q pe, qe
elastic
properties
ep
eq
vp'
0 p'
1 q
3G
=M
pp
=0
p'o
p'
N
N
iso ncl
iso ncl
slope
v
=0
url
url
=0
slope
=M
=M
p'
p'=1
ln p'
p. 2/
=M
yl A
p'
oA
p'
elliptical yield locus
q2
p
(p
p
)=0
o
2
M
or
p
M2
= 2
po
M + 2
p. 3/
=M
yl B
yl A
p'oB
p' p'oA
q2
p
(p
p
)=0
o
2
M
incremental form: p , q po
po
= (2p
2q q
+ 2
p
M p
p
po )
p. 4/
q
B
A
p'
p'oB
p
o
pp =
v po
iso-ncl
v
q
2
2 p
=
(M ) + 2
2
2
v(M + )
p
p
url A
url B
p'
p. 5/
qp
p
pp
M
p'o
p'
p. 6/
0
ep
p
vp
=
1
eq
q
0 3G
plastic compliance
!
p
p
= 2
p
vp (M + 2 )
q
M 2 2
4 2
M 2 2
p
q
p. 7/
2
2
p'
p'
p'i M
> M, p' > 0 < M, p' < 0
p'o
p'
p
0
vp'
vp'o
2
a
M 2 2 2 2
8.Stiffnessformulation:
MohrCoulomb,Camclay
(GM3)
yield = failure
elastic
stress
p. 1/
inaccessible
yield = failure
elastic
stress
p. 3/2
f T
D
g
f T
D
p. 4/2
T
f
D g
D
= D ep
= D
g
f T
D
p. 5/2
q
inaccessible
pp
M
M*
elastic
p'
p'
isotropic elastic D =
K 0
0 3G
p. 6/2
q
inaccessible
pp
M
M*
elastic
p'
p'
yield surface f () = q M p = 0
p. 7/2
qp
p
q
q
inaccessible
pp
M
M*
elastic
p'
plastic potential
p'
g() = q M p + k = 0
p. 8/2
qp
p
q
q
inaccessible
pp
M
M*
elastic
p'
p'
plastic potential
g() = q M p + k = 0
!
!
!
p
p
g/p
M
=
=
p
q
g/q
1
plastic mechanism
pp
=
M
pq
p. 9/2
initial
stress
plastic
q = Mp'
elastic
p'
0 3G
q
1
p. 10/2
q = Mp'
initial
stress
plastic
elastic
p'
deduce =
M 1
M 1
K 0
0 3G
!
K 0
0 3G
p
q
M
1
p. 11/2
final result
p
q
1
KM M + 3G
"
K 0
0 3G
M M K 2 3M GK
3M GK
9G2
!#
p
q
p. 12/2
1
M
M MM
p
q
check that q = M p
plastic work W p = p pp + qpq = (M M )p pq
plastic work W p = 0 for M = M - physically unreasonable
- in practice M < M
p. 13/2
q
a.
b.
q
M* > 0
p'
dilation
q
p
c.
M* < 0
compression
p. 14/2
p
plastic potential g() = 0
elastic
stress
hardening yield surface f(, ) = 0
p. 15/2
p
plastic potential g() = 0
elastic
stress
hardening yield surface f(, ) = 0
p. 16/2
g
= D = D( ) = D D
f T
f T g
f =
+
=0
p
p. 17/2
f T
D
f T
g
D
g f T
D D
= D ep
= D
g
f T
D
+ H
p. 18/2
pp
M
p'o
p'
p. 19/2
2p po
2q
M2
p. 20/2
N
v
p' = 1
ln p'
p' = p'o
vpo /( )
0
p. 21/2
vpo
f po g
2p po
H = p = p
po p p
K 0
0 3G
h
K
2 6GKq(2p po )
2
K (2p po )
2
M
6GKq(2p po )
36G2 q 2
M2
M4
i
vp po (2p po )
2
12Gq 2
(2p po ) + M 4 +
p
q
elastic predictor (is the resulting stress state within the yield
locus?) and plastic corrector
p. 22/2
M=1.2
1
normally consolidated
a.
