Video Lecture for MCA

By:
video.edhole.com
Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model &
Parameter Selection
Short Course on Computational Geotechnics + Dynamics
Boulder, Colorado
January 5-8, 2004

Stein Sture
Professor of Civil Engineering
University of Colorado at Boulder
video.edhole.com
Contents
Introduction
Stiffness Modulus
Triaxial Data
Plasticity
HS-Cap-Model
Simulation of Oedometer and Triaxial Tests on
Loose and Dense Sands
Summary

Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection video.edhole.com
Introduction
Hardening Soils
Most soils behave in a nonlinear behavior soon after application of
shear stress. Elastic-plastic hardening is a common technique, also
used in PLAXIS.

Usage of the Soft Soil model with creep
Creep is usually of greater significance in soft soils.


R
f
=
q
f
q
a

E
ur
= 3E
50
Hyperbolic stress strain response curve of Hardening Soil model
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection video.edhole.com
Stiffness Modulus
Definition of E
50
in a standard drained triaxial experiment

E
50
= E
50
ref
o
3
'
+ c cot
p
ref
+ c cot
|
\

|
.
|
m
= E
50
ref
o
3
'
sin + c cos
p
ref
sin + c cos
|
\

|
.
|
m

E
ur
ref
c cot o
3
'
c cot + p
ref
|
\

|
.
|
m
G
ur
=
1
2(1+ v)
E
ur

p
ref
=100kPa
Elastic unloading and reloading (Ohde, 1939)
We use the two elastic parameters v
ur
and E
ur

Initial (primary) loading
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection video.edhole.com
Stiffness Modulus
Definition of the normalized oedometric stiffness
Values for m from oedometer test versus initial porosity n
0
Normalized oedometer modulus versus initial porosity n
0
Oedometer tests

E
oed
ref
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Stiffness Modulus
Normalized oedometric stiffness for various soil classed (von Soos, 1991)
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Stiffness Modulus
Values for m obtained from triaxial test versus initial porosity n
0
Normalized triaxial modulus versus initial porosity n
0


E
50
ref
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Stiffness Modulus
Comparison of normalized stiffness moduli from oedometer and
Triaxial test
Summary of data for sand: Vermeer & Schanz (1997)

E
oed
= E
oed
ref
o
y
'
p
ref
E
50
= E
50
ref
o
x
'
p
ref
Engineering practice: mostly data on E
oed

Test data:

E
oed
ref
~ E
50
ref
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Triaxial Data on
p
~ 2c
1
p
Equi-g lines (Tatsuoka, 1972) for dense Toyoura Sand
Yield and failure surfaces for the Hardening Soil model

2c
1
=
q
a
E
50
q
q
a
q

E
50
= E
50
ref
o
3
'
sin + ccos
p
ref
sin + ccos
|
\

|
.
|
m

q
a
=
q
f
R
f
= M( p + c cot)R
f
1

M =
6sin
3sin
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Plasticity
Yield and hardening functions

p
=c
1
p
c
2
p
c
3
p
~ 2c
1
p
= 2c
1
2c
1
e
=
q
a
E
50
q
q
a
q

2q
E
ur
f =
q
a
E
50
q
q
a
q

2q
E
ur

p
= 0
3D extension
In order to extent the model to general 3D states in terms of stress, we use
a modified expression for in terms of and the mobilized angle of
internal friction

q

q

m


q =o
1
'
+ (o 1)o
2
'
oo
3
'

o =
3+ sin
m
3sin
m

f = q

M ( p+ ccot)


M =
6sin
m
3sin
m
where
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Plasticity

q
-
=o
1
'
+ (| 1)o
2
'
|o
3
'

| =
3+ sin
m
3sin
m

g = q
-
M
-
( p+ ccot
m
)

M
-
=
6sin
m
3sin
m
Plastic potential and flow rule
with

c
p
-
=
c
1
p
-
c
2
p
-
c
3
p
-







(

(
(
(
(
(
= A
-
12
cg
co
12
+ A
-
13
cg
co
13
= A
-
12
1
2

1
2
sin

1
2

1
2
sin
0





(

(
(
(
+ A
-
13
1
2

1
2
sin
0

1
2

1
2
sin





(

(
(
(
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Plasticity
Flow rule
with
C [kPa] [o] [o] E50 [Mpa]
0 30-40 0-10 40
Eur = 3 E50 Vur = 0.2 Rf = 0.9 m = 0.5 Pref = 100 kPa

