Soil modelling: South East Asia: October-November 2010

10.Mohr-Coulomb improved: strength, critical

states, particle breakage
David Muir Wood
d.muirwood@dundee.ac.uk
c. Mohr-Coulomb improved: particle
breakage

p. 2/
 Chattahoochee River sand

100
triaxial
80 compression
% finer
60

40 initial
20 compression grading
62.1MPa
0
0.02 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2
particle diameter: mm

evolving particle size distribution: particle breakage

triaxial compression with confining pressure 62.1MPa
(Vesic & Clough, 1968)

p. 26/8
 grading state index IG
100 E
A

% finer limiting
grading
50
D d=dmax
current
d=dmin grading
0 B
C
particle diameter: d (log scale)

IG = area ABC/area ABD (current and limiting

gradings)
limiting grading might be fractal (Appolonian)...
...scaling factor for calculation of IG (area ABD = B )
(other definitions possible)
for linear grading IG = [ln (dmax /dmin )]/2B
p. 14/3
 Grading state index IG: critical states
original
material critical state line?
specific deduced from tests with
volume onset of increasing stress levels
crushing
IG increasing (irreversible)
changing material

crushing
complete

mean stress: log scale

 Grading state index IG: critical states
critical state line reinterpretation:
before crushing: IG = 0 critical state
specific surface
volume limit of critical state lines
during crushing: 0 < IG < 1
IG increasing:
evolving
critical state
line
critical state line
crushing
IG exhausted: IG = 1

mean stress: log scale

critical state and isotropic compression lines

specific isotropic compression line

volume through current state
v

critical
state line

1
p' (logarithmic scale)

h i

vc = v + (v v) exp (p /pcs )
ensure realistic values at low and high stress
p. 20/3
 critical state surface

2.4
specific
volume v
2.0

1.6

1.2

0
0.5
grading state 105 109
1 10-3 10
index: IG mean stress p'
log scale

specific volume as combined function of grading IG and

mean stress p
critical state line changes as particles removed
p. 22/3
agglomerated particles: DEM: (Cheng, 2005)

100
Influence of axial strain:
originalPSD
Original distribution

% passing by volume
80 20MPa
20 MPa compression
before shear
6.66 mm axial
20 MPastrain = 0.3
axial strain = 0.3
axial
20 MPastrain = 0.5
axial strain = 0.5 crushing
(Cheng, 2004)
60
axial
20 MPastrain = 0.6
axial strain = 0.6
axial
20 MPastrain = 0.7
axial strain = 0.7
40

20

0
389 agglomerates
100 1000
Size, log d (m)

evolving particle size distribution through breakage of

contact bonds within agglomerates
isotropic compression to 20MPa (negligible change)
shearing (axial strains indicated)
dmax somewhat constant

p. 32/8
 particle crushing: critical state surface
critical state line
before crushing
IG = 0
2.7 specific
fresh samples Final states of p' -constant tests: volume
2.5
Dense loose: normal
2.3 Loose
Loose compression and
2.1 Loose, over-compressed
unloading
Voids ratio, e

1.9
Dense
1.7
1.5 Loose, over-compressed
1.3
1.1 IG increasing:
0.9 precompressed samples evolving critical
0.7 state line
1 10 100
Pressure, p' (MPa)
IG
mean stress
logarithmic scale

loci of end points on critical state surface

precompression leads to lower critical state specific
volume (higher IG )
(Cheng)
p. 33/8
 effect of addition of fine particles?
1.2
void ratio
1.0
emax
0.8

0.6 emin

0.4
0 20 40 60 80 100
fines content: %

fine particles filling fine particles pushing

gaps - natural result larger particles apart -
of crushing unnatural?

effect on emax and emin

all aspects of behaviour linked with void ratio range
affected
for example: location of critical state line
p. 29/8
 DEM: removal of particles: gradings
100
RD=10 after
% finer removal

50 10
5
RD 2
20

0
5 10 20 50 100
particle diameter (mm)

gradings used for discrete element modelling (solid

curves)
grading reached by removal of particles from initial
grading with RD = 10 (dotted curve)
p. 17/8
 DEM: grading and critcal states

1.25
RD RD=dmax/dmin
specific
volume 2
5
1.2
10
20

1.15
0 1 2 3
mean stress (MPa)

broadening grading lowers critical state line

broader gradings pack more efficiently

p. 21/3
 Severn-Trent sand model
specific
volume
critical state

critical
state stress:dilatancy
critical state line & relationship
line
state parameter
expansion contraction
mean effective stress 0
plastic dilatancy
available
strength 1

mobilised strength
available strength
critical state
monotonic hardening
strength dependent towards current strength
on state parameter
0 plastic distortional strain
state parameter

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
 particle crushing: effect of increasing IG

available
state parameter strength 1
specific
volume mobilised strength
critical critical state
critical state available strength
state line
stress:dilatancy
falls stiffness
strength unchanged
unchanged expansion contraction
unchanged
mean effective stress 0 plastic distortional strain 0
state parameter plastic dilatancy

lowering of critical state line (first order )

strength unchanged (first order )
stiffness unchanged (first order )
dilatancy unchanged (first order )
slope of critical state line unchanged (first order )
few data - often from artificial mixtures not naturally
crushed or eroded materials

p. 31/8
 how best to crush particles...

compression produces particle breakage ...