0
0.05
0.1
0.05
normally consolidated
b.
-0.05
increasing
overconsolidation ratio
0
0.05
0.1
p. 23/2
100
100
a.
b.
q: kPa
q: kPa
50
50
increasing
overconsolidation
ratio
0
0
50
p': kPa
100
0
0
40
u: kPa
20
0.05
0.1
c.
0
-20
-40
0.05
0.1
p. 24/2
Cam clay
stiffness formulation always works: strain increment
stress increment
elastic prediction - followed by plastic correction if
predicted elastic stress state violates the yield condition
however, compliance formulation may be less
cumbersome: stress increment strain increment
but note that this breaks down if soil wants to soften and is unsure whether to unload plastically or elastically
p. 25/2
Sand
to first order yielding depends on
mobilised friction (at low
stresses)
volume changes primarily linked
with distortional dilatancy rather
than mean stress compression
failure: q - pp' = 0
q
inaccesssible
plastic potentials
M
pp
elastic + plastic
p
yield
loci
yield: q - yp' = 0
elastic
p'
p'
p. 26/2
Dilatancy
loose
dense
Dilatancy
shear box
direct observation of dilatancy
link mobilised friction Q/P and
dilatancy y/x
Dilatancy
Taylor flow rule
dense
loose
incremental work: W = Py + Qx
dissipate in friction: W =Px
y Q
tan =
= = tan m
x P
Dilatancy
tan = tan m = tan m tan c
= tan c : critical state friction shearing with no volume change
Ottawa sand: 0.49, c 26
analogy with triaxial test
x qp
y pp
Q q
P p'
y
Q
=
x
P
pp
qp
=M
q
=M
p'
failure: q - pp' = 0
q
inaccesssible
plastic potentials
M
pp
elastic + plastic
p
yield
loci
yield: q - yp' = 0
elastic
p'
p'
p
g() = q M p ln r
p
plastic mechanism
!
p
p
=
p
q
g
p
g
q
M
1
p. 27/2
mobilised friction
shear strain
0
0.1
0.2
y
pq
=
p
a + pq
or incrementally
(p y )2 p
y =
q
ap
p. 28/2
g f T
D D
= D ep
= D
f T
g
D
+ H
p. 1/
K 0
0 3G
y /q
(p y )2 /ap
f
=
f /p
f q
y
1
f
= p
y
p. 29/2
hardening function:
f y T g
2
H=
=
p
0
(
)
p
y /ap
p
y
M y
1
2
(
)
y
p
=p
(ap )
3G Ky (M y ) + p (p y ) / (ap )
p
q
p. 30/2
mobilised friction
1
0
q/p'i
shear strain
0
0.1
M = 0.8, p = 1
0.2
M = 1, p = 1
expansion
0
M = 0.8, p = 1.0
0.2
M = 1.0, p = 1.0
M = 1.2, p = 1.0
compression
M = 1.2, p = 1
0
0
p'/p'i
0.05
volumetric strain
but no softening
continuing volumetric deformation (unless M = p )
p. 31/2
hardening function
H 0;
M y ;
2
(
)
p
y
H = p
(ap )
M (M y )
p. 2/
9.Selectionofsoilparameters
(exercise)
(GM3)
Soilmodelling:SouthEastAsia:OctoberNovember2010
9. Practicalexercise:choiceofsoilparameters
DavidMuirWood
d.muirwood@dundee.ac.uk
1.5
0.5
observation
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.15
0.2
shear strain eq
shear strain eq
0
0.05
0.1
volumetric strain ep
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
observation
Summary
Mohr-Coulomb model is widely available but
unsuitable to describe prefailure nonlinearity
elastic-hardening plastic models are more
useful but one simulated test is insufficient
for decision on optimum model
desirable to match range of data for stress
paths relevant to application
experimental data are not infallible
10.MohrCoulombimproved:
strength,criticalstates,
particlebreakage
Soilmodelling:SouthEastAsia:OctoberNovember2010
10.MohrCoulombimproved:strength,critical
states,particlebreakage
DavidMuirWood
d.muirwood@dundee.ac.uk
a.MohrCoulombimproved:strengthandcriticalstates
standardelasticperfectly
plasticMohrCoulombmodel
nonassociatedplasticflow
simplicity
sharpstiffnesschanges
tangentstiffnesseither
elastic orzero
continuingvolumechange
elastichardeningplasticMohrCoulombmodel
nonassociatedflowsteadyfallinstiffnesscontinuingvolumechange
standardelasticperfectlyplastic
MohrCoulombmodel
availableinallnumericalanalysis
programs
subjectivityinselectingvaluesofsoil
parameters stiffness,strength,
dilatancy
SevernTrentsand
buildonMohrCoulombmodel
describejourneyfrominitialelastic
responsetoultimatecriticalstate
includenonlinearity,peakstrength
andsoftening
simplicity?