c
v
p
-

p
-
= sin
m
c
v
p
-
= sin
p
-

sin
m
=
sin
m
sin
cv
1sin
m
sin
cv

cv
=
p

p
Primary soil parameters and standard PLAXIS settings
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Plasticity
Results of drained loading:
stress-strain relation (o
3
= 100 kPa)
Results of drained loading:
axial-volumetric strain relation (o
3
= 100 kPa)
Hardening soil response in drained triaxial experiments
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Plasticity

c
'
;
'
;
'
E
50
ref
v
ur
= 0.2; E
ur
= 3E
50
;m = 0.5; p
ref
=100kPa






c
u
;
u
;
E
50
ref
v
ur
= 0.2; E
ur
= 3E
50
;m = 0.5; p
ref
=100kPa





Undrained hardening soil analysis
Method A: switch to drained
Input:
Method B: switch to undrained
Input:
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
2c
u
E
u
~ 1.4 E
50
Plasticity
Interesting in case you have data on C
u
and not no C and |

E
50
= E
50
ref
o
3
'
sin
u
+ C
u
cos
u
p
ref
sin
u
+ C
u
cos
u
|
\

|
.
|
m
= E
50
ref
= const.
E
ur
= E
ur
ref
o
3
'
sin
u
+ C
u
cos
u
p
ref
sin
u
+ C
u
cos
u
|
\

|
.
|
m
= E
ur
ref
= const.
Assume E
50
= 0.7 E
u
and use graph by Duncan & Buchignani (1976) to estimate E
u
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Plasticity
Results of undrained triaxial loading:
stress-strain relations (o
3
= 100 kPa)
Results of undrained triaxial loading:
p-q diagram (o
3
= 100 kPa)
Hardening soil response in undrained triaxial tests
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
HS-Cap-Model

f
c
=

q
2
M
2
+ p
2
p
c
2

g
c
= f
c

c
v
p
-
=
p
-
K
c

p
-
K
s
=
1
H
p
-

H =
K
c
K
s
K
c
K
s
Cap yield surface
Flow rule
Hardening law
For isotropic compression we assume
(Associated flow)
with
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
HS-Cap-Model
For isotropic compression we have q = 0 and it follows from
For the determination of, we have another consistency condition:

p
-
= p
-
c

p
-
c
= Hc
v
p
-
= HA
-
c
cg
cp
c
= 2HA
-
c p

f
-
c
=
cf
c
co
T
o
-
+
cf
c
cp
c
p
-
c
= 0
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
HS-Cap-Model
Additional parameters
The extra input parameters are K
0
(=1-sin|) and E
oed
/E
50
(=1.0)
The two auxiliary material parameter M and K
c
/K
s
are determined
iteratively from the simulation of an oedometer test. There are no direct
input parameters. The user should not be too concerned about these
parameters.
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
HS-Cap-Model
1
2 3
Graphical presentation of HS-Cap-Model
I: Purely elastic response
II: Purely f rictiona l hardening with f
III: Material f ailu re according to Mohr-Coulomb
IV: Mohr- Coulomb and cap fc
V: Combin ed friction al hardening f and cap fc
VI: Purely cap hardening with fc
VII: Isotropic compression
Yield surfaces of the extended HS model in p-q space (left) and in the deviatoric plane (right)
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
HS-Cap-Model
o
1
= o
2
=
o
3
Yield surfaces of the extended HS model in principal stress space
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Simulation of Oedometer and Triaxial
Tests on Loose and Dense Sands
Comparison of calculated () and measured triaxial tests on loose Hostun Sand
Comparison of calculated () and measured oedometer tests on loose Hostun Sand
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Simulation of Oedometer and Triaxial
Tests on Loose and Dense Sands
Comparison of calculated () and measured triaxial tests on dense Hostun Sand
Comparison of calculated () and measured oedometer tests on dense Hostun Sand
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com
Summary
Main characteristics
Pressure dependent stiffness
Isotropic shear hardening
Ultimate Mohr-Coulomb failure condition
Non-associated plastic flow
Additional cap hardening

HS-model versus MC-model
As in Mohr-Coulomb model
Normalized primary loading stiffness
Unloading / reloading Poissons ratio
Normalized unloading / reloading stiffness
Power in stiffness laws
Failure ratio

c,,

E
50
ref

v
ur

E
ur
ref

m

R
f
Computational Geotechnics Non-Linear Hyperbolic Model & Parameter Selection videos.edhole.com