... but shearing better

p. 34/8
 ring shear apparatus: Dogs Bay sand

100
estimated shear strain
% finer 11100%

730%
10 104%
52%
compression
initial
1
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
particle size: mm

evolution of particle size distribution: constant after

about 730%? (definition of strain in ring shear?)
double logarithmic axes
(after Coop et al., 2004)
p. 35/8
 IG 1 inevitably?
0.8
relative compression 650-930kPa 1?
800kPa
breakage 248-386kPa
Br grading
0.4 state index
60-97kPa IG

0 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

current strength
normalised
deviator stress particle breakage
4
(yield criterion)
2 P
3
1

mobilised strength
(yield criterion)

normalised mean stress

crushing yield locus: normalised stresses (Hardin)

h i
p 1 + 12 (/M )3 pc = 0

normality of crushing strains

rotation of principal axes certainly damaging

p. 38/8
 particle crushing
specific
volume
isotropic compression line
v
through current state

critical
state line
vmin -vcIG

1
p' (logarithmic scale)

energy to create new material surface through crushing

magnitude of crushing volumetric strain
critical state line falls as IG rises: v IG
newly crushed material steals some void ratio from
remaining soil
compression line falls somewhat
p. 39/8
 particle crushing: simulations
AF 1.9
1.5
F
stress ratio critical state
q/p' line IG=0
1.0 1.7 A
specific
volume v

0.5 1.5
a. critical state
c. line IG=1
1.3
0.0 100 1000 10000
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 mean effective stress p' (kPa)
axial strain
volumetric 1.0
strain 0.04 contraction no crushing for test AF
IG
0.02 0.8

0.00 0.6
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
-0.02 axial strain
b. 0.4
-0.04
0.2 d.
-0.06

-0.08
expansion AF 0.0 A
100 1000 10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
precompression: A
p. 40/8
 particle crushing: simulations
AF 1.9
1.5
ABAF
stress ratio critical state
q/p' line IG=0
A B
1.0 1.7
specific
volume v

0.5 1.5
a. critical state
c. line IG=1
1.3
0.0 100 1000 10000
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 mean effective stress p' (kPa)
axial strain
volumetric 1.0
strain 0.04 contraction no crushing on unloading
IG
0.02 0.8

0.00 0.6
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
-0.02 axial strain
b. 0.4
-0.04
0.2 d.
-0.06

-0.08
expansion ABAF 0.0 A B
AF 100 1000 10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
precompression: A, ABA
p. 41/8
 particle crushing: simulations
AF 1.9
1.5
ABAF
stress ratio critical state
q/p' line IG=0
A B
1.0 ACAF 1.7
specific
C evolution of
volume v
critical state on
0.5 1.5 path ACAF
a. critical state
c. line IG=1
1.3
0.0 100 1000 10000
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 mean effective stress p' (kPa)
axial strain
volumetric 1.0
strain 0.04 contraction no crushing on unloading
IG
0.02 0.8

0.00 0.6
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
-0.02 axial strain
b. 0.4
-0.04
ACAF
0.2 d.
-0.06 C
expansion ABAF 0.0 A B
-0.08 100 1000 10000
AF
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
precompression: A, ABA, ACA
p. 42/8
 particle crushing: simulations
AF 1.9
1.5
ABAF
stress ratio critical state
q/p' line IG=0
A B
1.0 ACAF 1.7 evolution of
specific critical state on
ADAF C
volume v path ADAF
D
0.5 1.5
a. critical state
c. line IG=1
1.3
0.0 100 1000 10000
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 mean effective stress p' (kPa)
axial strain
volumetric 1.0
strain 0.04 contraction no crushing on unloading
IG
0.02 0.8
ADAF
0.00 0.6 D
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
-0.02 axial strain
b. 0.4
-0.04
ACAF
0.2 d.
-0.06 C
expansion ABAF 0.0 A B
-0.08 100 1000 10000
AF
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
precompression: A, ABA, ACA, ADA
p. 43/8
 particle crushing: simulations
AF 1.9
1.5
ABAF
stress ratio critical state
q/p' A line IG=0
1.7 B evolution of
1.0 ACAF AEAF specific critical state on
ADAF C
volume v path AEAF
D
0.5 1.5 E
a. critical state
c. line IG=1
1.3
0.0 100 1000 10000
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 mean effective stress p' (kPa)
axial strain
volumetric 1.0
strain 0.04 contraction AEAF no crushing on unloading
IG E
0.02 0.8
ADAF
0.00 0.6 D
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
-0.02 axial strain
b. 0.4
-0.04
ACAF
0.2 C d.
-0.06
expansion ABAF A B
-0.08 0.0
AF 100 1000 10000
mean effective stress p' (kPa)
precompression: A, ABA, ACA, ADA, AEA
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
increases pore pressure generation ...

p. 45/8
 particle crushing: undrained compression

specific
volume
150 2.0 v=2.0 initial state
deviator
stress q: kPa v v=1.9 critical
100 1.8 v=1.8
state line undrained path
increasing v=1.7 for v = 1.7 in
initial critical state
1.6 line IG=1 v=1.6 absence of
50 specific
v=1.5 crushing
volume
0 1.4
0 50 100 150 1 10 100 1000
mean stress p': kPa mean effective stress p' (kPa)

effective stress paths

paths in compression plane ln p : v
effect of initial specific volume v

p. 46/8
 increased fines: decreased permeability
permeability of mixtures of kaolin clay with fine gravel
10% clay content
log10[permeability]
log10[permeability] (m/s)
20% 90% clay content
(m/s)
30% 50% 70% 10%
80%
-8 40% 60% 100% -8 30-100%
20%

-9 -9
0 1 void ratio 2 3 1 2 3 4 5
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