adequatecomplexity?
SevernTrentsand:strength
error:strengthasanindependent quantity
infactdependent ondensityandstresslevel
introducecriticalstateline locusof
asymptoticstates(largestrain,endoftest)
criticalstateline
stateparameter =volumedistance
fromcriticalstateline
'loose'
specific
volume
functionofdensityand stresslevel
'dense'
meanstress
moreusefulthanvoidratioalone
indicatingeffectofdensityand stress
Been&Jefferies
SevernTrentsand:strength
peak
strength
whatispeakstrength?
propertyofthesoilwhichchanges
withstresslevel,density
dataconfirmlinkbetweenstrength
andstateparameter
stateparameter
'loose'
specific
volume
SevernTrentsandisjusttheMohr
Coulombmodelwithcurrent
strengthdependentoncurrent
stateparameter
'dense'
meanstress
Been&Jefferies
SevernTrentsand:dilatancy
dilatancy:volumechangeduring
shearing
2.0
q/p'
dense
1.5
constant strength
1.0
loose
'dense'sandexpands
0.5
'loose'sandcontracts
0.0
a.
0
volumetric
dilatancydependsondensity
10
unlimited
contraction
loose
10
15
20
shear strain: %
shearstrain
dilatancyvariesduringtest
-4
unlimited dilation
b.
-8
20
shear strain: %
volumestrain
strain: %
0
15
dense
Benahmed
SevernTrentsand:dilatancy
criticalstateline
dilatancy
'loose'
specific
volume
'dense'
'loose'
'dense'
stateparameter
meanstress
dataconfirmlinkbetweendilatancyandstateparameter
ifsoilisnot atcriticalstatewhenitisbeingsheared( 0):
thenvolumechangesoccurtowardsthecriticalstate:dilatancy
'loose': >0:contraction
'dense': <0:dilation
Been&Jefferies
MohrCoulombmodelwithstrengthdependentonstatevariable
ratio currently mobilisedstrength
currently availablestrength
distortionalhardening
monotonicincreaseofratioofmobilised
toavailablestrength(/p)with
distortionalstrainqp
1
monotonic
relationship
shear strain
hyperbolichardeninglaw:simple
mobilised
strength'mob
available strength':
varieswithstateparameter
variation of current
peak strength
increasing
initial
density
mobilised
strength
q/p' 2
a.
0.1
0.2
0.3
shear strain
0.2
volumetric b.
strain 0.1
-0.2
increasing
initial
density
0
-0.1
1
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
shear strain
b. Mohr-Coulomb improved:
non-monotonic loading
p. 2/1
G/Gmax
0.5
end of elastic
region?
stiffness
0
0.0001
0.001
0.01
shear strain %
0.1
20 %
damping
10
damping
Quiou sand: resonant column and torsional
0.0001
0.001
0.01
shear strain %
0.1
p. 3/1
perfectly plastic
stress
elastic
damping
0.5
secant
stiffness
0.001
0.01
0.1
10
strain
p. 4/1
1.0
secant stiffness
Gs/G
mobilised friction
0.5
shear strain
0
0
0.1
tangent stiffness
Gt/G
damping
0.0
0.2
0.001
0.01
0.1
qp/a
10
hyperbolic hardening
implied stiffness and damping variation
p. 5/1
kinematic
yield surface
q
failure
elastic region
stress path
elastic
region
b.
kinematic
yield surface
p'
a.
p. 6/1
e=0.83
e=0.87
e=0.92
e=0.94
- batr06 (model)
- batr05 (model)
- alert51 (model)
- batr02 (model)
q (kPa)
q (kPa)
100
100
increasing initial
state parameter
0
0
0
100
p' (kPa)
200
10
axial strain (%)
15
p. 7/1
q (kPa)
simulation
q (kPa)
100
25 cycles
100
89 cycles
0
0
200
p' (kPa)
400
200
p' (kPa)
400
q (kPa)
100
100
0
0
2
axial strain (%)
2
axial strain (%)
p. 8/1
p. 9/1
B
D
C
a.
b.
G
p. 10/1
60
1.0
Gs/Gmax
0.8
hyperbolic
typical relationship
hyperbolic
damping
40
damping
ratio %
0.6
typical relationship
0.4
20
stiffness
0.2
0.0001 0.001
0.01
0.1
shear strain %
10.0
10
0
0.0001 0.001 0.01
0.1
shear strain %
10
0.04
/Gmax
hyperbolic
0.02
0.000
4
6
shear strain %
10
p. 11/1
a.
0.02
00
200
20
pore pressure
00
100
0.02
100
0.02
0.02
0.02
100
50
100
200
100
00
200
100
b.
50
00
50 z
100
0.02
00
pore pressure
0.02
100
00
100
0.02
100
100
100
00
50 z
50
100
0.02
pore pressure
00
0.02
c.
100
0.02
00
100
0.02
p. 12/1
messages
possible to develop elegant models which reproduce
desirable mechanical characteristics
especially effects of density and stress level
mathematical complexity not essential
build up from well known model: Mohr-Coulomb
p. 13/1
p. 2/
triaxial
compression
80
% finer
60
40
20
0
compression
62.1MPa
0.02
initial
grading
p. 26/8
100
% finer
50
D
d=dmin
0
current
grading
d=dmax
B
C
particle diameter: d (log scale)
p. 14/3
specific
volume
onset of
crushing
specific
volume
IG increasing:
evolving
critical state
line
reinterpretation:
critical state
surface
IG
mean stress: log scale
critical
state line
1
p' (logarithmic scale)
vc = v + (
v v) exp (p /pcs )
p. 20/3
1 10-3
105
109
10
mean stress p'
log scale
p. 22/3
% passing by volume
6.66 mm
389 agglomerates
80
60
originalPSD
Original
distribution
20MPa
20
MPa
before
compression
shear
axial
20
MPastrain
axial strain
= 0.3
= 0.3
axial
20
MPastrain
axial strain
= 0.5
= 0.5 crushing
axial
20
MPastrain
axial strain
= 0.6
= 0.6
axial
20
MPastrain
axial strain
= 0.7
= 0.7
(Cheng, 2004)
40
20
0
100
1000
p. 32/8
Voids ratio, e
2.7
2.5
fresh samples
specific
volume
2.3
Loose
2.1
1.9
Dense
1.7
loose: normal
compression and
unloading
IG increasing:
evolving critical
state line
precompressed samples
1
10
Pressure, p' (MPa)
100
IG
mean stress
logarithmic scale
p. 33/8
0.6
0.4
20
40
60
80
fines content: %
100
p. 29/8
RD=10 after
removal
50
10
20
5
RD
10
20
50
100
particle diameter (mm)
p. 17/8
RD=dmax/dmin
RD
2
5
1.2
10
20
1.15
0
2
mean stress (MPa)
p. 21/3
critical state
critical
state
line
stress:dilatancy
relationship
expansion
0
plastic dilatancy
critical state
strength dependent
on state parameter
0
state parameter
contraction
1
mobilised strength
available strength
monotonic hardening
towards current strength
plastic distortional strain
p. 19/3
Severn-Trent sand
extended Mohr-Coulomb model
model built round critical state line as divider of
response
adequate complexity - effects of density, strain softening
simple assumed relationships
(use as basis for extended model)
many such models exist - aesthetic judgement mathematical expediency
p. 21/4
state parameter
critical
state line
falls
mean effective stress
available
strength
critical state
mobilised strength
available strength
strength
unchanged
0
state parameter
critical state
stiffness
unchanged
stress:dilatancy
unchanged
expansion
contraction
0
plastic dilatancy
p. 31/8
p. 34/8
10
52%
compression
initial
0.001
0.01
0.1
particle size: mm
p. 35/8
IG 1 inevitably?
0.8
compression
800kPa
relative
breakage
Br
0.4
650-930kPa
248-386kPa
60-97kPa
1?
grading
state index
IG
0.1?
10
1000
100000
shear strain: %
relative breakage Br IG
different normal stresses
crushing does not continue indefinitely
final grading depends on stress level
Dogs Bay sand: ring shear tests (Coop, 2004)
p. 36/8
particle crushing
normalised
deviator stress particle breakage
(yield criterion)
current strength
4
P
3
1
mobilised strength
(yield criterion)
normalised mean stress
p. 38/8
particle crushing
specific
volume
v
vmin
-vcIG
1
p' (logarithmic scale)
p. 39/8
1.5
1.9
F
stress ratio
q/p'
1.0
1.7
specific
volume v
critical state
line IG=0
1.5
0.5
critical state
line IG=1
a.
c.
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.0
volumetric
strain 0.04 contraction
1.0
IG
0.8
0.02
0.00
0.0
-0.02
0.2
1.0
b.
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
no crushing for test AF
0.6
0.4
-0.04
0.2
-0.06
-0.08
expansion
AF
d.
0.0 A
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
precompression: A
p. 40/8
1.5
1.9
stress ratio
q/p'
1.0
1.7
specific
volume v
critical state
line IG=0
1.5
0.5
critical state
line IG=1
a.
c.
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.0
volumetric
strain 0.04 contraction
1.0
IG
0.8
0.02
0.00
0.0
-0.02
0.2
1.0
b.
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
no crushing on unloading
0.6
0.4
-0.04
0.2
-0.06
-0.08
expansion
ABAF
AF
d.
B
0.0 A
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
precompression: A, ABA
p. 41/8
1.5
1.9
stress ratio
q/p'
1.0 ACAF
1.7
specific
volume v
critical state
line IG=0
C evolution of
critical state on
path ACAF
1.5
0.5
critical state
line IG=1
a.
c.
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.0
volumetric
strain 0.04 contraction
1.0
IG
0.8
0.02
0.00
0.0
-0.02
0.2
-0.04
ACAF
-0.06
-0.08
expansion
ABAF
AF
1.0
b.
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
no crushing on unloading
0.6
0.4
0.2
d.
B
0.0 A
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
p. 42/8
1.5
1.9
stress ratio
q/p'
1.0 ACAF
ADAF
1.7
specific
volume v
critical state
line IG=0
B
C
1.5
0.5
critical state
line IG=1
a.
c.
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.0
volumetric
strain 0.04 contraction
0.02
1.0
IG
0.8
ADAF
0.00
0.0
-0.02
0.2
-0.04
ACAF
-0.06
-0.08
evolution of
critical state on
path ADAF
expansion
ABAF
AF
1.0
b.
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
no crushing on unloading
0.6
0.4
0.2
d.
B
0.0 A
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
p. 43/8
1.5
1.9
stress ratio
q/p'
1.0 ACAF
AEAF
ADAF
1.7
specific
volume v
critical state
line IG=0
evolution of
critical state on
path AEAF
C
D
1.5
0.5
E
critical state
line IG=1
a.
c.
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
volumetric
strain 0.04 contraction
0.02
1.0
AEAF
IG
0.8
ADAF
0.00
0.0
-0.02
0.2
-0.04
ACAF
-0.06
-0.08
1.0
expansion
ABAF
AF
1.0
b.
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
no crushing on unloading
E
D
0.6
0.4
0.2
d.
B
A
0.0
100
1000
10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
p. 44/8
particle crushing
shearing at constant mean effective stress p
samples with different precompression histories
evolution of grading state index IG
compression plane ln p : v
IG , peak strength , soil feels looser
p. 45/8
150
deviator
stress q: kPa
100
specific
volume
2.0
v
1.8
increasing
initial
1.6
50
specific
volume
1.4
0
0
50
100 150
mean stress p': kPa
initial state
v=2.0
v=1.9
v=1.8
critical state
line IG=1
critical
state line undrained path
for v = 1.7 in
v=1.7
absence of
v=1.6
crushing
v=1.5
1
10
100
1000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
p. 46/8
-9
0
clay content
20%
90%
30% 50% 70%
80%
100%
40% 60%
1 void ratio 2
log10[permeability]
(m/s)
clay content
10%
-8
30-100%
20%
-9
1
2
3
clay void ratio
for clay contents above 30% the permeability is determined by the clay matrix
the gravel particles merely occupy space and reduce flow cross-section
(data from Kumar)
p. 47/8
crushing: consequences
crushing lowers critical state line
material feels looser
increased tendency for pore pressure generation
reduced permeability: slower pore pressure dissipation
increased likelihood of liquefaction
p. 48/8
modelling proposals
underpinning constitutive model for distortional
response
characterisation of grading
link between grading and particle removal or particle
breakage
link between grading and critical states
assumption concerning change of specific volume
resulting from erosion (destabilisation) or stolen void
ratio for particle breakage
problem of validation data: importance of
fabric/structure
p. 76/8
11.Camclayimproved:
nonlinearity,structure
Soilmodelling:SouthEastAsia:OctoberNovember2010
11.Camclayimproved:nonlinearity,structure
DavidMuirWood
d.muirwood@dundee.ac.uk
a.Camclayimproved:nonlinearity
plastic
lessstiff
shear
stress
shear
stress
elastic stiff
mean
stress
classicalelasticplasticmodellingofsoil
forexample,Camclay(1963,1968)
shear
strain
stress
yield?
classicalidentificationofyield
fromstress:strainresponse
typical actual response
void
ratio
strain
geometricalconstructionfor
estimationofpreconsolidation
pressure
preconsolidation
pressure
vertical stress
(log scale)
Camclayprovidinginspiration:
searchforCamclaylike yieldloci
egkaolin(AlTabbaa,1984)
200
Cam clay?
q: kPa
150
100
50
p': kPa
0
0
100
200
300
-50
-100
-150
Fig 3: Anisotropic yield locus for one-dimensional stress history
(after Al-Tabbaa, 1984)
400
yieldlocifornaturalclays
0.9
0.8
0.7
q/ vc
0.6
0.5
0.4
Rang de Fleuve
Belfast
0.3
Winnipeg
0.2
St Alban
Lyndhurst
0.1
Mastemyr
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
p/ v c
collectedbyGrahametal(1988)
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
typicalexperimentalobservation:
stiffnessfallssteadilywithmonotonicstraining:
isthereanelasticregion?
limitofelastic
response??
shearstiffnessdegradationdataforQuiousandfromresonant
columnandtorsionalsheartests(afterLoPrestietal,1997)
howdoweobjectivelyidentifyyielding?
occurrenceofirrecoverablestrain?
dissipationofenergyinloading/unloadingcycles?
changeinslopeofstress:strainresponse?
stress
stress
b.
a.
strain
strain
directprobing
70
yieldingofBothkennar
clay:
q: kPa
60
boundariesdeduced
frominspectionof
stress:strainresponse
50
Y1approximately
centredoninsitu
stressstate
30
Y3reflectsnatural
structure damaged
byany irrecoverable
strain illusory
afterSmithetal(1992)
Y3 yield locus
40
Y2 yield locus
20
Y1 yield locus
nonmonotonic
probing damage
toyieldlocus?
10
0
0
-10
-20
10
20
30
40 p': kPa
50
60
kaolinrevisited:
isotropicconsolidationhistories
200
a.
150
100
50
0
0
-50
50
100
150
200
250
datafromAlTabbaa(1987)
300
350
400
450
kaolinrevisited:
onedimensionalconsolidationhistories
200
b.
150
100
50
0
0
-50
50
100
150
200
datafromAlTabbaa(1987)
250
300
350
400
q
kPa
q
kPa
p' kPa
p' kPa
plasticstrainincrements:approximatenormalitytokinematicyield
loci
q
q
kPa
kPa
p' kPa
kaolin: AlTabbaa,1987
p' kPa
Camclay
elastichardeningplasticmodel
volumetrichardening
associatedflow normality
Camclay
responseindrainedtriaxial
compressiontestswith
constantp'
asymptoticapproachto
criticalstate
effectofoverconsolidation
ratio
sharpdivisionbetween
elasticandplasticresponse
compareresponseofsoilonnonmonotonic
loadingwithcapabilityofsingleyieldsurface
model
elastichardeningplasticmodelexpectselastic
behaviouronreversal,suddendropinstiffness
atyield
soilstypicallyshowhystereticbehaviouron
unloadreloadcycles,steadychangein
incrementalstiffness
compareresponseofsoilonnonmonotonicloading
withcapabilityofsingleyieldsurfacemodel
extensiontosimplemodels
usingkinematichardening
andboundingsurface
plasticity
kinematichardeningextension
yieldlocuscarriedaroundwithstressstate 'bubble'
stronglyinfluencedbyrecenthistory
stiffnessfallsasyield'bubble'approachesbounding
surface controlledbydistanceb
whenloadingwith'bubble'incontactwithbounding
surfacemodelisidenticaltoCamclay
assumerelativesizeRof'bubble'
assumerulefortranslationof'bubble'
assumeinterpolationrulelinkingplasticstiffnesswithb
otherwiseidenticaltoCamclay
new
bounding
surface
bounding
surface
newyield
surface
p
yieldsurface
(bubble)
consistencylaw:stresscannotlieoutsidecurrentyieldsurface: +
yieldsurfaceexpands withboundingsurface asresultofhardeninglawandplastic
strains entirestressspaceisstretched
yieldsurfacetranslatesparalleltovectorb linkingpointswithparallelnormalsonyield
surface(atcurrentstress)andonboundingsurface ensuresthatyieldsurfaceand
boundingsurfaceneverintersect
assumerelativesizeRof'bubble'
assumerulefortranslationof'bubble'
assumeinterpolationrulelinkingplasticstiffnesswithb
otherwiseidenticaltoCamclay
volumetricstrain
kaolin
constantp' cycles
hysteresis
experiment
simulation
distortionalstrain
buildupof
volumetricstrain
q
kPa
p' kPa
migrationof'bubble'duringconstantp' unloading
afteronedimensionalnormalcompression
hardeningof'bubble'andboundingsurface
experiment
simulation
constantq cyclesafteronedimensionalnormalcompression
b.Camclayimproved:structure/bonding
naturalsoilsoftencontainstructure:bondingbetweenparticles:
destroyedwithmechanicalorchemicaldamage
designmodelinwhichyieldsurfacehasincreasedsizeasaresultof
thebondingbetweenparticles
extensionof'bubble'kinematicextensionofCamclay
ratioofsizesofstructure
surfaceandreferencesurface
givesindicationofcurrent
degreeofstructure
yieldsurfaceandbounding(structure)surfaceshaveincreasedsize
asaresultofthebondingbetweenparticles
withplasticstraining(orchemicalweathering)theyieldsurface
graduallyshrinkstotheyieldsurface,forremoulded,structureless
material
extensionof'bubble'kinematicextensionofCamclay
allfeaturesof'bubble'modelretained
reference
surface
structure
surface
p
yieldsurface
(bubble)
consistencylaw:stresscannotlieoutsidecurrentyieldsurface: +
yieldsurfaceexpands withboundingsurfaceandreferencesurface asresultof
hardeninglawandplasticstrains entirestressspaceisstretched
structure
surface
reference
surface
p
yieldsurface
(bubble)
consistencylaw:stresscannotlieoutsidecurrentyieldsurface: +
plasticstrainsdamagethestructureofthesoilaccordingtoadamagelaw structure
surfaceandbubbleshrinkandshifttowardsreferencesurface
structure
surface
p
yieldsurface
(bubble)
yieldsurfacetranslatesparalleltovectorb linkingpointswithparallelnormalsonyield
surface(atcurrentstress)andonboundingsurface ensuresthatyieldsurfaceand
boundingsurfaceneverintersect
carefulconsiderationofgeometricallogic!
addmeasureofstructureorbonding:singlescalarparameterr
'bounding'surfacenowcalled'structure'surface:sizertimes
largerthanareferencesurface
structurelostwheneverplasticstrainsoccur
damagelaw:
k
(r 1) dp
r =
damageplasticstrainincrementdp combinesplasticvolumetric
andplasticdistortionalstrainincrements:
additionalparametertocontroltheirrelative
importance
structureprogressivelydisappears:
r 1asplasticdeformationincreases
logic:structurelesssoilisonewhichhasbeensomechanically
pummelledthatithasnoremainingbondsbetweenparticles=
Camclay
particularformsoflaboratorytesting(triaxialtesting,for
example)maynotbeabletoprovidesufficientdamage
evolutionlawanddefinitionofdamagestrainmayneedtoinclude
somemoresubtlereferencetothenatureofthestrainpath
shearingwithrotationofprincipalaxesislikelytobeespecially
damaging
feasibletointroduceotherevolutionlawswhichrelatechange
(increaseordecrease)ofscalarmeasureofstructurer(ortensor
measureofstructure)tochemicalenvironmentortimeor
temperatureeffects
Camclaycanberegainedbysettingr=1,R=1
hierarchicalextensionof'bubble'
modeltoincludeeffectsof
structure
otherevolutionlaws:relatechange
(increaseordecrease)ofscalar
measureofstructurertochemical
environmentortimeor
temperatureeffects
Camclaycanberegainedbysettingr=1,R=1
simulation
experiment
Bothkennarclay
Gajo&MuirWood,2001
resultsnormalisedbyHvorslevequivalent
consolidationpressurep'e forstructureless soil
HierarchicalextensionsofCamclay
itisrelativelystraightforwardtoaddextrafeaturestoa
soilmodel
advantageinusingwellknownmodelasbasis check
implementation acceptability
extrafeaturesimplyadditionalsoilparametersand
additionalcalibrationtests
seekadequatecomplexityinmodelling matchcomplexity
ofmodeltoavailabilityofdataandneedsofapplication
12.Conclusion
12. Conclusion
David Muir Wood
d.muirwood@dundee.ac.uk
volume
strength
critical
state line
density
strength
volume
p'
compression
density
specific
volume
v
loose: v > vf
stress level
strength
dense:
v < vf
strength
critical state
line: v = vf
p. 1/
PLAXIS analyses
same problem different modellers
spread of predictions
(Schweiger, 2003)